The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA REPORT 2019 0306 CCSA REG ITEM 08ACITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA City Council Meeting of 3/6/2019 ACTION Approved staff recommendation. Adopted Reso No. 2019-3792, as amended and 2019-3793, as amended. Introduced Ord Nos. 468, as amended and 469, as amended BY B. Garza A. Consider a Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; an Ordinance Approving Zone Change No. 2013-02; a Resolution Approving Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01; and an Ordinance Approving Development Agreement No. 2013-01; 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 February 6, 2019) Staff Recommendation: 1) Continue to accept public testimony and close the public hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2019-3792 adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; 3) Introduce Ordinance No. 468, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for March 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance; 4) Adopt Resolution No. 2019-3793 approving Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01; and 5). Introduce Ordinance No. 469, approving Development Agreement No. 2013-01, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for March 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. Item: 8.A. MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Joseph Fiss, Acting Community Development Director DATE: 03/06/2019 Regular Meeting (Continued Public Hearing from 2/6/19) SUBJECT: Consider a Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; an Ordinance Approving Zone Change No. 2013-02; a Resolution Approving Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01; and an Ordinance Approving Development Agreement No. 2013-01; 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. SUMMARY The public hearing for this project was opened on January 16, 2019, continued to February 6, 2019, and subsequently to March 6, 2019. At a public hearing on November 27, 2018 the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; Zone Change No. 2013-02; Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01; and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 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 analysis of the proposed project previously identified Biological Resources, Land Use, Open Space, and the Hillside Management Ordinance for Planning Commission consideration in their recommendation to the City Council. BACKGROUND On September 3, 2013, Ernie Mansi, dba Aldersgate Investment LLC, filed an application on behalf of 1 Moorpark LLC (subsequently Grand Pacific Asset 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 Item: 8.A. 1 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 2 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, at which meeting, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the proposal. 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 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. There are 168 mature trees over 9.5 inches in diameter 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. 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 2 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 3 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 nor was City entitlement review 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 for 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 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 3 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 4 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. 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). 4 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 5 • 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 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. Due to changing market conditions, it may be necessary to make 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). A condition of approval has been added to the project and Development Agreement allowing the applicant to apply to the City Manager to approve such modifications administratively provided they do not cause the maximum development density of the Project to exceed 390 units. 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 5 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 6 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 cochère 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 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 6 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 7 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 to be provided on site, including within garages, driveways and on private streets. Per Policy 2.1 of the City of Moorpark Circulation Element, Level of Service (LOS) C is the system performance objective. If an LOS degradation of one level of service or greater is attributable to a project, it can be considered significant enough to require mitigation measures. Three “Less Than Significant With Mitigation” project-specific impacts are identified in the Initial Study. Mitigation Measures are limited to pro-rata contributions to study-area intersection improvements, including for the Los Angeles Avenue area of contribution (AOC) fee. Mitigation language is also included for specific driveway design customary to development. The Development Agreement includes the detailed requirements for Casey Road improvements in Section 6.14, which language has also been included in the special conditions of approval. 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, outside of the villas, share a total of 242 spaces, while the villas contain an additional 76 spaces for a total of 318 parking spaces. These numbers 7 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 8 have been updated slightly from the Planning Commission report, which noted 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) (MMC 17.32.020 (B9)). 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 (MMC 17.32.020 (G1)). This would require 65 parking spaces for the 130 units (beds) plus 199 parking spaces for the 99,514 additional 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 by 25 percent from 264 to 198 spaces. Parking Sq. Ft. No. Units Required Provided Surplus/(Deficit) Independent Living 216,192 184 92 135 43 Assisted Living Skilled Nursing/Memory Care 99,514 130 198 (264x.25) 107 (91) Villas 123,080 76 38 76 38 Totals 390 328 318 10 The total required parking for the facility, if divided by uses, would be 394 parking spaces versus the 318 proposed parking spaces. Applying the shared parking allowance for the commercial/institutional uses, 328 parking spaces would be required. This deficit of 10 parking spaces can easily be corrected by incorporating an additional 10 parking spaces throughout the parking area, creating a fully conforming parking condition. A condition of approval has been included to this effect. Although the plans show street and driveway parking in the villas, the City has typically not counted this when calculating required parking. The greater parking need for this 8 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 9 facility will be surrounding the community buildings and the assisted living/memory care/skilled nursing facility. 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. 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 to handle the project’s onsite detention requirements and to ensure there will be no impact on the regional drainage detention facilities. 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 Mitigation 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. 9 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 10 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 of carbon dioxide equivalent (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 the 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 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 former Councilmember Van Dam. 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 and improvements to Casey Road. 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 City Council consideration: 10 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 11 • Biological Resources • Land Use • Open Space • Hillside Management Ordinance Biological Resources: There are 168 mature trees over 9.5 inches in diameter scattered throughout the site. 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. A tree location map is included as Appendix 16 to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The project also affects the existing scattered California Sagebrush Scrub (CSS) plants which comprise the habitat of the California Gnatcatcher (CAGN). A Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Focused Survey report is included as Appendix 8 to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 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. 10.9 acres of new CSS will 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 project biologist who prepared the original Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Focused Survey report has reviewed the plans and concluded that 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 detailed habitat restoration plan is required to be developed and approved by the City and potentially by the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and California Fish and Wildlife Department (CDFW) prior to approval of a grading permit and as part of the permitting process. 11 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 12 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 emergency medical 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 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. 12 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 13 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 cochère, 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. 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. 13 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 14 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. Staff required a visual study of the effect on the views from those properties and from Walnut Canyon Road. These materials were 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. The concern in the Hillside Development 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 inapplicable. 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. 14 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 15 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: 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. 15 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 16 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration for City Council review and consideration. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study (Attachment 5) 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 6) 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 16 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 17 7a) 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. Due to these comment letters, the Initial Study was revised to address these issues. This item was originally scheduled to be heard by the City Council on January 16, 2019. On January 15, 2019, a second letter was received from Better Neighborhoods (Attachment 7b). Although the MND/Initial Study had been revised, Better Neighborhoods raised issues of concern. The MND/Initial Study was previously circulated and made available to the public and responsible agencies. Although there are revisions made to the Initial Study, the revisions and additional language only provide more clarification and make insignificant modifications based on comments received. No new impacts or mitigation were identified to require recirculation pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. The attached revised MND/Initial Study show the revisions in legislative format for clarity. The major issues clarified are found within the Biological Resources and Traffic and Transportation sections of the Initial Study. The mitigation measures proposed in the MND and draft resolution are as follows: BIO-1: 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 at least two (2) 24”-box Quercus agrifolia, four (4) 24” box Black Walnut, and ten (10) sycamore trees. Prior to approval of building permits, applicant shall submit a tree planting and 5- year maintenance plan showing the tree planting including the required trees as listed. The five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees is 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) 17 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 18 Protective fencing shall be installed around or along all trees listed to remain (see TLC report for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the TLC. 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. BIO-2: 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). Prior to final occupancy clearance, verification of the restoration of 10.82 acres shall be field verified by a qualified biologist. BIO-3: 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 with 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. Prior to building permits, applicant will be required to show proof of permits from ACE (404 Permit), SCRWQCB (401 permit), and CDFW (1602 permit) that will require full approval of a habitat restoration plan, wetlands restoration plan and the required 5-year mitigation plan for the project TRA-1: The MND/Initial Study provided to the Planning Commission provided mitigation measures for Traffic and Transportation impacts; however, these impacts were incorrectly identified in the Initial Study checklist as “Less than Significant”. The checklist has been corrected to reflect the impacts as “Less than Significant with Mitigation”. The mitigation measures reviewed by the Planning Commission remain the same, as follows: • 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 18 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 19 the Community Development Director and City Engineer / Public Works Director. • 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. • 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. The attached Initial Study, within Attachment 5, 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 January 6, 2019. 2. Mailing. The notice of the public hearing was mailed on January 4, 2019, 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 January 18, 2019. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Continue to accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2019-____ adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02. 3. Introduce Ordinance No. ___, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for March 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. 19 Honorable City Council 3/6/2019 Regular Meeting Page 20 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2019-____ approving Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01. 5. Introduce Ordinance No. ___, approving Development Agreement No. 2013-01, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for March 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Photograph 3. Preliminary Title Report 4. Project Exhibits (Design Submittal Package) 5. Draft Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approving GPA No. 2013-02 6. Department of Fish & Game Letter 7a. Better Neighborhoods Letter 7b. Better Neighborhoods Second Letter 8. Draft Ordinance Adopting ZC No. 2013-02 9. Draft Resolution Approving RPD No. 2013-01 10. Draft Ordinance Approving DA No. 2013-01 20 General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02: Zoning Change No. 2013-02: Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01: and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 J • ', Rust �' r.loor park —,00 Ganfon Golf Gou try Calf se e' • Clu 1 Legend yl Parcels City Boundary III 40#011 ff4 I! _ Sillic411.14:....,7 t lb osiiii I , 11 ' 'i' ri1 Own,• •1r 4. * :111,4,4111111 •El > lirVit tr $ 410 IP #44 Al riri VT i / tii6.11011111 IC;• - Ale Mr III .414111141. }1111a Ora ...------- rn \ . " 1 A15:=1.4 z \ =g. .A.411111.''1 so 1 . , pLAip %II =rM Id,rg4lialill , — wig ir TANA 1 irtrprogninim ..pii" 74411:aran __ ..,../ ltl � �IIllllo 11IIIIII : 1 s. ti,�141111111111� . , 1I -1 I /0) — — I 111 —5. . 111111'_ n- Illlz�all■1i 1;1■1•,III I I yam; 0111111.116 i. iiilii i -.'`1/4-.... i i i I I ) 1 1 1 4.5_km ■ om■ ��m a te■ 00s 1I_ f 'nil ■1111' �.��i��'. ■ �Cii Il 1 1 ----.•111§Wtt ‘/----n....., AL l I i_I I ■■■ 'ini, • :11.--m -- 11111111111 NJ r ~ _ N 1" = 1 ,505 ft Location Map 06/0512014 -pi-4*1.--t P.wieth 1 This map represents a visual display of related geographic information. Data provided hereon is not a guarantee of actual field conditions. To be sure of complete accuracy, please contact Moorpark staff for the most up-to-date information. 21 GPA No. 2013-02, ZC No. 2013-02, RPD No. 2013-01, DA No. 2013-01 ` v:- - - Win,Dr T i.+8h - �elwar.,.�s YJ i • - + y i Iti -. .., ale.'' . -.. .Meridia�K� — 4"K EJr M�'"� a1er�� } � fil i1 l / - ;.,i I +E�' h ray .!.;:r. } i }• r r�'gii ! t� .7 . r ,7 .,,L.:;1 ' ._ fir *r ; .s, f .y.S I I JRC. - - .-4= +AI A.. , fox - S _ 4• 1. L /Ai/ I 144 • } • . , 1 f t — f' -- — _ ft ' 4 � } ■ S I�:`‘ i..—} r III - •••, ,f ‘1,V it;., 1 to i,,‘ ,,, i : , ., --ant , 7 7., . . • . A ' �' .�; rr , .iii �w• , •' • i•i' rj`• '' Y •. .... V `!---+ft r +c A ,I �' ' ', '*.' '� ��{•! r di, ly " . . II` t ''',...„ ‘ I i; •...).! ?if°. soffray f ! 4S. t , e IS1w.S� ▪ , y •c. . . ,. i'/' i ( ir.4 .... , ._ 4 '4 '1, '10••;:':ilk : • .f ).' .... . n. ijcimorr'onsot5.. i L. # 0.,, - ) _ 7. mid .' t _ " •� w- It ii* ';:l. ., 7-.. .,_ ,_ ......_its .i. : ,..! ..., ,... - . 1 ;411.40. I '••••'rCr;I% • ' 4 ''Lc.--....4 404 -. NI L .11111'1 •- to._ -01h- :: Illii . ,yR �JII y y, a .... - .- i-c O ��rrr.ieE. ori Ji� �'+� , ` 4 +�, r • 7� = "�� - ='t °jr r .aat�IrE[;' .dr� '1 li▪ '�4 ;fig 7l Map data'©2D18 Google Imagery.C20113,DigitalGlobe,U.S.Geological Survey,USDA Farm Service Agency Terms of Use ! =.i,:.-..::a I l ap e.'.':-....' hir- in =752 ft Aerial Photo 11/19/2018 w E This map may represents a visual display of related geographic information-Data provided here on is not guarantee of acutual field conditions.To be sure of complete accuracy,please contact the22 responsible staff for most up to date information. OCHICAGO TITLE COMPANY Order No.: 131303690 -SLS Property: vacant land Moorpark, CA In response to the application for a policy of title insurance referenced herein, Chicago Title Company hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a policy or policies of title insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an exception herein or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations or Conditions of said policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said policy or policies are set forth in Attachment One. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner's Policies of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Attachment One. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report. This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested. The policy(ies) of title insurance to be issued hereunder will be policy(ies) of Chicago Title Insurance Company, a Nebraska corporation. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to herein and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Attachment One of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects and encumbrances affecting title to the land. Countersigned By: C— 5 Authorized Officer or Agent CLTA Preliminary Report Form -Modified (Adopted: 11.17 Chicago Title Insurance Company By: Attest: President Secretary Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM CA -CT -FLAX -02180.055610 -SPS -1-13-131303690 23 ( Visit Us on our Website: www.ctic.com CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY ISSUING OFFICE: 500 E. Esplanade Dr,Suite 102,Oxnard,CA 93036 t FOR SETTLEMENT INQUIRIES,CONTACT: Chicago Title Company 500 E. Esplanade Dr.,Suite 102 • Oxnard,CA 93036 (805)656-1300 • FAX 805-639-0682 PRELIMINARY REPORT Amendment: 1 Title Officer: Sharon Skercevic Escrow Officer: Linda Hamilton, CSEO, CEI Email: SkercevicS@ctt.com Email: Linda.Hamilton@ctt.com Phone No.: (805)656-1300 Phone No.: (805)656-1300 Fax No.: (805)642-8280 Fax No.: (805)639-0682 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Escrow No.: 131303690-LH PROPERTY ADDRESS(ES): vacant land, Moorpark, CA EFFECTIVE DATE: October 8,2013 at 07:30AM The form of policy or policies of title insurance contemplated by this report is: 1. The estate or interest in the Land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this Report is: Fee 2. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: Iris Betty Lieb and Gary S. Lieb, Co-Trustees of the Iris Lieb Family Trust dated October 18, 2002 3. The Land referred to in this Report is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT"A"ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 2 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 ) 24 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description F For APN/Parcel ID(s): 513-0-130-070,513-0-130-060,511-0-110-115,511-0-110-125,511-0-040-190 and 511-0-110-035 THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF MOORPARK, COUNTY OF VENTURA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Parcell: Those portions of Lots"T"and"U"of Tract"L", Rancho Simi, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 5, Page 5 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County,described as a whole as follows: Beginning at the Southwesterly corner of Lot 1 of Walnut Grove Tract, as per Map recorded in Book 8, Page 22 of Maps;thence along the Westerly line of said Lot 1, 1st: North 10°48' East 46.25 feet;thence, 2nd: North 0°26'West 405.9 feet;thence, 3rd: North 89° 34' East 40 feet;thence, 4th: North 0°26'West 16.91 feet to an angle point in the Northwesterly line of the land described in deed to Pilar Dominguez, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 264 of Official Records; thence along said Northwesterly line to and along the Northwesterly line of the land described in deeds to Refugio Garcia, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 263; Basilio Reyes, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 264;Antonio Aguirre, recorded July 1, 1941, in Book 638, Page 460; Santos Hernandez, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 262;Joe Dominguez, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660 Page 262; and Mary Macias, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 261 all of Official Records, by the following three courses, 5th: North 31°41' East 235.84 feet to an angle point in the Northwesterly line of said land of Basilio Reyes;thence, 6th: North 33°41' East 339.91 feet to an angle point in the Northwesterly line of said land of Joe Dominguez;thence, 7th: North 35°48' East 304.7 feet, more or less, to the most Northerly corner of said land of Mary Macias; thence along the Northeasterly line of said last mentioned land, 8th: South 41° 12' East 120.38 feet to the Northwesterly line of said Walnut Grove Tract;thence along said last mentioned Northwesterly line, 9th: North 35°48' East 56.50 feet to the most Westerly corner of Lot 24 of Walnut Grove Tract; thence along the Westerly prolongation of the Southerly line of said Lot 24, 10th: South 89°58' East 6.67 feet to the most Easterly corner of the land described in Parcel 2 in deed to Alfonso Valenzuela and wife, recorded October 17, 1957, Book 1558 Page 181 of Official Records;thence along the boundary of said Parcel 2 by the following two courses, CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 3 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 ( 25 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description 11th: North 49°21'34"West 140.90 feet;thence in a direct line, 12th: North 1°35'East 29.5 feet, more or less,to the most Westerly corner of the land described in deed to Eduvijar Addapa, recorded November 19, 1929, Book 290, Page 305 of Official Records;thence along the Northwesterly line of said last mentioned land to and along the Northwesterly line of the land described in deeds to Toribia Rosos Herrez, recorded June 20, 1929, Book 275, Page 37; Jubencio Guerrero, recorded September 27, 1930, Book 328, Page 181; Virginia R.Armenta, recorded June 22, 1940, Book 615, Page 642; Manuel Banuelos, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 659, Page 219; and Patrick J. Chavez, as Administrator, recorded December 29, 1941, Book 648, Page 684 all of Official Records, 13th: North 35°48' East 565.3 feet, more or less,to the Southerly line of Lot 36 of Vallette Tract, as per Map recorded in Book 3, Page 41 of Maps;thence along the Southerly line of Lots 36 and 32 of said Vallette Tract, 14th: South 89° 53'West 1476.27 feet, more or less,to the Northwesterly corner of the land described in deed to Maxwell W. Wright, recorded October 1, 1914, Book 144, Page 283 of Deeds;thence along the Westerly line of said last mentioned land, 15th: South 1360.3 feet, more or less,to the most Northerly corner of the land described in deed to Letha C. Richards, recorded October 10, 1929, Book 286, Page 292 of Official Records;thence along the boundary of said last mentioned land by the following three courses, 16th: South 68° 17' East 222.42 feet to the Northeasterly corner thereof;thence, 17th: South 4° 01'West 46.56 feet to an angle point;thence, 18th: South 22° 33' East 128.24 feet to the Northeasterly corner of the land described in deed to R. R. Casey, recorded April 3, 1930, Book 309, Page 319 of Official Records;thence along the boundary of said last mentioned land by the following two courses, 19th: South 22°33' East 9.7 feet to an angle point;thence, 20th: South 28° 54' East 178.22 feet to the most Westerly corner of the land described in Parcel 3 in deed r to the County of Ventura, recorded October 21, 1931, Book 358, Page 107 of Official Records; thence along the Northerly line thereof, 21st: North 89° 59' 30" East 266.56 feet to the Westerly line of the land described in deed to County of Ventura recorded December 12, 1922, Book 189, Page 269 of Deeds;thence along said Westerly line, 22nd: North 10°48' East 47.96 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT all public roads lying within said land. ALSO EXCEPT that portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at a point in the Westerly line of the land described in deed to Maxwell W.Wright, recorded October 1, 1914, Book 144, Page 283 of Deeds; being also the Westerly line of the herein before described Parcel 1, distant along said Westerly line North 736.09 feet from the Northwesterly corner of the land described in deed to Moorpark Memorial Union High School District, dated July 3, 1920, recorded in Book 176, Page 275 of Deeds; thence along said Westerly line, CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 4 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 ( 26 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description 1st: South 285.05 feet to the most Northerly corner of the land described in deed to Letha C. Richards, recorded October 10, 1929, Book 286, Page 292 of Official Records;thence along the Northeasterly line of said last mentioned land, 2nd: South 68° 17' East 222.42 feet to the Northeasterly corner of said land of Letha C. Richards;thence, 3rd: North 4° 01' East 162.37 feet;thence, 4th: North 4°30'West 152.20 feet;thence, 5th: North 19° 51'West 72.64 feet;thence in a direct line, 6th: South 85°23'West 182.04 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPT the property described in deed recorded February 1, 1957, Book 1479, Page 316 of Official Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 23 of Walnut Grove Tract; thence, North 35°48' East 2.17 feet; thence, North 41' 12'West 120.48 feet to the true point of beginning of said Parcel to be described; thence, 1st: North 41° 12'West 33.50 feet to a point; thence, 2nd: South 25° 37'24"West 184.74 feet to a point;thence, 3rd: North 35°48' East 174.29 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPT 49%of oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances and minerals, but without the right to enter on the surface or within 500 feet of the surface on a line drawn vertically, as reserved by Arnold F. Dush and Ethel M. Dush, also known as A. F. Dusch and Ethel M. Dusch, in deed recorded May 27, 1959, Book 1739, Page 9 of Official Records. Parcel 2: A part of Lot"U"of Tract"L", Rancho Simi, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 5, Page 5 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, and a part of Lots 32 and 36 of Vallette Tract, being a Subdivision of Lot"2", Block"L"of Rancho Simi, as per Map recorded in Book 3, Page 41 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, said real property particularly described as an entirety as follows: Beginning at the corner common to Lots"T"and"U", as per Map first above described, and at the corner common to Lots 32 and 36, as per Map last above described;thence from said point of beginning. 1st: North 89° 53' East 10 chains to a redwood fence post set at an angle of fence on spur of hills at the Southwest corner of that certain parcel of land as described in the deed to Maxwell W.Wright to James M. Robinson,dated February 12, 1912, recorded in Book 128, Page 319 of Deeds;thence, 2nd: North 89° 58' East 2.715 chains to a point in the West line of Lot 35, as per Map entitled, "Map of Walnut Grove Tract", recorded in Book 8, Page 22 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 5 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 ( 27 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description County;thence along the Westerly line of Lots 35 to 44, inclusive as per Map last above described, by the following three courses and distances, 3rd: North 35°48' East 4.193 chains to a point at an angle in the Westerly line of Lot 40 of Walnut Grove Tract;thence, 4th: North 5° 18' East 2.716 chains to a point in the Westerly line of Lot 43 of Walnut Grove Tract;thence, 5th: North 17° 18' East 1.052 chains; at 0.735 of a chain,the Northwest corner of Lot 44 of Walnut Grove Tract; at 1.052 chains a point in the South line of Lot 36 of Vallette Tract;thence, 6th: North 89° 58'West 20.415 chains to a 2"x 2" stake set on West bank of a barranca at the Northeast corner of that certain parcel of land, containing 4.123 acres, as conveyed by James M. Robinson to George M. Carter, by deed dated February 28, 1919, recorded in Book 162, Page 265 of Deeds;thence Southerly along the general course of the Westerly bank of said barranca by the following two courses and distances, 7th: South 24°59' East 1.879 chains to a 2"x 2"stake;thence, 8th: South 13° 35'West 5.560 chains to a 2"x 2"redwood stake set on the Westerly bank of said barranca in the South line of Lot 32 of Vallette Tract, and at the Southeast corner of said lands of George M. Carter;from which a 2"x 2"stake set at the Northeast corner of that certain parcel of land, containing 10 acres, as conveyed by Alice M. Graham, et al.to Maxwell W.Wright, by deed dated September 10, 1914, recorded in Book 144, Page 283 of Deeds, bears South 89° 53'West 4.894 chains distant;thence, 9th: North 89° 53' East 5.116 chains along the South line of Lot 32 of Vallette Tract to the point of beginning. Parcel 3: Lot 23 of Walnut Grove Tract, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 8, Page 22 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 6 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 28 I Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 AT THE DATE HEREOF, EXCEPTIONS TO COVERAGE IN ADDITION TO THE PRINTED EXCEPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS IN SAID POLICY FORM WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10066 Tax Identification No.: 511-0-110-035 Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 1st Installment: $2,988.69(Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $2,988.69 (Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 Land: $404,827.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 3057280 Affects: Parcel 1 and other land 2. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10007 Tax Identification No.: 511-0-110-115 Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 1st Installment: $316.76(Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $316.76(Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 i Land: $24,803.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 2983720 1 Affects: Parcel 1 3. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10041 Tax Identification No.: 511-0-110-125 '! Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 I 1st Installment: $1,023.86 (Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $1,023.86 (Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 Land: $137,605.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 3052720 Affects: Parcel 1 I CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 7 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 29 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) 4. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10041 Tax Identification No.: 513-0-130-060 Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 1st Installment: $289.44(Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $289.44 (Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 Land: $35,848.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 3052740 Affects: Parcel2 5. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10041 Tax Identification No.: 513-0-130-070 Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 1st Installment: $672.59(Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $672.59(Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 Land: $114,939.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 3052750 Affects: Parcel 2 6. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10007 Tax Identification No.: 511-0-040-190 Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 1st Installment: $224.98(Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $224.98(Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 Land: $17,449.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 2983710 Affects: Parcel 2 CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 8 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 30 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) t t 7. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes are as follows: Code Area: 10066 Tax Identification No.: 511-0-030-180 Fiscal Year: 2013-2014 1st Installment: $250.19(Not Paid) 2nd Installment: $250.19(Not Paid) Exemption: $0.00 Land: $43,932.00 Improvements: $0.00 Personal Property: $0.00 Bill No.: 3056570 Affects: Parcel 3 8. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3.5 (Commencing with Section 75)of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California. I 9. Easement(s)for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto,as delineated on or as offered for dedication on Map/Plat: Licensed Surveyors Map Recording No.: Book 5, Page 3 of Records of Survey Purpose: Right of way Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 10. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Letha C. Richards Purpose: Street Recording Date: October 10, 1929 Recording No.: Book 286, Page 292 of Official Records I Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 i 11. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto,as granted in a document: Granted to: R. R. Casey Purpose: Street Recording Date: April 3, 1930 Recording No.: Book 309, Page 319 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 12. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Southern California Edison Company Purpose: Public utilities and incidental purposes Recording Date: October 17, 1949 Recording No.: Book 895, Page 557 of Official Records I Affects: A portion of said land I The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 9 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 ) 31 i Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) ( i 13. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Arnold F. Dush, et al. Purpose: Road and utilities Recording Date: May 27, 1959 Recording No.: Book 1739, Page 9 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 14. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Fay Goolsby Verzerian, et al. Purpose: Water pipeline Recording Date: November 27, 1959 Recording No.: Book 1801, Page 113 of Official Records Affects: A portion of said land The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. 15. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: 1 i Granted to: Ventura County Water Works District No. 1 Purpose: Sewer pipelines Recording Date: March 6, 1968 Recording No.: Book 3273, Page 40 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 3 16. Easement(s)for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto,as granted in a document: Granted to: The Pacific Telephone&Telegraph Company Purpose: Public utilities and incidental purposes Recording Date: March 25, 1969 Recording No.: Book 3460, Page 549 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 17. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Ventura County Water Works District No. 1 Purpose: Sewer pipelines Recording Date: January 5, 1970 Recording No.: Book 3603, Page 504 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 18. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Ventura County Flood Control District Purpose: Flood control Recording Date: April 16, 1970 Recording No.: Book 3650, Page 453 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 3 i i CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 10 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 32 I Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) tt I 19. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Ventura County Flood Control District Purpose: Flood control Recording Date: March 7, 1972 Recording No.: Book 3928, Page 862 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 20. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: 1 Granted to: Daryl Ivan Parker, Jr. and Patricia K. Parker Purpose: Road and utilities Recording Date: June 11, 1973 Recording No.: Book 4125, Page 192 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 21. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: The Pacific Telephone&Telegraph Company Purpose: Public utilities and incidental purposes Recording Date: February 11, 1977 Recording No.: Book 4770, Page 121 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 22. Easements)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Joseph Anthony Hernandez, Sr. Purpose: Ingress and egress Recording Date: December 19, 1983 Recording No.: as Document No. 83-142970 of Official Records Affects: The Northerly 10 feet of Parcel 3 t 23. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Ventura County Water Works District No. 1 Purpose: Subsurface water pipelines Recording Date: April 4, 1988 Recording No.: as Document No. 88-43685 of Official Records Affects: The Southerly 20 feet of Parcel 3 I 's 24. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: I Granted to: Ventura County Water Works District No. 1 Purpose: Subsurface water pipelines Recording Date: May 20, 1988 I Recording No.: as Document No. 88-70048 of Official Records = Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 s I CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 11 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 € 33 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) 25. The Land described herein is included within a project area of the Redevelopment Agency shown below, and that proceedings for the redevelopment of said project have been instituted under the Redevelopment Law(such redevelopment to proceed only after the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan)as disclosed by a document. Redevelopment Agency: City of Moorpark Recording Date: July 12, 1989 Recording No.: as Document No. 89-108897 of Official Records 26. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Joe A. and Susan T. Gutierrez Purpose: Right of entrance and egress and to trespass thereupon Recording Date: March 19, 1991 Recording No.: as Document No. 91-34439 of Official Records Affects: Parcel 3 The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. 27. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other matters shown on Map: Record of Survey Recording No.: Book 47, Page 39 and 40 of Records of Survey 28. An unrecorded easement for the right to construct and maintain slopes,together with drainage devices and incidental purposes, as disclosed by an Indemnity Agreement, executed by and between JBH Associates- Moorpark, a California Limited Partnership; and Abe Guny, for terms, conditions and provisions contained therein, recorded December 11, 1992, as Document No. 92-224896 of Official Records. Affects:A portion of Parcel 2 29. Terms, conditions and provisions contained in an unrecorded Settlement Agreement, executed by and between Abe Guny; and Thomas Jacoby and Valerie A. Jacoby on May 27, 1992, as disclosed by Quitclaim Deed from Thomas Jacoby, et ux., recorded June 3, 1993, as Document No. 93-100641 of Official Records. Among other things, said document recites in part: "Guny agrees to allow Jacoby reasonable access and use of a portion of his real property for the purposes of alternate ingress and egress on a permissive use basis." 30. An easement for ingress and egress,waterline and utilities, pursuant to the"Judgment after Trail by Superior Court,Ventura County, Granting Easement by Prescription, Case No. 108091,Ventura County Superior Court",as disclosed by Memorandum Describing Prescriptive Easement, recorded October 13, 1994, as Document No. 94-165143 of Official Records, subject to the terms, conditions and provisions contained therein. Affects:A portion of Parcel 1 31. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Martin Hernandez, Jr. and Isabel P. Hernandez Purpose: Right of entrance, exit and travel Recording Date: August 1, 1995 Recording No.: as Document No. 95-89797 of Official Records Affects: Parcel 3 CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 12 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 34 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) II The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. 32. Covenants, conditions and restrictions but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including, but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation,familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, source of income, gender, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition or genetic information, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable laws, as set forth in the document referred to in the numbered item last above shown. 33. Easement(s)for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Martin Hernandez, Jr. and Isabel P. Hernandez Purpose: Right of entrance and egress and to trespass thereupon Recording Date: August 1, 1995 Recording No.: as Document No. 95-89798 of Official Records Affects: Parcel 3 The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. 34. A Notice Entitled: Notice of Uncertified Fill Executed by: Harry K. Lieb and Iris Betty Lieb, as Trustees of the Lieb Family Trust of 1988 dated December 23, 1988; and City of Moorpark Recording Date: May 9, 1996 Recording No.: as Document No. 96-62226 of Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. Affects: A portion of Parcel 2 35. Matters contained in that certain document Entitled: Judgment After Trail By Court Dated: May 13, 1996 Executed by: Arturo F. Gutierrez, Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Ventura Recording Date: May 29, 1996 Recording No.: as Document No. 96-71632 of Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 13 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 35 • Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) 36. Matters contained in that certain document Entitled: Declaration of Reciprocal Easement and Agreement for Maintenance, Use and Development Re: Boundary Slope Dated: March 13, 1996 Executed by: Joseph C. Latunski and Evelyn J. Latunski,as Trustees of the Joseph C. Latunski and Evelyn J. Latunski Living Trust dated August 17, 1990; and Harry K. Lieb and Iris Betty Lieb, as Trustees of the Lieb Family Trust of 1988 dated December 23, 1988 Recording Date: August 23, 1996 Recording No.: as Document No. 96-116093 of Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 37. An easement or other rights for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in the document above mentioned: For: Barranca slope and drainage devices Affects: A portion of Parcel 2 The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. 38. Matters contained in that certain document Entitled: Purchase Agreement Memorandum Dated: December 26, 1997 Executed by: Harry K. Lieb and Iris Betty Lieb, as Trustees of the Lieb Family Trust of 1988 dated December 23, 1988; and First American Communities, a Colorado Limited Liability Company Recording Date: February 26, 1998 Recording No.: as Document No. 98-26377 of Official Records I Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 39. Easement(s)for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Joseph A. Gutierrez Purpose: Ingress and egress and utilities Recording Date: October 24,2000 Recording No.: as Document No. 2000-166426 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 1 40. Easements)for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Joseph A. Gutierrez Purpose: Construction, maintenance and operation of a right of way(ingress and egress), utilities and incidental purposes Recording Date: October 24, 2000 Recording No.: as Document No. 2000-166426 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcel 3 CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 14 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 36 { Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 EXCEPTIONS (continued) 41. Covenants, conditions and restrictions but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including, but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation,familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, source of income, gender, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition or genetic information, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable laws, as set forth in the document referred to in the numbered item last above shown. 42. An option to purchase said Land with certain terms, covenants, conditions and provisions as set forth therein. Optionor: 1 Moorpark, LLC Optionee: Iris Betty Lieb and Gary S. Lieb, Co-Trustees of the Iris Lieb Family Trust dated October 18, 2002 Disclosed by: Memorandum of Purchase Agreement Recording Date: December 3, 2003 Recording No.: as Document No.20031203-452617 of Official Records Affects: Parcels 1 and 2 43. Easement(s)for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Samuel Castro Purpose: ingress and egress, utilities and incidental purposes Recording Date: March 30, 2006 Recording No.: as Document No. 20060330-68042 of Official Records Affects: A portion of Parcels 1 and 3 The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record. 44. Covenants, conditions and restrictions but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including, but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation,familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, source of income, gender, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition or genetic information, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable laws, as set forth in the document referred to in the numbered item last above shown. 45. Any invalidity or defect in the title of the vestees in the event that the trust referred to herein is invalid or fails to grant sufficient powers to the trustee(s)or in the event there is a lack of compliance with the terms and provisions of the trust instrument. If title is to be insured in the trustee(s)of a trust, (or if their act is to be insured),this Company will require a Trust Certification pursuant to California Probate Code Section 18100.5. The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after review of the requested documentation. END OF EXCEPTIONS CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 15 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 37 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 NOTES Note 1. The Company will require the following documents for review prior to the issuance of any title assurance predicated upon a conveyance or encumbrance from the entity named below. Limited Liability Company: 1 Moorpark LLC a. A copy of its operating agreement, if any, and any and all amendments, supplements and/or modifications thereto, certified by the appropriate manager or member. b. If a domestic Limited Liability Company, a copy of its Articles of Organization and all amendment thereto with the appropriate filing stamps. c. If the Limited Liability Company is member-managed a full and complete current list of members certified by the appropriate manager or member. d. If the Limited Liability Company was formed in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence, satisfactory to the Company that it was validly formed, is in good standing and authorized to do business in the state of origin. e. If less than all members, or managers, as appropriate,will be executing the closing documents, furnish evidence of the authority of those signing. The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after review of the requested documentation. Note 2. In order to complete this report,the Company requires a Statement of Information to be completed by the following party(ies), Party(ies): All parties The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after review of the requested Statement of Information. NOTE: The Statement of Information is necessary to complete the search and examination of title under this order. Any title search includes matters that are indexed by name only, and having a completed Statement of Information assists the Company in the elimination of certain matters which appear to involve the parties but in fact affect another party with the same or similar name. Be assured that the Statement of Information is essential and will be kept strictly confidential to this file. Note 3. Note: If a county recorder,title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent or association provides a copy of a declaration, governing document or deed to any person, California law requires that the document provided shall include a statement regarding any unlawful restrictions. Said statement is to be in at least 14-point bold face type and may be stamped on the first page of any document provided or included as a cover page attached to the requested document. Should a party to this transaction request a copy of any document reported herein that fits this category,the statement is to be included in the manner described. Note 4. NOTE: When this title order closes and if the Company is handling the loan proceeds through a sub-escrow, all title charges and expenses normally billed will be deducted from those loan proceeds. Title charges and expenses would include Title Premiums, any Tax or Bond advances, Documentary Transfer Tax, Recording Fees, etc. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 16 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 38 Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 NOTES (continued) Note 5. If this company is requested to disburse funds in connection with this transaction, Chapter 598, Statutes of 1989 mandates hold periods for checks deposited to escrow or sub-escrow accounts. The mandatory hold period for cashier's checks, certified checks and teller's checks is one business day after the day deposited. Other checks require a hold period of from two to five business days after the day deposited. In the event that the parties to the contemplated transaction wish to record prior to the time that the funds are available for disbursement(and subject to Company approval),the Company will require the prior written consent of the parties. Upon request, a form acceptable to the company authorizing said early recording may be provided to Escrow for execution. Wire Transfers There is no mandated hold period for funds deposited by confirmed wire transfer. The Company may disburse such funds the same day. There is no mandated hold period for funds deposited by confirmed wire transfer. The Company may disburse such funds the same day. Chicago Title will disburse by Wire(Wire-out)only collected funds or funds received by confirmed Wire (Wire-in).Wiring Instructions for Chicago Title Company, Oxnard, CA, are as follows: Receiving Bank: Union Bank 1980 Saturn Street Monterey Park, CA 91755 ABA Routing No.: 122000496 Credit Account Name: Chicago Title Company Credit Account No.: 0033324153 Escrow No.: 131303690 These wiring instructions are for this specific transaction involving the Title Department of the office of Chicago Title Company.These instructions therefore should not be used in other transactions without first verifying the information with our accounting department. It is imperative that the wire text be exactly as indicated.Any extraneous information may cause unnecessary delays in confirming the receipt of funds. Note 6. Your application for title insurance was placed by reference to only a street address or tax identification number. Based on our records,we believe that the legal description in this report covers the parcel(s) of Land that you requested. If the legal description is incorrect,the seller/borrower must notify the Company and/or the settlement company in order to prevent errors and to be certain that the correct parcel(s) of Land will appear on any documents to be recorded in connection with this transaction and on the policy of title insurance. Note 7. Note: The policy of title insurance will include an arbitration provision. The Company or the insured may demand arbitration. Arbitrable matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company and the insured arising out of or relating to this policy, any service of the Company in connection with its issuance or the breach of a policy provision or other obligation. Please ask your escrow or title officer for a sample copy of the policy to be issued if you wish to review the arbitration provisions and any other provisions pertaining to your Title Insurance coverage. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 17 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 39 • Title No.: 131303690-SLS Amendment: 1 NOTES (continued) Note 8. Note: Any documents being executed in conjunction with this transaction must be signed in the presence of an authorized Company employee, an authorized employee of an agent, an authorized employee of the insured lender,or by using Bancsery or other approved third-party service. If the above requirement cannot be met, please call the Company at the number provided in this report. END OF NOTES ( CLIA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (Adopted: 11.17.2006) Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM 18 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055610-SPS-1-13-131303690 40 PRIVACY STATEMENT Effective Date: May 1, 2008 Order No.: 131303690-LH Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries ("FNF") respect the privacy and security of your non-public personal information ("Personal Information") and protecting your Personal Information is one of our top priorities. This Privacy Statement explains FNF's privacy practices, including how we use the Personal Information we receive from you and from other specified sources, and to whom it may be disclosed. FNF follows the privacy practices described in this Privacy Statement and, depending on the business performed, FNF companies may share information as described herein. PERSONAL INFORMATION COLLECTED We may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: • Information we receive from you on applications or other forms, such as your name, address, social security number,tax identification number, asset information, and income information; • Information we receive from you through our Internet websites, such as your name, address, email address, Internet Protocol address, the website links you used to get to our websites, and your activity while using or reviewing our websites; • Information about your transactions with or services performed by us, our affiliates, or others, such as information concerning your policy, premiums, payment history, information about your home or other real property, information from lenders and other third parties involved in such transaction, account balances, and credit card information; and • Information we receive from consumer or other reporting agencies and publicly recorded documents. DISCLOSURE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION We may provide your Personal Information (excluding information we receive from consumer or other credit reporting agencies) to various individuals and companies, as permitted by law, without obtaining your prior authorization. Such laws do not allow consumers to restrict these disclosures. Disclosures may include, without limitation,the following: • To insurance agents, brokers, representatives, support organizations, or others to provide you with services you have requested, and to enable us to detect or prevent criminal activity, fraud, material misrepresentation, or nondisclosure in connection with an insurance transaction; • To third-party contractors or service providers for the purpose of determining your eligibility for an insurance benefit or payment and/or providing you with services you have requested; • To an insurance regulatory authority, or a law enforcement or other governmental authority, in a civil action, in connection with a subpoena or a governmental investigation; • To companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or to other financial institutions with which we have joint marketing agreements and/or • To lenders, lien holders, judgment creditors, or other parties claiming an encumbrance or an interest in title whose claim or interest must be determined, settled, paid or released prior to a title or escrow closing. Privacy Statement Printed: 10.29.13©08:30AM by SLS SCA0002565.doc/Updated: 07.11.13 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055611-131303690 41 PRIVACY STATEMENT Effective Date: May 1, 2008 (continued) We may also disclose your Personal Information to others when we believe, in good faith, that such disclosure is reasonably necessary to comply with the law or to protect the safety of our customers, employees, or property and/or to comply with a judicial proceeding,court order or legal process. Disclosure to Affiliated Companies: We are permitted by law to share your name, address and facts about your transaction with other FNF companies, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate service providers to provide you with services you have requested, for marketing or product development research, or to market products or services to you. We do not, however, disclose information we collect from consumer or credit reporting agencies with our affiliates or others without your consent, in conformity with applicable law, unless such disclosure is otherwise permitted by law. Disclosure to Nonaffiliated Third Parties: We do not disclose Personal Information about our customers or former customers to nonaffiliated third parties, except as outlined herein or as otherwise permitted by law. CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY OF PERSONAL INFORMATION We restrict access to Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard Personal Information. ACCESS TO PERSONAL INFORMATION / REQUESTS FOR CORRECTION, AMENDMENT, OR DELETION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION As required by applicable law, we will afford you the right to access your Personal Information, under certain circumstances to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed, and request correction or deletion of your Personal Information. However, FNF's current policy is to maintain customers' Personal Information for no less than your state's reauired record retention reauirements for the purpose of handling future coverage claims. For your protection, all reauests made under this section must be in writing and must include your notarized signature to establish your identity. Where permitted by law, we may charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. Please send requests to: Chief Privacy Officer Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 601 Riverside Avenue Jacksonville, FL 32204 CHANGES TO THIS PRIVACY STATEMENT This Privacy Statement may be amended from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. When we amend this Privacy Statement, we will post a notice of such changes on our website. The effective date of this Privacy Statement, as stated above, indicates the last time this Privacy Statement was revised or materially changed. Privacy Statement Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM by SLS SCA0002565.doc!Updated: 07.11.13 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055611-131303690 42 I ATTACHMENT ONE AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION RESIDENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY(6-1-87) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B,you are not insured against loss,costs,attorneys'fees,and expenses resulting from: 1. Governmental police power,and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes building and zoning ordinances and also laws and regulations concerning: • land use • improvements on the land • land division • environmental protection This exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters which appear in the public records at policy date. This exclusion does not limit the zoning coverage described in Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks. 2. The right to take the land by condemning it,unless: • a notice of exercising the right appears in the public records on the Policy Date • the taking happened prior to the Policy Date and is binding on you if you bought the land without knowledge of the taking 3. Title Risks: • that are created,allowed,or agreed to by you • that are known to you,but not to us,on the Policy Date-unless they appeared in the public recordsIi • that result in no loss to you • that first affect your title after the Policy Date-this does not limit the labor and material lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks 4. Failure to pay value for your title. 5. Lack of a right: • to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Schedule A or • in streets,alleys,or waterways that touch your land This exclusion does not limit the access coverage in Item 5 of Covered Title Risks. In addition to the Exclusions,you are not insured against loss,costs,attorneys'fees,and the expenses resulting from: 1. Any rights,interests,or claims of parties in possession of the land not shown by the public records. 2. Any easements or liens not shown by the public records. This does not limit the lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks. 3. Any facts about the land which a correct survey would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. This does not limit the forced removal coverage in Item 12 of Covered Title Risks. 4. Any water rights or claims or title to water in or under the land,whether or not shown by the public records. { { Attachment One(07/26/10) 43 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY-1990 EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs,attorneys'fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law,ordinance or governmental regulation(including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations)restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land;(iii)a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or t governmental regulations,except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect,lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by(a)above,except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims,or other matters: (a) whether or not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy,but created,suffered,assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company,not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy,but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy;or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage or for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness,to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof,which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6. Any claim,which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate or interest insured by this policy or the transaction creating the interest of the insured lender,by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy,state insolvency or similar creditors'rights laws. SCHEDULE B, PART I EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage(and the Company will not pay costs,attorneys'fees or expenses)which arise by reason of: PART I 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements,liens or encumbrances,or claims thereof,not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies,conflicts in boundary lines,shortage in area,encroachments,or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose,and which are not shown by the public records. 5. (a)Unpatented mining claims;(b)reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;(c)water rights,claims or title to water,whether or not the matters excepted under(a),(b),or(c)are shown by the public records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services,labor or material not shown by the Public Records. ( 1 ( 1 ( Attachment One(07/26/10) 44 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) FORMERLY AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY(10-17-92) WITH A.L.T.A. ENDORSEMENT-FORM 1 COVERAGE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs,attorneys'fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law,ordinance or governmental regulation(including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances,or regulations)restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii)a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations,except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect,lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by(a)above,except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims,or other matters: (a) created,suffered,assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company,not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy,but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy(except to the extent that this policy insures the priority of the lien of the insured mortgage over any statutory lien for services,labor or material or to the extent insurance is afforded herein as to assessments for street improvements under construction or completed at Date of Policy);or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy,or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness,to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. t 5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6. Any statutory lien for services, labor or materials(or the claim of priority of any statutory lien for services, labor or materials over the lien of the insured mortgage)arising from an improvement or work related to the land which is contracted for and commenced subsequent to Date of Policy and is not financed in whole or in part by proceeds of the indebtedness secured by the insured mortgage which at Date of Policy the insured has advanced or is obligated to advance. 7. Any claim,which arises out of the transaction creating the interest of the mortgagee insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy,state insolvency,or similar creditors'rights laws,that is based on: (i) the transaction creating the interest of the insured mortgagee being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer;or (ii) the subordination of the interest of the insured mortgagee as a result of the application of the doctrine of equitable subordination;or (iii) the transaction creating the interest of the insured mortgagee being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (a) to timely record the instrument of transfer;or (b) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage,the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage(and the Company will not pay costs,attorneys'fees or expenses)which arise by reason of: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements,liens or encumbrances,or claims thereof,not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies,conflicts in boundary lines,shortage in area,encroachments,or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose,and which are not shown by the public records. 5. (a)Unpatented mining claims;(b)reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;(c)water rights,claims or title ) to water,whether or not the matters excepted under(a),(b)or(c)are shown by the public records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services,labor or material not shown by the Public Records. Attachment One(07/26/10) 45 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) 2006 AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY(06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy,and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs,attorneys'fees,or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law,ordinance, permit,or governmental regulation(including those relating to building and zoning)restricting, regulating,prohibiting,or relating to (i) the occupancy,use,or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character,dimensions,or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land;or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b)does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims,or other matters (a) created,suffered,assumed,or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy(however,this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14);or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. 6. Any claim,by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy,state insolvency,or similar creditors'rights laws,that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage,is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer,or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b)of this policy. 7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b). The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage,the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following a Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage(and the Company will not pay costs,attorneys'fees or expenses)that arise by reason of: 1. (a)Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b)proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2. Any facts,rights,interests,or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. Easements,liens or encumbrances,or claims thereof,not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 5. (a)Unpatented mining claims;(b)reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;(c)water rights,claims or title 1 to water,whether or not the matters excepted under(a),(b),or(c)are shown by the Public Records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services,labor or material not shown by the Public Records. ) Attachment One(07/26/10) 46 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) FORMERLY AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY(10-17-92) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs, attorneys'fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law,ordinance or governmental regulation(including but not limited to building and zoning laws,ordinances,or regulations)restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land;(iii)a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations,except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect,lien or encumbrance resulting 1 from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by(a)above,except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy,but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims,or other matters: (a) created,suffered,assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company,not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy,but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy,or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate or interest insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy,state insolvency,or similar creditors'rights laws,that is based on: (i) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer;or (ii) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (a) to timely record the instrument of transfer;or (b) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage,the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage(and the Company will not pay costs,attorneys'fees or expenses)which arise by reason of: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements,liens or encumbrances,or claims thereof,not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies,conflicts in boundary lines,shortage in area,encroachments,or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose,and which are not shown by the public records. 5. (a)Unpatented mining claims;(b)reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;(c)water rights,claims or title to water,whether or not the matters excepted under(a),(b)or(c)are shown by the public records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services,labor or material not shown by the Public Records. Attachment One(07/26/10) 47 • ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) 2006 AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY(06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy,and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs,attorneys'fees,or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law,ordinance,permit,or governmental regulation(including those relating to building and zoning)restricting, regulating,prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy,use,or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character,dimensions,or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land;or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b)does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims,or other matters (a) created,suffered,assumed,or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy(however,this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10);or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. 4. Any claim,by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy,state insolvency,or similar creditors'rights laws,that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A,is ( (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer;or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. 5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage,the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage(and the Company will not pay costs,attorneys'fees or expenses)that arise by reason of: 1. (a)Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b)proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2. Any facts,rights,interests,or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. Easements,liens or encumbrances,or claims thereof,not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 5. (a)Unpatented mining claims;(b)reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;(c)water rights,claims or title to water,whether or not the matters excepted under(a),(b),or(c)are shown by the Public Records. 6. Any lien or right to a lien for services,labor or material not shown by the Public Records. } Attachment One(07/26/10) 48 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) CLTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE(10-22-03) ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE(10-22-03) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B,You are not insured against loss,costs,attorneys'fees,and expenses resulting from: 1. Governmental police power,and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes ordinances, laws and regulations concerning: a. building b. zoning c. Land use d. improvements on Land e. Land division f. environmental protection This Exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters if notice of the violation or enforcement appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14,15,16,17 or 24. 2. The failure of Your existing structures,or any part of them,to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not apply to violations of building codes if notice of the violation appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date. 3. The right to take the Land by condemning it,unless: a. notice of exercising the right appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date;or b. the taking happened before the Policy Date and is binding on You if You bought the Land without Knowing of the taking. 4. Risks: a. that are created,allowed,or agreed to by You,whether or not they appear in the Public Records; b. that are Known to You at the Policy Date,but not to Us,unless they appear in the Public Records at the Policy Date; c. that result in no loss to You;or d. that first occur after the Policy Date-this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7,8.d,22,23,24 or 25. 5. Failure to pay value for Your Title. 6. Lack of a right: a. to any Land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A;and b. in streets,alleys,or waterways that touch the Land. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 11 or 18. LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner's Coverage Statement as follows: • For Covered Risk 14, 15, 16 and 18,Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability shown in Schedule A. The deductible amounts and maximum dollar limits shown on Schedule A are as follows: Your Deductible Amount Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability Covered Risk 14: 1.00%of Policy Amount $10.000.00 or $2,500.00(whichever is less) Covered Risk 15: 1.00%of Policy Amount $25.000.00 or $5,000.00(whichever is less) Covered Risk 16: 1.00%of Policy Amount $25.000.00 or $5,000.00(whichever is less) ( Covered Risk 18: 1.00%of Policy Amount $5.000.00 or $2,500.00(whichever is less) Attachment One(07/26/10) 49 { ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) CLTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE(02-03-10) ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE(02-03-10) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B,You are not insured against loss,costs,attorneys'fees,and expenses resulting from: 1. Governmental police power,and the existence or violation of those portions of any law or government regulation concerning: a. building; b. zoning; c. land use; d. improvements on the Land; e. land division;and f. environmental protection. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 8.a.,14,15,16,18,19,20,23 or 27. 2. The failure of Your existing structures,or any part of them,to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14 or 15. 3. The right to take the Land by condemning it. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 17. 4. Risks: a. that are created,allowed,or agreed to by You,whether or not they are recorded in the Public Records; b. that are Known to You at the Policy Date,but not to Us,unless they are recorded in the Public Records at the Policy Date; c. that result in no loss to You;or d. that first occur after the Policy Date-this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7,8.e.,25,26,27 or 28, 5. Failure to pay value for Your Title. 6. Lack of a right: a. to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A;and b. in streets,alleys,or waterways that touch the Land. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 11 or 21. - 7. The transfer of the Title to You is invalid as a preferential transfer or as a fraudulent transfer or conveyance under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency,or similar creditors'rights laws. ) • LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner's Coverage Statement as follows: • For Covered Risk 16, 18, 19 and 21,Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability shown in Schedule A. • • The deductible amounts and maximum dollar limits shown on Schedule A are as follows: Your Deductible Amount Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability Covered Risk 16: 1.00%of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A $10,000.00 or $2,500.00 • (whichever is less) Covered Risk 18: 1.00%of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A $25,000.00 or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) Covered Risk 19: 1.00%of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A $25,000.00 or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) Covered Risk 21: 1.00%of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A $5,000.00 • or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) Attachment One(07/26/10) 50 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) ALTA EXPANDED COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOAN POLICY(10/13/01) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs, attorneys'fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to(i)the occupancy,use,or enjoyment of the Land;(ii)the character,dimensions or location of any improvements now or hereafter erected on the Land;(iii)a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or areas of the Land or any parcel of which the Land is or was a part; or(iv)environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect,lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the Land has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 12,13,14,and 16 of this policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by(a)above,except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the Land has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 12,13,14,and 16 of this policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy,but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without Knowledge. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims or other matters: (a) created,suffered,assumed or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy,but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy(this paragraph does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 8,16,18, 19,20, 21,22,23,24,25 and 26);or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of the Insured at Date of Policy,or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness,to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state in which the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage, or claim thereof,which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury,except as provided in Covered Risk 27,or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6. Real property taxes or assessments of any governmental authority which become a lien on the Land subsequent to Date of Policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 7,8(e)and 26. ) 7. Any claim of invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to advances or modifications made after the Insured has Knowledge that the vestee shown in Schedule A is no longer the owner of the estate or interest covered by this policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 8. 8. Lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to each and every advance made after Date of Policy,and all interest charged thereon,over liens,encumbrances and other matters affecting the title,the existence of which are Known to the Insured at: (a) The time of the advance;or (b) The time a modification is made to the terms of the Insured Mortgage which changes the rate of interest charged, if the rate of interest is greater as a result of the modification than it would have been before the modification. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 8. 9. The failure of the residential structure, or any portion thereof to have been constructed before, on or after Date of Policy in accordance with applicable building codes. This exclusion does not apply to violations of building codes if notice of the violation appears in the Public Records at Date of Policy. ( ( ) ( Attachment One(07/26/10) 51 ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) ALTA EXPANDED COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOAN POLICY(07/26/10) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage,costs,attorneys'fees or expenses which arise by reason of: ) 1. (a) Any law,ordinance, permit,or governmental regulation(including those relating to building and zoning)restricting,regulating,prohibiting,or relating to (i) the occupancy,use,or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character,dimensions,or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land;or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the ( coverage provided under Covered Risk 5,6,13(c),13(d),14 or 16. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b)does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5,6,13(c),13(d),14 or 16. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims,or other matters (a) created,suffered,assumed,or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy(however,this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 16, 17, 18,19,20,21,22,23,24,27 or 28);or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury,or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 26. 6. Any claim of invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to Advances or modifications made after the Insured has Knowledge that the vestee shown in Schedule A is no longer the owner of the estate or interest covered by this policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11. 7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching subsequent to Date of Policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11(b)or 25. 8. The failure of the residential structure,or any portion of it,to have been constructed before,on or after Date of Policy in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 5 or 6. 9. Any claim,by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy,state insolvency,or similar creditors'rights laws,that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured mortgage,is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer,or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 27(b)of this policy. Attachment One(07/26/10) 52 Notice of Available Discounts Pursuant to Section 2355.3 in Title 10 of the California Code of Regulations Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries ("FNF") must deliver a notice of each discount available under our current rate filing along with the delivery of escrow instructions, a preliminary report or commitment. Please be aware that the provision of this notice does not constitute a waiver of the consumer's right to be charged the filed rate. As such, your transaction may not qualify for the below discounts. You are encouraged to discuss the applicability of one or more of the below discounts with a Company representative. These discounts are generally described below; consult the rate manual for a full description of the terms, conditions and requirements for such discount. These discounts only apply to transactions involving services rendered by the FNF Family of Companies. This notice only applies to transactions involving property improved with a one-to-four family residential dwelling. Not all discounts are offered by every FNF Company. The discount will only be applicable to the FNF Company as indicated by the named discount. FNF Underwritten Title Companies Underwritten by FNF Underwriters CTC-Chicago Title Company CTIC-Chicago Title Insurance Company Available Discounts CREDIT FOR PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORTS AND/OR COMMITMENTS ON SUBSEQUENT POLICIES (CTIC) Where no major change in the title has occurred since the issuance of the original report or commitment,the order may be reopened within 12 to 36 months and all or a portion of the charge previously paid for the report or commitment may be credited on a subsequent policy charge. FEE REDUCTION SETTLEMENT PROGRAM (CTC, CTIC) Eligible customers shall receive a $20.00 reduction in their title and/or escrow fees charged by the Company for each eligible transaction in accordance with the terms of the Final Judgments entered in The People of the State of California et al. v. Fidelity National Title insurance Company et al., Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 99AS02793, and related cases. DISASTER LOANS (CTIC) The charge for a Lender's Policy (Standard or Extended coverage) covering the financing or refinancing by an owner of record, within 24 months of the date of a declaration of a disaster area by the government of the United States or the State of California on any land located in said area, which was partially or totally destroyed in the disaster,will be 50% of the appropriate title insurance rate. CHURCHES OR CHARITABLE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS(CTIC) On properties used as a church or for charitable purposes within the scope of the normal activities of such entities, provided said charge is normally the church's obligation the charge for an owner's policy shall be 50% to 70% of the appropriate title insurance rate, depending on the type of coverage selected. The charge for a lender's policy shall be 32%to 50% of the appropriate title insurance rate, depending on the type of coverage selected. Notice of Available Discounts Printed: 10.29.13 @ 08:30AM by SLS SCA0002565.doc/Updated: 07.11.13 CA-CT-FLAX-02180.055611-131303690 53 o � a .. °' POR. TRACT L, RANCHO SIM! 511-03 ly 0, 3704';;; ,5,0°24''E.. 40590 Tax Rate Area k 'F.,. � 2•a J°&en 589,342,-.420- 10066 — X V:7*t- •91 . M\ SanZ6'E /6.9/ 10006 H fF ',F+ O 1 38 39+ -'Fo&-',.,,ws 4t, 36 *' '9.+ T (+1 b n O 4'.,',20,-9' r 9 'V n n '..?. W Et I 2 3u 37„ Q��?\\\f�'*o4 0` O 3 Rs. (kora ° 4. . : \ Y m� '':o�`" O R E .3 34 `,,..-;\e\ `t' ED N O s1 (] 0`o Z a 6 ----%,----..- o,...h 6 East Line Lot T O h os1. • r 33 �`, ,. a 4 1 1't� 50y, 2 m 7 32\•J?09 . 's. R _ .__ _ _.__ ._O • N n"1`',4d-E • .o �� "% 'e°' O� West Line Lot U C) t 'g0 q, az 'i U \ > N. � o � .3. 1 8 ;sd. � .L\�, 't'' n r ? O It, ••• Ci �3'\\ " 1 m moo'\ ,,. W T J86 3n n ® ,\fib„ /�, �� og�i o a \ zf 4 • (77 �0`�`6`\0'0. I n N 25 ` s\"�o. z. t0 ' �.a+> Ch.'. ` `\ a2 s " 15r 24 `sl i-... h ;,";�- �� < �W� r,�a� b O \ W29.5a W ,:6. " G o \ 1 6 0 23 : ¢ �.s. N N tl r S/r5 fid./,.8620 '0 SOTS:ASSESSOR 000055 SHOWN ON THIS PAGE ` .&....16p,./. rs 17 ,s•-•;:e'4 �. 5.35 tPn1 DO NOT NECESSARILY CONOTTUIE LEGAL LOTS. ' C ry N Q `` .559 • IZ"',N�/—.Si' ta CHECK SRN COUNTY SURVEYOR'S OFFICE OR C R 'Tear o A 7 Aoy �ti ro PLANNING DIVISION TO VERIFY. .1w � 4\6`,.` '" N 2t . 'I',6,'41,ye' # 12�,'Q/Ip N..' 1-1 CA/ '�•-• \ m 19 al ...1 ©p e°o�;,� ?q„ // 13 b a t4 l 3s\ St ems' % 0 b 0 Bk.5/2y 0 2p '74E oh 16 NOTE VCFCD.Esmfs md,coledby Doc Refs 9 \\ 22 ''''°•' \^\\'� brOk¢n tines wllhln Porc¢Is , \\\6›.` •. 17 °', `\ 23 �,,.� `:6 4�0 to .5 *, • , 24 ' \ 04 5 CITY OF MOORPARK -90 � '- 26 Ventura County Assessor's Map. \ , Assessor's Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses. ''',,a6;.5.- Assessor's Parcel Numbers Shown in Circles. w Assessor's Mineral Numbers Shown in Squares. \` ,'' 1 2. Por Lot T & U "Poindexter Sub" M.R. Bk.5, Pg.5 'DRAWN REVISED 4-19-20021 .e.,_,.,,, Walnut Grove Tract, M.R. Bk.B, Pg.22 !REDRAWN CREATED 4-19-20021 \ �$[., g (INKED PLOTTED EFFECTIVE ROLL! Rancho Simi, M.R. Bk.3, Pg.7 1 PRENOUS Bk.5(1,Portion Pq.07 I I Compiled By Pastors County Assessors office I \ \-'• 54 ctNb 511-04 t. RANCHO SIMI, PORTION TRACT L Tax Rate Area h 10007 • ,n 10007 m iw N 0, \ w T 32 . W •• ti 0 U.36 CIN D o Bp4i2�o P/ 0 �• U 13 • t'2a a, 3�oa u tb Z •� 26 M \ Z h 45 \ \s\ 0 '.1": • y \ae, o9 to 0N'--;.; O s to q41 27 \t'\ 6, W \ .s...,-,,.s...,-,, 469.26 (Vii) a t(11S 15\. \ ''4. ;ti ; 0 w 28 \ 663 a•my •eiTi O r y N Q67.,,,....;-, b Wn n z 29 \\\ms's? k y". �� y ti ' 3-" • 3p r'3 \\ate s,. w U �a sr 31 �� s,' B a 1-4 a 4)R539 3.44AcP1 e, � `\ 6, 3 4. e� m ', e� W Ns a \ 3e ir,T IT N S>Q w 3q \ Ia,� In ��ti PMT' J x Bk o— j. 35 s,;':�� i • 513 I.4 \ ',.f‹...44.‹.._ ^�(.4 iii o_ Q \ `\ `�F� Ib.�. q.`T%k"� 1.4.5-,8(e-",°.7)fl - N,Ta 8- F'h �O�%C•\.�,F- �C(�aT'F �, \ (4496 5022'5022' 4,'..j(.ori ci F+ ...../.....,\ ,`,i, 1•-.sy'i 4%a 2 AkR.2 $N' ✓20.92' _ u \ r wfbr.t i\�%3� 47{ �� .W\ ql 404439 3n' 1� y � \ . c��I m�s "48" \ v �d:� mg �E. {y 'I,t&�.". NOTE VCFCD Esmts.Indicated by Doc.Refs 8 V1- \\ •149.. r'2- 43 I v�^_ONLY LINE Li 0 broken lines within Porter's 01 , \\ ., O u __ V 35S ' gpi �°_y LOT U sr, '� PAR.1 OP • e �'y{� \ r .+`t.a 44 0�.mrt..H w�• r�'3J \ `_ a Zo_ SO22 beaa Z�j:Riot CITY OF MOORPARK A,7 _ _ _--'72 3747 ee412 Ventura County Assessors Map. 512Bk Og�p �• �. N�,'4; 2a"�= Assessor's Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses. L� AD S6 n� .(„ g' H C Assessor's Rome!Numbers Shawn in Grecs. Rp p Assessor's Mineral Numbers Shown in Squares. R ,7„t„.• (q ne g (DRAWN JREVISED 8-15-20101 3 y Portion Walnut Grove Tract, M.R. Bk.B, Pg22 �� 'REDRAWN (CREATED Portion Lot U Poindexter Sub" M.R. Bk.5, Pg.5 NOTE:ASSESSOR PARCELS SHOWN ON SOS PAGE II NEED PLOTTED!EFFECTIVE ROLL 8 DO NOT NECESSARILY CONSUME LEGAL LOTS. I I a ig Rancho Simi, M.R. 8k.3, Pg.7 °"E°"P 005 COUSIN' ERFY OR I Compiled By Ventura County Assessor's Mos I ; W.+ 55 ° � 51 1—1 1 w RANCHO SIMI, PORTION TRACT L Tax Rate Area .. ti Bk �, EASTj r»2' Bk 101-0096- w 0007 N 513 ME CORnER`Dr r 10041 MRS H o w o to 12 _ }1 tto2 '0 1"= 200' CZ% e,v,4',6"' •.$ C 7.8 4A,.. 4.9}Ac. ,� to CD 8.26Ac. e ij e s.oz' • D. N \ n135'48•E 36' 1.3 v Ar/'35'E 24.5/' 'i ge •• �' N49'91'34'W 148.38' 2,``• 8CR R(� 889.58'W 6.61' 3 t W �• / NJ5'48f T6.50' ® 4'. Bj O P' 9..509.0 E9MT. v\ B23 9.70'3 2'33'. W S 4e12£x10.33' PEe ✓362 �'•Td 12.39 5 28 54E j 23.06AL. 925• .1 ,; >s• 1't Kq 2 589.'9'36W",9.'9'3ow". , ti 7s' o O w z `h�3 c ! "m b 02 3 3 aq Q 8 © e O o- _mr ul e T U 2 _ ; I., b N; O 4-r , z% b W3,t:rty Bounaory J. , I..t Lin3 211 O.R.107 qq••�� SW Cor. ,Te•/37.46' 75' 589.49'W/30' I•,, = 241 O.R.to7 ___2L3..RL_,....,_4___ ——— F �+q� 03 5895930W a I''F'. NW COR i S85 23'W .. DEEDS 176/275 m 92 04 - CASEY ROAD w� I_, W� 2O c; qy.ss kq0 DETAIL k b ).S6QL. o ,e..1,"' SCALE re 100' O W p se e N076'W /6.91' Pit ;1.''' Ci ,b" `2. 1I89't i'£ 40' 4� N6 U06.,./ m '. h. 2 ,,• n?J2? e O)4 m i yo N � O r ..*<1".'''11.• tee• 3 Portion Poindexter Sub, Rancho Simi, M.R. Bk.5, Pg.5 ��„9 Pe« Portion Fremont Tract, M.R. Bk.3, Pg.39 DI _Walnut sWL� oR LOT) Rancho Simi, M.R. Bk.3, Pg.7 CITY OF MOORPARK SEE DETAIL -`t,''`, , Will a-,-� �c�.r8��Rpm��;;� -WALNUT Ventura County Assessors Map. N u` s99//961,%W 1 4R4 r g Assessors Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses. ^ mi-•N O s3'M'"m3 i CANYON Assessor's Poiret Numbers Shown in circles. 266.56' Iyy2f3.43 ; ROAD Bk Assessor's Mineral Numbers Shown in Squoms. • F W89.S9 30"E 63.38W 11 (HWY. 3) 512 'DRAWN REVISED 1-9-20071 NW COR ✓ -- ———"f'— _[-10 DEEDS 176/275 CASEY O ROAD 6 !0 1 b� I II INKED PCOTIED EFFECTWE ROLL NOTE:ASSESSOR PA0.,T SHOwN ON MI5 PAGE 02 I CHECH WnH LWMY SURJEYO 5 Otf'ICE OR ( PI.WNINO DIOSION TO VERIFY. Compiled Be Ventura County Asseaoora Office 56 IC) 51010 o 1!-Ik-04'.19000-001-0-000 II '03 599 SOK,/569 0079+;0955 I 96 601101 0000/1/0 010 9 090-031-0-LOG 000-m611 010-021-0-010) 001-5501 Oil-010-0-0061 66 090-9 060-00l-O-0LO) 090-16 050-0LL-0-001) 90t-Oft-0-ft5) 590-091-0-00502 S01-001-0-0l 620-010-0-0001 _ Sll-9 S60-00I-0-ftO OZZ-000-0-005Z 5 t-0HIS 0111.4(1 u 0099009 l6 9 4Z NA LSI 0000/6/0 _ (H)'MdY (s)'N'd'W (H)'N'd'tl I 107003009 0900 89N '91701978 010A I N0I1NNy1dX7 1000 309393338 31tl0 001 9019909 f1'90' £10'88 80-LO 300.0-1109 II r.4-) G G 9 90107 030390 M5\ 09 101000900 3S !n' • 0 0 _ tom. .099 ,09100 .01000 _ ,20966 C u �8 a ,a IiaNL91 0 ..1.-SE. o We9 o MM( .00z =..{ 'OylL'L OyLL'£4 w 'OYZL', '•6` �1 IY�o =• �� ' ' J .00i=.1:a1o01 l'...:ry ® R r b, rp\ R Q N 3 - 9 J £ �l W ,� 0 907 Il in In 0 '.-Q -li r- V 80#0� _ r „k p m yah �' z If) y lo'od __ K:o s°CSHH a:ossa`9.v R. Q �3 2 ,c 41 �.010I9 X„29,20.099 .099 E'er .50999 1 + M.246fb6N N 2 E E 6 L B 6 01 I l ti L '2 9 M C o -L. C1 'Oy98'6i g4 16� ''7 107C-.) SG V m�t a 0 d' Q07Mc iS j'G it ZL \O�D, O UC '�a i$ F 51 N 907 0 4° 07 0 61 E cr00 8600 *E. C Ivy d 3074 y9 9z - -",9 S� o Q _ IL }0919'3 00 ml ttarvle •170 LG o lG9 GG5 n?4rcn3 Mscc 0, )189G X18 � Y 90107.0 ,u ,0X8( 1 .65Gfl 10079[91 i n 61a��3,IZ.YISIN .1969=I �tZB. SI El--1 3Ud 09-99-ZFSZ 391 1 •01«'a [904 3„2192169 Of �` SOiS ;x.ers99 9 1 'ysa.z L K,S.09 A ^, ,091 07 M r 1[01#1 335 9 ` _ smvm-11.0 m 'A 6559 962 . , '�� '01+80',, K.o6.i5r1H 7,,z2,0'.' i a ��sy h \J �/ Sts 60000 '»0JfO r o N, )fi.•Lzcsc3''" a1', 3070071 3 z Oj/' 3„0,59069 1.1f 11��yg66 CYI. Z z o _ ,06f g33.Zf.i.WNftH6H wuF'- a o '0VLZO'Z "' ''' ' . .E' 0L '6t �� { z i .1 q&14 e :11:IAd) S 907 = k LO �l =g eL4/1051 (Q' +'1J,.,'"°,,,2 a 107 B 907 it ) ,622 `� ... ,i/r7 �� Bp19=a 90,5$.5 9 V W t o'.4,4,,, 1 o X S77/!]a NVIGWN3W OL Øj- K.91,f06N . ., ,, 1 , Pia' z V xl iio3 �'46 Oi N 107 69�,�, 43 It WO 39055 ', O4.0 S off/9 d 107 y Q^ zi 1'i ait t,G O 4 4 •�' I Q ,° P.k, � 4 4S qi �,a. se • .107 y N. y 4. a N 101 IV l5(•�.�dJ CL l7d SSy�y9 W39 a.6(1_6", ,`",, 99 99 39 69 ^Y O' 'Ov£L'SZ V'x 99 Ng. j 90y,1 6 69 0,�o Q]R] (' of moo �� 9 LL IL L3.7"i..,zo N.N.O P N. 0000~ Ili i *9 1L._t._ ,1949=1 AN 05-8 001 1,564 1.6,51,1SL99 a '9.N S9 ,1964 3„01,90,69 00 1.91'681 3.,54.8,009/ 9 000w 0 0 S ,OC M,8L,0991 se 1,0050=1 ,562=011 -6' . Al,LI K.1,242I9 XA L 4 396 41L .4 ,829 l �0�0 0 f .x .M1 , ,u 1 %.astkt z 16'02=1 ,995=a x ti 99 .90'00 3.,10.01919 A 1,16'[1=l ,606=9 f € .OZ 116,629211 X 1,54,4=1 ,602=8 H z0�q. •961f 1,81,6A81 00 1.00 f2 1,51,5281'9 0 2 *Z9NLSI.zseoz .0099 6,00.90.0.4A 1.09'99 3,66,99.609 3 .10 191 .66615 1A,00699 .11'20=1 ,0000=a A 1,0000=l .016-6/ 3 M1,0Zbbv ,99'0601- ,00'42=1 ,6601=a 1 1.0000 3,494829 0 LO (� .08'90 6.6[,2509 S I.SCZ['=l ,645>a a _ Z07 ,0091 66$1.16•1911a I,49"90=1 .2601=0 9 Description: Ventura,CA Assessor Map 513.13 Page: 1 of 1 3,91,400,0 0 1.06'901 3,6£06109 5 Order: 131303690 Comment: I \ 1 _,,,,,,,tos3sana I 3na32x3san(5 Site Plan D E F G A B B1 C Pool area with sunning deck and trellis Yoga lawn Putting green Community plaza with fireplace and outdoor seating Community vegetable garden Overlook seating area Open lawn area for social gathering Rose garden and DG pathways Bocce ball courts Multiuse trail Gated entry with visitor callbox Cloister garden w/ outdoor seating Atrium courtyard Atrium courtyard Memory garden w/ central fountain 660670630 POOL AREA ASSISTED LIVING A.L. COURTYARD ATRIUM FIRE LANEM.C. COURTYARD MEMORY CARE 59 0630640650660600610620640 580 590 62 0 600 610 63 0 6 1 6 640 61 2 61 4 61 8 62 4 62262 6 67062 8640640640 650660670 672680 690 660 670 660670680690650 630 640 640 650 660 640 650 580 590 600 58 0 620 650660 654 66 4 610630COMMONS 636FITNESS/REC. PAD 620 PAD 636 PAD 624 PAD 610 PAD 626 PAD 629 PAD 626 636PAD 628 638 PAD 638 626630 63062862862 6 626632636.5628 634 PAD 620 PAD 630 PAD 628 62 4 62 2 620618620630 640626 610620626 58 0 570 560640 58 Sections 0 40 8020 North Hills Parkway ROW Villa Housing Villa HousingB Street 0 40 8020 North Hills Parkway ROW Villa Housing Villa HousingB Street Independent Living 0 40 8020 North Hills Parkway ROW Villa Housing Villa HousingB Street Memory Care 0 40 8020 North Hills Parkway ROW Villa Housing Villa HousingB Street Memory Care Proposed Building Property Line 0 40 8020 Walnut CanyonRoad Property Line 0 40 8020 Property Line 0 40 8020 Independent Living Property Line Existing Building Existing Building 0 40 8020 Walnut CanyonRoad Independent Living Section A Section B Section B1 Section C Section D Section E Section F Section G 59 ASSISTED LIVING & SKILLED NURSING I \ \ C A S E Y \ �--_/ CASEY ROAD � RO AD senior community --- Applicant: I I Aldersgate Investments, LLC 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 Oxnard , CA 93036 805 988 4114 ,, =------I \ \ \ \ • ___ _,, X DRIVEWAY PARKING STREET PAR Kl NG '-TRASH ENCLOSURE ' PATH OF TRAVEL � "-. COVERED PARKING -INDEPENDENT LIVING �VILLAS Assisted Livin lnde endent Livin Villas er Unit Villas Guest Parking Required per Moorpark Municipal Code 17.32.020 .5 spaces per unit .5 spaces per unit .25 of spaces covered 2 spaces 1 covered .5 spaces per unit 1 LEVEL '-------"J 2 LEVELS 3 LEVELS Parking Required 65 spaces total 92 spaces total 23 covered 15 2 spaces total 76 covered 38 guest parking Parking Provided 135 spaces 107 spaces 47 covered 152 spaces total 76 driveway spaces 76 covered spaces 74 guest parking (on street parking) VICINITY MAP not to scale -ll' Owner: --.,,,.. I� \ ,'/ .... = 1 -· f.'111-Pif�• ' db f -· --! l . l a..,-- r . . --,f IIJ,.• ,,--""" 'r ' I --I l -.� Jr i ----� , ... ·---! Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC 5900 Canoga Avenue, Suite 400 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 PROJECT INfORMATION Gross Project Area Proposed Zoning RPO Zone Area Total Dwelling Units Density Building Coverage Parking Coverage Gross Floor Area Building Heights Parking Provided 49.52 AC RPD,OS 26.58 AC 390 DU 14. 7 DU/AC 25% 14% 455,552 sq. ft. 1 to 3 stories, appx. 44'-6" 316 spaces Proposed Development Standards Front Setbacks 20' typical Side Setback Rear Setback Building Separation Drive Aisle Width Parking Dimensions 8' min. @ cul-de-sac 1 O' 35' 1 story: 15' typical, 1 O' min. 2 or more stories: 20' min. 25' 9' x 20' unco vered 1 O' x 20' covered Assisted Living & Skilled Nursing Memory Care Studio Units 1 Bedroom Units Subtotal Parking Provided Gross Floor Area Independent Living Studio Units 1 Bedroom Units 2 Bedroom Units Subtotal Parking Provided Gross Floor Area Villas 2 Bedroom Units 3 Bedroom Units Subtotal Parking Provided Gross Floor Area 26 DU (20%) 47 DU (36%) 57 DU (43%) 130DU 135 spaces 99,514 sq. ft 70 DU (38%) 76 DU (41 °/o) 38 DU (21%) 184DU 107 spaces (47 covered) 216, 192 sq. ft. 47DU (61%) 29 DU (39%) 76DU 7 6 garage spaces 123, 080 sq. ft. �UBMITTAL MOORPARK, CA KT G Y # 2013-0956 08-14-2014 �HEET INDEX SP .1 Site Plan Assisted Living & Memory Care A 1.1 Conceptual Perspectives A 1.2 Conceptual Elevations A 1.3 Conceptual Elevations A 1.4 Conceptual Elevations A 1.5 Floor Plan -Assisted Living Level 1 A 1.6 Floor Plan -Assisted Living Level 2 A 1.7 Floor Plan -Assisted Living Basement Level A 1.8 Floor Plan -Memory Care A 1.9 Roof Plans A 1.10 Unit Plans -Assisted Living A 1.11 Unit Plans -Memory Care Independent Living A2.1 Conceptual Perspective -Building C A2.2 Conceptual Perspective -Building C A2.3 Conceptual Elevations -Building C A2.4 Conceptual Elevations -Building C A2.5 Floor Plan -Building C Level 1 A2.6 Floor Plan -Building C Level 2 A2.7 Floor Plan -Building C Basement Level A2.8 Roof Plan -Building C A2.9 Floor Plan -Building A Level 1 A2.10 Floor Plan -Building A Level 2 A2.11 Floor Plan -Building B Level 1 A2.12 Floor Plan -Building B Level 2 A2.13 Floor Plan -Building B Basement Level A2.14 Unit Plans A2.15 Conceptual Perspective -Commons A2.16 Conceptual Perspective -Commons A2.17 Conceptual Elevations -Commons A2.18 Conceptual Elevations -Commons A2.19 Floor Plan -Commons Level 1 A2.20 Floor Plan -Commons Level 2 A2.21 Floor Plan -Commons Basement Level A2.22 Conceptual Perspective -Recreation A2.23 Conceptual Elevations -Recreation A2.24 Conceptual Elevations -Recreation A2.25 Floor Plan -Recreation Villas A3.1 A3.2 A3.3 A3.4 Conceptual Perspective -Villa D Conceptual Elevations - Villa D Floor Plans Unit Plans Architecture + Planning 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 Santa Monica, CA 90401 ktgy.com 310 394 2623 T.I 60 i II 111111 II ■ rilk mIi;! Iiiiii ■■iAA, .............,..w , i , , ,.... �� ■■f i� iii iii ■■■ ■■f ■Mfiu ■■■ ■■■; :CT ;JW. 1. Ji . . ■■L_ .■a ■r■ ■■■ ■li... Br 4 1 t al I 1� ■f■ 11 ■■■ ■■■ ■■■ ■! ■f■ gig logII _ 7 il %•"*.-141 i 1 , 7 ..' . -; !' — �l ,.a " ll I rP.IL � 11 R `` if !HP �[ JP al sonn min _'1 iii P 5 ' 1111111 ... I. 5 0 il ON mon ,am , . , [ , � ■ ■ ( ,1-:: _ i■ fA ! RIl1{A I ; mu �"; i_. ilk 1 A. ir I!!JIe . um min s -> 7. , ...0)----crirrirmr, .- , ,T - 9 '.9 ' 4,Of'40444 i tg, - 9 .dakilt spi „k?„. . _ _ „_..._ _ _ r rrl� f■i^ 1�, 1:,. k � L 4 1111 MO Ell 111 i WIIIII: 1 OEM IMO rbi , -.L..y , . , i. , , . %. I • 1 T 1 I ” 4 f - I , 1 A" i • ' c • - f r , 1 i I Ill ll 1111. 4.491111111111111111111111 - .1 Ill . , 1mhz" m1; . - ::iIuu '� . ...________ „... __ �- - r iii .1J9o; . � 111 d ,` ih °' 111 ,., ,.mac I *ti:= N. I -tea: 1',-'�'`,�"' �� : eta.,.•_-.. L - -- - - - --- ,� �!, --..» - - c-•a - - - - - - ,.-. l, i i 1 r I .. 111 ..ganiniallar: '��_` �'. ' - � �I_ --- 1 _ ' b1;a ,��`` , ,�- �'�.`.� .;1//:f� ,/ / '‘Iii 7.„. 1111 I .r an Mk k ) III 1111 III li "■ 1■1 tl ► j ■ iR II 1® ill III lit i; NVQ. 14 _�., :91 iii ■■■ N 111 I f 111111 s . ..t... ill:31 . it5 11.. ' - :1. Aim. II III .11:I il , t" ' 1::'":. Ili 11 1111 littia141110-i- j. - . fitig'4 ' -4 �� 1,1 -.. . A '• - - , ,i _ -rte--ti - ��( � !ti 7 '4 tJ > , S. I IIID _ _ . -` a III III error 4°14' _ 4 r , , - - i 1 i .... Lk- ' _ - •--- -,,i. 7r -54 11. S. 411 ,� � ill I } , A . 9 44 t-1"" 111044/4114 i 4111 111 11 IIII irr 4l i i .. , irill' lo 1 it --,- JP IP 11111 II , t 146, i IN - • I . j , • lip . . A C i ir illirt as t 4 er yr- , 4 Ill I ir 41 im • • vigh-- * .., jai .., IP Illi •1 , vie dr' 1 i il "V .. 4. 41. .Ill 411 rVip -----------------------------.._______ -egi ic iiiii‘,#)%i Ati401-. II tit i . t .,. r _ it Iri - IP f di Or �-� , 4 A II -.. . , wi, A AliiiilLt • 10° CASEY ROAD senior community CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVES . ASSISTED LIVING MEMORY CARE AI . 1 _ _ _ _ _ Applicant: Owner: MOORPARK , C A Architecture + Planning Alders ate Investments LLC Grand Pacific Asset LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 IIIII g � 2, Santa Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr. , Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com 0.44 Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 i 818 591 3300 61 WU Q 14 ® 10 20 EN 111 III 0 © El 111 El 18 111 immIllk • 1 11.111111 11111.111111 _ _. 11.1 .11 p in 4,..„h 0 i 0 ik.iiiiii A i-- Li . _ ■■■ 111111 111111 ■■ 111 \ "4 _Ms_ 1 PPI lin ■■■ ■� ill �� UN ■■■ ■■ 111 � HMI iii ii 1 , u rIr Ili inn: _ in 111 1 111 111 i�■ ■■. 1 ioo 111 111 111 111 - , i11 111 III 1 _.�I III III -- •__ 111 111 111111 111 r�■ iii li \, .. ■■■ ■■■ II it 0 1■■ ■■■ ■ III -- ■■■ ■■■ ■ III 111 111 1111 __ _ __ III 111 111 111 111 111111 111 I i l ■a[ I. 1 , I I IIV I�Izci- II�I IIIIIIIIII II �� IIIIIIIII T -— -- . 141 Mil + E�I 4- r �— ® n .�a !'r v I.t t i ,` t ff 4. Am t I A■ P _ 111 1 11111 '� 1111 _ N 4lir e I r. ' f l [ . ffIt�_ � __ 111 111111L- I !! �� I� 4,1 I !! III 1 ueS� F -�_ 11 t 1 t t �` a °} tA' fi t q t t. I I- % ! !!, aa!�!6"*k it/ it;IA t..,fic4 'P«gtf.,, ,., - I ' �. �a , A - .\ I .0 :,1. - ■ ■ r,! y `I . .t m. ::,s • 1.� i tL I. 9 ri1+t" .r►' =s 7 - Z _r L 1�. . Ap+.. r. 1. ik a ti • — i o A N• �y —I `, �. .17111 .. - 1 i ! ! 1111iii4 , i II11! ! 111111 iii !! !! ■� 1111 �- - ■■■f� II■■■■ 11111 III r _ - ■■Vu. 1 I.'. .".:-_ : dilis. �- ,„ '+ ��...a !! ! I�� fir--- allr_ • -�� FRONT ft] II rfl 4 20 El 18 17 111 13 © 14 Fq II 15 1 p \ A - - - - -_ --------_.-- -- _. - - - - - - .._._._- _ .,. . , .*.. - __ . . .. . _ . . . . . - - - - •g- iffli_ ... 0.1 1 I - I � AViiw�iu�Si$�Gi�Ab�oiJ+et#� 11 0 q -��,�I+ .■. 111111 limmmT 111111 111i�! liffi iii'"""41� - INII� t- [.. iii Ililii iii III Iii iia ' n■ !! 1! f r ` �� 11! --- I 1 - I1�11 i III 111 III IIS: mg - \I III ■■■ - r • . ,� , + ' 1 ► .. k:� — - — cul 1111 -71�� j , ■..��.i r) r t 1.J. '1, bt �■1r � err I ` +� trr 5011111 1 _ �� !•ti s r f v, ii■■■■ II■■ 111111 ]II111 111 I 2 : n■■ ■� ' ■I■■■7Irt I I■■ 111111 1 , 1 IM i ■I�1 + .R �. � � �� I� ■1 I ■1!+-' 11■■ ,,. ` ' IIS^�1 ..� 111111 I — ` !� �- - -- F r---a) . ■i ■I■ 1[4,l • I l■■ I IC 1 1 11 L I, 1 _ � o 1 �Y ■ t 1 11 1 rn _ 'i 4. ,.. [.� F' -.1.. w • -�E.' t r t i•• / ' .� •!:" `1. "t by - .l r t 1 a - 2 0:-.,' -1 4 t� {{ yit �f.�.r ' . .. t,.[13 , , — rl r tJf 1.t r• I f �' r r } y ).. , , S.I I II fin 1 -- - -, -ii, , ,,,, ,.,,,, • .i.,4 , : .,,_.:, , ., i . - i ,,,, ,.. .' � I. a AT, t 1��.tj ��IIi i, I 17 !C 'El ��I !!, 1 � , , i 4 �� ; _Ell I _ _ __ — mr [I II!I L. J REAR ELEVATION LEGEND ( AS NOTED ) I CONCRETE S — TILE 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 STUCCO FINISH TRIM 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 17 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM ROOFING SURROUND 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale CASEY ROAD senior community CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS . ASSISTED LIVING I 2 ■ _ _ ■ ■ ■ Applicant: Owner: M O O R P A R K , C A Architecture + Planning 1111 Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 gSanta Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr. , Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com S Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 •.-44 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 62 13 14 12 El 10 4 20 [i] 11 1 10 11 5 18 11 21 0. Z • ','.:;;.21,";,; rTI:;:-"KIM!Ittliti f , _ . 771 ...., ....,,„ 11 U III II 11 III in IIi1 ■ ■■ ■■� 1!r I 111 1 11 1111 �� ■■f in C1 [I Fi , „ �xj � = iv 1 -- — ■1 IIII ■ ■■■ ■■■I '1 �° .--. 4 .� - ch 1111111 I II II IIII ��►.!I 11111 I a.. s �,, ,� °° -- iredrii), t , tilt . 4 t di ■Sj . le tjf r ., r� _ �11y .�., i -4;, - N - • I -+� + ili 11;; 1- 0 4 1 r■■■! 7 TI y I 1 f� 1lir '' il I1 tk , ■■ ■I '1 ' , iKl "l� ., op *i 7 ■ �! �� w � i� 7 I II"1 a : .z } L 1 —" IM ■ 11 11 I'll ■■■ C'_! 11 ;:' 11 1.�1'll 1 ■ `_ s� i ; ..: . . .. 1�i, ti� ti :.; J■ 1� 11 ■� 111 111 ! it �� 111 ill ■ �� °, 1-1-4416: .dir'1 ., *ill i 'ti, I gm iii, ,,,, . ,:r 1 „,, . , *, r t' 44761 i'-iiii_a:, ..♦ —_--` ' r T a-•-`° _.,...i.,...LA.,_—__� I. I.•• • • mss.. 4.14,•• . .1 tkv4t * #M a - :OA% _- , ,. . oL ''' ... .i;t . 111, .., —' 1 . r 11} V :F i iiii.itiiii : ---- --1-- _.,.:du.s. 4. _ FRONT 10 1 T 1 II 20 17 21 18 1111 lis .4f. I I "IIIMMP. 1,f0 Illkati 1. 1 t _ e#411014"41 I ytty 111111 IH1!! `�'' 7■ _- 01 $ 111111,,... 7■ llllll L_ ■■ i.-- ---F- .—. III111 .. 111.110. W \ N { � '1 ,+1t `' j - 1. .il�ltlis: �' �i,�, r � { �`t ,i�i%rtki.. f' .'�,,'' L, 4�l `.I�• i.Id i 1 • �� 1 -- 4t + ''J� 1 T rr. •1 N, "'t'�3'li - �_• L. I `' - - - - - ' -. 31� N _ i 1 �1 1. ,_ ��--- - -.. - �_ 11: t111 'i/. i ■ �y l ; i .yYL . t - _ I '�' r. , ' L R % I ' ^1,1 i1► ' ;, . f T 4.� 71 - .' c A• ,I "1 1)11 i 1. 1 ` _ 1 - - I 1 -.r tSf 1 i ._�NEB II t �_ ; • , I.+ C� .,..j 0-W- T� ,} s 1 �r � 1111IR i A. 0 111 �t, , �, 1+ :,. . = , , i,�' E IIIi11 iva I1 r 4 11111 11111 • (� ' i_ ■i ■■■ .■■ ■■■ ■. IMO �� - C I i ■■ UR I In ; . !. 1 III II S:� �` 'r 1114 I I` _L—� I- ' ,', ! ' - h�111 ' 3 ' _ - I i i i �ri:i� ,11i-s_j 4 1 _ 111 11 1 _ L ,.►„ ! 1 111111 111 r-.l' .it s;— • y _. ,i 1111 • 1 REAR ELEVATION LEGEND ( AS NOTED ) CONCRETE S - TILE 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 STUCCO FINISH TRIM 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 17 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM ROOFING SURROUND 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale CASEY ROAD senior community CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS _ MEMORY CARE I . 3 _ _ Applicant: Owner: M 0 0 R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 gSanta Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com S Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 `A 63 5 Q © IO El 4 II 0 EU 111 :. '''' IN0 ' :',5 .11 i aO .` w s • '�-. t..410101 . .; �, ' i t:,i� 'v� a i Iii: i t N--- ,.. .F ,t,r, i'I I 4r t. ‘. it t 6 -_ ..,.. ,_ - I r .. � � •r '�� `� 93 .¢: :IIS y {� .. '�,'�'�' - � �. i iti yl .,. ;, , - -. ,, '-i.� > '. t .; :�% ' Ilk � .✓--1:.. t4�5 - , . 7. �. `<t�� - � .� !,- lt�.' _,,.� .,.; ,! :. .> �: .' S- ,a,j#, ;., .,.• _� S.. � •. •�: ,�.,� �i UIIl�i it I y : - ,. ...Li:I.r.t:� A.l:i i:,L( I, 'I".I„ilia,��. ,'fit. yl .....1 A: it"' �i��i� i', it". : T't+'. I I .. .. _ ,q a 1,. .771E -_ 1' _ ,.'i . _ _lti s , 'Z.�`.1. �,2s -,'..y- '3• 1 ,y.'. y _ - `- • f ti d 41 y }{ W"--,i z t �s:_ �: \l 0It -z- - C �� ®� �r.. t{..E ri ii__ i .: •. -z� yl _ - L- .. N �� ..1 III I a■■ _LI1_ a LL' !r'' 1_ . I I ■■ Nimes' i, I' 7 N■■■ ' �~ ,, J ° g ', - tlit .< < '�! -r ' mersmo• 11 NNW ill II lei ■■ ■1 ■. ifi ■■' ■■'■■ [� ■ ■. ■i. '�I ■■t■■■11I■ 1 ill - ii q' t� �� r' I 1 1 1i 1I, di il i a■■ 11 I. ROO Par ■■ ■■ L l I t ■■■ ■■► ,- au �r r III 1■ ■■ rt°� 'F ■1 r ■P a • Vit 'f •' - :� , 1,,,.' 1E4 '''' , iik ,ls,:_r�.�1 -. ,W ,--. .� -`, t,_�ri. , A.tlt __ , . _ � ;, .�_ ,- ..�� i :�'. s`e�c_. :...�-'�M."`�Y :. .,. ,... MI . .. '�i�,.�--s+" i4�k , ".5�-- :► - ..�.. + �M.�c,OA,Q��i.�t-' III III •,. r - .- .n RIGHT EU I 20 © 4 m ® E ® 14 10 15 Ei gi El il - --,'":1-71 4 l''-I,---r---",- c miri— liplir 111111 111 Al 111111 111 61 Jill 11 ■■■ '� O11111 ��1 SII 111 1�1 1'P' EIIIIE 11 111111lil t1 II ,,,r 111111 111 111111 1111111 111 111 .� 111 111 �' - 1 T _ III j 11111111 1111111! I 11110111 IIS m�� . it ,, T1,41, I .� + 111 1 111 111 111.1' �f I/y' I ILA f : r.x 1r. . r • A I I IIIJO gr. Li ` I I I 1� a l�lI%IL Al " ( 111 1� 1'1■ i... ' 111■. - .t l J■ 1■1. ■M■ 1 1 . N � ,9 1 " IM 1 111 J 1 I' ' 'r + 1E 1� i1N • ;i _ ■■ ■ '� p _ -_ , ,r, ' = 0� ► - x - ' _ nnnunum� minimum . _ -. - Y t (. ,t i- i._ ,, e1. . S t ` ,',t ,0"._ }l alt �' 47�'� x � 1 '# p Y� yj • J 1ir tR !�I l > h 1'+1' 1 rL + !11aI^ 'S < 1 • ;:. - — a, `. :i ��f r} — 11 f f r 11 r} C',/ f i ♦ t — '! 1 IC ' 111; moi ` K_ r_ ,< 41 ' 116miltAkii,bild .- i. ' ff ' 1 1 �,+ 1 ..pt1 1 i tA ii is 1 ii,,, -_ 1 �� r e rn l' i / ��'■■ L. .. I III I1W i _ j _ r — - . . '- �� J 11I� l�llihll�l'�� , ' I � 1 ...a __. :.a - - ._ _•4 -: ' - - - - c__•: I ii■l'9s - .•. , �A _ . _e._!C-<i . A_ _-, .__L r. LAdmia' -+�+Ya...r•...---_ - _- - - .iY G- e' 41- LE FT ELEVATION LEGEND SAS NOTED ) I CONCRETE S - TILE 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 STUCCO FINISH TRIM 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 11 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM ROOFING SURROUND 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale CASEY ROAD senior community CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS . ASSISTED LIVING & MEMORY CARE I . 4 _ _ _ _ _ .. Applicant: Owner: M O O R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning Pli Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 gSanta Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr. , Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com S Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 `lA 64 94'-10" 103'-5" • 10'-0" 21'-2" 22'-7" 23'-4" 11'-4" 6'-5" 92'-9" 10'-8" /AL c 7 .c. �� , �� P-1 B P-1 B _ MECHANICAL STORAGE FREEZER COOLER ELECTRICAL C � P 16 0"x 8'-0" 2'_8„x 8'-0" 0_0„x 8-0" b'-8"x 8'-0" 20,_6'x 8'-0" MEN'S0 WOMEN'S s/♦� UP J DN �� C 9'-1"x 14'-6" V 91'x 14'-6" ___= i '-I i -- _ ____ O C TRASH :1- P-SB 9'-2"x 2T-a" N STORAGE SUPPLY 77 77 ' \/ 12,_0"x 15'-b" 20'-10"x 14'-11" M ,(8 r ♦ U ` i MEN'S ■ - WOMEN'S �\� O O OCKER RM - LOCKERRM. .� 0P _, co0000 1 ;_1„x8_3 0'_8„ 83” R>� • KITCHEN x 1 1 1 1 / 39-3”x 30-9" -7 ___7 STORAGE 17-7'x 8'-10" MED 1 /i A ^ z'-°"x8 0 • FFICE LINEN I EMPLOYEE //, r�� O O I\ 7j 7-1 "x 12�_,�, o'-c x 17_ / ' 21,_3"x 12'-7" �� D 8 8 8 D � � -- - P-1 B 4&� ORAGE A HOUSE 86'-8" le/\ .-0'x 7-1 i — LAUNDRI� V KEEPING 8'_0"x14'-27C OFFICE ~ \ • V . 5'-10"x 14'-2" _ A 71 12,_0"x 12'-0° c o JANITO� \ O �\ 9'-6" 11'-4" 11'-8"1. / 11'-8" 22'-7" / 11'-8" 8'-2" P-1 B / .:--- 1 o'a"xs'2" �� P-SC P-SC LL�� • SERVICE 1`L,j_y_o_., / �,a a�/\ 46414 \ ��/ _ _ STORAGE 3.10"xa'_o7v, ♦ PSACO rri -4 t1I a. / \ BEAUTY �" SERVICE = C 7M11 �^ / \ ,,, 0 LIVING 1o"x13-10" 17-Tx ♦ ♦ �� / �,i P-SD DINING �(�� L P-1 A [-iii 31ax187„ 16'-10;_l / � o \ P-SC N P-1A P-1A \ / 2-- f� z9 JF' P-SC �� • _ ._, 7 • O =___,T,As_.__., , ,. UP DN 0 yi-i r- PANTRY ° /,� \O \ ,, 1 .4. % II 8'-2"x 13,_5„ ��" / \ * IF P-1>5 , , r P-I O O q[1: Act 4, N��/ ■ O ASSISTED P-B 44%.,,, � _ LIVING I O' DINING �� , 2s'-9"xaa'-9° MEMORY N I �CJ CARE [E � _� �� P-S C DINING I� Lr)N �U U 0 L A O MEN'S 2s-s"x42'-1 o" 7.71 -- 'a.±1. 11) V7 \ 7"x 10'_0,. / _7 Doo �\ NI/ irml I .#___Lil -.. mmmmmmm< -1 /\ L` U DINING \` \\• 0 D I .r. ATRIUM 0 I� 4,0----ALy. r— 18-4'x 15-1 s. �� II i .0 25-3'x 48'_6' KL - 0 WOMEN'S t� gqII `� � 1V-7"x10-0" � �reAD 11L # VP-SC --( u(7- P 1A P 1A P 1A \ #Il . . , � I 0-11 ul T 4 7_,A____ __,....„ __A: °b K8IT2CH8EN 4 \ iii ,z).- = ■PSA L., 1 ,[i]?(- P- _ \6LI r •4P / o " MENS CON / �� lgr (� 6 5 xSP. (1-0 `6,_10"x7-6" 13- ir �� / EQUIP. PRIVATE O 11'-4" 23'-5" 22'-7" 11 -8 13'-8" 8.2 O o / DINING LIBRARY/ (p O �, / - �' 10-10"x 24-5" LOUNGE I I V OMEN' \ P S C , / 16-11"x 20'_4" I lir ASSISTED LIVING - LEVEL 1 -ERVI�L LOBBY 1= �� p 23 209 S . FT. /\ 4 / / l/ 23'_2"x,0'_8" • 2\ _ # 8 / , IL, 1-- -.. P-SA •% / ' STORA \\\ \. �. tS)4 DN UP _iMAINT./0, \ /.161\ / 8_4..x 18._6„ PL]p_1A 4 �� - � \ \ � 1E1 � � � �-\ "1r," /, ♦ i ��) OFFICEADMIN. LOBBY ADMITTING OFFICE j \ �\ �i ./ \ / 13'_3"x13,_3" OFFICE 2a'-2"x 13'_7" 11'_8"x13'_1" 10'-10"x13'_1„ \\ 77, '6), \\J C)-81-(20 '\ � / �� P-SC P A • _ / --11— . -- , .,, \ \‹ ''\ / ,, -'tJ----44/// \ / 1 T-5" / 28' 2" 1 F a, 23'-7" / 5'-3" / \ a O / _ �- / ./ \'\�� / \ '� P 1 B FA FACILITIES crn-I I I 1 P-B �� - / . COMMONC S \ P-1 A /\ z .1 II / / `� 12,795 SQ. FT. \. \ _ 77. P-SB 1 p_SB ,D,, iP 9% o- \ / ,;; 00 P-SD o ticb v' `/ Ca le ♦� COCHTERE 7:1- ME 9'-9" / 17'-0" / 9'-9" / �� 0 ■ F 1 1 0 4 8 16 1 1 1 L 1 Scale CASEY ROAD senior community FLOOR PLAN . ASSISTED LIVING I . 5 _ _ _ . ,... Applicant: Owner: M O O R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 gSanta Monica, CA 90401 ILI °'11111111 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 • 818 591 3300 65 DNDNDNLOUNGE11'-8" x 20'-11"MEN'S11'-7" x 10'-0"WOMEN'S11'-7" x 10'-0"LAUNDRY8'-0" x 14'-2"HOUSE-KEEPING5'-10" x 14'-2"STORAGE10'-0" x 7'-11"STORAGE17'-7" x 8'-10"STORAGE8'-2" x 13'-5"MAINT.8'-4" x 18'-6"STORAGE9'-7" x 6'-4"STORAGE18'-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"11'-0"13'-8"11'-8"22'-7"11'-8"17'-4"9'-9"17'-0"9'-9"2 9 ' - 1 "22'-4"17'-5"ASSISTED LIVING - LEVEL 223,209 SQ. FT.ROOFBELOWP-1A P-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1AP-1AP-1AP-SAP-SAP-SAP-SBP-SBP-SBP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SDP-SDSTORAGE6'-1" x 20'-4"2 2 ' - 8 "8'-2"2 2 ' - 7 " 1 1 ' - 8 " 8' - 1 0 " 1 7 ' - 4 "Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 3300Scale0 4 8 16Scale66 UPDNUPUPLOUNGE11'-8" x 20'-11"MEN'S11'-7" x 10'-0"WOMEN'S11'-7" x 10'-0"LAUNDRY8'-0" x 14'-2"HOUSE-KEEPING5'-10" x 14'-2"STORAGE10'-0" x 7'-11"MAINT.8'-4" x 18'-6"STORAGE9'-7" x 6'-4"STORAGE9'-8" x 7'-4"COURTYARD11'-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"17'-4"9'-9"17'-0"9'-9"29'-1"2 2 ' - 4 "17'-5"ASSISTED LIVING - BASEMENT LEVEL23,076 SQ. FT.COVEREDPORCH6'-5"23'-11"77'-10" 8'-5" 35'-9" 5 1 ' - 0 "35'-8"56'-2" 3 6 ' - 6 "67'-11"P-1A P-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1AP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1BP-1AP-1AP-1AP-SAP-SAP-SAP-SBP-SBP-SBP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SCP-SDP-SDApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 3300Scale0 4 8 16Scale67 DNUPATRIUM25'-3" x 48'-6"LIBRARY/LOUNGE16'-11" x 20'-4"PRIVATEDINING10'-10" x 24'-5"SERVICE6'-5" x 11'-4"EQUIP.6'-5" x 5'-0"STORAGE6'-0" x 8'-0"13'-10" x 8'-0"BEAUTYSALON17'-2" x 13'-10"SERVICE7'-10" x 13'-10"MEMORYCAREDINING25'-5" x 42'-10"ASSISTEDLIVINGDINING25'-9" x 44'-9"ASSISTEDLIVINGDINING31'-4" x 18'-7"MAINT.8'-4" x 18'-6"STORAGE9'-7" x 6'-4"OFFICE10'-10" x 13'-1"LOBBY24'-2" x 13'-7"ADMIN.OFFICE13'-8" x 13'-3"OFFICE13'-3" x 13'-3"LOBBY23'-2" x 10'-8"EXAM.9'-2" x 11'-1"LOUNGE13'-2" x 13'-0"STORAGE7'-6" x 5'-2"MED.9'-10" x 7'-4"TOILET7'-6" x 6'-10"BATHING13'-3" x 22'-3"OFFICE8'-0" x 8'-0"UTILITY10'-6" x 13'-6"NURSE'SSTATION14'-10" x 12'-3"NURSE9'-4" x 23'-9"NURSE9'-7" x 14'-11"PORTECOCHERE29'-1"22'-4"17'-5"28'-2"24'-0"23'-7"5'-3"27'-9"27'-5"24'-10"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 117,225 SQ. FT.COMMON FACILITIES12,795 SQ. FT.7'-10"132'-6"179'-1"ADMITTING11'-8" x 13'-1"44'-0"7'-9"36'-0"P-1AP-1AP-1BP-SAP-SCP-SCP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-AP-BP-BP-BP-BP-BP-BP-CP-CP-CP-CP-CP-CApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 3300Scale0 4 8 16Scale68 VOMMUMME \ MENEM, -IR 1 \ / , . i \2fr/ . , , sir ' r / \ , . ik... / / /r/z/z://// / ,iii r ______, 1 I ... ,—. tb. \ .....L, _ , r / \ r . I I A ,.,:‘• / ' •'.• / I I I I 1 Ad A // *,, 1 I I / [ . [ / / / ,.... / I I / I \ I ,-„ 7- --7,1E, I \ \ t , . \ / 1 I A A 11. \ \ 1 ' ,_, ,_ I I I lik. A 1 I 11111 / / /- 1 •741 iLAti / ,\ b. \ I = I 10,i _ I I 1 I 7 I I 0 8 Ai 32 Scale CASEY ROAD - senior communityROOF PLAN ASSISTED LIVING & MEMORY CARE . 9 _ _ _ Applicant: Owner: M 0 0 R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 pi Santa Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 IN 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 IOWA 69 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/LIVINGAREA13'-0" X 12'-3"SLEEPING/LIVINGAREA16'-4" X 12'-10"SLEEPING/LIVINGAREA11'-6" X 14'-4"SLEEPING/LIVINGAREA20'-1" X 13'-3"BEDROOM11'-6" X 11'-5"BEDROOM11'-6" X 11'-5"LIVING10'-6" X 8'-3"LIVING10'-6" X 14'-0"KITCHENETTE7'-6" X 6'-0"KITCHENETTE7'-2" X 7'-0"KITCHENETTE7'-6" X 6'-2"KITCHENETTE8'-4" X 7'-0"KITCHENETTE10'-5" X 9'-0"KITCHENETTE10'-5" X 9'-0"PATIO10'-6" X 5'-2"BATH7'-4" X 10'-5"BATH10'-10" X 7'-6"BATH10'-8" X 9'-0"BATH7'-3" X 12'-7"BATH11'-3" X 8'-7"BATH11'-3" X 8'-7"PLAN SA - STUDIO, 1 BATH324 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 9PLAN SD - STUDIO, 1 BATH410 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 6PLAN SB - STUDIO, 1 BATH376 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 9PLAN SC - STUDIO, 1 BATH386 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 24PLAN 1A - 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH449 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 39PLAN 1B - 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH511 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 18LINENLINENCOATS COATS LINENApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 2 48ScaleScale70 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 BATH371 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 6PLAN B - 1 BED, 1 BATH318 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 6PLAN A - 1 BED, 1 BATH282 SQ. FT. NETCOUNT: 14SLEEPING/LIVINGAREA11'-9" X 12'-3"SLEEPING/LIVINGAREA13'-3" X 10'-7"SLEEPING/LIVINGAREA14'-9" X 15'-11"BATH6'-3" X 9'-4"BATH7'-2" X 11'-0"BATH7'-2" X 11'-0"0 2 48Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 3300ScaleScale71 Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 330072 Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 330073 IU 21 3 13 11 4 II 5 20 15 14 13 12 17 7 6 19 8 10 plum r _ _f ! w voir. ....„,„ -s-? ,....„,.,•=n-.4,-,4,i...c,n,,,.,_ __. ....„..i. _ , _. _ • . . * kms:Tlild A ...1rtt !' i- v.. Ft; C AlOPPOIrf' Y A,. x.. MOM _,_ ■■■ i 11 I N ... I 1 ��■ i� \�\�� ■!1 ■11■ gr ■■■ >',;,^ -."?x ■� rl M UM NEI IMII 1 x ■■■ EIEi.. l ,g V■ 1 ■11■ I ■■■t itli , En IP tetttI,r -I - `.up I MI I� . III. i• i I INN imi 11•111 f �f ! 1 I, \ --- Ile u� ■ lib r : . . Iiuiiiidll ��1� �I : iIIiI`��4 IiIIllllllla�lli �lilll n I 1 [, rte,. �_. .. r ' -�- II it •? �,� ♦ ,,., R r •it , + ��ttti� i . , I .� IA jiliUrp'. ' " 1 i@ . IN, ii. . ' ' ,, ryfa ■■■ ■■■ II It NMI IMO Ldi < < ito _ II ■■ ■ aii i �� i M til ■ I■ ■ ■■■ ■■■ _ .- • f■ ■■■ ■■■ r -- 9111111 nrlttl Mir ` [ 111 ntu�ll ;if { — �L.• .r �, . ,. { r.y ' �,- - �$' .1; •! I �' g :a•a.7ji. ,t... _ w , - ' , k•1i� _ II ■ :t,- _ c'..I. - i 1. '4PL.� , s• , 41 r . ,- pe-_= — a— d 1 r. ... • - .•.. e_ —, _ 'v , '--N.— s — —�'' • --- -t. _ _ . _ _ �i�F a �� 1:--4-. 4a-int . Y _, _ _.. FRONT II 8 10 I 20 21 3 19 0 18 4 © 13 El II 15 17 13 14 El IF l . .: _ _ _ • r' t iY■ ,■ �■ { .■ l ,■I,i ,■f_■ i [ •R ■..■ .■•ifav•2: ■ .■ i R ,■ .t ■. t .■:' i.{'r_ `- -' - • R .■ `[.i .iv,■a,i'.t .Gt,i .■ ,i i•f'i i-.iY RY i .■•.i L ri .114 i •i'.ir.i ili .i .., ,i.i'.i i.•■' t ■1 �f '- NM ■i ■� ■I I■ 111 �., _ Sj _ i► ,,1� 11 ■■■ r+f'® .� ,' '! IIi ■ _, i Ill_ L _ .. ■■ I■In III IS Illilk - 1 ■■■ NIN 11111 r. c ��! [ t III im •• i� r- 1�11IIiii,li �llllll �� 1i�li1 , llIt il i�iluII 111111111 SIN 4Pk ri — —S111— •if—luir —IF- _ _ ■■■ ■■■ ii, ■■ , ;t 7 ■■■ ■■■ 4 ■ ■■ ■■ E� ■■■ ■■■ _ , , 'irr F - I ,�■■ �I __ - �• -� ■■■ .■■ �_ ►= til _lio �� . s. _ ' -91 Ii1lul 1 IIIIP !� uni {11111 noon 1111" 1 �� , �, , _ � � --_ _ Illlllli��ll fel y� _.. _ � S1110_ .4 ., a P ,s.,- f F{ a;T , , [ 't �� jt lt. = I , ,l ` r�)�. tO I �� i 1' I u " kg t irk i ■ _ II dig_ill ,. ; _,10 . )1. —1.1. :I 147 . '^ff , r rt. [1 E` , 3: X1,1 1� .1.' I. . r ► 7111k a ;� t ff r ` 'f- . [ ' ■■ k�i .r 'ALL . •- .1. I .L,_... Ill rr V L�t L.fir• It �t 'li r, lo` ��ifil flit i .. . r 1, . -_ - - r w[ e'fi'L ._ s`. - - • ..._ ._. .-, j.:A • . - ; Y:[. " ' - _ "• -t�r`+.1_s.iMC- *- .. r=?` R"�= - �=t. i - , - - = . - -. _ -. _ .-• - A ._.. d.i i. r ft REAR ELEVATION LEGEND ( AS NOTED ) 1 CONCRETE S - TILE 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 STUCCO FINISH TRIM 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 17 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM ROOFING SURROUND 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale CASEY ROAD senior community CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS . INDEPENDENT LIVING BUILDING C 2 • 3 _ _ _ _ _I. Applicant: Owner: MOORPARI( , CA Architecture + Planning IIII II Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 gSanta Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com S Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 LI 4 iiii 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 `4 74 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"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale124781212412345678910111213141516171819202171213141511212051735151710201121321131475 UTILITYSTORAGELOBBYTRASHPLAN 1BPLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BPLAN 1BPLAN 2 PLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 1B 189'-11"143'-0"LEVEL 116 UNITS16,950 SQ. FT.Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale76 UTILITYSTORAGETRASHPLAN 1BPLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BPLAN 1BPLAN 2 PLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 1B 189'-11"143'-0"LEVEL 216 UNITS16,950 SQ. FT.Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale77 UTILTYSTORAGEPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BPLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 1B 189'-11"BASEMENT LEVEL10 UNITS11,705 SQ. FT.UNITSABOVEApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale78 ROOF PITCH 4:12Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 330004816ScaleScale79 74'-5"PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 1B174'-8"PLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BLEVEL 111 UNITS11,136 SQ. FT.TRASHUTIL.LOBBYApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale80 74'-5"PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 1B174'-8"PLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BLEVEL 211 UNITS10,977 SQ. FT.TRASHUTIL.Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale81 74'-5"PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 1B174'-8"PLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BLEVEL 111 UNITS10,977 SQ. FT.TRASHUTIL.LOBBYApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale82 74'-5"PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 1B174'-8"PLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BLEVEL 211 UNITS10,977 SQ. FT.TRASHUTIL.Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale83 54'-6"174'-8"PLAN 1BPLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1APLAN 1BBASEMENT LEVEL6 UNITS6,344 SQ. FT.TRASHUTIL.LOBBYUNITSABOVEApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale84 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"PATIO11'-1" X 6'-0"PLAN 2 - 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH1103 SQ. FT.PLAN 1B - 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH613 SQ. FT.PLAN 1A - STUDIO, 1 BATH524 SQ. FT.BEDROOM12'-1" X 12'-3"KITCHEN6'-3" X 8'-7"BATH7'-10" X 10'-11"SLEEPINGAREA8'-1" X 12'-4"LIVING/DINING12'-11" X 16'-8"ENTRY6'-3" X 7'-4"LIVING/DINING12'-1" X 16'-8"KITCHEN6'-3" X 8'-7"BATH10'-11" X 7'-10"W.I.C.5'-8" X 5'-0"ENTRY4'-4" X 7'-4"LAUNDRYLAUNDRYCOATS COATS MASTERBEDROOM12'-5" X 14'-4"BEDROOM 212'-6" X 14'-0"LIVING ROOM13'-6" X 17'-4"KITCHEN8'-2" X 8'-8"DINING7'-7" X 10'-4"M. BATH9'-11" X 8'-8"W.I.C.6'-4" X 7'-11"ENTRY4'-10" X 7'-1"COATSLINEN PATIO11'-1" X 6'-0"PATIO12'-7" X 7'-8"BATH 26'-8" X 9'-10"F.A.U.F.A.U.LAUNDRYApplicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 2 48ScaleScale85 Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 330086 • 'r'. r .. •teams -_ .^ 1r peo 1 41,,„,.. . . r __ . P .1111113 ......,.... ...!--- --.-- -,... , __........ . ... ..,. _,„.... , ii„.., 4 , , _,. _ mr- II 11 III '.' i F .. 3: i _ „�F' - - II + Iith41110 - f . ' Q111"111 wa J4 �a • y" a1IJPI ; - 'i 0. IIMM im II a�• ii �� hh rri err ,� a. jut111 1 ! �� i■ a. �f • �r1 ,� '"` _ i i ill R I C,li _ { _ s l ■ iik • . ■4 - .. '.... .. .. _■ .uar ail.4aai usk/'l�� ..r resat. _ _- J�� ;+��f.��f��+�l��/7a•I lr��/A1 .. _ - � � 1 frt_ r ■ ■i 1111■1111 ' i , II ; .� ' `F�� 46 1 w_��t_ �; -•'--- ■ 1111 1111■■■■ ■ 1� : 1 I11�� ii •.t �'S► -• _ , -��- 11 IIS __ _._. .__. 11111ill Ili telirmif ._ —. �: 1111 _ �� _ .� 11 �� # r 1I SII ill ,�'� �� -� ■ M■11■ 11111 _- -�.�� 1Ili _: = - 1 1111 1111■■■■: ■1 ' IIIIII� i�� _ - • . I to...• ''', a 11 �� •1 _ __ _ ________ ___ !111 �N� .......�_ ....... . ii, �� —� ....„ IMO 1�1 _ - .. . �. -�i 1 ■11 ■11111111■ IOW • .. ,_a� ` _ .. III ------ C_ P%fr ' i '., ._------ __ _ --Ill i � '' .�� I inimAIL r --tea s Fa s r s .__ 'q41.111111 MININIO jelja"....... .'t 711111111111.11.1. _-_---. _..- _, -:'"M"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII • i' rte. `'�'3 - _ -111 _ - - - E - �• -. , a. 4. ... ` • ... /'•�.• L y u _ __ - r�' . IMPIPIF f • ! F — — —te` _ �� - 1 ---_ _ - •s' - - - �- - _ yam_ — ti - -- – fir___ CASEY ROAD A2 senior community CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE . COMMONS 0 16 _ _ -.. , Applicant: Owner: M O O R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning Aldersgate Investments LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 g Santa Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 .44 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 87 IMP: 1 3 111 111 18 19 5 7 10 0 El El 4. - _ ice_ YE, _ r:.., r: .-a_. F.a.r.A_... r 1..r J. /..r J.i.J_ i-J.-T x�i-lt...J.J an.0 r..a.}_1•_ ..: .'1�*_ __... w r.a.. r ...J•..r J•... r.,c a r .r:a•J.t-._).t.r r_A J,. r'f. .. 1._ J._JL_0..as .. -'J.* ,n. ; IS I . . -4, fie- 4 — - - / BE MEI i . I. :4-01 , ., ,,, - :iiii's.. - : • ..,.., .,. z9 .,,. . _ . . _ . . . a I.. • .40'r 6 Z9 '' b N r •-.- y :, ._,, ir' '�Lliil• i�'g7'•ir� 'I-!'�:•. 1• ■ ,„„.i,„....,!„.....abopi.,.....,...,,- _ ,..., , I I . IL RI • .4. , .„, , el" ,,.% . / 441.0 I ° - li.ir �. . + I1 41 r' 4_ dew Iiiimulim i■ ' + tt w �• 4 + .. c• .r N, t 16 1. h — i -MAW rr a 7 {Fji L �1 Ay, f I A i I 1 lo ' .�■ !Mx J Nil id, J1iil ! no i i . 1 , II ` . lli ''',7thr1 II MI It �, itj ' z s y. , w R� _{\ rel . , ,,,,I. SO MI . ____ Illi . I . -_,4-.-1. c....1,. ..-_____,.. 44,. .1000-t ____.. --. - -__ _,. - _.....„. viiiiiir--,- _ - . '81 F I I — FRONT 1 3 II 20 4 2 111 7 15 - -/ \ I I / _. . . - I r , 0 . 0 A IR 0 .I. J.-lb A 1. A P. . P _a_.. . . 0 . , ///jam\ \ \ r�-• • ._ii 1 / \ ' f \ r p i a.r•J a A' # a If t i JP .1-.J a s A, a )'.a-.1.4:•I.••I_.•_.1. .!. ._.. .... p l a s i a a•. - _I, a F A'r P• * I a .f i.A a * _Ja.. A..{A a a R s 1 s a..i , a r , a ..p% . . . .. . 1. A• n . PaE — /// / I + �� — rte■ "mw , .�, r•.� "�■w�r ..•• • ... . • .,.....N. 1 r II;V : . . . , . _ 7/ \7\ I , III .I.. IT T FT 7_. ilak . , . . , 1 ...11'"; 1 gi -1.,11 :'..T •7-11.!-TV/ -L:Tr-- ''':. ,." - :7- '?:1-^ :ItiTesr. h . 1 I 41§14, 1 fir, s 1 I _ ,. .,. . _ . . . , . lilts _ . _ _ _._ _ . ___............ - 1 I (.,. I 0 - 1 1 ' . . ao • ,- 40 / / .,4 _ _--c- , fi p er... ir, i ....,_,._._ m�■ ■� �. n;tfl1 ■ I� I�■■ } 5. • 1l �.� ■� '43.• '1.,.411. `� I +.04"-;' iy� r , - 11111 11111 F. 1 • fr d!dirk A t -1—Al i . -c('S 8 1.---ar l' IME i . _ NM ■■ ILi: • , 2 , ,.fiir. ,, ,. ... UN, ' Ili ---' , ' ' ._ i i■■l�i 1114.1 4• ' -Iir - - - - - I / r I~ * ,145.11 _ _ ••1 1■1■■i A■1 W.� ■■�� IOWAiIi. aN . , — — — — _ 111 111111 III MIN ■■■■=;A Ili iUiilli, aA _ R— — _ — 7..........!.....,T.- -, a III 111111 i11 Y■ ■■■■� ■■■ 111111 11€ ,6'. —�= .. : — = - .Y ' Y I- , :,::1.,:t•.._ _ _ 111 111111 111 Y■ 110111•11 ■■■ 1111111111 111 =: ' -- - - 0 1 1 - • •° - `e -• 111 111111 111 Y■ ■■■■r ■■■ ► fill 11 111 111 r 111 � . : , 4 � ' 1 1if - - 1 1 •_ _ ;_— ..- - 111 1111!1 111 Y■ ■■■■� ■■■ All 111111111 Iii F '} a =R. r _ r'�= ,,•, :... '' �. ROOF ; — � r ''4 � t ,. , , ..., _:�, - - - =—� 4 ROOF PITCH 4:12 `' �� • r I, � -+ '.1;EN.,. Wit.. T — - ._. . r k.aa ..vo. 1., -i i • - . .... ~ - . r . . _ . s _ i�_ REAR ELEVATION LEGEND AAs NOTED ) CONCRETE S - TILE STUCCO FINISH TRIM I ROOFING 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 SURROUND 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 17 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale SoSroYwimuiR CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS . COMMONS . 17 _ _ Applicant: Owner: M 0 0 R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning I 111 Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC 1( T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Li 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 ..04 liii 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 i 818 591 3300 ` A 88 5 19 I 3 17 20 4 7 IS 18 21 II 2 10 • - _ L .44... P. x t_■T..R + -.I �_.i.-.- JF K,�.-.I J.J.�Jr-J�-1Ti-�JLJ�. _ i+.�s.1.�_JLiJr- .f l .- i `.f-e.../a-sL,..ayi }��.r P.0-MI-A,1_TR,•I ilr.i!'..; .x.•I J_k ■' ,. r a ,�"" :ray ��+�3eniErt �! ,•k _ � _ � ti,.�: _�� . ' r ', ,2 • M� .a+. ',Vi'�' ,, .e- • " T-. r r-i 1 ..1.. II FPR '� 111 ill 1! !! '' ' • • � _k] r �r A f:- r ae.A. 1 R .w.� s.a, �... : .. r ,1 i .� '1- i.. , ■■■ - � 4 ♦ 4_T ismimim _ _ - y - t � a .'-.Y...n.a•.n a. }. •.J r J - 7 r CL 'r '{ +' • e k If j r i ilk Ail A }s 1 ■ E I I .tiE ' ■■ ■■ ■ ■n.l.. •.l_T ■- ■T- I•'Y. n - a 41111111 .1 1111111111P III=M1.1111, .111P. - r,i + i -4461111,1 r 4* r ' + r ! - Iii i ' . ' ll f,_F-9 ElY ,: , ti �, a .■� ■■ _ .,,i ini , In , Bibs Mill IL Illb ilr 7 -',91 I " / .' ''-.,-:•••.Att,:': " _ ,i . ill .iirt . 11 - - . •. way - - - •"5_ -� S amt a:.a 4•... �.}Ri • e ► _ c R•iti' r•. w..•i I tia^: ' .CT• .7 ...-- :.� i . 2.‘-w,4___`i-_ - _ _-- - •-4e4.1' ` • I +' , * - i 1 .i- c 1 X $ r .� tgAr • lot a . -r '� �- I ..[i 4 .. 1■ Illi. icy i " FT e , . ' • � �I - _ 1� �� I mail 111 •11. _IL.pr ; • • t _ , Mil Illi - .-.- + I ' ! ' - ■I li :Iir1,: ,■, ■■ J _ - ,-.• .,.,- - 4 RIGHT 2 II I 11 3 7 4 10 14 15 21 20 5 18 11 Floolmwor V. r a,I .111.111. 641111, I 4911111 IIIIMINIMIPP"411E- 31114014.m=141" fulW III ill .71 7 T-HLI FFP1 : .., ,,,-.-. --- A . „ I. . . . ,,... • 1 : , . A _ __,__ -A:0 .-.44-A,SE;S.;'i.,.." .°. .'Pk...1.......'.' "..i..-..,n-'.. -:::-.F.'..-s .,...,,,,,.. • - ' ' 91M ill ilm•—•-mi IMO 111.11 MI l'7 — ..-.�TJax =a.x.t:x.a.�.�.h-a,T ,tet. a:.tE.r.r..X, r - +FrWra . *; K010 7■■ ■Y ■t■■ 'Ai$ fit ' ' 1 / t . 1` I �� •��■ _ =i iAl■ ■w ■■■ r rit x �,-4 r. k .N. I • ■ I - ; _. Ail •■ • , 'IN 'A •■ •• lii r e ! P..:.• . ',.• Xi EN OM 1.1 ii ,. . K • i- /A ■ e� ��t' •� ; MI. ■r Ell MO ■■ ' 11 NMI,, . - _ lia fflk r- '4'4 ' I i'vim I , . . i„ei iii.ip irr,,,„cy , ......,. ,.......„ ...a-4 ...km- ..': .4:_ -. _,....,=_, - - -, .. -- , _-..-_ .5.10_4.30 : . ._A111111 ' '44 •. • 1 111 11 1 -- - - — ■ *i': : BM ' s 4V �` y' . . t 1� 111 11 1 i =. '_—_- _- A Il�;� w � ■ •�:' ;: '.r' ' ! 1;Jy' o 1 111 !� II ---- ---- - - ■ no! ! 1'��M !rt . n ,� r f1 4t t' . illIIIC ,b—* _'."�-. .► ■i_._ .-..-. 11..,-: - .,...7IEt-_• r-. oak ¢ -- LEFT ELEVATION LEGEND ( AS NOTED ) CONCRETE S - TILE STUCCO FINISH TRIM I ROOFING 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 SURROUND 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 17 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale CASEY ROAD A2 senior community CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS . COMMONS . I 8 _ _ . ■_ Applicant: Owner: M OORPARKI CA Architecture + Planning FO Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 gSanta Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com S Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623icil ...,14 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 ` A 89 WOMEN'S14'-10" x 18'-11"MEN'S18'-5" x 12'-5"STAFFDEVELOPMENT11'-5" x 15'-8"CONFERENCE15'-1" x 21'-6"MARKETING20'-0" x 15'-1"HUMANRES.15'-6" x 15'-8"WORKRM.10'-11" x 8'-8"EXEC.DIR.12'-0" x 15'-1"OFFICE10'-11" x 15'-1"OFFICE10'-1" x 15'-1"RECEP.13'-3" x 9'-8"STORAGE2'-10" x 9'-0"ELEVATORLOBBY18'-4" x 13'-8"SERV.8'-0" x 15'-4"STORAGE8'-10" x 15'-7"LOBBY27'-7" x 16'-1"HALLHALLUPSTAIRSRESIDENT SERVICES13'-1" x 10'-0"RESIDENTSERVICESDIRECTOR10'-7" x 10'-0"STORAGE7'-10" x 8'-4"HALLHALLFIRST FLOOR GROSS AREA14205 SQ. FT.+/- 32,048 SQ. FT. TOTALHALLUPBILLIARD RM.28'-4" x 31'-4"ELEV. EQUIP.5'-7" x 12'-5"LIBRARY27'-9" x 24'-4"BOOKS17'-8" x 12'-2"OFFICE11'-0" x 12'-2"COMPUTER LAB17'-0" x 20'-0"HALLCARD RM.27'-7" x 31'-4"LOUNGE AREA29'-6" x 45'-8"CATERING KITCHEN22'-2" x 21'-1"MAIL RM.14'-6" x 20'-4"OPENTOBELOW157'-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"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale90 OFFICE17'-4" x 10'-0"ACCOUNTING22'-8" x 26'-2"EMPLOYEE LOUNGE22'-11" x 20'-10"MEN'S LOCKER8'-8" x 10'-11"MEN'SR.R.14'-5" x 10'-7"WOMEN'SR.R.14'-5" x 10'-7"WOMEN'SLOCKER8'-8" x 10'-11"TEL. /NETWORK6'-2" x 8'-10"JAN.5'-6" x 8'-10"COPY9'-5" x 8'-10"WOMEN'S17'-11" x 17'-4"DNHALLELEVATORLOBBY17'-9" x 15'-11"MEN'S10'-9" x 17'-4"HALLSTAIRSHALLHALLSTORAGE5'-9" x 7'-7"SECOND FLOOR GROSS AREA6236 SQ. FT.+/- 32,048 SQ. FT. TOTALSTAIRSDNHALLACTIVITYDIRECTOR12'-3" x 12'-9"ACTIVITY12'-3" x 15'-6"HOME HEALTHDIRECTOR12'-1" x 10'-8"HOME HEALTH12'-1" x 10'-8"RESIDENT SERVICESDIRECTOR12'-2" x 10'-8"RESIDENT SERVICES12'-2" x 10'-8"OPENTOBELOWROOF DECK17'-9" x 15'-11"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"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale91 PRIVATE DINING16'-3" x 31'-4"LOUNGE18'-6" x 31'-4"BAR10'-3" x 11'-8"SERV.8'-2" x 8'-7"ELEVATORLOBBY18'-4" x 16'-11"MAIN DINING68'-6" x 47'-4"HALLOUTDOOR PATIO15'-10" x 31'-9"UPSTAIRSOUTDOOR PATIO15'-10" x 31'-9"AREA3354 SQ. FT.FIRST FLOOR GROSS AREA11607 SQ. FT.+/- 32,048 SQ. FT. TOTALRECYCLE8'-8" x 22'-10"TRASH COMPACTOR12'-0" x 30'-10"STORAGE16'-7" x 6'-0"WOMEN'S18'-11" x 14'-10"MEN'S18'-5" x 14'-9"JAN.6'-10" x 9'-2"KITCHEN AREA67'-7" x 46'-4"EQUIPMENT45'-6" x 24'-8"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"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale92 Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 330093 7 I © 4 19 18 5 17 IN -.... x I J., - r.. _ .. r' p �:; r ."y. y1; r• i .i' ~7 i }} r k� [-..--.. + - :i' % -,.Y it.,,,,.„.,,.ft, : ;r„., , •:. ., . .I r .1.,, .: ',. 1f,, . ' 4\ ' 1 /0 , ,._. r r ., .. \ \ / /// - -� I•. : � , T�I':l�r.��ti� r �?I:�4-ic. ,�??f� i .? r c - - ,} � t�'=- - d; � � !i4171',-, r,` r . . . __ • F 1 R i i' 11 • I( srs "{:rte ,, , - , : i I!!' 4- •TP ' , V. ;ft. :.' ,I• .14 •ii 414LE • Jo • N .4.411.1 �.,ff ! it. �.w .ev!_.lxx�_p_Jxx�_K f _'� .a�. �.•�.� ` � ; ; .iiiiiiiiiiiLl 4. --+-- &) • ,—,i _ _..,..t _ ■■■■■N ■■■■■■ ■■.■■■ ■■■■■ __ A' I I 1 r . , I,.,..' 1 ift- 6 i *go-.:" ftLi ii f4 li t4 '- rn.:11 1.% : i ' \..titi. itil_ ki• I • 1 ' - ' n 111 II II 6 im II a II , t' -4 -• . ii` :,:'.' L-iiiiiit' _ o it11 11 II it II II11 11 II II .- - - Orr }'i" ,././_ 7_____-____t__- i.11 11 1 I FRONT / \ / 2 5 1 3 19 7 17 Ei 1 \\ ,,,,\\\\\ \ 1 \, ROOF PITCH 4:12 - T a ROOF • Litt . T t;rr:.�sr k a.s x s_;rc_ .s.Tr s s r . - T �yy: ;.. i. : y,. Vii- •i i Y 7 -snrb }�. �.J� k fi r.W ,.a-- ...._" —..1_ - -I-=-_ - - _ v ■i i ■ ■ ce . r'r _- •w+'r ;-- Ate, ■■■■ ■ ■■r■ ■ r I --� ... -.1 r Y r III ,�,� fI s r e 11'I son .._ .•'. Ji . M ... ' 74 -'--v •s ,>r. III K T ■�1 _ - _ _ II■ ■II 4 - .II }� I y ti -4 - . "/ ilk itli ;r A r •• •, r -\--=--•. —` i—�x r • 9.-JM r �i. ,ie .5.---;..P. , .:_•.43. -...• `' •} 41114.06 : - • .:.+ 1rmtaS s a_ = 0. _ _ : _ ai+a _, ---•-•:3t 44211k. _--► 11110E REAR ELEVATION LEGEND ( AS NOTED ) CONCRETE S - TILE STUCCO FINISH TRIM 1 ROOFING 5 DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURE 9 SURROUND 13 WOOD POST / BEAM 17 DECORATIVE STUCCO TRIM 21 CEMENT FIBER TRIM 2 RAFTER TAIL 6 DECORATIVE TILE 10 BAY WINDOW 14 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS 18 RECESSED STUCCO DETAIL 3 FASCIA BOARD 7 STUCCO FINISH II WOOD TRELLIS 15 DECORATIVE TILE CAP 19 RECESSED STUCCO & METAL DETAIL 4 VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM 8 DECORATIVE GABLE 12 DECORATIVE METAL RAIL 16 DECORATIVE CORNICE 20 CEMENT FIBER BOARD AND END DETAIL TRIM 0 4 8 16 Scale CASEY ROAD A2 senior community CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS . RECREATION . 23 _ _ Applicant: Owner: M 0 0 R P A R K , CA Architecture + Planning Aldersgate Investments, LLC Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC K T G Y # 2013-0956 08- 14-2014 1733 Ocean Ave., Suite 250 Santa Monica, CA 90401 300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550 5900 Canoga Avenue, ktgy.com Oxnard, CA 93036 Suite 400 310 394 2623 805 988 4114 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 818 591 3300 94 14'-1"15'-1"19'-7"+/-24'-5"11'-1"12'-6"19'-7"+/-24'-5"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale12345678910111213141516171819202113214567101718213457171995 ENTRY HALL21'-5" x 10'-2"CONFERENCEROOM27'-4" x 27'-0"BEAUTY SALON15'-7" x 24'-8"STORAGE5'-0" x 10'-10"JANITOR5'-0" x 6'-8"MEN'S9'-10" x 25'-6"WOMEN'S14'-8" x 19'-4"MASSAGE8'-3" x 9'-11"STORAGE6'-3" x 9'-11"EQUIP. RM.6'-3" x 8'-7"STORAGE14'-1" x 9'-4"SWIM / SPA25'-0" x 18'-4"STORAGE31'-1" x 15'-1"FITNESSCENTER53'-0" x 61'-11"HALLMULTI-PURPOSE/CRAFT ROOM19'-5" x 39'-0"STOR.3'-2" x13'-2"PHOTO9'-6" x 9'-10"CERAMIC9'-2" x 9'-7"SERVICE9'-11" x 9'-10"ELEC.9'-1" x 5'-2"MECH.9'-1" x 4'-4"PATIOPATIO16'-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 BUILDING8,878 SQ. FT.Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale96 Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 330097 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"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816ScaleScale11457111516457181115161457191318169145719911131516221234567891011121314151617181920212221211898 PLAN 1PLAN 168'-2"PLAN 2PLAN 247'-8"93'-2"58'-8"PLAN 1PLAN 280'-8"55'-2" 58'-8"114'-10"PLAN 1PLAN 2PLAN 1VILLA A2 UNITS3,352 sq. ft.COUNT: 5VILLA B2 UNITS3,656 sq. ft.COUNT: 7VILLA C2 UNITS3,960 sq. ft.COUNT: 4VILLA D3 UNITS5,332 sq. ft.COUNT: 14Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 4 816Scale99 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 ROOM15'-6" X 22'-4"FOYER7'-2" X 11'-2"KITCHEN 9'-6" X 10'-8"MASTERBEDROOM 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 ROOM16'-8" X 23'-6"KITCHEN9'-8" X 13'-0"GARAGE17'-8" X 20'-0"MASTERBEDROOM16'-0" X 12'-6"BEDROOM 212'-6" X 14'-0"BEDROOM 312'-6" X 14'-2"BATH 28'-8" X 9'-2"M. BATH16'-0" X 5'-8"W.I.C.8'-4" X 5'-6"FOYER5'-0" X 7'-10"LINENCOATSLAUNDRY LAUNDRYCOATSLINENPLAN 1 - 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH1676 SQ. FT.COUNT: 45PLAN 2 - 3 BEDROOM, 2 BATH1980 SQ. FT.COUNT: 29COVERED PORCH15'-0" X 9'-2"PATIO16'-8" X 8'-0"PATIO15'-10" X 8'-0"COVEREDPORCH6'-6" X 7'-2"Applicant:Aldersgate Investments, LLC300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550Oxnard, CA 93036805 988 4114Owner:Grand Pacific Asset 2, LLC5900 Canoga Avenue,Suite 400Woodland Hills, CA 91367818 591 33000 2 48ScaleScale100 RESOLUTION NO. 2019-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2013-02 FOR A CHANGE OF LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (M) AND RURAL LOW RESIDENTIAL (RL) TO VH – VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 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. WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, applications for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 were filed by Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC, for property owned by Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, for a proposed development for a 390-Unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-2018-634, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, to amend the General Plan land-use designation from Medium Residential (M) and Rural Low Residential (RL) to VH – Very High Density Residential, on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, on the application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC.; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2019, February 6, 2019, and March 6, 2019, the City Council considered the agenda report for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 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 City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with any comments received during the public review process and determined that, with the incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to biological resource and transportation/traffic, 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. CC ATTACHMENT 5 101 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared for the project are complete and have been prepared in compliance with CEQA, and City CEQA Procedures. B. The Mitigation Measures have been incorporated into the project conditions of approval for the accompanying Residential Planned Development Permit. C. With the incorporation of the Mitigation Measures into the project conditions, the City Council finds on the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed development of a 390-unit senior community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, which includes General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; Zone Change No. 2013-02; Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01; and Development Agreement No. 2013-01, will have a significant effect on the environment. D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the proposed development of a 390-unit senior community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, which includes General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; Zone Change No. 2013-02; Residential Planned Development No. 2012-02; and Development Agreement No. 2013-01, along with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, all attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein, are hereby adopted. SECTION 3. APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: General Plan Amendment 2013-02 is approved, amending the General Plan Land Use Map as proposed in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 shall be concurrent with the effective date of the Ordinance for Zone Change No. 2013-02 and the Ordinance for Development Agreement No. 2013-01, whichever occurs last. 102 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 3 SECTION 5. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2019. __________________________________ Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Maureen Benson, City Clerk Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Exhibit B: General Plan Amendment Map 103 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 4 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517-6200 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION On the basis of an initial study, and in accordance with Section 15070 of the California Code of Regulations, the City of Moorpark has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. Attached is the Initial Study documenting the reasons to support the finding of no significant effect on the environment. Mitigation measures are included in the Initial Study to reduce the identified potential effects to a less than significant level: I. PROJECT Project Title: Aldersgate Senior Living Apartments GPA No. 2013-02; ZC No. 2013-02; RPD No. 2013-01; DA No. 2013-01 Location: North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road Assessor Parcel Number(s): 511-0-110-115, 511-0-110-035, 511-0-110-125, 511-0-030-180 Parcel Size: 49.52 acres Applicant/Owner: Grand Pacific Asset 2. LLC (Mansi) General Plan Designation: Rural Low (RL) and Medium Density Residential (M) Proposed General Plan Designation: Very High Residential (VH) Zoning: Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) Proposed Zoning: Very High; 7.9 units/acre Responsible or Trustee Agencies: California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), South Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (SCRWQCB), and Ventura County Water Protection District (VCWPD) EXHIBIT A 104 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 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 proposed General Plan Amendment would amend the general plan from the designation of Rural Low (RL) and Medium Residential (M) to VH Residential. The proposed Zone Change would amend the zoning designation from Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) to VH – Very High Density; 7.9 units/acre. The project site consists of a 49.52-acre irregularly-shaped parcel north of Casey Road and west 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. Walnut Canyon Elementary School is located on the south side of Casey Road, and residential housing exists between the project site and Walnut Canyon Road to the east. 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 for the apartment complex 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 for the apartment complex. The Project site consists of disturbed open space bordered on the north by previously graded residential pads that are reverting back to coastal sage scrub, and on the west by open space. The Project site is dominated by Venturan California Sagebrush Scrub with non-native annual grassland and disturbed or developed areas. The site is divided by a ridge which runs north to south. The western portion of the site currently drains into a small defined natural drainage that flows south to Casey Road. A small retention basin, with a concrete spillway, is located near the center of the site in this drainage. Sediment has accumulated in this basin over time and Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian vegetation has become established in and around this basin and, for this reason, this basin currently qualifies as a jurisdictional wetland area with the riparian areas north of this basin also qualifying as jurisdictional streambed areas. 105 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 6 Grading will consist of cut and fill to allow for development of the proposed residential buildings, internal roadways, parking and yard/recreational areas, access road, utilities, and drainage facilities. The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns and involve filling the existing natural drainage on the western portion of the site and removal of the retention basin in this drainage. The Project includes creating 1.24 acres of riparian and wetland habitat west of the access road and around the drainage retention basin proposed at the southern end of the site to compensate for the loss of 1.02 acres of riparian and wetland habitat associated with this existing drainage and retention basin. A habitat restoration plan will be developed as part of the CDFW, USACE, and SCRWQCB process to issue permits to allow the proposed alterations to this existing drainage feature. II. STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS State law requires the lead agency for the proposed project, to prepare an lnitial Study to determine if the proposed project could significantly impact the environment. Based on the findings contained in the attached Initial Study, it has been determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment; however, mitigation measures are available that would reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and the applicant has agreed to implement the mitigation measures. III. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN INITIAL STUDY: Section IV: Biology Section XVI: Traffic and Transportation IV. PUBLIC REVIEW Document Posting and Comment Period: January 31, 2018 to March 1, 2018 The MND/Initial Study was previously circulated and made available to the public and responsible agencies. Although there are revisions made to the Initial Study, the revisions and additional language only provide more clarification and make insignificant modifications based on comments received. No new impacts or mitigation were identified to require recirculation pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. V. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Prior to approving the project, the decision-making body of the Lead Agency must consider this Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received on the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Those decision-makers may approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration if they find that all of the significant impacts have been identified and that the proposed mitigation measures will reduce those impacts to less than significant levels. 106 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 7 Prepared By: Joseph Fiss Planning Manager 107 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 8 Environmental Impact Recommended Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation Responsible Party Biological Resources This mitigation addresses Impact IV. (e) BIO-1: 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 at least two (2) 24”- box Quercus agrifolia, four (4) 24” box Black Walnut, and ten (10) sycamore trees. Prior to approval of building permits, applicant shall submit a tree planting and 5- year maintenance plan showing the tree planting including the required trees as listed. The five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees is 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 TLC report for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the TLC. Orange construction fencing is sufficient and its position must be Less than Significant Applicant, Planning 108 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 9 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. Biological Resources This mitigation addresses Impacts IV. (a, b, d) BIO-2: 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). Prior to final occupancy clearance, verification of the restoration of 10.82 acres shall be field verified by a qualified biologist. Less than Significant Applicant, Planning Biological Resources This mitigation addresses Impacts IV. (a, b, c, d) BIO-3: 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 with 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 Prior to building permits, applicant will be required to show proof of permits from ACE (404 Permit), SCRWQCB (401 permit), and CDFW (1602 permit) that will require full approval of a habitat restoration plan, wetlands restoration plan and the required 5-year mitigation plan for the project. Less than Significant Applicant, Planning 109 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 10 Traffic and Transportation This mitigation addresses Impacts XVI (a, b, c) TRA-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. • 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. • 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. 110 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 11 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517-6200 INITIAL STUDY FOR Aldersgate Senior Living Apartments This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, in accordance with Section 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. Project Title: Aldersgate Senior Living Apartments GPA No. 2013-02; ZC No. 2013-02; RPD No. 2013-01; DA No. 2013-01 Location: North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road Assessor Parcel Number(s): 511-0-110-115, 511-0-110-035, 511-0-110-125, 511-0-030-180 Parcel Size: 49.52 acres Applicant/Owner: Grand Pacific Asset 2. LLC (Mansi) General Plan Designation: Rural Low (RL) and Medium Density Residential (M) Proposed General Plan Designation: Very High Residential (VH) Zoning: Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) Proposed Zoning: Very High; 7.9 units/acre Responsible or Trustee Agencies: California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), South Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (SCRWQCB), and Ventura County Water Protection District (VCWPD) 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 proposed General Plan Amendment would amend the general plan from the designation of Rural Low (RL) and Medium Residential (M) to VH Residential. The proposed Zone Change would amend the zoning designation from Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) to VH – Very High Density; 7.9 units/acre. 111 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 12 The project site consists of a 49.52-acre irregularly-shaped parcel north of Casey Road and west 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. Walnut Canyon Elementary School is located on the south side of Casey Road, and residential housing exists between the project site and Walnut Canyon Road to the east. 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 for the apartment complex 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 for the apartment complex. The Project site consists of disturbed open space bordered on the north by previously graded residential pads that are reverting back to coastal sage scrub, and on the west by open space. The Project site is dominated by Venturan California Sagebrush Scrub with non-native annual grassland and disturbed or developed areas. The site is divided by a ridge which runs north to south. The western portion of the site currently drains into a small defined natural drainage that flows south to Casey Road. A small retention basin, with a concrete spillway, is located near the center of the site in this drainage. Sediment has accumulated in this basin over time and Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian vegetation has become established in and around this basin and, for this reason, this basin currently qualifies as a jurisdictional wetland area with the riparian areas north of this basin also qualifying as jurisdictional streambed areas. Grading will consist of cut and fill to allow for development of the proposed residential buildings, internal roadways, parking and yard/recreational areas, access road, utilities, and drainage facilities. The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns and involve filling the existing natural drainage on the western portion of the site and removal of the retention basin in this drainage. The Project includes creating 1.24 acres of riparian and wetland habitat west of the access road and around the drainage retention basin proposed at the southern end of the site to compensate for the loss of 1.02 acres of riparian and wetland habitat associated with this existing drainage and retention basin. A habitat restoration plan will be developed as part of the CDFW, USACE, and SCRWQCB process to issue permits to allow the proposed alterations to this existing drainage feature. 112 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 13 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is a vacant 49.52 acre site surrounded by urban development. EXISTING LAND USES Location General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land Use Project 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 113 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 14 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 114 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 15 Methodology for Evaluating Cumulative Impacts: The methodology used to analyze cumulative impacts of the proposed project, in the Initial Study was the list approach. The following pending and recently approved projects located within the City of Moorpark have been evaluated for this Initial Study. See below: Pending and Recently Approved Projects within the City of Moorpark Number Project Land Use Size 1 Toll Brothers SFR 50 Units 2 Pacific Communities SFR 284 Units 3 Hitch Ranch SFR/Apartments 755 Units 4 Aldersgate Senior Housing Senior Independent Living 260 Units Senior Assisted Living 130 Units 5 Toll Brothers SFR 132 Units 6 City Ventures SFR 110 Units 7 John C. Chiu, FLP-N Condos 60 Units 8 K. Hovnanian Homes SFR 248 Units 9 Essex Moorpark Apartments 200 Units 10 Birdsall Group, LLC SFR 21 Units 11 Grand Moorpark Condos 66 Units 12 Housing Authority SFR 24 Units 13 Spring Road, LLC Condos 95 Units 14 West Pointe Homes SFR 133 Units 15 Moorpark Hospitality Hotel 108 Rooms 16 Patriot Commerce Center Industrial 350,000 sf 17 A-B Properties Industrial 36 acres 18 Triliad Development Movie Studio 37 acres 19 Wayne J. Sand & Gravel Quarry N/A 20 Grimes Rock Quarry N/A 115 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 16 EXHIBIT 1 VICINITY MAPS 116 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 17 117 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 18 118 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 19 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 as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture/Forestry Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the 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 or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ___________________________________ February 7, 2019 Joseph Fiss Planning Manager 119 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 20 Initial Study Checklist I. AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion: a) 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. 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. b) 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. c) 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 existing vegetation was burned in the 2007 Moorpark 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 be developing a habitat restoration plan to mitigate for the loss of wetland habitat and vegetation that will restore a wetland on site and establish new vegetation. 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. 120 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 21 d) 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 Measure(s): None Required Monitoring: None Required II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES/FORESTRY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Discussion: a-d) 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. 121 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 22 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 Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. III. AIR QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Discussion: a-d) The City of Moorpark and the proposed project are located within the jurisdiction of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). The project would not have a significant impact 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 pounds/day threshold of significance established by the VCAPCD 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 122 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 23 Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) 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? d) 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 123 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 24 Discussion: 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). Arroyo Willow Thickets (Salix lasiolepis Shrubland alliance), Mulefat Thickets (Baccharis salicifolia Shrubland Alliance), Non-Native Annual Grassland and Upland Mustard–Semi Natural Herbaceous Stand are present along the natural drainage located on the western portion of the site. The 0.69 acres of seasonal wash on the site contains small areas of Arroyo Willow Thicket vegetation (0.34 acres) and Mulefat Thicket habitat vegetation is located upstream of a small retention basin in this drainage that includes 0.34 acres of Arroyo Willow Thicket vegetation. that meets the regulatory definition of a wetland. The VCCS on the site is distributed in patches on the site separated by areas of non-native grassland and is uneven and varied. Characteristic plants found in VCCS on the site include California sagebrush (Artemesia californica), purple sage (Salvia leucophylla), California. The density of the VCSS plants is uneven and varied across the site. 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 existing natural drainage on the western portion of 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 The Proposed project would project result in the removal of 92 mature living trees, both native and non-native, Removal of 3 three native trees consisting of two 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 92 mature living 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 in the existing drainage on the western portion of the site. 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. VCSS habitat. 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. 124 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 25 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. A detention basin will be constructed at the southern end of the site, immediately west of the access road. This basin will surrounded by wetland and riparian habitat with additional new wetland and riparian habitat located south of the development area and west of the access road. 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. 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. 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 Measure(s): BIO-1: This mitigation addresses Impact IV (e) 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 at least two (2) 24”-box Quercus agrifolia, four (4) 24” box Black Walnut, and ten (10) sycamore trees. Prior to approval of building permits, applicant shall submit a tree planting and 5- year maintenance plan showing the tree planting including the required trees as listed. The five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees is 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 TLC report for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the TLC. 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 125 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 26 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. BIO-2: This mitigation addresses Impacts IV (a, b, d) 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). Prior to final occupancy clearance, verification of the restoration of 10.82 acres shall be field verified by a qualified biologist. BIO-3: This mitigation addresses Impacts IV (a, b, c, d) 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 with 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 Prior to building permits, applicant will be required to show proof of permits from ACE (404 Permit), SCRWQCB (401 permit), and CDFW (1602 permit) that will require full approval of a habitat restoration plan, wetlands restoration plan and the required 5-year mitigation plan for the project V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Sources: Archaeological Survey (W&S Consultants, 1/12/2014 ); Project Application (September 3, 2013) Discussion: a-d) An Archaeological Survey was prepared for the site by W&S Consultants (1/12/2014). There was no evidence found in a records search for any expected cultural resources on the project site. Furthermore the archeological survey that was conducted on site found no evidence of archeological or cultural resources. 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 126 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 27 Resources Code and has not received any requests to consult on the Project. As part of the standard conditions, a condition will be imposed that states 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. Another standard condition will be 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. Therefore, through standard conditioning of the project, impacts to archeological and cultural resources are considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required Monitoring: None Required. VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of topsoil? 127 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 28 VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) 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? d) 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? e) 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? 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) Discussion: a-e) 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion: a-b) 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 128 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 29 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 Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. VIII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) 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? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) 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? e) 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? f) 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? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 129 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 30 VIII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact h) 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? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001) Discussion: There are no known hazards on the project site, nor will new hazards be created as a result of the project, which is among residential subdivisions outside of wildlands. a-h) 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, and 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required Monitoring: None Required IX. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) 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 preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 130 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 31 IX. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) 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? d) 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 substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) 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? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) 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? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 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 Discussion: a-f) 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 are not be detained. Sediment has accumulated in this basin over time and riparian vegetation has become established and, for this reason, this basin currently qualifies as a jurisdictional wetland area. 131 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 32 The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns. The existing small retention basin in the center of the site would be removed as part of the project. 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 of 3.6 acre feet will be constructed at the southern end of the site, immediately west of the access road. This basin will surrounded by wetland and riparian habitat created to mitigate for the loss of habitat associated with the existing small retention basin and drainage this basin is located in. Additional new wetland and riparian habitat will also be located south of the development area and west of the access road. The detention 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. g., h.) The site is not within a within a FEMA identified 100-year flood hazard area. i) The project will not 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 as there is no dam or levee on the site and site is not subject to flooding. j) There is no risk of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow as the project is not next to a coastal area. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Indicate the District’s easement over Walnut Canyon on all plans and drawings. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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 (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. 132 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 33 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. 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) iii. 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) The Applicant shall provide for the long term maintenance of any lateral connection to Walnut 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) Monitoring: None Required. X. LAND USE & PLANNING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Land Use Element (1992) Discussion: a-c) 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 133 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 34 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. 134 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 35 XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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? b) 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? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Discussion: a., b.) There are no known mineral resources onsite. Therefore, there are no impacts anticipated for this project to mineral resources. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. XII. NOISE Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? e) 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? f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 135 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 36 Sources: Noise Study (Veneklasen Associates, 1/16/14); Project Application (September 3, 2013); General Plan Noise Element (1998) Discussion: a-f) 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 as part of the Conditions of Approval. 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. XIII. POPULATION & HOUSING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through an extension of roads or other infra-structure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013) Discussion: a-c) 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. 136 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 37 Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES* Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts to the following: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Discussion: a-e) 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 less than significant. The Project site Development fees and increased property taxes will be paid to fund required public services. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. 137 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 38 XV. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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? b) 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? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Discussion: a-b) Onsite recreational facilities are proposed such as a pool facility and tennis courts for the residents on site. Park and recreation fees will be also be paid as part of the developer fees. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. XVI. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 138 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 39 XVI. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation 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) Discussion: a-g) 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 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. Adequate access to the site will be provided from Casey Road, and emergency access augmented by a controlled point on Walnut Canyon Road. 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. Mitigation: TRA-1 (XVI a,b,c): 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 139 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 40 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 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. • 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. • 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. Monitoring: Fees need to be paid as per above and Development Agreement XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Sources: Discussion: a) The project is a vacant site and has no listed structures in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). 140 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 41 b) There are no known cultural resources that would be of significance to a California Native American tribe. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. XVIII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) 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? c) 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? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) 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? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures (2002) Discussion: 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. 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. 141 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 42 Mitigation Measure(s): Development Fees will be required. Monitoring: Development Fees will be paid as per Development Agreement 142 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 43 XVIV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Sources: The City of Moorpark’s General Plan, as amended. Discussion: a) 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. b) 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 IV. Biological Resources and XVI. 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. c) 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. 143 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 44 REFERENCES 1. Project Application (September 3, 2013) 2. Environmental Information Form application and materials submitted on September 3, 2013. 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. 8. General Plan Safety Element (2001) 9. General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) 10. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Memorandum to City (Stratton, 7/8/14) 11. Rincon Consultants Inc., Greenhouse Gas Study (12/31/13) 12. Oak Tree Report (Tree Life Concern Inc., 1/31/14) 13. Biological Resources Technical Report (Seven Elk Ranch Design Incorporated, 1/22/14) 14. Coastal California Gnatcatcher Focused Survey and Amendment (BioResource Consultants Inc., 7/23/15 and 5/12/16) 15. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Delineation Report (BioResource Consultants Inc., 5/12/16). 16. Archaeological Survey (W&S Consultants, 1/12/2014) 17. Hydrology and Hydraulics Study (LC Engineering Group, Inc., 2/25/2014) 18. Memorandum (Ventura County Watershed Protection District [VCWPD], 7/7/2014) 19. Traffic and Circulation Study, Associated Traffic Engineers (3/26/2014) 20. Review of Traffic Study, Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers (6/10/2015) 21. Acoustical Analysis Report Veneklasen Associates (1/16/2014) 22. Soils Report, Workman and Associates (3/7/2014) 23. Cut and Fill Report, Cook (3/10/2014) 24. Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures (2002) 25. General Plan Noise Element (1998) 26. General Plan Circulation Element (1992) NOTE: Appendix Nos. 10-23 is included as a separate attachment under Item No. 8.A. for the regular meeting of 3-6-2019. 144 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 45 EXHIBIT B 145 Res o0\on No. 2019-,,_ page Prepared 8 \ \ 0 t ver A Jose. `, gManager pian r I 146 a Initial Study Aldersgate Senior Apartments February 7, 2019 Page 3 of32 AGREEM ENT TO PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM In accordance with the CEQA Guideline s 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 IN CLUDE ALL OF THE ABOVE- LISTED M IT IGATION MEASURES IN THE PROJECT. Sign ature of Proj ect App li cant Date 147 Resolution No. - Page 19 I i 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 as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture/Forestry ❑ Air Quality ® Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils I ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards& Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ® Transportation ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) El On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® I find that although the 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 or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. /". February 7, 2019 JoseD. 1 . Pl.nlin... a .ger 148 i State of California – Natural Resources Agency EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director South Coast Region 3883 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123 (858) 467-4201 www.wildlife.ca.gov Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870 March 6, 2018 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 jfiss@moorpark.gov Subject: Aldersgate Senior Living Project in the City of Moorpark, Ventura County (Project) SCH No. 2018021010 Dear Mr. Fiss: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) circulated by the City of Moorpark (Lead Agency). The Lead Agency’s MND is for development of the Aldersgate Senior Living Project, a 390-unit continuing care senior retirement community on 49.52 acres (Project), pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code. CDFW ROLE CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources, and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the state. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a)). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, the law charges CDFW to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA, (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW’s lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority, (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.). Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in “take”, as defined by State law as any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA; Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), or state-listed rare plant pursuant to the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA; Fish and Game Code §1900 et seq.), related authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code will be required. CC ATTACHMENT 6 149 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 2 of 9 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proponent: Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC (Mansi) 300 Esplanade Drive Oxnard, California 93030 (805) 988-4114 Project Summary: The Lead Agency’s MND analyzed development of the proposed Project, which would construct a 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 Project site is located on the north side of Casey Road, west of Walnut Canyon Road. Project Objectives: 1.A General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Residential Planned Development (RPD), and Development Agreement. 2.Construction of 40 single-story and two-story structures. 3.A main paved access road extending from Casey Road, and internal paved roadways and parking areas. 4.Related new utilities and infrastructure. 5.Landscaping and paved active and primary passive recreation areas. Location: The Project site is located in a small valley, and is part of the Little Simi Valley. The Project is more specifically described as on the north side of Casey Road, west of Walnut Canyon Road in the City of Moorpark, in northeastern Ventura County. Surrounding land uses include single-family homes to the north, single-family homes to the east, Walnut Canyon Elementary School to the south. The Project Site is contiguous with extensive natural habitat occurring to the west. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CDFW offers the following mitigation recommendations below to assist the Lead Agency in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. I. Project Description and Shortcoming: Issue #1: The Lead Agencies MND, states, “The applicant shall replace trees on the site in an amount equal to the appraised value of the removed trees, as identified in the Oak Tree Report, including two 24”-box Quercus agrifolia. Should there not be sufficient space to replace the required trees, or should appropriate trees not be available, 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. Additionally, the Lead Agency states only one oak tree will be removed; however, the 2014 Oak Tree Report states that one oak tree (Quercus agrifolia), two black walnuts (Juglans californica), and one blue elderberry (Sambucus caerulea) are to be removed” (Oak Tree Report, 2014, Page 6). 150 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 3 of 9 According to the Biological Assessment (2014), Mulefat Scrub occurs along a seasonal wash where it is dominated by a nearly pure stand of mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia). An isolated patch of Southern Willow Scrub occurs in a seasonal wash where it is dominated by a canopy of arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) with intermittent Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii). Associated plants included giant wild rye (Leymus condensatus) and curly dock (Rumex crispus). Specific impact: The Project site has three native vegetation communities: Mulefat Scrub, Southern Willow Scrub, and Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub. The primary vegetation throughout the property site is Venturan coastal sage scrub with mature native and non-native trees mixed throughout, including Coast live oak and black walnut. This plant assemblage is ecologically valuable to native wildlife. Additionally, the following California Native Plant Society (CNPS) special status plants and California Species of Special Concern (SSC) animal species are likely to occur on the Project site: Slender mariposa lily (Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis) CNPS-1B2; Plummer's mariposa lily (Calochortus plummerae) CNPS-4.2; Chaparral ragwort (Senecio aphanactis) CNPS-2014b; Southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis) CNPS 2014a; Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus) federal Endangered; coastal whiptail (Cnemidophorus tigris stejnegeri) SSC; coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) SSC; San Bernardino Ring-necked Snake (Diadophis punctatus modestus) SSC; and rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps) SSC. Evidence impact would be significant: The loss of mature native and non-native trees and the previously described native vegetation communities will likely impact the nesting and foraging opportunities of the local avian and wildlife population. The Lead Agency further states, “The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, on Biological Resources” (Initial Study, Page 21). Several recent like-kind Projects have been recently approved in the City of Moorpark. Additionally, this specific Project proposes to remove an ephemeral wash and streambed that empties into Walnut Creek, remove an emergent wetland, remove 101 mature trees, and impacts the habitat of an endangered species. Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s): Mitigation Measure #1: The MND should include measures to fully avoid and otherwise protect sensitive plant and plant communities from Project-related direct and indirect impacts. Plant communities, alliances, and associations with a statewide ranking of S-1, S-2, S-3 and S-4 should be considered sensitive and declining at the local and regional level. CDFW recommends the Lead Agency require Off-site mitigation lands be acquired and preserved with the necessary endowment in perpetuity. It is also recommended the location of this off-site mitigation lands consider the expanding a current or proposed future wildlife movement corridor. Mitigation Measure #2: CDFW recommends the Lead Agency require the Applicant to conduct a recent Floristic, alliance-and/or association-based mapping and vegetation impact assessments at the Project site and within the neighboring vicinity. Evans (2009) Identification and mapping of rare plant communities is recommended for mapping an isolated area for unique and rare plants. Adjoining habitat areas should be included in this assessment where site activities could lead to direct or indirect impacts offsite. Habitat mapping at the alliance level will help establish baseline vegetation conditions. In addition, the CDFW website, with regard to Natural Communities, can provide guidance for surveying and mapping sensitive and rare plant communities: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural- Communities/List. 151 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 4 of 9 Issue #2: The Lead Agency’s MND states that only one tree is a Coast live oak, and the “applicant shall include two 24” box Quercus agrifolia trees on-site as mitigation” Oak Tree Report, 2014). Additionally, the Lead Agency’s MND further states, “trees shall be replaced in an amount equal to the appraised value of the removed trees, as identified in the Oak Tree Report prepared in 2014” (Initial Study, Page 9). The Lead Agency further states, “However, should there be insufficient space to replace the required trees, or should appropriate trees not be available, 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.” (Initial Study, Page 9). Based on information in the Oak Tree Report, dated January 2014, the estimated value of the 101 trees on-site is approximately $74,500. Specific impact: The loss of 101 tress on-site, including the riparian areas associated with the streams and wetlands, provide local avian species nesting and foraging habitat will be permanently impact. The Lead Agency’s MND also indicates that if the Project cannot incorporate trees equal to the appraised value, the City of Moorpark is to receive compensation for the loss of the appraised value of the trees. Why impact would occur: The 2014 Oak Tree Report identified 101-tagged trees for removal to develop the Project as proposed, and includes large mature native trees. Evidence impact would be significant: The proposed Project site is currently primarily open space with over one-hundred trees, streams, and an emergent wetland. The Lead Agency’s MND states that the applicant shall remove 101 trees on the site. If sufficient space does not exist to mitigate the removal of the trees, 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. The transference of monies between the applicant and the Lead Agency does not mitigate the significance of the impacts, as this would be considered deferred mitigation, which does not avoid, minimize, or fully offset Project-related impacts. Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s) Mitigation Measure #1: To minimize significant impacts CDFW recommends tree replacement for mitigation purposes be with native species local to the area. In addition, if sufficient space does not exists on-site, the remaining trees should be planted adjacent to the Project, or off-site to enhance the riparian buffer between the Project site and open space to the west, the remaining fragmented streambed located off-site, and newly created streambed and wetlands habitats proposed as mitigation both on-site, off-site, and adjacent Walnut Creek. Mitigation Measure #2: To minimize significant impacts CDFW also recommends trees be placed within areas preserved as wildland Open Space in the City of Moorpark, or the Lead Agency could propose acquisition and enhancement of a mitigation parcel of sufficient size to incorporate the remaining number of replacement trees, and/or creation of ephemeral wash and wetland. A Conservation Easement should cover all mitigation areas in perpetuity to minimize the cumulative impacts of the Project. In addition, the Lead Agency’s proposal to replace the ephemeral Streambed and wash, and associated wetland habitat, at an equal amount is insufficient to offset the temporal losses of these resources to wildlife. CDFW recommends the mitigation focus on replacement of native trees on-site, equal to the number of trees removed, to offset the Project-related significant impacts. 152 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 5 of 9 II. Environmental Setting and Related Impact Shortcoming Issue #1: Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) is a federally listed species and a California Species of Special Concern. The Lead Agency’s MND stated, “Coastal sagebrush scrub shall be provided throughout the restoration and habitat enhancement area of 18.51 acres of the Coastal California Gnatcatcher Focused Survey” (Initial Study, Page 9). CDFW cannot ascertain where the 18.51 acres is in proximity to the proposed Project site. The Lead Agency proposes a Project Habitat Conservation Plan, developed prior to Project construction activities and approved by USFWS. A population of gnatcatchers was previously documented approximately 1.5 miles to the north of the Project site. Due to the presence of the open Venturan coastal sage scrub and the occurrence of nearby source populations, and appropriate soils, this species has a moderate potential to occur onsite. As stated in the Biological Report no protocol surveys were conducted for this species. Evidence impact would be significant: Coastal California gnatcatcher use coastal sage scrub habitats, documented in close proximity to and within the Project site. The primary plant community on the Project site is Venturan coastal sage scrub. The Lead Agency MND stated, “It also affects the existing scattered California Sagebrush Scrub plants which comprise the habitat of the California Gnatcatcher” (Initial Study, Page 9). Coastal sage scrub habitat are more common and more widely disbursed along the coastal range of gnatcatcher, because of changing climate. Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s) Mitigation Measure #1: To minimize significant impacts CDFW recommends protocol surveys be conducted during the appropriate time of year by a qualified ornithologist prior to adoption of the MND document the presence Coastal California gnatcatcher prior to any ground disturbance activities, results of the surveys would influence the requirement of more mitigation measures, ultimately adopted within the final CEQA document. Survey protocol and guidelines for coastal California gnatcatcher are located at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols. Issue #2: There does not appear to have been any nesting bird surveys conducted, or proposed nesting bird surveys, prior to the removal of the 101 tress on the Project site. Additionally, the MND does not state when the removal of these trees will occur. Specific impact: The loss of the 101 trees and removal of a riparian corridor along streams, if not replaced on-site, would be a permanent significant impact to locally occurring native nesting birds. Why impact would occur: Trees identified in a 2014 Oak Tree Report, tagged for removal, to develop the Project as proposed. Undergrounding and grading of streams and emergent wetland on-site to develop the Project as proposed. Evidence impact would be significant: The riparian area of the streams, described by the Lead Agency’s Biological Report “dominated by a nearly pure stand of mulefat” and the probable location for many species of native aquatic and terrestrial species, especially nesting birds. The Biological Report conducted by the applicant demonstrated a diverse array of species currently using the riparian area of trees on the proposed Project site. The trees and riparian 153 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 6 of 9 corridor of the ephemeral wash and wetland, utilized as nesting habitat by locally occurring bird species. Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s) Mitigation Measure #1: To minimize significant impacts CDFW recommends mitigation of impacts to the 101 trees include establishing a buffer of herbaceous plants and shrubs between the Project site and adjacent the open space to the west of the Project site. These plantings should consist of like-kind plant assemblages, listed in the MND 2014 Oak Tree Report. Establishment of the buffer would minimize edge effects and the movement of non-native weeds and Argentine ants into the adjacent open space and riparian area of the Arroyo Simi (Holway, Suarez, and Case, 2002; Porensky, and Truman 2013; Simberloff, et al., 2013). Mitigation Measure #2: To minimize significant impacts CDFW recommends nesting bird surveys be conducted as described in the nesting birds survey protocols and guidelines located at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols. An ornithologist familiar with local avian species should conduct the surveys. Survey findings should be disclosed to decision- makers prior to adoption of the MND, as the results may influence the need for additional avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures. Additionally, CDFW recommends nesting bird surveys should be conducted prior to any ground disturbing or vegetation removal activities. Mitigation Measure #3: To minimize significant impacts CDFW recommends the Lead Agency’s MND include adequate protection measures to prevent impacts to nesting birds during construction. Nesting birds have the potential to be impacted directly, or indirectly, by construction noise, dust, or vibration. Nests missed during pre-project surveys could lead to nest abandonment during Project implementation. CDFW recommends avoiding the nesting bird season, which generally runs from February 1st through September 1st (as early as January 1st for some raptors), for all Project-related activities, to avoid take of birds or their eggs. Migratory nongame native bird species are protected by international treaty under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (Title 50, § 10.13, Code of Federal Regulations). Additionally, Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit take of all birds and their active nests including raptors and other migratory non-game birds (as listed under the Federal MBTA). If avoidance of the avian breeding season is not feasible, CDFW recommends the Lead Agency develop a nesting bird’s management plan, submitted to CDFW for review, prior to ground disturbing or vegetation removal. All Project’s personnel, including all Project contractors working on-site, should be provided a copy of the nesting bird’s management plan, and instructed how to avoid nests and nest buffer areas. Reductions in the nest buffer distance may be appropriate depending on the avian species involved, ambient levels of human activity, screening vegetation, or possibly other factors. Issue #3: The Project site currently supports an ephemeral wash, stream and emergent wetland. The Project proposes undergrounding the streambed on-site, and installing a water catchment basin and runoff infrastructure. The adjacent open space, where this stream continues, from the Project site, has the potential to support a wide variety of state-listed, state species of special concern, and native aquatic and terrestrial species. Project modifications may affect the hydrology of the stream and emergent wetland, as well as, its functions and values; consequently, it may become uninhabitable for local fish and wildlife species. 154 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 7 of 9 The Lead Agency’s MND states, “to offset impacts to U.S. and State Wetland and Waters, on- site mitigation will be implemented in the southern portion of the proposed Project.” The Lead Agency’s MND also states, “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.” If there is space on- site to re-create the stream and wetland then it is CDFW’s concern that these resources are not all together avoided, and the Project implemented on the portion of the property away from these valuable and rare habitats. Why impact would occur: The Project would remove a stream and emergent wetland and create almost 50 acres of newly constructed impervious surfaces and permanently affecting an ephemeral stream and an emergent wetland. Specific impact: A seasonal wash with hydrophytic vegetation is present in the central portion of the Project Site. The Lead Agency’s MND stated, “A drainage field subject to classification as wetlands is also affected” (Initial Study, Page 9). The potential impacts from runoff of impervious surfaces from the Project site that empty into the streambed on the adjacent open space and potentially empty into Walnut Creek are not fully described. Wetlands resources, as described in Fish & Game Code section 703(a), are guided by the Fish and Game Commission’s policies. The Wetlands Resources policy (http://www.fgc.ca.gov/policy/p4misc.aspx#WETLANDS) of the Fish and Game Commission “…seek[s] to provide for the protection, preservation, restoration, enhancement and expansion of wetland habitat in California. Further, it is the policy of the Fish and Game Commission to strongly discourage development in or conversion of wetlands. It opposes, consistent with its legal authority, any development or conversion, which would result in a reduction of wetland acreage or wetland habitat values. To that end, the Commission opposes wetland development proposals unless, at a minimum, project mitigation assures there will be "no net loss" of either wetland habitat values or acreage. The Commission strongly prefers mitigation which would achieve expansion of wetland acreage and enhancement of wetland habitat values.” The Fish and Game Commission’s Water policy guides CDFW to ensure the quantity and quality of the waters of this state should be apportioned and maintained respectively so as to produce and sustain maximum numbers of fish and wildlife; to provide maximum protection and enhancement of fish and wildlife and their habitat; encourage and support programs to maintain or restore a high quality of the waters of this state, and prevent the degradation thereof caused by pollution and contamination; and endeavor to keep as much water as possible open and accessible to the public for the use and enjoyment of fish and wildlife. Evidence impact would be significant: All wetlands and watercourses, whether ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial, should be retained and provided with substantial setbacks, which preserve the riparian and aquatic values and functions for the benefit to onsite and offsite wildlife and plant populations. The Wetlands Resources policy provides a framework for maintaining wetland resources and establishes mitigation guidance. The CDFW encourages avoidance of wetland resources as a primary mitigation measure and discourages the development or type conversion of wetlands. 155 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 8 of 9 CDFW encourages activities that would avoid the reduction of wetland acreage, function, or habitat values. Once avoidance and minimization measures have been exhausted, the project should include mitigation measures to assure a “no net loss” of either wetland habitat values or acreage. Conversion of wetlands and watercourses includes, but is not limited to, conversion to subsurface drains, placement of fill or building of structures within the wetland, and channelization or removal of materials from the streambed. The Lead Agencies Initial Study states, “the Applicant must provide for the long term maintenance of any lateral connection to Walnut 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” (Initial Study, Page 15). However, it remains unclear if the Project will impact Walnut Creek, either directly or indirectly, as a result of Project-related activities. Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s) Mitigation Measure #1: To minimize significant impacts CDFW has regulatory authority with regard to activities occurring in streams and/or lakes that could adversely affect any fish or wildlife resource. For any activity that will substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow, or change the bed, channel, or bank (which may include associated riparian resources) of a river or stream or use material from a streambed, the Project applicant must provide written notification to CDFW pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Based on this notification and other information, CDFW then determines whether a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement is required. CDFW’s issuance of an LSA Agreement is a project subject to CEQA. To facilitate issuance of a LSA Agreement, if necessary, the environmental document should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake, stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, monitoring and reporting commitments for issuance of the LSA Agreement. Early consultation is recommended, since modification of the proposed project may be required to avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Again, the failure to include this analysis in the Project’s environmental document could preclude CDFW from relying on the Lead Agency’s analysis to issue a LSA Agreement without CDFW first conducting its own, separate Lead Agency subsequent or supplemental analysis for the Project. Information on submitting a Notification for a LSA Agreement, the current fee schedule, and timelines required in obtaining an Agreement and found using the following URL: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database, which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd (e)). Accordingly, please report any special status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNNDB field survey form located at the following link: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/CNDDB_ FieldSurveyForm.pdf. The completed form mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following email address: CNDDB@wildlife.ca.gov. The types of information reported to CNDDB located at the following link: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/plants_and_animals.asp. 156 Mr. Joseph Fiss-Planning Manager City of Moorpark March 6, 2018 Page 9 of 9 FILING FEES The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089). CONCLUSION CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the MND to assist the Lead Agency in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources. Direct questions regarding this letter, or further coordination, to Ms. Jamie Jackson, Senior Environmental Scientist (Specialist), at (805) 382-6906 or jamie.jackson@wildlife.ca.gov. Sincerely, Betty J. Courtney Environmental Program Manager I South Coast Region ec: Ms. Christine Found-Jackson, CDFW, Newbury Park Ms. Jamie Jackson, CDFW, Oxnard Mr. Brock Warmuth, CDFW, Santa Barbara Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento Steve Henry, USFWS, Ventura, steve_henry@fws.gov References Holway, D. A., Suarez, A. V., and Case, T. J. “Role of abiotic factors in governing susceptibility to invasion: a test with Argentine ants.” Ecology 83, no. 6 (2002): 1610 1619. Porensky, Lauren M., and Truman P. Young. "Edge‐effect interactions in fragmented and patchy landscapes." Conservation Biology 27, no. 3 (2013): 509-519. Simberloff, D., Martin, J. L., Genovesi, P., Maris, V., Wardle, D. A., Aronson, J., and Pyšek, P. “Impacts of biological invasions: W hat's what and the way forward.” Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28, no. 1 (2013): 58-66. 157 17901 Von Karman Ave, Suite 600 Irvine, CA 92614 (949) 556-8714 www.better-neighborhoods.com/ September 23, 2018 Joseph Fiss Planning Manager City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Ave. Moorpark, CA 93021 Via email: jfiss@moorparkca.gov Re: Aldersgate Project (the “Project”) Dear Fiss, Thank you for the opportunity to provide questions and comments regarding the proposed Project referenced above. Better Neighborhoods Inc. is an organization established to help people have a voice in local development decisions that can be heard equally to that of the planners and developers, to encourage smart growth that is consistent with the needs of the community, to protect the natural environment and our places of historical and esthetic significance, to support affordable housing, and to balance the needs for growth and livable cities. As a preliminary matter, on Friday September 21 you informed me via email that “there are still some outstanding items in the Initial Study and MND . . . I will send you a link to the complete report and package when it is available this afternoon.” As of today – two days before the public hearing scheduled for September 25, I have not yet received a link to the complete report and package to which you refer. Are there any outstanding items? In any event, based on the materials that we have reviewed, we believe that the City has not adequately studied several issues where there is a reasonable probability of potentially significant environmental impacts from the Project, as discussed in more detail below. Additional study, analysis and, if possible, mitigation measures are needed before this Project can be approved. CC ATTACHMENT 7a 158 Mr. Joseph Fiss Re: Aldersgate Project September 23, 2018 Page 2 The Project The Applicant, Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, proposes the development of a 390-unit senior continuing care retirement community on 49.52 acres on the north side of Casey Road and the west side of Walnut Canyon Road in the City of Moorpark. The project will include independent living, assisted living, and memory care as well as associated amenities. Entitlements for the project include a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Residential Planned Development, and Development Agreement. Site development will include 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. The remaining site will be landscaped and paved, with active and, primarily, passive recreation areas. Structures are expected to be conventional wood frame construction. Site grading is expected to consist of cut and fill for the proposed structures, related new utilities, access road, internal roadways, parking and yard/recreational areas, and site drainage (the “Project”). Biological Resources – Destruction of Wetlands and Native Habitat The CEQA Guidelines (e.g., Section 15370) express a strong preference for avoiding impacts to wetlands altogether, or for minimizing impacts by limiting the magnitude or implementation of the Project, or by rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the impacted environment. In this case, the City is willing to allow the complete destruction of 0.3 acres of protected wetlands and 0.7 acres of jurisdictional waters, including the destruction and loss of the existing ecosystem and its native species and inhabitants. The City purports to mitigate this destruction by trying to replace/re-create these waters somewhere else on the property. We believe that CEQA only allows for replacement mitigation of a protected wetland as a final measure, and only if there is no less environmentally damaging, feasible alternative. For this reason alone, the City must prepare an EIR to fully consider alterations or alternatives to the Project that would not eliminate existing wetlands. And if, after additional study, it turns out there are no feasible alternatives to replacing the wetlands, an EIR is still required to study whether there are any endangered species that rely on both the wetland and the surrounding upland, what measures can be taken to limit the degree and magnitude of the Project impacts to those species, and an analysis of the effectiveness of the proposed replacement wetland system. Preparing an EIR would be consistent with California “no net loss” in wetland acreage, quality and values mandate, especially considering the imperiled status of wetlands in California. According to a California Water Boards report, entitled “Wetland and Riparian Area Protection Policy CEQA Scoping” dated April 9, 2007 (the “Wetland Protection Report”), over 91% of historic wetland acreage has already been lost in California, and up to 98% of historic riparian areas has been lost. The Wetland Protection Report also concludes that “although losses have been mitigated at a minimum of one to one acreage . . . the quality and function [of these mitigated waters] have not 159 Mr. Joseph Fiss Re: Aldersgate Project September 23, 2018 Page 3 been achieved.” The Wetland Protection Report also cites a National Research Council Wetland study and a UCLA Compensatory Mitigation study, which both conclude that “[California’s] ‘no net loss goal’ is not being met” and that “most mitigation sites [are] not functioning wetlands.” Furthermore, it is not clear that the delineation of existing wetlands would comply with the California Coastal Act. Biological Resources – Trees and the California Gnatcatcher According to the Initial Study, the Project proposes the removal of 101 mature trees and the destruction of existing scattered California Sagebrush Scrub plants which comprise the habitat of the California Gnatcatcher. As mitigation for the lost trees, Staff states that the Applicant “shall replace trees on the site in an amount equal to the appraised value of the removed trees . . . [s]hould there not be sufficient space to replace the required trees, or should appropriate trees not be available, 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 the site.” There are a few problems with this approach. First, it is not adequate CEQA analysis to mitigate an impact by letting someone (meaning, someone hired by the developer after the project is approved) to place a value on the trees that are to be chopped down, and then only require that an equal amount be spent on replacement trees. This procedure could easily lead to the replacement of 101 mature trees with 15 “really nice” or rare or expensive trees. Or it could lead to the replacement of 101 mature trees with 101 of the exact same kind of mature trees (an outcome we highly doubt, for some reason). The point is, there’s no way to tell what will happen, and the City is just letting the developer determine the result rather putting in place a clear mitigation measure, which we think should be a two-to-one replacement of lost trees. Second, allowing the developer to pay a fee to the City if the developer elects not to install new trees only makes sense – and only has teeth -- if the City actually has an existing tree replacement program in place – one with an actual existing fund and procedure for that purpose, and one which accounts for species destroyed and species replaced. But as far as we know, the City has no such program, so there is no way to know if the mitigation would actually happen. Which leads us to the third issue – the improper deferral of a mitigation measure. The City must have a clear, specific tree and vegetation replacement plan as a mitigation measure to be approved for this Project. Indeed, the entire purpose of CEQA is to "inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made, protecting the environment as well as informed self-government.” (Citizens for Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564.) Similarly, with regard to the California Gnatcatcher, the supposed mitigation measure requiring that a “Project Habitat Conservation Plan” be prepared after the Project is approved but before 160 Mr. Joseph Fiss Re: Aldersgate Project September 23, 2018 Page 4 construction starts, is another improper deferral of mitigation. In order for the City to conclude that a conservation plan is adequate mitigation, it has to be developed now and considered by the City and understood by the community before approving the Project. Among other things, such a conservation plan should include a focused analysis of the impact of the location of the Project to the Gnatcatcher habitat, and have a very specific vegetation replacement plan and time-table in order to avoid the total annihilation of the Gnatcatchers in the area. The conservation plan should also study the temporary construction impacts to the lifecycle of resident Gnatcatchers including their breeding program, and any necessary mitigation measures. Hydrology and Water Quality Staff again proposes an improper deferred mitigation measure. On page 15 of the Initial Study, Staff states: “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.” Staff admits that there is a known downstream flooding problem that the Project will make worse. The engineering study should be completed now, and any mitigation measures to make this a less than significant impact should be provided and studied before approval of the Project. Similarly, staff acknowledges there may be a significant impact on Walnut Creek, but there is no study analyzing it. The City should require a hydrology drainage study to determine the impacts on Walnut Creek and what mitigation measures are required to reduce those impacts to less than significant. Air Quality Staff’s indication that there will be no significant air quality impacts is based only on “operational” emissions, and fails to consider the impacts of construction on air quality. The City needs mitigation measures to minimize air quality impacts during construction. Land Use and Planning Staff states that “the Residential Planned Development Application was filed concurrently with a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The applications and plans are internally consistent and, if approved, will not conflict with any other plans. The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan.” The City cannot make the findings required for the proposed General Plan Amendment because the MND does not provide any analysis of the consistency or inconsistency of the Project with the goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan. Traffic 161 Mr. Joseph Fiss Re: Aldersgate Project September 23, 2018 Page 5 Staff acknowledges that the Project will reduce the level of service (LOS) at the Los Angeles Avenue/Spring Road intersection which will be degraded from B to C. The proposed mitigation measure – contributing to the City’s Traffic Mitigation Fund is not adequate mitigation. Also, the traffic study relied on by Staff is more than four-years old and is outdated. The City needs an updated traffic study to account for all of the current traffic conditions in the City. Other Issues Regarding cultural resources, has the City contacted the local Native American Indian tribes? The report doesn’t say. Regarding public services, Staff simply concludes that incremental impacts to fire and police will be insignificant. But it is not clear why a 390-unit senior-care facility (presumably housing nearly 800 elderly) wouldn’t have a significant impact on paramedics, for example. Has the City studied whether it has adequate fire and paramedic resources, with acceptable response-times, to service the Project? Regarding Utilities and Services Systems, Q3 on the Initial Study, Staff indicates there will be no impacts. But this is contradicted elsewhere in the report (as discussed above) where Staff acknowledges downstream stormwater drainage problems – a significant impact that needs to be studied. Conclusion As discussed above, additional study and information is required before the City can approve this Project. Sincerely, J. Michael Goolsby President and CEO Better Neighborhoods, Inc. 162 17901 Von Karman Ave, Suite 600 Irvine, CA 92614 (949) 556-8714 www.better-neighborhoods.com/ January 15, 2019 Joseph Fiss Acting Community Development Director VIA EMAIL & HAND-DELIVERY Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Ave. Moorpark, CA 93021 Via email: jfiss@moorparkca.gov Re: Item 8.B. on City Council Agenda for 1/16/2019 Aldersgate Project (the “Project”) Dear Fiss, Further to the issues we raised in our September 23, 2018 comment letter with regard to the above- referenced Project, we wish to provide the following additional comments for staff and the City Council to consider at tomorrow night’s City Council meeting. Please provide a copy of this letter to each member of the City Council in advance of the hearing. We urge the city council to read in detail the points we raised in our September 23 letter, for we do not believe that the developer or staff has adequately addressed certain significant environmental impacts and/or mitigated them to a less than significant level, and we do not wish to waste time restating every one of those issues in any great detail here. When the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Project on November 27, 2018, it had before it a newer, updated Initial Study/MND – one which attempted to respond to some of the issues we raised in our September 23 comment letter. We do commend you and your staff for properly dealing with one glaring inadequacy – the issue of the lost trees -- by requiring the developer to actually add a specified number of trees to replace the lost ones, and to have a 5-year monitoring program. However, these mitigating requirements may ultimately amount to nothing if the city does not also require the replacement of any tree that should die within the five-year monitoring period, for it is during this early life-cycle when young trees are most vulnerable. 163 Mr. Joseph Fiss Re: Aldersgate Project January 15, 2019 Page 2 On the issue of Biological Resources, we believe that the mitigation measures adopted by the Planning Commission are completely inadequate. For example, most, if not all, of the mitigation measures proposed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) in its March 6, 2018 comment letter were not adopted. Further, it inadequate CEQA analysis to defer biological studies and any unknown mitigation measures until after approval of the Project, including and especially when said studies and mitigation measures may be needed or required to gain the approval of the CDFW. On the issue of protected wetlands, the CDFW made it clear that destroying the existing wetlands and attempting to replicate them with a synthetic one somewhere else on the property is seriously discouraged and should only be used as a last resort, under supervised circumstances. We, in our September 23 comment letter, made a fair argument of how this would be an unmitigated impact -- that these sort-of Disneyland Habitat Re-Creations are in fact illusory because they almost never work in real life. The burden of proof should be on the developer to show why no other less environmentally damaging, feasible alternative (other than by paving over, and thereby causing the complete destruction of an ecosystem supporting protected plant species and other inhabitants), is possible. It appears no one in the city has ever asked the developer this question. And the biology report did not even consider functional capacity for the so-called “replacement” wetlands. Functional capacity must include at least that the Disneyland Wetland be created adjacent to the existing one, if at all possible. Was that ever considered? On another note, we have heard that several neighbors believe the façade of the Project would substantially degrade the visual character of the neighborhood. We would urge the developer to work with the community on this issue also. Finally, we respectfully urge the city council to reject the Project and require the preparation of a complete CEQA analysis. Sincerely, J. Michael Goolsby President and CEO Better Neighborhoods, Inc. 164 ORDINANCE NO. ___ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2013-02, FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM RE (RURAL EXCLUSIVE) AND RE-5AC (RURAL EXCLUSIVE-5 ACRE MINIMUM) TO RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RPD-8U) ON 49.52 ACRES NORTH OF CASEY ROAD AND WEST OF WALNUT CANYON ROAD WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, applications for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 were filed by Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC, for property owned by Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, for a proposed development for a 390-Unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-2018-634, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve ZONE CHANGE NO. 2013-02, FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM RE (Rural Exclusive) and RE-5ac (Rural Exclusive-5 acre minimum) TO RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RPD-8U), on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, on the application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC.; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2019, February 6, 2019, and March 6, 2019, the City Council considered the agenda report for Zone Change No. 2013-02 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 City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with any comments received during the public review process and determined that, with the incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to biological resource and transportation/traffic, 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Zone Change No. 2013-02 is consistent with the General Plan as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 in that the proposed zoning of the project site to Residential Planned Development 8 Units Per Acre (RPD-8U) is CC ATTACHMENT 8 165 Ordinance No. ____ Page 2 consistent with the General Plan land use category of Very High Residential Density (VH). SECTION 2. The Zoning Map described and referenced in Chapter 17.12 of Title 17, Zoning, of the Municipal Code of the City of Moorpark is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, parts or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said City; shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the minutes of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall publish notice of adoption in the manner required by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___th day of __________, 2019. Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Maureen Benson, City Clerk Exhibit A: Zone Change Map 166 Ordinance No. ____ Page 3 EXHIBIT A ZONE CHANGE NO. 2013-02 167 RESOLUTION NO. 2019-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RPD) PERMIT NO. 2013-01 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 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. WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, applications for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 were filed by Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC, for property owned by Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, for a proposed development for a 390-Unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-2018-634, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, to amend the General Plan land-use designation from Medium Residential (M) and Rural Low Residential (RL) to VH – Very High Density Residential, on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, on the application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC.; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2019, February 6, 2019, and March 6, 2019, the City Council considered the agenda report for Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01 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 City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with any comments received during the public review process and determined that, with the incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to biological resource and transportation/traffic, 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 and the mitigation measures have been incorporated into this resolution. WHEREAS, on March 6, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019- ____, adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 and introduced Ordinance No. ____, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for the project referenced above. CC ATTACHMENT 9 168 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS: Based upon the information set forth in the staff report(s), accompanying studies, and oral and written public testimony, the City Council makes the following findings in accordance with City of Moorpark, Municipal Code Section 17.44.040: 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. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: The City Council approves: A. Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, subject to the Standard and Special Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 4. The effective date of the approval of Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01 shall be concurrent with the effective date of the Ordinance for Zone Change No. 2013-02 and the Ordinance for Development Agreement No. 2013-01, whichever occurs last. 169 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 3 SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2019. __________________________________ Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Maureen Benson, City Clerk Exhibit A – Standard and Special Conditions of Approval for Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01 170 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 4 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2013-01 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The applicant shall comply with Standard Conditions of Approval for Planned Development Permits 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 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 for Community Development Director approval 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. The deficit of 8 parking spaces must be corrected to provide the required parking spaces, which may be distributed throughout the onsite parking areas, creating a fully conforming parking condition. A revised parking plan is required to be submitted, and approved by 171 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 5 the Community Development Director, 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 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, or other appropriate entity 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. 172 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 6 13. Painted and decorative sectional roll up garage doors, including garage window glazing, compatible with the architectural style of each villa are required. 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 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. 19. Consistent with the Development Agreement (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 the 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 173 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 7 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. 20. 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 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. 21. 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 no less than 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 174 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 8 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 Tree Location Map for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the Tree Location Map. 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. 22. 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). 23. 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. 24. 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 175 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 9 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. - END - 176 ORDINANCE NO. ___ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2013-01 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOORPARK AND GRAND PACIFIC ASSET 2 LLC FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2013-02, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2013-02, AND RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 2013- 01, A 390-UNIT SENIOR COMMUNITY ON 49.52 ACRES NORTH OF CASEY ROAD AND WEST OF WALNUT CANYON ROAD WHEREAS, Section 65864, Article 2.5, Chapter 4, Division 1, Title 7 of the State Planning and Zoning Law provides that cities may enter into contractual obligations known as Development Agreements with persons having equitable interest in real property for development of that property; and WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, applications for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 were filed by Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC, for property owned by Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, for a proposed development for a 390-Unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-2018-634, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01, on the application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC.; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was conducted by the City Council on January 16, 2019, February 6, 2019, and March 6, 2019, to consider the Development Agreement and to accept public testimony related thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all points of public testimony relevant to the Development Agreement and has given careful consideration to the content of the Development Agreement, and has reached a decision on the matter; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019- ____, adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 and introduced Ordinance No. ____, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for the project referenced above. CC ATTACHMENT 10 177 Ordinance No. ___ Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Moorpark does hereby find as follows: A. The Development Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein (Exhibit A) is consistent with the General Plan as most recently amended in that the project is consistent with the planned use and density of the General Plan Land Use Element and helps achieve the goals of the Housing Element and is consistent with the goals and policies of all other elements. There is no applicable Specific Plan for the area covered by the Development Agreement. B. The Development Agreement and the assurances that said agreement places upon the project are consistent with the provisions of Chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code because the Development Agreement contains the elements required by Section 15.40.030, has been reviewed and recommended by the Planning Commission following a noticed public hearing and otherwise contains the required contents and has been processed as required by law. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby adopts the Development Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein (Exhibit A) between the City of Moorpark, a municipal corporation, and Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC and the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause one copy of the signed, adopted agreement to be recorded with the County Recorder no later than ten (10) days after the City enters into the development agreement pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 65868.5. SECTION 3. Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the Community Development Director shall cause the property that is the subject of the Development Agreement to be identified on the Zoning Map of the City by the designation “DA” followed by the dates of the term of said Agreement. SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, parts or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. 178 Ordinance No. ___ Page 3 SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said City; shall make a written record of the passage and adoption thereof in the minutes of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall publish notice of adoption in the manner required by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2019. ______________________________ Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________________ Maureen Benson, City Clerk EXHIBIT A - Development Agreement 179 Ordinance No. ____ Page 3 EXHIBIT A 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 180 Ordinance No. ____ Page 4 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement the ("Agreement") is made and entered into on ______________, 2019 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 ___________, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-____, 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"). 181 Ordinance No. ____ Page 5 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 ___________, 2019, 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 __________, 2019, 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 182 Ordinance No. ____ Page 6 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"). 183 Ordinance No. ____ Page 7 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 184 Ordinance No. ____ Page 8 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. 185 Ordinance No. ____ Page 9 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 186 Ordinance No. ____ Page 10 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: $9,015.00/unit Independent Living Apartments: $6,040.00/unit Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $2,975.00/unit The Development Fee shall be adjusted annually commencing January 1, 2021, 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/Long Beach/Anaheim metropolitan area during the prior year. The calculation shall be made using the month of October over the prior October. 187 Ordinance No. ____ Page 11 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: $8,880.00/unit Independent Living Apartments: $8,880.00/unit Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $4,440.00/unit The Citywide Traffic Fee shall be adjusted annually commencing January 1, 2021 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: $1,320.00/unit Independent Living Apartments: $884.00/unit Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $660.00/unit 188 Ordinance No. ____ Page 12 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, 2021, then commencing on January 1, 2021, 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/Long Beach/Anaheim 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: $9,015.00/unit Independent Living Apartments: $6,040.00/unit Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $2,975.00/unit If the Park Fee is not paid by January 1, 2021, the Park Fee shall be adjusted annually commencing January 1, 2021 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/Long Beach/Anaheim 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. 189 Ordinance No. ____ Page 13 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 $2,811.00 per residential dwelling unit. Commencing on January 1, 2021, 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/Long Beach/Anaheim 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. 190 Ordinance No. ____ Page 14 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 Community Facilities District (a) It is the mutual intent of the Parties that the development of the Project will not have any impact on or require any contribution from the General Fund of the City. To facilitate such intent, the City and Developer shall use reasonable efforts to form a Community Facilities District(s) (“CFD”), pursuant to Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of the California Government Code (the “CFD Act”), for the purposes of financing facilities and services required to be constructed, provided or funded under this Agreement, as the City determines are lawfully and appropriately financed by the CFD. Such facilities and services may include but are not limited to: public facility fees, all fees and other amounts payable by Developer pursuant to Section 6 of this Agreement (including, without limitation, Development, Citywide Traffic, LAAOC, Air Quality, Park, Community Services, Art, Library Facilities, Police Facilities, Fire Facilities, Drainage, Processing, and In-Lieu Fees), construction and installation of landscaping, and future costs for the maintenance of landscaping and irrigation of the landscaped area. (b) Developer shall: (i) file with the City a petition for the formation of the CFD, (ii) provide any deposit required by Section 53318 of the CFD Act, (iii) not oppose formation of the CFD and (iv) vote in favor of the special tax to fund the CFD. (c) Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City will not accept any improvements or facilities to be maintained by the CFD nor shall the Developer receive any payments from the CFD for any improvements or facilities until such facilities and improvements have been inspected and the City determines in its reasonable discretion, that such improvements and facilities have been completed in accordance with the applicable plans, and have no liens outstanding. (d) 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 costs advanced or paid by Developer for CFD formation and related proceedings. 191 Ordinance No. ____ Page 15 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, and Government Code Sections 65915 through 65917.5; 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, 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 each, affordable to low income households (not to exceed 80% of median income adjusted for family size). These twenty-six (26) housing units are referred to herein as “affordable units” or “units affordable to low income households” or “required affordable units.” (b) Subject to Subsection 6.13(c), Developer must construct all twenty- six (26) units in accordance with this Agreement and 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) In order to provide some or all of the required affordable units, Developer may purchase and rehabilitate units within the City of Moorpark. 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, toilets, 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 (1 1/2) attached for-sale unit for each single family detached unit. In the 192 Ordinance No. ____ Page 16 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 twenty-six (26) 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, 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 obligations of the Developer. The City has no obligation to approve any entitlement or permit applications for the affordable units which do not meet applicable zoning requirements, or the engineering, and building standards of the City or are not of comparable quality to the market rate housing units, except as provided in Subsection 6.13(c). (e) Developer also explicitly acknowledges that its agreement to construct or provide these affordable units is given both as specific consideration for 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 result of an 193 Ordinance No. ____ Page 17 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 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 out-of-pocket costs (including attorneys’ fees, but excluding staff time) 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 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 clause (f) above or between the Affordable Housing Agreement and 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 194 Ordinance No. ____ Page 18 ($200.00) into a City administered trust account to assist with future HOA fees for each affected unit. (i) The Affordable Sales Price for low-income buyers shall not exceed affordable housing cost, as described in the first sentence of Section 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 then-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 $208,000.00 Down Payment 5% of Affordable Sales Price $10,400.00 Loan Amount Affordable Sales Price less Down $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 figures in Subsection 6.13(i) 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 1.25%, based on Affordable Sales Price, homeowners’ 195 Ordinance No. ____ Page 19 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 the first sentence of Section 50052.5(3) of the California Health and Safety Code, should change in the future, the above figures will be modified. The Affordable Housing Purchase and Sale Agreement negotiated pursuant to this Agreement shall address any such changes. Consequently, 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) The City, may, in its sole discretion purchase one or more of the units from Developer in lieu of a qualified buyer purchasing such units. In that event, (and in the case of any units purchased by City under clause (u) below), 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 (for approval by City) the forms of Deed of Trust, Promissory Note, Resale Refinance Restriction Agreement and Option to Purchase Property and Notice of Affordability Restriction 196 Ordinance No. ____ Page 20 on Transfer of Property and all necessary contracts and related documents to ensure that the 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 in a promissory note by the buyer to the City secured by a second priority deed of trust in favor of City. (n) Developer shall pay closing costs for each affordable unit, not to exceed eight thousand dollars ($8,000.00). Beginning January 1, 2021 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/Long Beach/Anaheim 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, for any required units 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). However, 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 197 Ordinance No. ____ Page 21 units. This applies to both new affordable housing units, or existing housing stock, purchased and rehabilitated pursuant to this Agreement. (q) Developer agrees that all warranties for the affordable units shall be consistent with California Civil Code Sections 895-945 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 also 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 durations required under California Civil Code Sections 895-945. Developer shall be required to provide an extended 10 year warranty, which may be provided directly by a reputable 3rd party (at Developer’s sole discretion) and shall cover foundation, structural, plumbing and electrical building systems and include 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, toilets, 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 198 Ordinance No. ____ Page 22 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 noted in clause (m) above, 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 Affordability Documents described in clause (m). Developer’s selected lender(s) shall not be exclusive to the program. Future buyers of the affordable units shall be able to choose any qualified lenders. 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 Developer deems 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, and that obligation will be included 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. (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 199 Ordinance No. ____ Page 23 said escrow. If a qualified low income buyer has not been identified at the time Developer receives final inspection approval for an 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. If City elects to purchase, 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 City final inspection approval 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 of $200,000 per unit 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 200 Ordinance No. ____ Page 24 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 201 Ordinance No. ____ Page 25 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 225th 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 202 Ordinance No. ____ Page 26 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. 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 203 Ordinance No. ____ Page 27 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 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. 7.9 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 204 Ordinance No. ____ Page 28 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 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 205 Ordinance No. ____ Page 29 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. 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. Developer shall not be entitled to monetary damages or consequential damages for the City’s breach. In addition, in the event this Agreement is terminated by City pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code, and such termination is found invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent 206 Ordinance No. ____ Page 30 jurisdiction, Developer shall not be entitled to monetary damages for the termination or consequential damages incurred that are the result of the termination. 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 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, 207 Ordinance No. ____ Page 31 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 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. 208 Ordinance No. ____ Page 32 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. 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 209 Ordinance No. ____ Page 33 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. 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 210 Ordinance No. ____ Page 34 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. 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. 211 Ordinance No. ____ Page 35 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. 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: Gil Priel – Managing Member 212 Ordinance No. ____ Page 36 EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION For APN/Parcel ID(s): 513-0-130-070, 513-0-130-060, 511-0-110-115, 511-0-110-125, 511-0-040-190 and 511-0-110-035 THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF MOORPARK, COUNTY OF VENTURA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Parcel 1: Those portions of Lots "T" and "U" of Tract "L", Rancho Simi, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 5, Page 5 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, described as a whole as follows: Beginning at the Southwesterly corner of Lot 1 of Walnut Grove Tract, as per Map recorded in Book 8, Page 22 of Maps; thence along the Westerly line of said Lot 1, 1st: North 10° 48' East 46.25 feet; thence, 2nd: North 0° 26' West 405.9 feet; thence, 3rd: North 89° 34' East 40 feet; thence, 4th: North 0° 26' West 16.91 feet to an angle point in the Northwesterly line of the land described in deed to Pilar Dominguez, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 264 of Official Records; thence along said Northwesterly line to and along the Northwesterly line of the land described in deeds to Refugio Garcia, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 263; Basilio Reyes, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 264; Antonio Aquirre, recorded July 1, 1941, in Book 638, Page 460; Santos Hernandez, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 262; Joe Dominguez, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660 Page 262; and Mary Macias, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 660, Page 261 all of Official Records, by the following three courses, 5th: North 31° 41' East 235.84 feet to an angle point in the Northwesterly line of said land of Basilio Reyes; thence, 6th: North 33° 41' East 339.91 feet to an angle point in the Northwesterly line of said land of Joe Dominguez; thence, 7th: North 35° 48' East 304.7 feet, more or less, to the most Northerly corner of said land of Mary Macias; thence along the Northeasterly line of said last mentioned land, 8th: South 41° 12' East 120.38 feet to the Northwesterly line of said Walnut Grove Tract; thence along said last mentioned Northwesterly line, 9th: North 35° 48' East 56.50 feet to the most Westerly corner of Lot 24 of Walnut Grove Tract; thence along the Westerly prolongation of the Southerly line of said Lot 24, 10th: South 89° 58' East 6.67 feet to the most Easterly corner of the land described in Parcel 2 in deed to Alfonso Valenzuela and wife, recorded October 17, 1957, Book 1558 Page 181 of Official Records; thence along the boundary of said Parcel 2 by the following two courses, 213 Ordinance No. ____ Page 37 11th: North 49° 21' 34" West 140.90 feet; thence in a direct line, 12th: North 1° 35' East 29.5 feet, more or less, to the most Westerly corner of the land described in deed to Eduvijar Addapa, recorded November 19, 1929, Book 290, Page 305 of Official Records; thence along the Northwesterly line of said last mentioned land to and along the Northwesterly line of the land described in deeds to Toribia Rosas Herrez, recorded June 20, 1929, Book 275, Page 37; Jubencio Guerrero, recorded September 27, 1930, Book 328, Page 181; Virginia R. Armenta, recorded June 22, 1940, Book 615, Page 642; Manuel Banuelos, recorded August 21, 1942, Book 659, Page 219; and Patrick J. Chavez, as Administrator, recorded December 29, 1941, Book 648, Page 684 all of Official Records, 13th: North 35° 48' East 565.3 feet, more or less, to the Southerly line of Lot 36 of Vallette Tract, as per Map recorded in Book 3, Page 41 of Maps; thence along the Southerly line of Lots 36 and 32 of said Vallette Tract, 14th: South 89° 53' West 1476.27 feet, more or less, to the Northwesterly corner of the land described in deed to Maxwell W. Wright, recorded October 1, 1914, Book 144, Page 283 of Deeds; thence along the Westerly line of said last mentioned land, 15th: South 1360.3 feet, more or less, to the most Northerly corner of the land described in deed to Letha C. Richards, recorded October 10, 1929, Book 286, Page 292 of Official Records; thence along the boundary of said last mentioned land by the following three courses, 16th: South 68° 17' East 222.42 feet to the Northeasterly corner thereof; thence, 17th: South 4° 01' West 46.56 feet to an angle point; thence, 18th: South 22° 33' East 128.24 feet to the Northeasterly corner of the land described in deed to R. R. Casey, recorded April 3, 1930, Book 309, Page 319 of Official Records; thence along the boundary of said last mentioned land by the following two courses, 19th: South 22° 33' East 9.7 feet to an angle point; thence, 20th: South 28° 54' East 178.22 feet to the most Westerly corner of the land described in Parcel 3 in deed to the County of Ventura, recorded October 21, 1931, Book 358, Page 107 of Official Records; thence along the Northerly line thereof, 21st: North 89° 59' 30" East 266.56 feet to the Westerly line of the land described in deed to County of Ventura recorded December 12, 1922, Book 189, Page 269 of Deeds; thence along said Westerly line, 22nd: North 10° 48' East 47.96 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT all public roads lying within said land. ALSO EXCEPT that portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at a point in the Westerly line of the land described in deed to Maxwell W. Wright, recorded October 1, 1914, Book 144, Page 283 of Deeds; being also the Westerly line of the herein before described Parcel 1, distant along said Westerly line North 736.09 feet from the Northwesterly corner of 214 Ordinance No. ____ Page 38 the land described in deed to Moorpark Memorial Union High School District, dated July 3, 1920, recorded in Book 176, Page 275 of Deeds; thence along said Westerly line, 1st: South 285.05 feet to the most Northerly corner of the land described in deed to Letha C. Richards, recorded October 10, 1929, Book 286, Page 292 of Official Records; thence along the Northeasterly line of said last mentioned land, 2nd: South 68° 17' East 222.42 feet to the Northeasterly corner of said land of Letha C. Richards; thence, 3rd: North 4° 01' East 162.37 feet; thence, 4th: North 4° 30' West 152.20 feet; thence, 5th: North 19° 51' West 72.64 feet; thence in a direct line, 6th: South 85° 23' West 182.04 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPT the property described in deed recorded February 1, 1957, Book 1479, Page 316 of Official Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 23 of Walnut Grove Tract; thence, North 35° 48' East 2.17 feet; thence, North 41° 12' West 120.48 feet to the true point of beginning of said Parcel to be described; thence, 1st: North 41° 12' West 33.50 feet to a point; thence, 2nd: South 25° 37' 24" West 184.74 feet to a point; thence, 3rd: North 35° 48' East 174.29 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPT 49% of oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances and minerals, but without the right to enter on the surface or within 500 feet of the surface on a line drawn vertically, as reserved by Arnold F. Dush and Ethel M. Dush, also known as A. F. Dusch and Ethel M. Dusch, in deed recorded May 27, 1959, Book 1739, Page 9 of Official Records. Parcel 2: A part of Lot "U" of Tract "L", Rancho Simi, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 5, Page 5 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, and a part of Lots 32 and 36 of Vallette Tract, being a Subdivision of Lot."2", Block "L" of Rancho Simi, as per Map recorded in Book 3, Page 41 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, said real property particularly described as an entirety as follows: Beginning at the corner common to Lots "T" and "U", as per Map first above described, and at the corner common to Lots 32 and 36, as per Map last above described; thence from said point of beginning. 1st: North 89° 53' East 10 chains to a redwood fence post set at an angle of fence on spur of hills at the Southwest corner of that certain parcel of land as described in the deed to Maxwell W. Wright to James M. Robinson, dated February 12, 1912, recorded in Book 128, Page 319 of Deeds; thence, 215 Ordinance No. ____ Page 39 2nd: North 89° 58' East 2.715 chains to a point in the West line of Lot 35, as per Map entitled, "Map of Walnut Grove Tract", recorded in Book 8, Page 22 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; thence along the Westerly line of Lots 35 to 44, inclusive as per Map last above described, by the following three courses and distances, 3rd: North 35° 48' East 4.193 chains to a point at an angle in the Westerly line of Lot 40 of Walnut Grove Tract; thence, 4th: North 5° 18' East 2.716 chains to a point in the Westerly line of Lot 43 of Walnut Grove Tract; thence, 5th: North 17° 18' East 1.052 chains; at 0.735 of a chain, the Northwest corner of Lot 44 of Walnut Grove Tract; at 1.052 chains a point in the South line of Lot 36 of Vallette Tract; thence, 6th: North 89° 58' West 20.415 chains to a 2" x 2” stake set on West bank of a barranca at the Northeast corner of that certain parcel of land, containing 4.123 acres, as conveyed by James M. Robinson to George M. Carter, by deed dated February 28, 1919, recorded in Book 162, Page 265 of Deeds; thence Southerly along the general course of the Westerly bank of said barranca by the following two courses and distances, 7th: South 24° 59' East 1.879 chains to a 2" x 2" stake; thence, 8th: South 13° 35' West 5.560 chains to a 2" x 2" redwood stake set on the Westerly bank of said barranca in the South line of Lot 32 of Vallette Tract, and at the Southeast corner of said lands of George M. Carter; from which a 2" x 2" stake set at the Northeast corner of that certain parcel of land, containing 10 acres, as conveyed by Alice M. Graham, et al. to Maxwell W. Wright, by deed dated September 10, 1914, recorded in Book 144, Page 283 of Deeds, bears South 89° 53' West 4.894 chains distant; thence, 9th: North 89° 53' East 5.116 chains along the South line of Lot 32 of Vallette Tract to the point of beginning. Parcel 3: Lot 23 of Walnut Grove Tract, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 8, Page 22 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. 216 Ordinance No. ____ Page 40 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 217 OPP PP�A`�'9 114dAlbm TFD o4A Jay General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC. Recommendation •1. Continue to accept public testimony and close the public hearing. •2. Adopt Resolution No. 2019-____ adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02. •3. Introduce Ordinance No. ____, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for February 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. •4. Adopt Resolution No. 2019-____ approving Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01. •5. Introduce Ordinance No. ____, approving Development Agreement No. 2013- 01, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for February 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. Project •For construction of a 390-unit Senior Community (CCRC) on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road •Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). Retirement communities with accommodations for independent and assisted living offering a continuum of care. A person can live in a CCRC permanently, moving between levels of care as needed. •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) Location Map Aerial Photograph Site Plan Commons Independent Living Independent Living Commons Villas Recreation Walnut Canyon Sections Existing and Proposed Grade North Hills Parkway Sections Analysis Staff analysis of the proposed project has identified the following areas for City Council consideration: •Biological Resources •Land Use •Open Space •Hillside Management Ordinance Biological Resources •92 mature native and non-native living trees to be removed. Includes one oak tree. •Approximately 1200 Replacement trees to be planted on the site shall have a value equal to, or greater than, the appraised value of $72,231.64 and shall include no less than two 24”-box Quercus agrifolia. •Approximately 17 acres of fragmented existing Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) to be removed. •CSS Mitigation is 10.9 acres of new CSS proposed to be created on the site, which has a higher habitat value for California Gnatcatcher than the existing. •A drainage field subject to classification as wetlands is affected. •The proposed mitigation/restoration of drainage field 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. Land Use •Senior Housing has a lower volume of vehicle trips than other age groups. •More internalized than other institutional uses. •Similar developments are quiet and peaceful neighbors. •University Village in Thousand Oaks, reports emergency medical calls ranging from 5 to 25 trips per month. •The land use is appropriate to the setting, when compared to the existing zoning, or a comparable single family residential project. Open Space •Residents less likely to venture offsite independently for either passive or active recreation. •Open space in setback areas is too steep to be useful as either passive or active recreation area. •Project includes large open spaces for passive and active recreation. •Sweeping views create a sense of place needing less actual open space than would a confined site. •Open space is adequate and appropriately distributed. Hillside Management Ordinance •Implements the goals and policies of the general plan as they relate to development and resource management in hillside areas. •Properties having development agreements may be exempted from the provisions of the Hillside Management Ordinance. •No protected ridgelines on the site, except for within the future North Hills Parkway. •In the proposed Development Agreement, the City agrees that grading associated with the North Hills Parkway, not considered for determining compliance with Hillside Management Ordinance (provided that contour grading is employed). •Project would not impact prominent landforms or ridgelines. •Grading on project’s east side would lower a ridgeline abutting residential parcels on Walnut Canyon Road. This is addressed by grading, landscaping, and building setbacks. •On-site open space and habitat preservation, further alleviate the effects of hillside grading and development on this site. Environmental •Based upon the Initial Study, the Community Development Director determined there was no substantial evidence the project may cause a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study were prepared and circulated. •A letter from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife offered mitigation recommendations regarding wetlands, tree removals, and Coastal California gnatcatcher habitat. • A letter from an interested party, known as Better Neighborhoods suggested the City did not adequately study several issues where there is a reasonable probability of potentially significant environmental impacts from the Project. •Staff reviewed the technical appendices of all special studies and incorporated additional information addressing these concerns into the MND/Initial Study. •The MND/Initial Study included as part of Attachment 5 is the document as amended. Development Agreement •The terms of the DA were negotiated by the developer and an Ad-Hoc committee of the City Council consisting of Councilmember Pollock and Former Councilmember Van Dam. •Planning Commission is a recommending body on the DA. •DA 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. •Provides improvements to Casey Road and dedication and partial improvement of North Hills Parkway. •Identifies development fees consistent with those of other recent projects. •Addresses the provisions of the Hillside Management Ordinance by acknowledging grading associated with the North Hills Parkway not considered for determining compliance of the Project with the standards of Hillside Management. Recommendation •1. Continue to accept public testimony and close the public hearing. •2. Adopt Resolution No. 2019-____ adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02. •3. Introduce Ordinance No. ____, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for February 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. •4. Adopt Resolution No. 2019-____ approving Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01. •5. Introduce Ordinance No. ____, approving Development Agreement No. 2013- 01, for first reading, waive full reading, and place this ordinance on the agenda for February 20, 2019, for purposes of providing second reading and adoption of the ordinance. CITY OF MOORPARK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM Date: March 6, 2019 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From: Karen Vaughn, Community Development Director Subject: Agenda report correction for Agenda Item 8A, Aldersgate Investment LLC (Mansi) This memo is to correct a discrepancy between the staff report and the environmental analysis pertaining to air quality. Page 9 of the staff report states, “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 (ROG) 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.” This section should be amended to state that the project would result in approximately 11.9 lbs. of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) per day and 22.9 lbs. of Reactive Organic Gases per day. Further, the project does not exceed the VCAPCD thresholds for NOx or ROG, and the project will not have a significant impact on regional air quality. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program correctly describe the air quality impacts as less than significant and that there is no need for air quality related mitigation measures. The attached VCAPCD Memorandum, dated October 11, 2013, further supports the environmental analysis and findings. Staff will verbally correct the record during the project presentation as well. SUPPLEMENTAL "ITEM 8.A." 1 COT. 11 2013 1 D: 32r M VCA PCB NO. 9 788 P. ' VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT Memorandum TO: Joe Fiss,Principal Planner,City of Moorpark DATE: October 11, 2013 FROM: Alicia Stratton SU BJ ECT: Request for Review of General Plan Amendment No.2013-02,Zoning change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development No, 2013-01 and Development Agreement No. 2013-01(Case Road Senior Community) Air Pollution Control District staff has reviewed the subject project, which is a proposal for entitlements to allow a 390-unit senior citizen continuing care retirement community on 49.52 acres. The project location is the north side of Casey Road,west of Walnut Canyon Road in the City of Moorpark, • The application is complete for the purpose of evaluating air quality impacts, .No significant air quality.impacts are expected to result from the project. Item 1(a): Regional Air Quality Impacts Based on information provided by the applicant and the Ca1EEMod Computer Program (Version 2013.2), air quality impacts will be below the 25 pounds per day threshold for reactive organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen as described in the Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines. Therefore,the project will not have a significant impact on regional air quality. Item 1(b): Local .ix Quality Impacts Based on information in the project application,the subject project will generate local air quality impacts but those impacts are not likely to be significant. Based on information provided by the applicant and the CalEEntod air emissions modeling programs air quality impacts will be below the 25 pounds per day threshold for reactive organic compounds (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)as described in the Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines(22.9 lbslday ROG and 11.911s/day NOx). Therefore,the project will not have a significant impact on regional air quality. 2 1 I 20'3 1vl.1241 NO. ', 78 I . 2 Although the project is not expected to result in any significant local ail"quality impacts, the District recommends the following conditions be placed on the permit to help minimize fugitive dust,particulate matter and creation of ozone precursor emissions that may result from project construction: Air Pollution Control District(APCD) Conditions, 1, APCI)Rules and Regulations for Project Grading and Construction:, Purpose: To ensure that fugitive dust and particulate matter that may result from any site preparation and construction activities are minimized. Requirement: The Perrnittee shall comply with the provisions of applicable VCAPCD Rules and Regulations, which include but are not limited to, Rule 50 (Opacity), Rule 51 (Nuisance), and Rule.55 (Fugitive Dust). Documentation: The Lead Agency shall ensure compliance with the following provisions: L Pre gradingfexeavation activities shall include watering the area to be graded or excavated before commencement of grading ox excavation operations. Application of water (preferably reclaimed, if available) should penetrate sufficiently to minimize fugitive dust during grading activities; II_ All tntcks shall cover their loads as required by California Vehicle Code §23114. 1( . Fugitive dust throughout the eontruction site shall be controlled by the use of a watering truck or equivalent means, generally at least three times a day (except during and inunediately after rainfall). Water shall be applied to all unpaved roads, unpaved parking areas or staging areas, and active portions of the construction site. Environmentally-safe dust control agents may be used in lieu of watering, IV. Signs shall be posted onsite limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less. V. All clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease during periods of high winds (i.e., wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact adjacent properties). During periods of high winds, all clearing, grading, earth moving, and excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary to prevent fugitive dust created by onsite activities and operations from being a nuisance or hazard,either offsite or onsite. VL Personnel involved in grading operations, including contractors and subcontractors, should be advised to wear respiratory protection in accordance with California Division of Occupational Safety and Health regulations; and VII.Signs displaying the APCD Complaint Line Telephone number for public complaints shall be posted in a prominent location off the site: (805) 645-1400 during business hours and(805)654-2797 after hours. 2. Construction Euuinment Purposes To ensure that ozone precursor and diesel particulate emissions from mobile construction equipment are reduced to the greatest amount feasible. 3 OCT. 11. 2( 13 10:33AM \TAPC° NO. 9788 P 3 • Requirement: The Permittee shall comply with the provisions of applicable VCAPCD ROC and NOx Construction Mitigation Measures, which include but are not limited to, provisions of Section 7.4.3 of the Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Claddings. a. Construction equipment shall not have visible ei issions, except when under load. b. Construction equipment shall not idle for more than five (5) consecutive minutes. The idling limit does not apply to: (1) idling when queuing; (2) idling to verify that the vehicle is in safe operating condition; (3) idling for testing, servicing, repairing or diagnostic purposes; (4) idling necessary to accomplish work for which the vehicle was designed (such as operating a crane); (5) idling required to bring the machine system to operating temperature, and(6)idling necessary to ensure safe operation of the vehicle. 3. APCD Rules and Reenlations Purpose: To ensure that project operations shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable VCAPCD Rules and Regulations, in particular Rule 10, (Permits Required) certain types of new and modified equipment and operations require APCs permits prior to installation. Requirement The Permittee shall obtain an Authority to Construct prior to installation and a Permit to Operate prior to operation, if needed. To help prevent project delays,the Permittee or their representative should contact the VCAPCD Engineering Division at the earliest practicable date to determine any air permit requirements. The VCAPCD Engineering Division can be contacted by telephone at (805) 645-1401 or by email at en eineerina@v canc d.or a;. Documentation: An approved Authority to Construct and an approved Permit to Operate, if needed. Item 24: Greenhouse Gases • The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District has not yet adopted any approach to setting a threshold of significance for land use development projects in the area of project greenhouse gas emissions. The project will generate less than significant impacts to regional and local air quality and the project will be subject to a condition of approval to ensure that all project construction and operations shall be conducted in compliance with all APCD Rules and Regulations, Furthermore,the amount of greenhouse gases anticipated from the project(2.12 metric tons per year CO2e)will be a small fraction of the levels being considered by the APCD for greenhouse gas significance thresholds and far below those adopted to date by any air district rn the state. Therefore,the project specific and cumulative impacts to greenhouse gases are less than significant. If you have any questions,please call me at (805) 645-1426. 4 Ca1EEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2 Page 1 of 24 Date: 10/11/2[3139:56 AM 1.1) Moorpark Senior Citizen Home Ventura County APCD Air District, Summer .0 Project Characteristics • 0 1.1 Land Usage _ c •�:y 3;�- � ;�. :` rr,` „ V .h '�rJ � {{��ff ;ab-. }a$T .,...L.:;4";2.-c--,:; ,"„t: ';. fi 3,;i. 4 1224: :ir k q� i 7,.�rf`3.,!. ;z? (✓cc .;',-- i#-.j;; i'r r r iF I.E2V Y1r!'.".4"' '..';';.V -- '' - :.a.... n •�..� ,1' •:I sc,. te' �_: X. .w'P �.;r',F� £ r_ -Fti- m4� �''t`�' sof-? �"iir r�r " F.iF'•. Congregate Care(AssisteWing) 1 390.00 i Dwelling Unit t 24.30 390,000.00 1193 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed(wife) 2.6 Precipitation Freq(Gays) 31 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2014 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity 630.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N20 intensity 0.006 (Ib MWhr) (IbiMWhr) - (IbOMWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments &Non-Default Data • Project Characteristics - U Land Use- 1 'e.:: - "{Y .- .:,----',,''.-p;.-0, l 5I, -. }- # 'z i- t r Y c•� } _,i.w.rliti j ' ;.. .n,t.. re..r -,�j Y1L'lf3 r ''•' -}'y "4- -T !i-''-',� ra 'S sr R�1 Fj' �tr1l fS ' S } �� `r„� ► � -n“r '� � ;;�ey 'F .,§�4..y�- :r7. ,1 '."s. 7 i Y3F:� , , :o- � .-_a . 3_:- r ', I�..- ..�' ,_ . - V. _ :L''.4•':_*"' h4.t�. 4 2.O Emissions Summary Q ti Q CajEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2013.2 Page 1 of 29 • Date: 1011112013 9:57 AM t, Moorpark Senior Citizen Home • oz Ventura County APCD Air District,Annual . 1.0 Project Characteristics - 0 ri.1 Land Usage `1M.;1 =- 1,i n n- F f r� aA' : w wA ` ^ s_`.� ia e. ,.i �l _ _ . , . �� " -lXr'��gp" msrr VxziI '�..ruI '{ - - - - s ..?:Congregate Care(Assisted Living) 390-00 G Dwelling Unit 24.38 1390.00D.O0 1193 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed(mfs) 2.6 Precipitation Fneq(Rays) 31 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2014 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity 630.69 CH4 Intensity - 0.029 N20 Intensity - U.006 (lbIMWhr) (IbrMWhr) (1b1MWhr) 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics- Land Use- -- -- . 1� i_ VIiY ce n��i�+ fxtc- �' .�ri� F,-..---1,;:w.411. a .} Y Il9 1= s,;.' --.s- -. ,lis-....:,.-..-,--;['•w7 - _ r rF � "�"!I i4 - - r � t ,,, - i, r# _, .. - ,: .teorri1 4,� ,Ef; ,,q�'� !• •n� �r,�`ti� ; +;.,.4� l #�� :o ^ L' � " ..ia.�t�..i . . :,.,,,-,,',,a f,..,*'. v �> - 4, �� : h a Q - M 2.0 Emissions Summary • 0 M • C--.1 I C.] () CaLEEMcd Version: Ca1EMI/loci 20.13.2 Page 3 of 29 Date: 10111/2013 10:08 AM r` x 2.2 Overall Operational MA)&161ULA-9\ Unmitigated Onerational O_ - - - ' ;poi :�.=-Ysa ;3-r•4 '-� fn � i5 a! �� z - :c.s -'•,F �QI 7' •d s :;:� f._._ -4: `.-• >� r _F• • r i .!•r� 3ly y� ` 'f -4 w• , • -. � .�1 N YMj.'-i•.�Artithi "l `;.f_#':., �. ?�Fy- ..-a/+� a 1 `�� A - JINI� ..: '.� - 1-2: Pltf Il'� j�•.-��,�`R - - �� 3e•_ .d : +x �r:a.' - "S's:�, -- 4,r_.•'."i- .r �...c'.'w = " • $. bls� ; ;-; • Y'3• o.¢ • ' i:. ••.;o-4 ••i�'-'`-':5;- _ - 'cs='.. ;: �•`a� 11:.`:;= _ _ ..j; F ::§f -# • `s-�"8.��'"' x' ,e s- � ^•'a 1: r,., =a�: �. � ... ..�r�: ....• .-.�.*_��" .. ..- �. 'S:% Kgs '_�_`-�s•,�.'•�~.'i�'`-`a 3s r,_ �'r !lain . I 4.8387 Area 1.8102 0.0952 ...- cif__ .W_.,.._.._._._._..,.T-_._.-.....,...--._.-.-......_._...— ----....—_�...._...._...,__._._.-..-,. -------- ..............,...--•--•-•-- -.-....__._.--- ».....S81. EReray ,. 8_oSa1 0.1545 Mable..,.,,,,:s, 2.2d937.9949_.,..._... -......,. .,. - .... .........��...... —.—. . .,......_..........,...._. ..._�1................ ....,.� ---._._.—�_ �.. . a _. .r. .....,1,205.9736 • • Waste ~�•� i 761.8955 =i i__ _........_....... _._._._,..,._. .T. — --._.-......._--._..-------._ --•-•-.-.-.--...-.__..._. F . ....,...�, ,—-----�.�. . .,... . . ._--------—'977.t�sJ29' Water 1! Tpt;l1 4.1056 ,2.1649 I I 2,1P8.5381 c7 0 O • #) Ca|EEModVe�iun: Co!EE��d.2O13.2 Paga3of�4 Dale' 1011/2D131(21B�� . ,— -�Lk� \/ 1 » x ,^�/ r _ Z'2 %�veraU Operational ~ ~ - =..._0unnit[omtndOomnmtimna| == ^.n. ,_ . 50 2228 Area 4i 10.5074 0.3507 ; i r089.3mm .~~^^.^.~..~ _--'- .____-_~~.---___-'------- ---'---___---~_-_-~-_----- -___ --'__--_—_'—___—_--'— �uoo2oum ---M��--��3o� 10_880110_8801 � 11."".. . "....'" � i 9,04037zz rmta/ 223018 11.5250 | U U M}0wab*d0pemat|mmmU . • � � ,� �� .� �,xN �� `� �� ` � �-� '� ~ ~~.. ^�� r� � �� ~� � �' �ar� x� ��* ''��" ` �aw~°~ ��',aw'.°-�-�~`�=� --s...—', ~,,~ �' . °" ~ — — , `~ -4:[ ~ 50.2320 c_.5. Area 11 10,5074 0.3001 . --' '-__-__--_'_---_.--_--'-._____' '-------' 1,058.3301 Energy '41 0.0-993 0,8452 I 11 ---_-_--_----_'---'--_--'_---'--_. ... —_-_—~'--�—___-_'--____.__---- ~ _ —'—'— -_--___--'-____---.-_---_._-_-- Mobile 12.3020/ 10.0051 / 7�m�u000 Cr', ,. el � ~_~_..... wo��xcr �� Total '11.5•260 . or, / I I - -- ^ r~ '� .��_�~_ __ CD RESOLUTION NO. 2019-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2013-02 FOR A CHANGE OF LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (M) AND RURAL LOW RESIDENTIAL (RL) TO VH – VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 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. WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, applications for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 were filed by Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC, for property owned by Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, for a proposed development for a 390-Unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-2018-634, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, to amend the General Plan land-use designation from Medium Residential (M) and Rural Low Residential (RL) to VH – Very High Density Residential, on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, on the application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC.; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2019, February 6, 2019, and March 6, 2019, the City Council considered the agenda report for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 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 City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with any comments received during the public review process and determined that, with the incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to biological resource and transportation/traffic, 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. CC ATTACHMENT 5 9 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared for the project are complete and have been prepared in compliance with CEQA, and City CEQA Procedures. B. The Mitigation Measures have been incorporated into the project conditions of approval for the accompanying Residential Planned Development Permit. C. With the incorporation of the Mitigation Measures into the project conditions, the City Council finds on the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed development of a 390-unit senior community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, which includes General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; Zone Change No. 2013-02; Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01; and Development Agreement No. 2013-01, will have a significant effect on the environment. D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the proposed development of a 390-unit senior community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, which includes General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02; Zone Change No. 2013-02; Residential Planned Development No. 2012-02; and Development Agreement No. 2013-01, along with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, all attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein, are hereby adopted. SECTION 3. APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: General Plan Amendment 2013-02 is approved, amending the General Plan Land Use Map as proposed in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 shall be concurrent with the effective date of the Ordinance for Zone Change No. 2013-02 and the Ordinance for Development Agreement No. 2013-01, whichever occurs last. 10 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 3 SECTION 5. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2019. __________________________________ Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Maureen Benson, City Clerk Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Exhibit B: General Plan Amendment Map 11 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 4 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517-6200 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION On the basis of an initial study, and in accordance with Section 15070 of the California Code of Regulations, the City of Moorpark has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. Attached is the Initial Study documenting the reasons to support the finding of no significant effect on the environment. Mitigation measures are included in the Initial Study to reduce the identified potential effects to a less than significant level: I. PROJECT Project Title: Aldersgate Senior Living Apartments GPA No. 2013-02; ZC No. 2013-02; RPD No. 2013-01; DA No. 2013-01 Location: North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road Assessor Parcel Number(s): 511-0-110-115, 511-0-110-035, 511-0-110-125, 511-0-030-180 Parcel Size: 49.52 acres Applicant/Owner: Grand Pacific Asset 2. LLC (Mansi) General Plan Designation: Rural Low (RL) and Medium Density Residential (M) Proposed General Plan Designation: Very High Residential (VH) Zoning: Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) Proposed Zoning: Very High; 7.9 units/acre Responsible or Trustee Agencies: California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), South Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (SCRWQCB), and Ventura County Water Protection District (VCWPD) EXHIBIT A 12 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 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 proposed General Plan Amendment would amend the general plan from the designation of Rural Low (RL) and Medium Residential (M) to VH Residential. The proposed Zone Change would amend the zoning designation from Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) to VH – Very High Density; 7.9 units/acre. The project site consists of a 49.52-acre irregularly-shaped parcel north of Casey Road and west 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. Walnut Canyon Elementary School is located on the south side of Casey Road, and residential housing exists between the project site and Walnut Canyon Road to the east. 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 for the apartment complex 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 for the apartment complex. The Project site consists of disturbed open space bordered on the north by previously graded residential pads that are reverting back to coastal sage scrub, and on the west by open space. The Project site is dominated by Venturan California Sagebrush Scrub with non-native annual grassland and disturbed or developed areas. The site is divided by a ridge which runs north to south. The western portion of the site currently drains into a small defined natural drainage that flows south to Casey Road. A small retention basin, with a concrete spillway, is located near the center of the site in this drainage. Sediment has accumulated in this basin over time and Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian vegetation has become established in and around this basin and, for this reason, this basin currently qualifies as a jurisdictional wetland area with the riparian areas north of this basin also qualifying as jurisdictional streambed areas. 13 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 6 Grading will consist of cut and fill to allow for development of the proposed residential buildings, internal roadways, parking and yard/recreational areas, access road, utilities, and drainage facilities. The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns and involve filling the existing natural drainage on the western portion of the site and removal of the retention basin in this drainage. The Project includes creating 1.24 acres of riparian and wetland habitat west of the access road and around the drainage retention basin proposed at the southern end of the site to compensate for the loss of 1.02 acres of riparian and wetland habitat associated with this existing drainage and retention basin. A habitat restoration plan will be developed as part of the CDFW, USACE, and SCRWQCB process to issue permits to allow the proposed alterations to this existing drainage feature. II. STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS State law requires the lead agency for the proposed project, to prepare an lnitial Study to determine if the proposed project could significantly impact the environment. Based on the findings contained in the attached Initial Study, it has been determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment; however, mitigation measures are available that would reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and the applicant has agreed to implement the mitigation measures. III. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN INITIAL STUDY: Section IV: Biology Section XVI: Traffic and Transportation IV. PUBLIC REVIEW Document Posting and Comment Period: January 31, 2018 to March 1, 2018 The MND/Initial Study was previously circulated and made available to the public and responsible agencies. Although there are revisions made to the Initial Study, the revisions and additional language only provide more clarification and make insignificant modifications based on comments received. No new impacts or mitigation were identified to require recirculation pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. V. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Prior to approving the project, the decision-making body of the Lead Agency must consider this Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received on the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Those decision-makers may approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration if they find that all of the significant impacts have been identified and that the proposed mitigation measures will reduce those impacts to less than significant levels. 14 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 7 Prepared By: Joseph Fiss Planning Manager 15 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 8 Environmental Impact Recommended Mitigation Measure Significance after Mitigation Responsible Party Biological Resources This mitigation addresses Impact IV. (e) BIO-1: 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 at least two (2) 24”- box Quercus agrifolia, four (4) 24” box Black Walnut, and ten (10) sycamore trees. Prior to approval of building permits, applicant shall submit a tree planting and 5- year maintenance plan showing the tree planting including the required trees as listed. The five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees is 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 TLC report for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the TLC. Orange construction fencing is sufficient and its position must be Less than Significant Applicant, Planning 16 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 9 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. Biological Resources This mitigation addresses Impacts IV. (a, b, d) BIO-2: 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). Prior to final occupancy clearance, verification of the restoration of 10.82 acres shall be field verified by a qualified biologist. Less than Significant Applicant, Planning Biological Resources This mitigation addresses Impacts IV. (a, b, c, d) BIO-3: 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 with 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 Prior to buildinggrading permits, applicant will be required to show proof of permits from ACE (404 Permit), SCRWQCB (401 permit), and CDFW (1602 permit) that will require full approval of a habitat restoration plan, wetlands restoration plan and the required 5-year mitigation plan for the project. Less than Significant Applicant, Planning 17 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 10 Traffic and Transportation This mitigation addresses Impacts XVI (a, b, c) TRA-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. • 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. • 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. 18 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 11 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517-6200 INITIAL STUDY FOR Aldersgate Senior Living Apartments This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, in accordance with Section 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. Project Title: Aldersgate Senior Living Apartments GPA No. 2013-02; ZC No. 2013-02; RPD No. 2013-01; DA No. 2013-01 Location: North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road Assessor Parcel Number(s): 511-0-110-115, 511-0-110-035, 511-0-110-125, 511-0-030-180 Parcel Size: 49.52 acres Applicant/Owner: Grand Pacific Asset 2. LLC (Mansi) General Plan Designation: Rural Low (RL) and Medium Density Residential (M) Proposed General Plan Designation: Very High Residential (VH) Zoning: Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) Proposed Zoning: Very High; 7.9 units/acre Responsible or Trustee Agencies: California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), South Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (SCRWQCB), and Ventura County Water Protection District (VCWPD) 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 proposed General Plan Amendment would amend the general plan from the designation of Rural Low (RL) and Medium Residential (M) to VH Residential. The proposed Zone Change would amend the zoning designation from Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive (RE-5) to VH – Very High Density; 7.9 units/acre. 19 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 12 The project site consists of a 49.52-acre irregularly-shaped parcel north of Casey Road and west 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. Walnut Canyon Elementary School is located on the south side of Casey Road, and residential housing exists between the project site and Walnut Canyon Road to the east. 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 for the apartment complex 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 for the apartment complex. The Project site consists of disturbed open space bordered on the north by previously graded residential pads that are reverting back to coastal sage scrub, and on the west by open space. The Project site is dominated by Venturan California Sagebrush Scrub with non-native annual grassland and disturbed or developed areas. The site is divided by a ridge which runs north to south. The western portion of the site currently drains into a small defined natural drainage that flows south to Casey Road. A small retention basin, with a concrete spillway, is located near the center of the site in this drainage. Sediment has accumulated in this basin over time and Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian vegetation has become established in and around this basin and, for this reason, this basin currently qualifies as a jurisdictional wetland area with the riparian areas north of this basin also qualifying as jurisdictional streambed areas. Grading will consist of cut and fill to allow for development of the proposed residential buildings, internal roadways, parking and yard/recreational areas, access road, utilities, and drainage facilities. The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns and involve filling the existing natural drainage on the western portion of the site and removal of the retention basin in this drainage. The Project includes creating 1.24 acres of riparian and wetland habitat west of the access road and around the drainage retention basin proposed at the southern end of the site to compensate for the loss of 1.02 acres of riparian and wetland habitat associated with this existing drainage and retention basin. A habitat restoration plan will be developed as part of the CDFW, USACE, and SCRWQCB process to issue permits to allow the proposed alterations to this existing drainage feature. 20 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 13 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is a vacant 49.52 acre site surrounded by urban development. EXISTING LAND USES Location General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land Use Project 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 21 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 14 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 22 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 15 Methodology for Evaluating Cumulative Impacts: The methodology used to analyze cumulative impacts of the proposed project, in the Initial Study was the list approach. The following pending and recently approved projects located within the City of Moorpark have been evaluated for this Initial Study. See below: Pending and Recently Approved Projects within the City of Moorpark Number Project Land Use Size 1 Toll Brothers SFR 50 Units 2 Pacific Communities SFR 284 Units 3 Hitch Ranch SFR/Apartments 755 Units 4 Aldersgate Senior Housing Senior Independent Living 260 Units Senior Assisted Living 130 Units 5 Toll Brothers SFR 132 Units 6 City Ventures SFR 110 Units 7 John C. Chiu, FLP-N Condos 60 Units 8 K. Hovnanian Homes SFR 248 Units 9 Essex Moorpark Apartments 200 Units 10 Birdsall Group, LLC SFR 21 Units 11 Grand Moorpark Condos 66 Units 12 Housing Authority SFR 24 Units 13 Spring Road, LLC Condos 95 Units 14 West Pointe Homes SFR 133 Units 15 Moorpark Hospitality Hotel 108 Rooms 16 Patriot Commerce Center Industrial 350,000 sf 17 A-B Properties Industrial 36 acres 18 Triliad Development Movie Studio 37 acres 19 Wayne J. Sand & Gravel Quarry N/A 20 Grimes Rock Quarry N/A 23 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 16 EXHIBIT 1 VICINITY MAPS 24 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 17 25 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 18 26 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 19 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 as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture/Forestry Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the 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 or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ___________________________________ February 7, 2019 Joseph Fiss Planning Manager 27 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 20 Initial Study Checklist I. AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion: a) 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. 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. b) 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. c) 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 existing vegetation was burned in the 2007 Moorpark 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 be developing a habitat restoration plan to mitigate for the loss of wetland habitat and vegetation that will restore a wetland on site and establish new vegetation. 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. 28 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 21 d) 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 Measure(s): None Required Monitoring: None Required II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES/FORESTRY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Discussion: a-d) 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. 29 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 22 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 Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. III. AIR QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Discussion: a-d) The City of Moorpark and the proposed project are located within the jurisdiction of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). The project would not have a significant impact 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 pounds/day threshold of significance established by the VCAPCD 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 30 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 23 Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) 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? d) 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 31 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 24 Discussion: 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). Arroyo Willow Thickets (Salix lasiolepis Shrubland alliance), Mulefat Thickets (Baccharis salicifolia Shrubland Alliance), Non-Native Annual Grassland and Upland Mustard–Semi Natural Herbaceous Stand are present along the natural drainage located on the western portion of the site. The 0.69 acres of seasonal wash on the site contains small areas of Arroyo Willow Thicket vegetation (0.34 acres) and Mulefat Thicket habitat vegetation is located upstream of a small retention basin in this drainage that includes 0.34 acres of Arroyo Willow Thicket vegetation. that meets the regulatory definition of a wetland. The VCCS on the site is distributed in patches on the site separated by areas of non-native grassland and is uneven and varied. Characteristic plants found in VCCS on the site include California sagebrush (Artemesia californica), purple sage (Salvia leucophylla), California. The density of the VCSS plants is uneven and varied across the site. 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 existing natural drainage on the western portion of 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 The Proposed project would project result in the removal of 92 mature living trees, both native and non-native, Removal of 3 three native trees consisting of two 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 92 mature living 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 in the existing drainage on the western portion of the site. 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. VCSS habitat. 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. 32 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 25 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. A detention basin will be constructed at the southern end of the site, immediately west of the access road. This basin will surrounded by wetland and riparian habitat with additional new wetland and riparian habitat located south of the development area and west of the access road. 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. 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. 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 Measure(s): BIO-1: This mitigation addresses Impact IV (e) 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 at least two (2) 24”-box Quercus agrifolia, four (4) 24” box Black Walnut, and ten (10) sycamore trees. Prior to approval of building permits, applicant shall submit a tree planting and 5- year maintenance plan showing the tree planting including the required trees as listed. The five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees is 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 TLC report for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the TLC. 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 33 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 26 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. BIO-2: This mitigation addresses Impacts IV (a, b, d) 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). Prior to final occupancy clearance, verification of the restoration of 10.82 acres shall be field verified by a qualified biologist. BIO-3: This mitigation addresses Impacts IV (a, b, c, d) 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 with 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 Prior to building permits, applicant will be required to show proof of permits from ACE (404 Permit), SCRWQCB (401 permit), and CDFW (1602 permit) that will require full approval of a habitat restoration plan, wetlands restoration plan and the required 5-year mitigation plan for the project V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Sources: Archaeological Survey (W&S Consultants, 1/12/2014 ); Project Application (September 3, 2013) Discussion: a-d) An Archaeological Survey was prepared for the site by W&S Consultants (1/12/2014). There was no evidence found in a records search for any expected cultural resources on the project site. Furthermore the archeological survey that was conducted on site found no evidence of archeological or cultural resources. 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 34 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 27 Resources Code and has not received any requests to consult on the Project. As part of the standard conditions, a condition will be imposed that states 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. Another standard condition will be 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. Therefore, through standard conditioning of the project, impacts to archeological and cultural resources are considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required Monitoring: None Required. VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of topsoil? 35 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 28 VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) 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? d) 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? e) 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? 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) Discussion: a-e) 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion: a-b) 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 36 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 29 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 Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. VIII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) 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? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) 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? e) 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? f) 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? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 37 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 30 VIII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact h) 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? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001) Discussion: There are no known hazards on the project site, nor will new hazards be created as a result of the project, which is among residential subdivisions outside of wildlands. a-h) 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, and 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required Monitoring: None Required IX. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) 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 preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 38 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 31 IX. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) 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? d) 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 substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) 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? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) 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? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 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 Discussion: a-f) 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 are not be detained. Sediment has accumulated in this basin over time and riparian vegetation has become established and, for this reason, this basin currently qualifies as a jurisdictional wetland area. 39 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 32 The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns. The existing small retention basin in the center of the site would be removed as part of the project. 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 of 3.6 acre feet will be constructed at the southern end of the site, immediately west of the access road. This basin will surrounded by wetland and riparian habitat created to mitigate for the loss of habitat associated with the existing small retention basin and drainage this basin is located in. Additional new wetland and riparian habitat will also be located south of the development area and west of the access road. The detention 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. g., h.) The site is not within a within a FEMA identified 100-year flood hazard area. i) The project will not 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 as there is no dam or levee on the site and site is not subject to flooding. j) There is no risk of inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow as the project is not next to a coastal area. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Indicate the District’s easement over Walnut Canyon on all plans and drawings. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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 (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. 40 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 33 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. 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) iii. 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) The Applicant shall provide for the long term maintenance of any lateral connection to Walnut 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) 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. (moved to conditions of approval, not considered mitigation) Monitoring: None Required. X. LAND USE & PLANNING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Land Use Element (1992) Discussion: a-c) 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 41 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 34 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. 42 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 35 XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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? b) 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? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Discussion: a., b.) There are no known mineral resources onsite. Therefore, there are no impacts anticipated for this project to mineral resources. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. XII. NOISE Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? e) 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? f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 43 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 36 Sources: Noise Study (Veneklasen Associates, 1/16/14); Project Application (September 3, 2013); General Plan Noise Element (1998) Discussion: a-f) 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 as part of the Conditions of Approval. 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. XIII. POPULATION & HOUSING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through an extension of roads or other infra-structure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013) Discussion: a-c) 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. 44 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 37 Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES* Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts to the following: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Discussion: a-e) 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 less than significant. The Project site Development fees and increased property taxes will be paid to fund required public services. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. 45 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 38 XV. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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? b) 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? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Discussion: a-b) Onsite recreational facilities are proposed such as a pool facility and tennis courts for the residents on site. Park and recreation fees will be also be paid as part of the developer fees. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. XVI. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 46 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 39 XVI. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation 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) Discussion: a-g) 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 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. Adequate access to the site will be provided from Casey Road, and emergency access augmented by a controlled point on Walnut Canyon Road. 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. Mitigation: TRA-1 (XVI a,b,c): 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 47 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 40 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 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. • 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. • 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. Monitoring: Fees need to be paid as per above and Development Agreement XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Sources: Discussion: a) The project is a vacant site and has no listed structures in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). 48 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 41 b) There are no known cultural resources that would be of significance to a California Native American tribe. Mitigation Measure(s): None Required. Monitoring: None Required. XVIII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) 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? c) 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? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) 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? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Sources: Project Application (September 3, 2013), Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures (2002) Discussion: 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. 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. 49 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 42 Mitigation Measure(s): Development Fees will be required. Monitoring: Development Fees will be paid as per Development Agreement 50 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 43 XVIV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Sources: The City of Moorpark’s General Plan, as amended. Discussion: a) 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. b) 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 IV. Biological Resources and XVI. 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. c) 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. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. Monitoring: None required. 51 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 44 REFERENCES 1. Project Application (September 3, 2013) 2. Environmental Information Form application and materials submitted on September 3, 2013. 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. 8. General Plan Safety Element (2001) 9. General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) 10. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Memorandum to City (Stratton, 7/8/14) 11. Rincon Consultants Inc., Greenhouse Gas Study (12/31/13) 12. Oak Tree Report (Tree Life Concern Inc., 1/31/14) 13. Biological Resources Technical Report (Seven Elk Ranch Design Incorporated, 1/22/14) 14. Coastal California Gnatcatcher Focused Survey and Amendment (BioResource Consultants Inc., 7/23/15 and 5/12/16) 15. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Delineation Report (BioResource Consultants Inc., 5/12/16). 16. Archaeological Survey (W&S Consultants, 1/12/2014) 17. Hydrology and Hydraulics Study (LC Engineering Group, Inc., 2/25/2014) 18. Memorandum (Ventura County Watershed Protection District [VCWPD], 7/7/2014) 19. Traffic and Circulation Study, Associated Traffic Engineers (3/26/2014) 20. Review of Traffic Study, Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers (6/10/2015) 21. Acoustical Analysis Report Veneklasen Associates (1/16/2014) 22. Soils Report, Workman and Associates (3/7/2014) 23. Cut and Fill Report, Cook (3/10/2014) 24. Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures (2002) 25. General Plan Noise Element (1998) 26. General Plan Circulation Element (1992) NOTE: Appendix Nos. 10-23 is included as a separate attachment under Item No. 8.A. for the regular meeting of 3-6-2019. 52 Resolution No. ___-____ Page 45 EXHIBIT B 53 RESOLUTION NO. 2019-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RPD) PERMIT NO. 2013-01 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 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. WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, applications for General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01 were filed by Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC, for property owned by Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, for a proposed development for a 390-Unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-2018-634, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, to amend the General Plan land-use designation from Medium Residential (M) and Rural Low Residential (RL) to VH – Very High Density Residential, on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West Of Walnut Canyon Road, on the application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC.; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2019, February 6, 2019, and March 6, 2019, the City Council considered the agenda report for Residential Planned Development No. 2013-01 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 City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with any comments received during the public review process and determined that, with the incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to biological resource and transportation/traffic, 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 and the mitigation measures have been incorporated into this resolution. WHEREAS, on March 6, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019- ____, adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02 and introduced Ordinance No. ____, approving Zone Change No. 2013-02, for the project referenced above. CC ATTACHMENT 9 54 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS: Based upon the information set forth in the staff report(s), accompanying studies, and oral and written public testimony, the City Council makes the following findings in accordance with City of Moorpark, Municipal Code Section 17.44.040: 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. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: The City Council approves: A. Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, subject to the Standard and Special Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 4. The effective date of the approval of Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01 shall be concurrent with the effective date of the Ordinance for Zone Change No. 2013-02 and the Ordinance for Development Agreement No. 2013-01, whichever occurs last. 55 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 3 SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2019. __________________________________ Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Maureen Benson, City Clerk Exhibit A – Standard and Special Conditions of Approval for Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01 56 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 4 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2013-01 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The applicant shall comply with Standard Conditions of Approval for Planned Development Permits 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 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 for Community Development Director approval 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. The deficit of 8 10 parking spaces must be corrected to provide the required parking spaces, which may be distributed throughout the onsite parking areas, creating a fully conforming parking condition. A revised parking plan is required to be submitted, and 57 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 5 approved by the Community Development Director, 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 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, or other appropriate entity 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. 58 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 6 13. Painted and decorative sectional roll up garage doors, including garage window glazing, compatible with the architectural style of each villa are required. 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 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. 19. Consistent with the Development Agreement (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 the 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 59 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 7 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. 20. 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 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. 21. 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 no less than 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 60 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 8 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 Tree Location Map for fence placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the Tree Location Map. 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. 22. 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). Mitigation plantings may not be removed or modified without prior City approval. 23. 23. 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. Mitigation plantings may not be removed or modified without prior City approval. 24. 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 61 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 9 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. 25. Prior to issuance of a zoning clearance for first building permit, the applicant shall record an age restriction covenant on the property, restricting the age of all residents to age 55 and above. 26. Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance for grading permit, the applicant shall provide 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 for the purposes of channel maintenance and future channel expansion on the final engineering and drainage plans. 27. Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance for grading permit, applicant must demonstrate that the project’s future 100-year outflow will be less than or equal to the existing 100-year outflow of Walnut Creek on final engineering and drainage plans. 28. Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance for grading permit, compliance with District criteria is required to the extent that the development impacts Walnut Creek. Preliminary drainage studies should address the following District requirements: a. 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. b. 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 62 Resolution No. 2019-____ Page 10 Permit can be found on the District's website at www.vcwatershed.org or by calling (805) 654-4060. c. 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. 29. Prior to the issuance of zoning clearance for grading permit , to further ensure that there will be long term facility maintenance and repair accessibility, there should not be any structures, including tree planting, placed in the District easement. Non-structural surface improvements such as parking areas, driveways, walkways or planting may be allowed with conditions under a District Encroachment Permit. 30. Prior to the issuance of zoning clearance for grading permit, the Applicant will be required to provide for the long term maintenance of any lateral connection to Walnut 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. - END - 63