Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 1986 111 1008RESOLUTION NO. PC -86 -111 A RESOLUTION OF THE MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY U.S. CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION REQUESTING APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. TR -3049. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 500 - 281 -13, -14. WHEREAS, at a duly notice public hearing on September 24, 1986, the Planning Commission considered the subject application requesting approval of a vesting tentative tract map to subdivide the property into 93 single family lots and 4 common area lots. Located west of the terminus of Loyola Street and Fordham Street and just north of the CalTrans right -of -way. Happy Camp Canyon drainage channel parallels the east boundary of the site. The undeveloped Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park is located to the north of the site. Property to the west is undeveloped and desig- nated OS -1. Property to the east is developed with single family homes. The assessors parcel map number for the project site is 500 - 281- 13 -14. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after review and consider- ation of the information contained in the staff report dated September 24, 1986, and information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, has found that this project will not have a significant affect on rv1 the environment; and has reached its decision in the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the findings contained in the staff report dated September 24, 1986, which report is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein are hereby approved; SECTION 2. That at its meeting of September 24, 1986, the Planning Commission took action to direct staff to prepare a Resolution with the attached recommended conditions, recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Permit No. TR -3049; said Resolution to be presented for consent calendar action at the next scheduled meeting. The action with the foregoing direction was approved by the following roll call vote; AYES: Commissioners Keenan, Claffey, LaPerch and Rosen; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Holland. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED 1986 ATTEST: Acting Secretary 570.7 CORSA AVENUE. SURE 209 15 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CALIFORNIA 91362 SAGE InSTITUTE In C. 0051497 -557 818/991-06.6 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Moorpark Planning Commission FROM: Carol Waldrop, Consultant to the City of Moorpark DATE: September 24, 1986 SUBJECT: vesting Tentative Tract 3049, Residential Planned Development 1057, U.S. Condominiums The following provides a project summary and review of prior action on Vesting Tentative Tract 3049, RPD 1057. A detailed discussion and analysis of the project and its conformance to the subdivision map act and City Code requirements is contained in the attached staff report. Project: Subdivide 58 acres into 97 lots for 93 single family units and 4 common area lots. Location: West of terminus of Loyola Street and of Fordham Drive. Surrounding uses: North - Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park South - Cal Trans Right of Way East - Developed single family residential West - Open space History: Tentative map approved by County in 1979 with park site. Map not recorded and expired. Zone change to RPD 1.6 approved in October 1985. Tentative Map for 93 clustered townhome units recommended for denial by the Planning Commission on June 25, 1986. Applicant directed by the City Council to resolve remaining issues with neighbors. Applicant agreed to a 90 day time extension for action on the Tentative map. Time extension expires, Nov. 4, 1986. Project 93 single family units, 56 accessed description from an extension of Loyola Street and 37 from an extension of Fordham Drive. Lots 1 - 93 single family,-ranging from 6000 to 18000 square feet lots, four floor plans, I and 2 story, 2,3,and 4 bedrooms. Homeowners Association 1.0 Prior Action On June 25, 1986 the Planning Commission reviewed the original proposed project for 93 townhome units in a clustered development. Following discussion of the project, considerations of conditions recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission, and hearing testimony -from neighbors on Loyola Street, the three members present at the Com- mission meeting voted two to one to deny the project, stating that the primary concern with the project was with the amount of grading intrusion into the 20% slope. The proposed project was reviewed by the City Council in a public hearing on July 21, 1986. The Council voted to approve the project. At the next meeting of the Council on August 4, 1986, the Council voted to reconsider the action Of July 21 approving Tentative Tract 3049 and Planned Development 1057 subject to findings and conditions, and then voted to rescind the action of July 21_ The primary concern was that of additional traffic on Loyola Street. The applicant consented to an extension of the time required for the City to take action on the subdivision map. The time period was extended by mutual consent for 90 days, expiring November 4, 1986. The applicant was directed to work with representatives of the concerned neighbors and return to the Council, or to the Planning Commission if the project were changed substantially, when an acceptable solution has been agreed upon between neighbors and the project applicant_ 1.1 Summary of Major Issues The citizens who attended the public hearings to speak in Opposition to the project were concerned that the increase in daily vehicle trips associated with the 93 unit townhouse project would impact the livability of their residential street. Even though several conditions were recommended by both the Planning Commission and the City Council members, the concern regarding traffic on Loyola and the concentration of traffic added to SR 118 remained unresolved to the extent that the Council acted to rescind their approval and direct the applicant to work with neighbors to reach a mutually acceptable solution. 2 9/18/86 2.0 Revised Project In order to address the concerns of the neighbors and those expressed at both the-Planning Commission and City Council meetings, the applicant has redesigned the project, changing both the unit type and the siting of those units. Therefore, it is the determination of staff that the project should be reviewed_. by the Planning Commission for their recommendation prior to. returning to the Council. The Planning Commission, at he September 24 meeting will action on the tentative map take and negative declaration. Development plans for the Planned Development Permit are in progress. The applicant will return to the Planning com- mission at a later date for final review of Residential Planned Development 1057. The revised project concept has been reviewed by the neighbors who have expressed their support. It should be noted that their support is contingent upon the installation of traffic control devices (stop signs) at specific locations in the neighborhood. The request is being reviewed by the City traffic engineer. The requirement for street maintenance during and after construction, requested by the neighbors, is enforced in connection with issuance of building permits. A letter from the neighbors' representative indicating that the revised project addresses their concern with traffic issues will be presented at the Commission meeting. 2.1 Summary of Project Features The project, as revised, consists of single family homes in two clusters. A cluster of 57 units is proposed at the north portion of the site at the extension of Loyola Street. This street extends in the same configuration as the previously proposed emergency access road and connects to the extension of Fordham Drive. A second cluster of 37 single family homes is located at the southerly end of the property. A central recreation area will be provided, linking the two clusters of homes. The recreation area includes a recreation building, pool, jaeuzzi, full court basketball area, tot lot and 10 picnic facilities. Parking for cars is provided. The single family homes will be of four different floor plans, one and two stories. The lot sizes range from 6000 to 18,000 square feet with a minimum pad size of 5000 square feet. The units themselves range from 1800 to 2500 square feet and have two and three car garages. The units are plaster and tile roof with wood fascia, bronze and anodized windows, and metal balcony railings. All rear yards will be fenced. Fifty eight percent of the total site area will be developed, leaving remaining intrusion into 4 1 space. the 20% slopeis reduced ainuthis p 9 ject as revised from 348 to 21.88. 3 9/18/86 2.2 Recommended Co:iditions During the review of the original project, several conditions were recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Planning Commission and the City Council. Those conditions which are applicable to the revised project are summarized as follows and are included in the conditions of approval attached as Exhibit C. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the revised project on September 3, 1986. Their recommended conditions are included in Exhibit C. 2.2.1. For the purpose of providing security for the homeowners, the use of perimeter fencing shall be evaluated by the Director of Planning and the Sheriff's Department and an administrative determination be made as to whether to require perimeter fencing. This determination shall be made in writing by the Director Of Community Development prior to the issuance of building permits. Comment: The question of perimeter fencing has been reviewed with both the Fire Department and the Sheriff's Department. Their recommendation is that individual yards be fenced along the property line but that the open space areas should remain unfenced. *40 2.2.2 No certificate of occupancy be granted for the units north of the Loyola Street extension until the signalization and intersection improvements at Princeton and SR 118 are installed. If the signal is not installed by June 1987, the City Council may waive the requirement. Comment: Should the Planning Commission and City Council choose to retain this condition, staff recommended that the wording be changed to read "no certificate of occupancy be granted for the 37 unit cluster at the southerly end of the project...", since that is the developer's second phase as currently planned. 2.2.3 The Planning Commission recommended deleting the Parks and Recreation recommendation for a twelve to fourteen person jacuzzi for both health and energy conservation reasons. Comment: The Parks and Recreation Commission, in the September 3 review of the revised project, reiterated their request for a jacuzzi. The applicant has agreed to include the jacuzzi if so desired by the Planning t Commission and City Council. 4 9/18/86 2.2.4 In lieu of Los Angeles Avenue AOC funds, an equivalent fee be paid to the Alternate Route Fund. By a 4/5 vote of Council, these funds may go the the Los Angeles Avenue AOC fund. 2.2.5 Oak tree protection. At the request of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the applicant has provided, on the tentative map, the identification and location of oak trees on the project site. This oak tree survey indicates that no oak trees are located in the area of development. An additional condition requires that a report be provided which specifies the condition of oak trees and identifies measures to protect the trees from damage due to grading. 3.0 Summary of Major Issues The following provides a staff summary of the major project issues regarding the revised project. 3.1 Park and Recreation The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed project on Sept 3, 1986. The Commissioners, consistent with their prior action, recommended to the Planning Commission that in lieu fees be required to satisfy the requirements of /- the City's Parkland Dedication Ordinance in that the City's Parks and Recreation. Commission policy is to not accept parks of less than 6 acres because park development and maintenance is not cost effective below the 6 acre size and that, given the remote location of the park, events there might create additional traffic on the neighborhood streets. The Parks and Recreation Commission required a 1000 square foot meeting room to be included in the facility providing rest rooms, kitchen and storage for the 20' x 40' pool, and reiterated their recommendation for a 12 to 14 person sized jacuzzi. They deleted parking spaces from the proposed parking lot to create a larger grassy area in the recreation complex. The project also provides a full court basketball area, 2500 square foot tot lot, and a picnic area in the centrally located recreation area.The Parks and Recreation Commission considered the potential need for an additional tot lot and picnic area on the Fordham cluster in order to satisfy the recreational needs of those residents. The Commission determined that if the minimum pad size for the single family lots is 5000 square feet or greater, such an additional lot would not be necessary. The applicant has provided verification of that minimum size. If the pad size is reduced to less than 5000 square feet, the applicant will be required to return to the Parks and Recreation Commission for approval of the size and location of a second tot. lot, picnic area. 5 9/18/86 3.2 Traffic and Circulation The revised project provides for an extension of Fordham Drive over the existing bridge and continuing through the project area in a similar configuration to the previously proposed access road to connect with the extension of Loyola. All streets will now be public. All units may be accessed either from Fordham or Loyola, resulting in a more equitable distribution of traffic through the surrounding residential neighborhood. The revised traffic study indicates that these units will generate approximately the same site traffic as the previous design, and therefore the impacts on the external study area arterial street system (ie, at the two Princeton Avenue intersections) would remain unchanged. The dispersion of the project into two clusters not only reduces the amount of traffic utilizing Loyola Street but also provides alternate access points to further distribute traffic potentially generated from the 56 unit cluster. The revised project will add some vehicle trips to Westwood and Amherst, but by redistributing traffic in this manner, it is the conclusion of the Traffic Study (Exhibit B) that the project will not have any significantly adverse effects on the operation of either the local street system adjacent to the study site or the arterial street system serving the study area. M 3.3 Grading '40 The revised project substantially reduces the amount of grading which intrudes in the areas of greater than 208 slope from 348 to 21.88. The remaining areas of intrusion are indicated by shading on Exhibit A -2. The City's Land Use Element discourages development on hillsides with slopes in excess of 208 or on ridgelines. Analysis of the site and grading plan indicates that the significant landforms and viewsheds are preserved. Section 4.1.1 of the staff report discusses specifically the rationale of the grading plan. Given that 428 of the project is in open space and the clustered single family development respects the topography of the site to the extent possible, the Council could find that the project substantially meets the intent of the Land Use Element Policy, a finding that is consistent with previous action of the Commission and Council. 3.4 Summary The revised project provides appropriate clustering of units, and, in general, conformance to the natural surround- ings and viewshed. Even though the project as designed has areas of intrusion into 208 slope, 428 of the site is left in open space. The redesigned project addresses both the concern with grading intrusion expressed by the Planning 6 9/1886 r Commission and the issue of traffic on Loyola raised by the existing neighbors and reiterated by the Council. Abundant areas of open space surrounding the developed area, natural landscaped buffers between the project site and the existing developed area to the east, and softly contoured slopes at the entry are additional positive features of the project. 4.0 Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve the tentative map and negative declaration subject to the recommended conditions and amended or additional ,conditions for consideration by the Planning Commission at its next regular meeting. r^ 7 9/18/86 City of Moorpark Planning Commission Staff Report and Recommendation Meeting of September 24, 1986 Subject: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 3049, and Residential Planned Development 1057 Applicant: U.S. Condominium, California Corporation P. O. Box 233 Moorpark, CA Request: The applicant is requesting approval of the following: D o a vesting tentative tract map to subdivide the property into 93 single family lots and 4 common area lots. The applicant will return to the Planning Commission at a future date requesting the approval of: o a residential planned development permit for the construction of the single family units. 1.0 LOCATION AND PARCEL NUMBER The property is located west of the terminus of Loyola Street and Fordham Street and just north of the Cal -Trans Right of Way. Happy Camp Canyon drainage channel parallels the east boundary of the site. The undeveloped Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park is located to the north of the site. Property to the west is undeveloped and designated OS -1. Property to the east is developed with single family homes. The assessors parcel map number for the project site is 500- 281- 13 -14. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Project History In 1979, prior to the incorporation of Moorpark, a tentative tract map for the project area was approved by the County Board of Supervisors for single family home units. The map was not recorded and has expired. Subsequently, in June 1985, the applicant requested a zone change to allow clustering of the development to conform to the topography of the site. The zone change was granted by the City Council in October 1985. The application for this project, involving a vesting tentative tract map and Planned Development permit for 93 units, was filed in December of 1985_ The original project for 93 townhome units was recommended for denial by the Planning Commission on June 25, 1986- The Project was approved by the City Council on July 21, 1986 and then the Council at the August 4, 1986 8 9/18/86 F5 n E5 meeting rescinded that action and directed the applicant to revise the project as necessary to address the remaining concerns. A time extension was agreed upon extending the period of time within which the City must take action on the project until November 4, 1986. 2.2 vesting Tentative Map In November of 1985 the City Council approved Ordinance 58 relative to provisions for vesting tentative maps. The approval or conditional approval of a vesting tentative map shall confer a vested right to proceed with development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies and standards as described in-Government Code Section 66474.2. The rights conferred by a vesting map shall last for an initial period of one (1) year beyond the recordation of the map. Such time period may be extended by action of the City Council. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Plan (Exhibit A -1) The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property into 97 lots. Lots 94 -97 are common area lots. Fifty eight percent of the total site area is proposed for development Entry to the northern portion (56 units) of the development is from an extension of Loyola Street which then connects to the extension of Fordham Drive. Entry from the southern portion (37 units) is from Fordham Drive. A recreation area is centrally located at the southwester most portion of the Loyola cluster. Lot sizes range from 6000 - 18,000 square feet. 3.2 Project Design The single family development will consist of 9 different floor plans, both 1 & 2 story, with 2, 3 & 4 bedroom models. The minimum pad size is 5000 square feet. The houses average in size from 1800 to 2500 square feet. The units are plaster and tile roof with wood fascia, and metal balcony railings. All rear yards will be fenced. Conditions of approval require that CC &R's be submitted to the City for approval. CC &R's will specify standards regarding accessory structures, patio covers and other Potential owner -added property improvements. 3.3 Recreation and Open Space The private recreation area will include a recreation building, with a 1000 square foot meeting room, a 2500 r square foot tot lot, a picnic area, a 20' x 40' pool, a 12 -14 person jacuzzi and a full court basketball area. The private recreational area will be provided for the use of the residents of the tract, and will be maintained by a homeowners' association. 9 9/18/86 The open space area adjacent to the developed portion of the property will also be owned and maintained by the homeowners' association. Should the association neglect its maintenance responsibilities, City Assessment District No. 85 -1 can provide back -up maintenance. Areas proposed to be graded or cleared of brush for fire protection purposes are to be planted with erosion control material. Under the City's Parkland Dedication (Quimby) Ordinance and assuming the current number of units proposed, the developer is required to dedicate approximately 1.2 acres for public park use, or pay in -lieu fees. The park area originally shown on the tentative map was a County requirement based on several hundred units. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that the approximately 2 acre park, originally proposed be deleted from the plan for the following reasons: o The City's Park and Recreation Commission policy is to not accept parks of less than 6 acres because park development and maintenance is not cost effective below the 6 acre size. o The project site is adjacent to Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park which will ultimately provide abundant recreational facilities and playfields. o Previous action by the Council and Parks and Recreation Commission indicate a priority for directing funding to developing existing community park areas rather than creating additional park sites for which facility development and ongoing maintenance may not be ensured by the City's level of funds. The project provides 428 of the site area in open space which will be the responsibility of the homeowners association. A private recreational area is provided within the project. From the standpoint of the City's overall plan for the location for parks and program of funding for park development and maintenance, requiring in lieu fees per the City's Park Land Dedication Ordinance will further those goals whereas acquiring additional acres at this location represents a cost which is not justified by acreage or accessibility. 4.0 EVIDENCE REGARDING REQUIRED SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND CITY ZONING ORDINANCE FINDINGS. Certain findings must,be made in order to determine that the proposed project�—is consistent with the State Subdivision Map Act and the City Code. These findings, and the project information and evidence to support them, are presented below. 4.1 Consistency of Tentative Map Desi n and Improvements with Applicable General Plan and . ninn 10 9/18/86 Im IM 4.1.1 General Plan Consistency An analysis of the project's consistency with the policies and goals of the City's General Plan (Land Use Element) is as follows: Policies and goals addressed under the Residential and Physical Environment /Hazards sections of the Land Use Element discourage urban development in mountainous areas, on hillside with slopes in excess of 20 percent or on ridgelines. The tentative map shows approximately 428 of the site retained in open space which preserves the most significant land forms. However, a portion of the project site will be developed on slopes greater than 20 percent. Clustering the development and the revisions to the site plan further reduces encroachment into slope areas. In cases where intrusion occurs in the slope in excess of 208, primarily only insignificant landforms are affected. The revised project reduces the incursion from 348 to 21.88. The natural slope that parallels the drainage channel will remain, protecting the viewshed and buffering the visual effect of new development: on the natural landscape. The most prominent visual features, land forms, and sensitive view areas on the site have been preserved. In order to create a gradual incline at the entrance to Loyola and to Fordham Drive, the plan shows a contoured variable face slope which recreates the natural topography. Development of the property at either the existing land use designation or any urban density will most likely require some grading of areas in excess of 20 percent slopes for building pads or roadways. It should be noted that no definition of "discourage" is provided in the Land Use Element. As a result, the Planning Commission and the City Council may determine that due to the large amount of open space that will be retained, the relatively small percentage of the site with excessive slopes that will be developed, and the difficulty of developing the property without grading some areas with slopes greater than 20 percent, the proposed project substantially meets the intent of these Policies and goals. This determination would be consistent with previous action of the Commission and Council. 4.1.2 Zoning The existing RPD 1.6 zone was adopted in October 1985. The Project conforms to the RPD 1.6 zone. 11 9/18/86 4.1.3. Existing Land Use The property is presently undeveloped and covered with non - native grass and native sage scrub with some introduced plants and trees. Existing features on -site include a flood control channel, two bridge crossings; dirt and gravel access roads, power poles, fencing. A large drainage course runs from northwest to southeast through the site. There is also one Union Oil drill site located within the property. This site is located where no development is to occur. It should be noted that since the City incorporated following the County approval of the entitlement permitting drilling on the property, the City Council needs to take Positive action approving a CUP for drilling to be permitted. 4.1.9 Adjacent Land Uses North: Undeveloped Happy Camp Canyon regional park open space. South: Cal Trans Right of Way West: Undeveloped open space East: Existing single family subdivision The density and land use of the proposed project will continue the urban land use pattern established to the south and east of the site. The proposed residential development, with a density of 1.6 units per acre, is compatible with the adjacent developed residential tracts which have densities of approximately 5.5 units per acre. Implementation of the project will not in itself encourage the urbanization of the adjacent property to the west, which would require a general plan amendment from its open space designation prior to development, or of the Regional park to the north and Cal Trans right of way to south. 4.2 PHYSICAL SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR THE PROPOSED TYPE AND DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT 4.2.1 Existing Natural Features The property consists of a series of gently inclined, southerly trending ridges and intervening drainage courses. The property is bounded on the east by an improved drainage control channel and by an existing residential subdivision. 12 9/18/86 oil M 'qo The site is presently vacant, with no signs of previous site usage, and is covered with a moderate to heavy growth of native grasses, weeds, and low shrubs. A few oak trees exist at scattered locations. Oak trees are designated on the tract map (Exhibit A -1). Natural side slopes on the ridge flanks are predominately about 2:1 or flatter, but are locally as steep as 1;1. The site appears to be in its virgin condition with the exception of a flattened (excavated) ridge line and a cut slope descending to the improved channel at the northeast corner of the site. Apparently, this area was used to borrow soils for the adjoining tract development. No other signs of grading or filled ground were noted. The proposed development and related grading activities will be confined primarily to the valley floor and northerly upland areas of the project site. Approximately 42% of the site, including the more prominent hillsides steeply- sloped areas, and open space. will be left ungraded and preserved in In addition, visual impacts can be mitigated by retaining as many mature trees as possible and by landscaping all man -made slopes and open space areas. All man -made slopes will also be required to be contoured to blend in with the r natural topography. The open space areas retained on the property will mitigate any visual impacts of the project by forming buffers between on the on -site developed areas and the undeveloped properties to the west and north. Project development will necessitate the removal of a Portion of the on -site grassland habitat. However 42% of the site will be retained in open space, and similar habitat is located within the undeveloped Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park areas to the north and open space west of the project site. 4.2.2 Drainage The project site is located within the boundaries of the Arroyo Simi watershed. Arroyo Simi is one of several tributaries comprising the larger Calleguas Creek drainage system through western Ventura County. The site presently drains through a major drainage course in a southeasterly direction into an improved County flood control channel which parallels the site on the east boundary. These drainages collect and convey runoff from within the site and adjacent upstream areas for discharge. No flooding problems exist on -site. 13 9/18/86 The increase in impervious surfacing is not anticipated to VW cause flooding by perceptibly increasing the drainage flow and, therefore, no negative impacts are anticipated. 4.2.3 Traffic /Circulation - Issue The project as revised provides 2 points of access to the project site. One primary access to the project site will be provided by the extension of Loyola Street west beyond its current terminus at Westwood Street providing access from Campus Park Drive. Loyola Street will extend to connect with the other primary access, provided from the extension of Fordham Drive beyond its current terminus at Westwood Street.This access provides an alternate route to SR118 via Fordham to Westwood to Amherst to Princeton. 4.2.4 Traffic Study for Revised Proiect. A traffic study was prepared for this project in December 1985 by Thomas Montgomery and Associates and revised in August of 1986 to reflect the proposed changes in the project. The traffic study data was obtained by direct count, field investigation, Cal Trans data and information for the EIP, prepared for the recently approved Griffin Homes development north of Campus Park Drive. Existing traffic conditions are described in Exhibit B. The analysis of traffic conditions on Princeton Avenue off Campus Park Drive remain as stated in the original traffic study and indicate that both are operating at high levels of service during both commuter peak traffic periods. Princeton Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue operate at level of service C which is an acceptable level during the afternoon period. The morning peak traffic exceeds design capacity by 23.5 percent as a result of traffic on a westbound 118 being restricted to one travel lane. 4.2.5 Traffic Generation The analysis indicates that the 93 unit single family project would generate less than 500 vehicle trips per day (VPD) with maximum peak demands of 32 vehicle trips per hour (VPH) outbound in the morning and inbound in the afternoon on an average weekday. The diagram of the attached traffic study indicates how these 32 (VPH) are anticipated to distribute through neighborhood residential streets to reach the intersection of Princeton and 118. The traffic study concludes that traffic from the revised project will be distributed at less impact on Loyola and more equitable throughout the residential neighborhood. M 14 9/18/86 4.2.6 Future Traffic Conditions The traffic analysis considered related future developments in the determination of future traffic demand. The resulting 1990 peak traffic volume estimates discussed on Exhibit B page 5 indicate that by 1990 both the Campus Park /Princeton Drive and Princeton Drive /Los Angeles Avenue intersections would operate at high levels of service (B, C) with the installation of intersection improvements and traffic signal controls. Traffic demands on Loyola Street west of Campus Park Drive were analyzed (Exhibit B page 7). The carrying capacity of a low speed two lane roadway is in excess of 5000 VPD. However, in order to preserve the residential character of the street an "environmental capacity" of 2000 VPD is a maximum capacity figure which considers residents' perceptions of congestion. Currently this residential collector carries 990 VPD which would increase by 200 VPD to 1,190 VPD upon completion of the project. Traffic demands of the Fordham , Westwood, Amherst route were also analyzed. Amherst carries 900 trips per day which would increase by 280 to 1,180 VPD upon completion of the project. Westwood, between Loyola, would change from 500 to 590 VPD_ With these increases Loyola Street and Fordham /Westwood/ Amherst would still be operating at well below even the "perceived" level of congestion. The analysis concludes that the traffic generated by the proposed project will not have any significantly adverse effect on the operation of the local street system adjacent to the project or on the arterial street system serving this area of the city. The project site is at the end of the developable area within this neighborhood. Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park is located directly to the north and the CalTrans Right of Way to the south. Property to the west which, if developed in the future, would not be accessed through this project site. Therefore this project represents the last addition to traffic volumes through the neighborhood bounded by Westwood, Princeton and Campus Park Drive. 4.3 LIKELIHOOD OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE'. The the impact of the proposed development on on -site resources, drainage and traffic circulation has been adequately mitigated by the project design and proposed conditions of approval. The project will, therefore, not �'- cause substantial environmental damage. The negative declaration and initial study is attached as Exhibit D. 15 9/18/86 4.4 LIKELIHOOD OF PROPOSED PROJECT YO CAUSE SERIOUS PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEMS. Provisions for services to the subdivision are as follows: 4.4.1 Water and Sanitation. The increased demand in connection with this project is not anticipated to significantly impact existing water supply availability, and sufficient water supply currently is available to meet the demands of cumulative development in the City. It shall be the developer's responsibility to determine if the existing facilities are capable of providing an adequate supply of water for domestic and fire flow requirements. Any upgrading of the existing facilities necessary to supply the subject property shall be the responsibility of the developer. The District is in the early stages of planning a sewerage treatment plant expansion project. Since the cumulative increase of flow into the existing treatment plant is directly related to the rate at which new connections to the sewerage system are made, the currently available plant capacity could be consumed prior to completion of any plant expansion. This could cause a delay in issuance of a "will serve" letter to the applicant to insure the plant expansion will be complete when sewer service begins. Any upgrading of the existing facilities necessary to provide service to the subject property and surrounding area, shall be the responsibility of the developer. 4.4.2 Fire Prevention. The County Fire Prevention Department, which provides service to the City of Moorpark under contract, has indicated that adequate protection is available to the project site. The project is proposed for a "high fire hazard" area due to the topography and vegetation of the site. Fire prevention measures, such as clearing natural vege- tation within 100 feet of any structure, and the use of fire retardant materials in roofing shall be provided. The provision of two primary access points to the development, connected by a private road, satisfies the County Fire Prevention Department access requirements. 16 9/18/86 0 0 en r Under the County Facility Fee Ordinance, fees are collected from developers of residential, commercial and industrial projects to offset the cost of additional fire stations and equipment necessitated by the incremental demand from additional development. However, the fees cannot be used for operation and maintenance costs, which must be met by the District's other revenue sources. The applicant will be required to contribute facility fees. 4.4.3. Law Enforcement. Police protection in Moorpark is provided by the County Sheriff's Department under contract to the City. According to the Sheriff's Department, the proposed project may require service area adjustments, but is not expected to significantly impact law enforcement capabilities, provided that future staffing and equipment needs are met. The Sheriff's Department reviewed the design of the revised project, and recommended no additional measures. Their original measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. Developer fees are also required to be contributed for construction of law enforcement facilities and provision of equipment. Similar to the fees collected by the Fire Protection District, these fees cannot be used for operations or maintenance costs. The developer also is required to contribute these fees. 4.4.4 Education. The proposed project is located within the Moorpark Unified School District (MUSD) . Capacity is available at all District schools, with the exception of the Peach Hill Elementary School, Flory School and the High School. Relocatable classrooms have been placed at the schools to accommodate additional students. The MUSD is planning on adding more relocatable classrooms at its elementary schools and the high school to expand available capacity. Current improvement plans also call for the construction of an elementary school in Planned Community 3 by 1987 and an elementary school within the Griffin Campus Village project by 1988. State aid funding opportunities are presently being explored to provide assistance in the development of a relocated high school to be located in Planned Community No. 3. Completion of this school is proposed for 1988 or 1989 with an initial capacity of 885 students and expansion capabilities to 1,500. The proposed project is 46 elementary, 14 junior expected to generate approximately high, and 15 high school students. 17 9/18/86 The developer will be required to contribute fees for the future construction of school facilities. These fees are based on an overall student generation, factor of .7 students per unit. The Planning Commission and the City Council in reviewing the impacts of the proposed project, must make one of the following findings consistent with Section 8941 of the School Facilities Fee /Dedication Ordinance. Findings (a) and (c) can be made for the project, since school facility fees will be paid by the developer. a) That the school district has entered into an agreement with the applicant or some other person which agreement provides a feasible means for mitigating any aggravation of such conditions of over - crowding which would otherwise be caused by the residential development; b) Where the application is for a building permit, that the applicant has paid the facilities fee specified in Section 8942 and, where applicable, the land fee specified in Section 8943; C) Where the application is for an approval which does not include the grant of a building permit, that such approval is conditioned upon the dedication of land (if any) required of the applicant pursuant to Section 8943, and, further, that the map, variance or permit so approved contains notice that the issuance of any building permit for residential development of the property shall be subject to the payment for such fees as may be required pursuant to this Chapter; d) That there are specific, overriding physical, economic, social or environmental factors which justify approval of the residential development without requiring the payment of fees or the dedication of land which would otherwise be required pursuant to this Chapter; e) Where the application is for a building permit, that the permit will be for the repair, alteration or replacement of a lawfully constructed residential unit which was lawfully occupied as a residential unit at some time within the one year period immediately preceding the date on which the application is accepted. 4.4.5 Air Quality. Air quality impacts in connection with this development are V considered to be an acceptable level. 18 9/18/86 4.4.6 Noise. Noise levels in the immediate project vicinity are presently not significant. Further, noise from traffic generated by the proposed development is not anticipated to significantly impact existing noise levels. 4.5 POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF PROPOSED PROJECT WITH PUBLIC EASEMENTS OR WATERWAYS No public access easements exist on they waterways. property. Further the subdivision does not contain nor front on any public 5.0 SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND CODE COMPLIANCE: Based upon the evidence and conclusions set forth above, it is determined that the proposed project, with the attached conditions, meets the requirements of Government Code Section 66473.5 66474.6 and 66478.1 et. seq. and City Code Section 8163 -3. The findings that were discussed in the previous section are summarized below. The section of this staff report in which the evidence supporting these findings is presented is shown in parentheses. 1. Subdivision Map Act Findings a. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans (Section 4.1); b. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the applicable general and specific plans (Section 4.1); C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed (Section 4.2), in that the visual impacts of grading on the project site are adequately mitigated by the retention of 426 of the site in open space and contour grading; d. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitats (Section 4.3) ; e. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems (Section 4.4); f. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements would not conflict with easements, 19 9/18/86 acquired by the public at large, for access through or *400 use of property within the proposed subdivision (Section 4.5); g. There would be no discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system in violation of existing water quality control requirements under Water Code Sections 13000 et seq. (Section 4.5). 2. City Ordinance Code Find a. The proposed use is compatible with existing and future land use within the zone and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located (Section 4.1 ); In that the open space buffer area provided adjacent to the undeveloped properties to the west and north, and the proposed lot design adjacent to the property to the east, renders the project compatible with these lands; b. The proposed use would not be obnoxious or harmful to adjacent properties (Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.4 and 4.5); C. The proposed use would not impact the integrity or character of the zone in which it is to be located (Section 4.1); d. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety convenience or welfare (Sections 4.2, 4.3 , 4.4, 4.5, 4.6). 6.0 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) COMPLIANCE: SAGE Institute, Inc., under contract to the City of Moorpark Department of Community Development, conducted an initial study to evaluate the potential impact of this project upon the environment. Based upon the findings contained in the initial study, it was determined that the proposal would not have a significant impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration (Exhibit D) was prepared and publicly noticed for fourteen (14) days. No comments have been received. 7.0 DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE A development Advisory Committee meeting was held during the week of June 2, 1986 and again regarding the revised project on September 3, 1986. Representatives of the City Engineer, County Fire Department and Sage Institute Inc. (consultant to the City Community Development Department) met with a representative of U.S. Condo and the project engineer to discuss the proposed conditions of approval. 20 9/18/86 E5 VAO r 8.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS No written comments on the revised project have been received to date. 9.0 RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Recommend to the City Council that it approve the Negative Declaration. 2. Direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the negative declaration, and the APPROVAL of the tentative tract map, subject to the proposed conditions of approval (Exhibit "C "), for consideration by the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting. Prepared by: Reviewed by: Carol Waldrop Michael A. Rubin SAGE Institute, Inc. Senior Planner Attachments: 1. Exhibit A -1 Tentative Tract A -2 Shaded Areas of Slope Intrusion 2. Exhibit B Traffic Study 3. Exhibit C Conditions of Approval 4. Exhibit D Negative Declaration, Initial Study 21 9/18/86 � M I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark, California, on Wednesday , the 24 day of September beginning at the hour of 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers in the C tp6 Hall of said City, located at 799 Moorpark. Avenue, Moorpark, California- 93021 for the purpose of consideration of the proposed project hereinbeloW described, NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN, that pursuant to California State law, an evaluation has been conducted to determine if the proposed project could significantly affect the environment;_ and that, based upon an unitial review, it has been found that a significant affect would not occur; therefore,a Negative Declaration has been completed -in compliance with State CEQA- Guidelines issued thereunder. Entitlement: Vesting Tentative Tract TR3049 Residential Planned Development Applicant: U.S. Condominium Proposal: 93 Single family homes. Location: West of the Terminus of Loyola Street, south of Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park, north of Cal Trans right of way. Assessor's Parcel No.: 500- 281- 12, -14. NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE If you challenge the proposed action in Court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the • Planning Department at or prior to the public hearing. JL you have any questions or comments regarding the project, contact the Community Development Department at the City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021; Phone: (805) 529 -6864. DATED: September 8 , 19 86'. Title: Administrative Secretary r �G CONDITIONS FOR: Tentative Tract Map 3049 APPLICANT: U.S. Condominiums DATE: September 24, 1986 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: 1. That the conditions of approval of this tract map supersede all conflicting notations, specifications, dimensions, typical sections and the like which may be shown on said map and. that all of the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, City of Moorpark Subdivision Ordinance, and adopted City policies apply. 2. That all requirements of any law or agency of the State, Ventura County, and City of Moorpark and any other governmental entity shall be met and all such requirements and enactments shall, by reference, become conditions of this entitlement. 3. That no condition of this entitlement shall be interpreted as permitting or requiring any violation of law, or any lawful rules or regulations or orders of an authorized governmental agency. In instances where more than one set of rules apply, the stricter ones shall take precedence. 4. That if any of the conditions or limitations of this entitlement are held to be invalid, that holding shall not invalidate any of the remaining conditions or limitations set forth. 5. That no zoning clearance shall be issued for the companion entitlement until each phase of the final map that includes the units for which the clearances have been requested has been recorded. Prior to construction, a zoning clearance shall be obtained from the Community Development Department and a building permit shall be obtained from the Building and Safety Division. 6. That applicant agrees as a condition of issuance (or renewal) for the use of this permit, to defend, at his sole expense, any action brought against the City because of issuance (or renewal) of this permit, or in the alternative, to relinquish this permit. Applicant will reimburse the City for any court costs and /or attorney's fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of any such action. City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 7. That applicant's recordation of this map shall be deemed to be acceptance by applicant of all conditions of this map. 8. That all on -site utilities shall be placed underground. CITY ENGINEERING CONDITIONS 9. That prior to Recordation, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, a grading plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall obtain a Grading Permit; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing completion. 10. Prior to recordation of the final maps, a Homeowner's Association shall be created. Copies of the By -laws, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC and R's) shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. The purpose of the Homeowner's Association shall be to oversee and maintain the on -site private recreational facilities, the open space area, on -site drainage facilities, with the exception of the County Flood Control District channel; the access road for fire protection, the construction of accessory structures, patio covers or remodeling within the project for its architectural compatibility with the existing units. Lots 94 through - - -- shall be dedicated to the Homeowner's Association, and shall be preserved in undeveloped open space. These responsibilities shall be indicated in the CC and R's. Upon approval by both the Community Development Director and State Department of Real Estate, the CC and R's shall then be recorded. 11. That City Assessment District No. 85 -1 shall provide for the maintenance of all on -site open space areas, to be activated as necessary, should the Homeowner's Association not maintain these areas. Total cost of the maintenance shall be-borne by the lot owners within the tract. 12. That in conjunction with recordation, the developer shall offer to dedicate on the final map to the City of Moorpark, a public service easement as required. 13. The tentative map shall expire three years from the date of approval. Failure to record a final map with the County Recorder prior to expiration of the tentative map shall terminate all proceedings, and any subdivision of the land shall require the filing and r" processing of a new tentative map. 14. That at the time water service connection is made, cross connection control devices shall be installed on the water system in accordance with the requirements of the Ventura County Division of Environmental Health. 15. Prior to recordation of the final map, an " Unconditional" Will -Serve Letter shall be obtained from County Waterworks District No. 1 for sewage and water service for each lot created. Said letter shall be filed with the Community Development Department. If said "Unconditional" Will -Serve Letter in a form satisfactory to the City cannot be obtained from the County Waterworks District, the developer shall execute proper disposition of the site; and shall obtain the Community Development Director's written concurrence of the recommended disposition before undertaking development. 16. That prior to any work being conducted in Happy Camp drain, the developer shall obtain a Ventura County Flood Control District watercourse Encroachment Permit. 17. That in conjunction with recordation, the developer shall offer to dedicate on the final map to the Ventura County Flood Control District, a storm drain easement of sufficient width to permit an ultimate right of way for the Happy Camp drain in accordance with the approval of the Flood Control District. 18. That lot to lot drainage easements and secondary drainage easements shall be delineated on the final map. Assurance shall be provided: to the City that these easements will be adequately maintained by property owners to safely convey storm water flows. 19. That the developer shall construct any necessary drainage facilities, including brow ditch and slope bench drainage channels, with a permanent earthtone color(s) so as to minimize visual impacts. Said colors shall be submitted to the Director of Planning as part of the grading plan. 20. That in order to reduce the visual impacts of grading, the developer shall construct all slopes with a "rounded -off" top and toe and shall blend graded slopes in the natural slopes and shall also undulate and vary the angle of the slope faces so as to break up the appearance of otherwise flat and uniform slope faces. 21. Site distances for turning movements into and out of the intersection between lot numbers 93 and 76 shall meet the City's requirements and are subject to approval of the City Engineer. 22. No drainage water from a 50 year storm shall leave the tract along Loyola Street or Fordham St. 23. An 18 inch slough wall shall be constructed directly behind the sidewalk where toe of slopes are adjacent to the back of the sidewalk so as to reduce debris from entering streets. Said slough wall locations shall be shown on grading plan and are subject to approval of the City Engineer. 24. If any hazardous waste is encountered during the construction of this project, all work shall be immediately stopped and the Ventura County Environmental Health Department, the Fire Department, the Sheriff's Department and the City Inspector shall be notified immediately. Work shall not proceed until clearance has been issued by all of these agencies. 25. That if archaeological or historical artifacts are uncovered during grading operations, the developers shall ensure the preservation of the site; shall obtain the services of a qualified archaeologist to recommend proper disposition of the site; and shall obtain the Community Development Director's written concurrence of the recommended disposition before undertaking development. 26. That during grading of on -site roads and building pads, regular watering of unpaved areas shall occur to reduce fugitive dust emissions. 27. That prior to recordation, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, a detailed soils report certified by a Registered Civil Engineer in the state of California. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the approved soils report. 28. That prior to recordation, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The improvements shall include concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, striping and signing, and paving in accordance with the Ventura County Road Standards. The applicable Road Standard Plates are as follows: o Plate B -5A: Between Loyola Street and Fordham Street o Plate B- SB:All remaining interior stree" o Existing Bridges over Flood Control Channel shall be improved to include concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, paving per Ventura County Standards. All cul de sacs per Plate C -3. o All cul de sacs per Plate c -2 29. That in conjunction with the recordation of the final map, the developer shall offer to dedicate on the final map to the City of Moorpark for public use, all the public street right -of -way shown on the final map. 30. That in conjunction with recordation, the developer shall dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark the access rights adjacent to the road between Loyola Street and Fordham Street. 31. That prior to any work being conducted within the State or City right of way, the developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the appropriate agency. 32. That prior to recordation, the developer shall demonstrate adequate protection from a ten year frequency storm to the satisfaction of the City of Moorpark. 33. That prior to recordation, the developer shall demonstrate legal access for each parcel to the satisfaction of the City of Moorpark. 34. That prior to recordation, the developer shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time of recordation. In lieu of Los Angeles Avenue AOC funds, an equivalent fee be paid to the Alternate Route Fund. By a 4/5 vote of the Council, these funds may go the the Los Angeles Avenue AOC fund. 35. That prior to recordation, the developer shall indicate in writing to the City of Moorpark, the disposition any water wells that may exist within the site. If any wells are proposed to be abandoned, or if they are abandoned and have not been properly sealed, they must be destroyed per Ventura county Ordinance No. 2372. 36. That prior to the submittal of the final map, the developer shall transmit by certified mail a copy of the conditionally approved tentative map together with a copy of Section 66436 of the State Subdivision Map Act to each public entity or public utility that is an easement holder of record. written compliance shall be submitted to the City of Moorpark. 37. That prior to recordation the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, drainage plans, hydrologic, and hydraulic calculations prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of improvements. The drainage plans and calculations shall indicate the following conditions before and after development: Quantities of water, water flow rates, major water courses, drainage areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps, drainage courses. 38. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval along with the grading plan. Along with the erosion control measures, hydroseeding of all graded slopes shall be required within 60 days of completion of grading. If any interim grading is to remain longer than 60 days, interim slopes shall be hydroseeded and irrigated until plantings are able to survive. 39. That the developer shall pay all energy costs associated with street lighting for a period of one year from the initial energizing of the street lights. 40. That prior to recordation, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, an Oak Tree Survey prepared by a qualified arborist, landscape architect, or other professional specializing in the morphology and care of oak trees. VENTURA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT CONDITIONS• 41. That the site is subject to acreage assessment fees for flood control purposes. Prior to recordation of the final map for each phase, the Ventura County Flood Control acreage assessment fee requirement must be satisfied. r 42. That in conjunction with recordation, the developer shall offer to dedicate on the Final (Parcel) Map to the Ventura County Flood Control District a storm drain easement of sufficient width to permit an ultimate right of way for the Happy Camp Drain in accordance with the approval of the Flood Control District. VENTURA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: 43. That all drives shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches (1316 "). 44. That access roads shall not exceed 15% grade. 45. That street signs within any phase of the project shall be installed prior to occupancy of any unit within the phase. 46. That prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for the approval of the location of fire hydrants. Show existing hydrants on plan within 380 feet of the development. 47. That fire hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to combustible construction and shall conform to the minimum standards of the County Water Works f- Manual. a. Each hydrant shall be a 6 inch wet barrel design, and shall have one 4 inch and one 2 -1/2 inch outlet. b. The required fire flow shall be achieved at no less than 20 per square inch residual pressure. C. Fire hydrants shall be spaced 500 feet on center, and so located that no structure will be farther than 250 feet from any one hydrant. d. Fire hydrants shall be 24 inch on center, recessed from the curb face. 48. That the minimum fire flow required shall be determined by the type of building construction, fire walls, and fire protection devices provided, as specified by the I.S.O. Guide for Determining Required Fire Flow. 49. That all grass or brush exposing any structures shall be cleared for a distance of 100 feet prior to framing, according to the Ventura County Weed Abatement Ordinance. 50. That an approved spark arrester shall be installed on the chimney of any structure (California Administrative Code, Title 24, Section 2- 1217). 51. That a plan shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for review indicating the method in which buildings are to be identified. / 52. That'portions of this development may be in a hazardous fire area that those structures shall meet fire zone 4 building code requirements. 53. That building plans of public assembly areas, which have an occupant load of 50 or more, shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for review. 54. That any structure greater than 5,000 square feet in area and /or 5 miles from a fire station shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with Ventura County Ordinance #14. 55. That a 100 foot buffer zone shall be established and maintained between the dwelling units and open space. MOORPARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CONDITIONS: 56. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any dwelling unit, payment of School Facility Fees shall be pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 9 of the Moorpark Ordinance Code. 10— 57. If any of the improvements which the subdivider is required to construct or install is is to be constructed or installed upon land in which the subdivider does not have title or interest sufficient for such purposes, the subdivider shall do all of the following at least 60 days prior to the filing of the final map for approval pursuant to Government Code Section 66457. a. Notify the City of Moorpark (hereafter "City ") in writing that the subdivider wishes the City to acquire an interest in the land which is sufficient for such purposes as provided in Government Code Section 66462.5; b. Supply the City with (i) a legal description of the interest to be acquired, (ii) a map or diagram of the interest to be acquired sufficient to satisfy the requirements of subdivision (e) of Section 1250.310 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (iii) a current appraisal report prepared by an appraiser approved by the City which expresses an opinion as to the current fair market value of the interest to be acquired, atFd (iv) a current Litigation Guarantee Report; i C. Enter into an agreement with the City, guaranteed by such cash deposits or other security as the City may require, pursuant to which the subdivider will pay all of the City's cost (jUcluding, without limitation, attorney's fees and overhead expenses) of acquiring such an interest in the land. 58. That a private recreational area shall be provided in the location shown on the tentative, map. The private recreation area shall include a recreation building with a 1,000 sq.ft. meeting room, a 20 by 40 foot pool, a 12 -14 person sized jacuzzi, a 2,500 square foot fenced tot lot with equipment and sand base, and a picnic area with two 6' aluminum picnic tables, a double size family grill and two permanent 22 gallon litter receptacles,a full court basketball area, a parking lot for 10 cars and landscaped grassy area. Security lighting shall be provided. In the event that final pad sizes are less than a 5000 square foot minimum, the project will return to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their review of the need for a second tot lot and picnic area in the Fordham cluster of 37 homes. Prior to the issuance of a zone clearance for the project, specifications for play equipment in the tot lots shall be submitted to the Parks and Recreation Commission for review and approval. 59. That a licensed security guard or fencing of the construction area be provided during the construction phase. 60. That for the purpose of providing security for the homeowners, the use of perimeter fencing be evaluated by the Director of Planning and the Sheriff's Department and an administrative determination be made as to whether to require perimeter fencing. This determination shall be made in writing by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of building permits. 61. That no certificate of occupancy be granted for the 37 unit cluster at the southerly portion of the site until the signalization and intersection improvements at Princeton and SR 118 are installed. If the signal is not installed by June 19878, the City Council may waive the requirement.