Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2002 0918 CC REGResolution No. 2002 -2001 Ordinance No. 286 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2002 6:30 P.M. Moorpark Community Center 799 Moorpark Avenue 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. INVOCATION: Pastor Tony Amatangelo, Life Spring Community Church 3. ROLL CALL: ` 4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: (Part of Opening Ceremony for Senior Games, Item 5.A.) 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS: A. Opening Ceremony for Senior Games. B. Recognize Country Days Logo Contest Winner - Emily Sarpolus. C. City Manager's Monthly Report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Any member of the public may address the Council during the Public Comments portion of the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or a Presentation /Action /Discussion item. Speakers who wish to address the Council concerning a Public Hearing or Presentations /Action /Discussion item must do so during the Public Hearing or Presentations /Action /Discussion portion of the Agenda for that item. Speaker cards must be received by the City Clerk for Public Comment prior to the beginning of the Public Comments portion of the meeting and for Presentation /Action /Discussion items prior to the beginning of the first item of the Presentation /Action /Discussion portion of the Agenda. Speaker Cards for a Public Hearing must be received prior to the beginning of the Public Hearing. A limitation of three minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Comment and Presentation /Action /Discussion item speaker. A limitation of three to five minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Hearing item speaker. Written Statement Cards may be submitted in lieu of speaking orally for open Public Hearings and Presentation /Action /Discussion items. Copies of each item of business on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public review. Any questions concerning any agenda item may be directed to the City Clerk at 517 -6223. City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 2 6. PUBLIC COMMENT: (AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, THE COUNCIL WILL CONVENE THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY) 7. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: (Pursuant to Council Rules of Procedure Section 2.9, Items to be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar shall be identified at this time.) 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Consider Amending Fiscal Year 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan of Ventura County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fiscal Year 2000 -2005 Consolidated Plan to Include Theater on High Project; Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 2002- to Apply for Section 108 Loan for Theater on High Project for $500,000 from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Furnishings, Fixtures and Equipment (FF &E) for the Theater at 45 East High Street and for the Acquisition of 11 -17 East High Street; and Consider Approving Agreement Between City of Moorpark and Janss IV Recreation for Theater on High Project. (Continued with public hearing open from September 4, 2002 meeting.) Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. B. Consider Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04, an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code Related to Lighting Regulations. (Continued with public hearing open from August 21, 2002 meeting.) Staff Recommendation: 1) Continue with the open public hearing and accept additional public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2002- f adopting the Negative Declaration prepared on behalf of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04; 3) Introduce zone change Ordinance No. for first reading. City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 3 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued) C. Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change No. 2002 -03 on the Application of Toll Brothers, Inc. and the City of Moorpark to Amend the Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map, in order to: 1) Align Land Use Designations and Zones with Lot Lines in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928; 2) Allow for a Lot Line Adjustment with an Adjacent Piece of Land for the Development of a Water Tank Site; and 3) Clarify Policy Related to the Separation of Residential Uses from Agricultural Uses. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2002- to adopt the proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element and Map prepared on behalf of General Plan Amendment Case No. 2002 -03; and 3) Introduce zone change Ordinance No. for first reading. D. Consider Minor Modification No. 1 to Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development No. 99 -01 to Modify the Conditions of Approval Pertaining to Drainage Matters. Applicant: TR Partners, LLC. (APN 512 -0 -131 -070). Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2002 - approving Minor Modification No. 1 to Tentative Tract 5181 and Residential Planned Development No. 99 -01. E. Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Testimony to Update the City °s Library Facility Fee and Adopt a Resolution Approving the Revised Library Facility Fee. Staff Recommendation: Open the Public Hearing to receive testimony, close the Public Hearing, adopt Resolution No. 2002- 01 revising the Library Facility Fee as identified in the Agenda Report to be effective 60 days hereafter, which will be November 18, 2002. 10. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider Proposed Sign Program for Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2001 -01 (Moorpark Marketplace - 357,621 Square Foot Commercial Center) Located South of New Los Angeles Avenue, East of Miller Parkway and West of the SR -23 Freeway on the Application of Zelman City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 4 10. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: (Continued) Retail Partners, Inc. (Assessors Parcel Nos. 512 -0- 260 -015, 085 and 105). (Continued from September 4, 2002 meeting.) Staff Recommendation: Approve the Master Sign Program subject to the staff recommended modifications. B. Consider Solid Waste Franchise Agreements, and Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 2001 -1924, Updating Solid Waste Collection Fees for 2003. (Continued from September 4, 2002 meeting.) Staff Recommendation: 1) Approve the City's Franchise Agreements with Moorpark Rubbish Disposal and GI Industries, subject to final language approval by the City Manager and City Attorney; and 2) Adopt attached Resolution No. 2002- updating the Solid Waste Collection Fees effective January 1, 2003. (ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED) C. Consider Ordinance to Amend Municipal Code 12.16, Parks, and Adopt a New Park Reservation Fees and Policies Resolution to Limit the Use of Amplified Sound in City Parks and other Use Revisions. Staff Recommendation: Introduce Ordinance No. for first reading, and adopt Resolution No. 2002- D. Consider Scheduling a Council Workshop to Review and Discuss Design of New Police Services Center. Staff Recommendation: Schedule work session to review concept design recommendations for the Police Services Center for October 9, 2002 at 6:30 p.m. 11. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Consider Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 3, 2002. Staff Recommendation: Approve minutes as processed. B. Consider Reconsideration of Approval of March 6, 2002, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes and Reconsideration of Vote on July 17, 2002. Staff Recommendation: 1) Reconsider approval of July 17, 2002, Regular City Council meeting minutes; 2) Reconsider vote on July 17, 2002; and 3) Adopt the corrected March 6, 2002 minutes. City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 5 11. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued) C. Consider Approval of Warrant Register 2001 -2002 - September 18, 2002. Voided Warrant 109788 110375 Regular Warrants 110527 - 110528 & 110559 - 110565 for Fiscal Year $ (39.58) $ (128, 926.55) $ 25,599.24 $ 105,084.59 Staff Recommendation: Approve the warrant register. D. Consider Approval of Warrant Register for Fiscal Year 2002 -2003 - September 18, 2002. Manual Warrants $ 0.00 Voided Warrants 110451 & 110624 $ (95.00) Payroll Liability 110551 - 110558 $ 13,228.90 Warrants Regular Warrants 110529 - 110549 & $ 40,574.14 110566 - 110619 & $ 11,515.92 110620 - 110640 $520,736.12 Staff Recommendation: Approve the warrant register. E. Consider Adoption of a Policy Resolution Regarding Local Government Involvement in the Adelphia Bankruptcy Proceedings. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002- F. Consider Moorpark Soccer Club (MSC) Use Agreement. Staff Recommendation: Approve five -year use agreement with Moorpark Soccer Club (MSC), as submitted subject to final language approved by City Manager and City Attorney and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. G. Consider Resolution Authorizing Access to Sales and Use Tax Records. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 2002- , updating the list of City positions that are authorized access to confidential sales and use tax records, and rescinding Resolution No. 95 -1108. City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 6 11. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued) H. City of Moorpark General Plan Annual Report including Housing Element Progress Report - September 2001. to August 2002. Staff Recommendation: 1) Receive and file the report; and 2) Direct staff to forward a copy of this report to: Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Department of Housing and Community Development, and County of Ventura Planning Division. I. Consider California Law Enforcement Equipment Program (CLEEP) Expenditures. Staff Recommendation: Approve purchase of listed equipment with CLEEP funds. ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED i. Consider Issues Relating to 323 Casey Road Regardinc Grading, Retaining Walls and Driveway Installation. Staff Recommendation: Receive and file the report. K. A Resolution Designating the Intersection of Millard Street and Roberts Avenue to be a Stop Intersection and Directing the Placement of STOP signs at all Entrances Thereto. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002- 12. ORDINANCES: A. Consider Ordinance No. 284, A Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Moorpark, California, Approving Zone Change No. 2002 -01 to Change the Zoning Designation from CPD (Commercial Planned Development) to RPD -20 DU /AC (Residential Planned Development 20 Dwelling Units /Acre) for a 9.48 Acre Site (Assessor Parcel No. 506 -0- 050 -185 and a Portion of 506- 0 -050- 475) Located on Park Crest Lane at Park Lane, on the Application of USA Properties Fund. Staff Recommendation: Declare Ordinance No. 282 read for the second time and adopted as read. B. Consider Ordinance No. 285, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Moorpark, California, Adopting a Development Agreement between the City of Moorpark and Vintage Crest Senior Apartments, L.P., a California Limited Partnership (USA Properties Fund, Inc.) . Staff Recommendation: Declare Ordinance No. 282 read for the second time and adopted as read. City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 7 13. CLOSED SESSION: A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code: (Number of cases to be discussed - 4) B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to Subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code: (Number of cases to be discussed - 4) C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9) The Environmental Coalition of Ventura County vs. City of Moorpark and City Council of the City of Moorpark (Case No. SCO21825) D. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9) The Environmental Coalition of Ventura County vs. City of Moorpark and City Council of the City of Moorpark (Case No. SCO22256) E. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9) Hidden Creek Ranch, LP, a California Limited Partnership and Messenger Investment Company, Inc., a California Corporation vs. The City of Moorpark and City Council of the City of Moorpark (Case No. SCO23388) F. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: APN 511 -0- 050 -270, Moorpark, CA 93021 Agency Negotiator: Steven Kueny, City Manager Negotiation Parties: The City of Moorpark and Colin Velazquez Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment G. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: APN 511 -0- 050 -080, Moorpark, CA 93021 Agency Negotiator: Steven Kueny, City Manager Negotiation Parties: The City of Moorpark and Monte Louis Abbath Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment City Council Agenda September 18, 2002 Page 8 13. CLOSED SESSION: (Continued) H. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: APN 506 -0- 042 -015, Moorpark, CA 93021 Agency Negotiator: Steven Kueny, City Manager Negotiation Parties: The City of Moorpark and Bert and Placide Curts Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment I. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Title: Assistant City Manager, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk, City Manager, City Attorney, City Engineer, Chief of Police, Administrative Services Director, Community Development Director, Community Services Director, and Public Works Director. J. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) Title: Administrative Services Director 14. ADJOURNMENT: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Department at (805) 517 -6223. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104; ADA Title II). ITEM . crry it1FMOORpARK. C,'ALTFORNTA City r.n1l" 1 Meeting of ;ep�e�nber 15, ��C W631 ! m o ; +• MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council st Anal FROM: Nancy Burns, Senior Management y DATE: September 12, 2002 (CC Meeting of September 18, 2002) SUBJECT: Consider Amending FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan of Ventura County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) FY 2000 -2005 Consolidated Plan to Include Theater on High Project; Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 2002- , to Apply for Section 108 Loan for Theater on High Project for $500,000 from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Furnishings, Fixtures and Equipment (FF &E) for the Theater at 45 East High Street and for the Acquisition of 11 -17 East High Street; and Consider Approving Agreement Between City of Moorpark and Janss IV Recreation for Theater on High Project BACKGROUND The City was asked to consider a request for funding assistance from Janss IV Recreation, owner of the former Moorpark Playhouse, at 45 East High Street. The funds are to be used for furnishings, fixtures, and equipment (FF &E) for the theater and for the acquisition of 11 -17 East High Street. The City was asked to consider authorizing a loan application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a Section 108 loan for $500,000 for this project. DISCUSSION At its September 4, 2002, regular meeting, the City Council was asked to consider amending the FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan of the FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan of the Ventura County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) FY 2000 -2005 Consolidated Plan, in order to include the Theater on High project as a funding priority. An Agreement between the City Honorable City Council Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 2 and Janss IV Recreation, the owner of the theater at 45 East High Street, was not completed at the time of the September 4, 2002, meeting, and Council continued the public hearing on this item to its September 18, 2002, meeting. Council also directed that the matter be referred to the Budget and Finance Committee (Mayor Hunter and Councilmember Wozniak) for review. If the Council approves a Section 108 loan, a Resolution will need to be adopted. A draft of the Resolution as well as a draft Agreement between the theater owner and the City is attached. The Budget and Finance Committee will consider this at a Special Meeting on September 18, 2002. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Attachment Budget and Finance Committee Report from Meeting of 9/18/02 (excluding Draft Agreement Between Janss IV Recreation and the City, provided under separate cover) Attachment Resolution No. 2002 - C 13 3 U21 tS'.y MEMORANDUM TO: Budget and Finance Committee Mayor Hunter and Councilmember Wozniak Burns Senior Management Analyst FROM: Nancy g Y DATE: September 12, 2002 (Special Mtg. of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Theater on High Project (CDBG Section 108 HUD Loan) SUMMARY This project concerns a request for funding assistance from Janss IV Recreation, owner of the former Moorpark Playhouse, at 45 East High Street. The funds are to be used for furnishings, fixtures, and equipment (FF &E) for the theater and for the acquisition of 11- 17 East High Street. The City was asked to consider authorizing a loan application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a Section 108 loan for $500,000 for this project. The loan, authorized in Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, will be repaid by the City from future annual CDBG allocations. The use of CDBG funds as a direct grant, without applying for a Section 108 loan, also is discussed in this report. With or without a Section 108 loan, the funds to the theater owner are a grant. BACKGROUND The former Moorpark Playhouse, dark since Summer 1999, was acquired in 2001 by Janss IV Recreation. The new owner's plans included the rehabilitation and update of the structure, to eliminate code violations and ensure access by disabled persons. Plans were made to re -open the theater as a venue for live theatrical performances and motion picture presentations. An option for four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) was obtained to purchase an adjacent property, at 11 -17 East High Street. This property will provide space for set design, rehearsal, and other support services for the theater. The building also will continue to provide commercial space for small commercial enterprises, such as those currently occupying space in that building. At its September 4, 2002, regular meeting, the City Council was asked to consider amending the FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan of Agenda Reports /B &F/ Committee Report - Theater on High y the Ventura County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) FY 2000 -2005 Consolidated Plan, in order to include the Theater on High project as a funding priority. An Agreement between the City and Janss IV Recreation, the owner of the theater at 45 East High Street, was not completed at the time of the September 4, 2002, meeting, and Council continued the public hearing on this item to its September 18, 2002, meeting. Council also directed that the matter be referred to the Budget and Finance Committee for review. DISCUSSION Since the theater was acquired by Janss IV Recreation for $275,000 in 2001, Larry Janss, owner, has expended approximately $527,770 for architectural studies, engineering reports, and some of the needed repairs. Engineering and architect's reports revealed that needed repairs exceeded budgeted funds. Exhibit "A" shows expenditures to date, and budgeted expenditures. An estimated six hundred eighty -one thousand nine hundred dollars ($681,900) still needs to be spent to allow it to re -open as a theater. In order to complete the needed repairs and re -open the theater, additional funds were requested by the project's owner, in the form of a HUD Section 108 loan for $500,000. This type of loan conforms to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) regulations and is provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for large projects. The Theater on High project is eligible on the basis of addressing a blighted condition in the City's Redevelopment Project Area. Staff has met with the owner and his consultant, representatives from the County, and HUD staff to discuss the project and the City's desire to revitalize its downtown. These meetings have provided the opportunity to identify concerns and answer questions, as the County must take the role of loan applicant, due to the Cooperative Agreement between the City and the County for the CDBG program. Staff believes that Davis -Bacon wage requirements will not be invoked for this project, and continues to work with HUD staff on compliance matters. The City is responsible for loan repayment, and terms will be set forth in an agreement with the County. Repayment of the Section 108 loan will be made from the City's annual allocation of CDBG funds received by the County. The annual payment is estimated to be approximately forty -two thousand dollars ($42,000) per year. Interest is based on treasury note rates. The loan term is 20 years, and could be repaid after ten (10) years, if the City chose to do so. City staff and County staff are developing this agreement. Agenda Reports/B &F/ Committee Report - Theater on High 2 X An Agreement (Exhibit "B ") between the City and Janss IV Recreation has been developed which defines funding terms and stipulates that the theater must be used only for motion picture presentations and live musical and theatrical productions, consistent with the conditions of any City permits. As long as the theater continues to be used as stipulated and no default of the Agreement has occurred, the City will continue to pay the semi - annual loan payment to HUD, from the City's annual CDBG allocation. If the theater ceases to be used as defined, the remainder of the loan will become due and payable by Janss IV Recreation. This will be appropriately secured as a part of the Agreement between the City and Janss. The City of Moorpark participates with certain other cities in the County, and with the County of Ventura, in the Ventura County CDBG Entitlement Area. The Entitlement Area's FY 2000 -2005 Consolidated Plan is a planning document required by HUD which identifies the participating jurisdictions' unmet needs for affordable and supportive housing, community development programs, social service programs and economic development opportunities for low income residents. The Plan also outlines a five -year Strategic Plan to address those needs through specific projects. The FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan is the third year of the five -year period and includes projects to be undertaken during the program year. An amendment to this Annual Plan is needed to add projects mid -year. This matter has been publicly noticed, as required by CDBG regulations, to consider amending the FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan. The public notice references the creation of jobs for low income residents. Subsequent discussions with HUD staff have clarified that project eligibility is more appropriately based on the blighted condition of the immediate neighborhood, and the desire to improve that area. Staff anticipates the project will create jobs that may be filled by low income residents, but project eligibility will not be based on that. The Section 108 loan request requires an application from the County to HUD, on behalf of the City, with repayment to HUD made by the City from future CDBG allocations. As such, it is a loan of $500,000 to the City, which the City would, in turn, grant to the theater owner. As an option, CDBG funds previously allocated for other purposes could be re- allocated to this project if the City deemed it a priority, and amended the Annual Plan to reflect this. This would eliminate the need for obtaining a Section 108 loan. A noticed public hearing would be required to consider a reallocation of CDBG funds. Agenda Reports /B &F/ Committee Report - Theater on High C'�)` 005 The following reflects current CDBG allocations and estimates of funds, if the Council wants to use existing CDBG funds: Project Existing Funding Projected Balances Comments Affordable Housing $49,710 $49,710 Affordable Housing (6479 -B Penn) 0 $230,000 Net to City, if property was sold Street Lights (Downtown Residential) $146,876 $95,000 Assumes project continues at estimated cost Public Park $143,400 $143,400 No action to date Code Enforcement $21,567 0 Boys & Girls Roof Repair (Teen Ctr.) $20,000 0 Administration $36,694 $10,000 RAIN Facility Rehab $5,000 0 Catholic Charities $10,920 0 Senior Nutrition $13,519 0 Senior Center Operations $13,563 0 Senior Survivalmobile $1,000 $900 Fair Housing $2,000 0 TOTALS $464,249 $529,010, STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. That the City Council amend the FY 2002 -2003 Annual Action Plan to include Theater on High Project; and 2. Provide recommendation to City Council for funding Theater on High Project by methods such as the following: A. Section 108 loan; B. Public hearing to consider re- allocation of CDBG funds; or C. Alternative funding source as grant or loan or some combination thereof. Exhibit "A" Theater on High: Investment and Construction Cost Exhibit "B" Agreement Between City of Moorpark and Janss IV Recreation cc: Honorable City Council Steven Kueny, City Manager Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager Agenda Reports /B &F/ Committee Report - Theater on High \y 130(o G THEATER ON HIGH INVESTMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COST Exhibit A _� -,J V E 27- Aug -02 Description of Work Budget Change Orders Adjusted Budget Actual Cost to Date Variance Percentage of Completion Dec -01 Jan -02 Feb -02 Mar-02 Apr -02 May -02 Jun -02 Jul -02 Aug-02 Sep -02 Oct -02 Nov -02 Dec -02 Rifait7AL�AF1'1`AL INVESTMENT -- - -- 49-E Hig"trest 275,000.00 V-5,000.6-6-27-50-00.0-0 0 100.00% 275,000.00 - - -- 669tretegies-Stuay 4,000.00 4,000.00 4000_0 6 100.00% 4,000.00 - - - ZaefiricRe­ArcfiitedtsA[A_ 7,110.14 7,1- 10.14- 7_11oA1a o -loo.00% 77,1-1-0 -14- - - -Ll Associates 1,500.00 1,500.00 1500.00 0 100.00% 1,500.00 -- _PHR _�rnironmentai 2,740.00 2,740.00 2740.00 0 100.00% 2,740.00 HIU[NAL CAPITA INVESTMENT 290,350.14 290,350.14 290350.14 290,350.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - -- -AE Mi1ODEiIN C-0 S'f ---------- -- - - - -- --- - - - --- - -- - - - -- - Janss Subcontractors _ _ _ ABC Liquour License__ _ _ 3,600.00 _3,600.00 1000.00 2,6_00.00 27.713% 1,0.00.00_ - - - -- - -- Permits and Fees 7,000.00 7,0_00.00 616.00 6,384.00 8.80 °h 616.00 Behr Browers Architect_ 60,000.00 60,000.00 64,2116.6642M.66 107.03% 9,515.15 5,726.50 23,704.68 11,72.5.14 3,900.20 928_.58 8,716.41 DC Foote & Vinci 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00 0.00% _ - -- - Electrical 3,975.00 3,975.00 0.00 3,975.00 HVAC 2,800.00 2,800.00 0.00 2,800.00 _0.00% 0.00% Plumbing &Sewer -- - -- --- - 5,200.00 - 5,200.00 ---- -- -- 0.00 5,200.00 0.00% - arm Fire Alarm -- -- -- - - - -- 1,200.00 -- -- 1,200.00 -- - 0.00 -1,206-.00 - - -- -- -- - -- - - - - Sewer Fees 7,500.00 _ 7,500.00 0.00 7,500.00 - - -- - - -- -- - -- _ Water Meter Fees 7,000.00 _ _ 7,000.00 0.00 7,000.00 _0.00% 0.00% __ Site Utilities 15,500.00 15,500.00 0.00 15,500_0 0.00 -- - - -- - Mar e e u q_ _ _ 44,000.00 _ -_ 44,000.0_0 23000.00 21,000.00 52.27% - - 1,000.00 2_2,000.00 Pink Cadillac 15,257.00 15,257.00 0.00 15,257.00 0.00% _ _ __ __ Haynco 48,214.67 48,214.67 24107.34 24,107.33 24,107.34 DeClerc 64,440.80 64,440.80 32220.17 32,220.63 _50.00% 50.00% 32,220.17 _ Cinetec 32,466.00 _ 32,466.00 11327.75 21,138.25 34.89_% E, 000.0- 4,290.60 2,037.75 Poster_Cases 3,600.00 3,600.00 0.00 3,660.00 0.00% _ _ _Electronic Creations software 23,588.20 23,586.20 18870.56 4,717.64 60.00% 18,870.56 Telephone Systems 4,50600 4,500.00 0.00 4,500.00 0.00% Demolition- 1,000.00 1,000.00 2105.00 - 1,105.00 _ 210.50% 1,120.00 985.00 Mark Briggs _ 19,000.00 19,000.00 5947.50 13,052.50 3,315.00 780.00 1,852.50 Total Janss Subcontractors 386,241.67 386,241.67 202,830.69 47.49% 5,000.00 616.00 10,515.15 5,726.50 24,704.68 66,557.48 7,702.95 53,871.81 8,716.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Forest _Co_ntru_ction - - 1010 Plans 28,000.00 28,000.00 25882.33 2,117.67 92.44% 7,000.0013,012.00 470.33 5,400.00 _1_040 _Supervision Project Management 16,800.00 750.00 16,800.00 8079.59 8,720.41 340.00 1,060.00 3,335.00 450.00 1,050.00 1,124.59 1051 750.00 0.00 7- 50.00 _4_8.09% 0.00% _720.00 - 1060 Permits 100.00 100.00 1678.96 - 1,578.96 1678.96% 100._00 1,301.46 277.50 116631 Telephone /Supplies 3,500.00 _3,500.00 0.00 3,500.00 0.00% _ _ _ -- - -- 1504 Temp Power 600.00 600.00 0.00 600.00 0.00% _ - 1505 _ Temp Toilet 480.00 _ 480.00 0.00 480.00 0.00% - 15 08 Cleanup /Misc Labor 8,383.00 8,383.00 0.00 8,38100 0.00% _ - 1507 Temporary Fence 750.00 750.00 0.00 750.00 0.00% _ - 2050 Demolition 1-6,89b.001' 6,890.00 16,890.00 13724.78 3,165.22 81.26% 6,655.50 73.9.50 108.00 60.00 6,161.78 2100 Site Preparation 640.00 640.00 3.21 636.79 0.50 °� 3.21 2640 Site Utilities 35,500.00 35,500.00 0.00 35,500.00 0.00% _ - -- - - _� -,J V E THEATER ON HIGH INVESTMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COST Exhibit A (�d �a Description of Work Budget Change Orders Adjusted Budget Actual Cost to Date Variance Percentage of Completion Dec -01 Jan -02 Feb -02 Mar -02 Apr -02 May -02 Jun -02 Jul -02 Aug -02 Sep -02 Oct -02 Nov -02 Dec -02 2740 Site Concrete 15,550.00 15,550.00 120.00 15,430.00 0.77% 120.00 3300 Building Concrete 13,400.00 13,400.00 0.00 13,400.00 0.00% _ 5120 Structural Steel 1,250.00 1,250.00 0.00 1,250.00 0.00% 5500 Misc Metals 7,905.00 7,905.00 0.06 7,905.00 0.00% 6100 Rough Carpentry 39,500.00 39,500.00 0.00 39,50_0.00 0.00_% 6200 Finish Millwork Allowance 5,250.00 5,250.00 0.00 5,250.00 0.00% 72_00 Insulation 14,766.00 14,766.00 0.00 14,766.00 0.00% 7500 Membrane Roofing 4,120.00 4,120.00 0.00 4,120.00 0.00% 7620 Sheet Metal Flashing 750.00 750.00 0.00 750.00 0.00% 8110 -- Doors & Frames & Hardware - -- 13,625.00 13,625.00 0.00 13,625.00 0.00% 8600 Glass & Glazing -- 2,250.00 2,250.00 0.00 2,250.00 0.00% - -- - -- - --..-__..------ 9220 Lath & Plaster 6,000.00 6,000.00 0.00 6,000.00 0.00% 9250 Metal Stud & Drywall 21,250.00 21,250.00 0.00 21,250.00 0.00% 931_0 Ceramic Tile Allowance 12,000.00 12,000.00 0.00 12,000.00 0.00% 9320 Countertop Allowance 1,575.00 1,575.00 0.00 1,575.00 0.00% _ 9680 Flooring Allowance 23,089.00 23,089.00 0.00 23,089.00 0.00% 9900 _ Paint 25,000.00 25,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 0.00% 10465 Supplies 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ Singnage 1,1_50.00 1,150.00 0.00 1,150.00 0.00% _ Toiltet Partitiions 4,030.00 4,030.00 0.00 4,030.00 0.00% Ticket Booth Counter 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00% - 0.00 0.00 0.00 -- - - -- - - - -- -- 10520 - - - -- Fire Exting - &Cabinets - 1,500.00 --T-,566-.66 1 -,500.- 00 0.00 - -- 0.00% - - - - - - - - -- 10810 Toilet Accessories 3,600.00 3,600.00 0.00 3,600.00 0.00% 15300 Fire Sprinklers 10,291.00 10,291.00 0.00 10,291.00 0.00% 15400 Plumbing 50,300.00 50,300.00 265.00 0.53% 265.00 15500 HVAC __ 12,300.00 12,300.00 214.00 _50,035.00 12,086.00 1.74% 214.00 _ 16010 _ _ Electrical 92,942.00 92,942.00 0.00 92,942.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 468,786.00 468,786.00 49967.87 418,818.13 10.66% 14,309.50 15,033.46 1,799.50 4,301.54 5,850.00 1,387.50 7,286.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Over Head and Profit- Sitewor 7,657.50 7,657.50 0.00 7,657.50 0.00% Over Head and Profit-Contract 62,549.40 62,549.40 9989.57 52,559.83 15.97% 2,861.90 3,002.69 359.90 860.31 1,170.00 277.50 1,457.27 70,206.90 70,206.90 9,989.57 60,217.33 14.23% 2,861.90 3,002.69 359.90 860.31 1,170.00 277.50 1,457.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Forest Contract 538,992.90 538,992.90 59,957.44 479,035.46 11.12% 17,171.40 18,036.15 2,159.401 5,161.851 7,020.00 I 1,665.UOI 8,743.64 0.001 0.001 0.00 I 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 Description of Work Budget Change Orders Adjusted Budget Actual Cost to Date Variance Percentage of Completion Dec-01 Jan-02 Feb-02 Mar -02 Apr-02 May -02 Jun-02 Jul -02 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Total Costs for T O H 43.91% (�d �a RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY'S APPLICATION FOR A $500,000 SECTION 108 LOAN FROM THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD), TO BE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE COUNTY OF VENTURA, FOR THE THEATER ON HIGH PROJECT WHEREAS, the City of Moorpark, a municipal corporation, together with certain other cities within the County of Ventura and the County of Ventura constitute the County of Ventura Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Area; and WHEREAS, the City of Moorpark and the County of Ventura have entered into a Cooperation Agreement for the CDBG Program, most recently amended in June 2000, which provides that the County shall assume certain administrative responsibilities from HUD; and WHEREAS, the City of Moorpark has publicly noticed and conducted a public hearing on September 18, 2002, to consider applying for a Section 108 loan from HUD to benefit the Theater on High project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Moorpark shall apply for a Section 108 loan from HUD to benefit the Theater on High project. SECTION 2. 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 18th day of September, 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk ' 0 N Iq ITEM A AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOORPARK AND JANSS IV RECREATION, INC. THIS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOORPARK AND JANSS IV RECREATION, INC. ( "Agreement ") is entered into this day of September, 2002, by and between THE CITY OF MOORPARK, a Municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and JANSS IV RECREATION, INC., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "JANSS IV ", with reference to the following facts: RECITALS: A. JANSS IV is the owner of certain real property improved by a theatre building and commonly known as The Moorpark Playhouse, located at 45 High Street in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California (the "'Moorpark Property "), as more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; B. JANSS IV has certain real property Moorpark ( "High Street property shall be used and musical performances purposes; entered into an agreement to purchase commonly known as 11 -17 High Street, Property ") with the intent that said to assist in the production of theatre at The Moorpark Playhouse and for other C. JANSS IV has requested that the City provide to JANSS IV certain financing to complete the rehabilitation and renovation of The Moorpark Playhouse and to purchase the High Street Property; and D. The City wishes to promote the rehabilitation of the Moorpark Theater and has agreed to provide to JANSS IV a loan to complete the renovation of the Moorpark Playhouse and the purchase of the High Street Property. PROVISIONS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, representations and provisions contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the undersigned do hereby agree as follows: 1. LOAN. The City shall diligently pursue all requirements of the CDBG program necessary for the release of funds for this project. A. Amount principal ($500,000). Of The Loan. The Loan shall be in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars B. Terms of Loan. The Loan will be due in full upon any default identified within this document which is not cured within thirty (30) days of notice, properly delivered to Janss IV. 2. LOAN DOCUMENTS. The Loan will be evidenced by a Promissory Note ( "Note ") , and secured by a first deed of trust on the Moorpark Property and a second deed of trust on the High Street Property (collectively, "the Deeds of Trust "). The Deed of Trust on the Moorpark Property shall be junior to no other. The Deed of Trust on the High Street Property may be junior to a first mortgage loan ( "First Mortgage Loan "), and no other, to be obtained by JANSS IV from a third party lender, in an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ($280,000). The Note and Deeds of Trust are collectively referred to as the "Loan Documents ". The City may record a request for notice of default and any notice of sale under any deed of trust or mortgage with power of sale encumbering either property in the Office of the Recorder of Ventura County. 3. LETTER OF CREDIT. JANSS IV will provide credit enhancement in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit ( "Letter of Credit ") in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) as additional security for the Loan. The Letter of Credit shall be for one year and renewed annually in an amount equal to the then outstanding balance of the Loan for the duration of the Loan. The Letter of Credit may be called by the City at any time upon an event of default by JANSS IV under the Loan Documents or this Agreement with no other obligations or requirements by the City except to notify the issuer that the Loan is in default. JANSS IV may select a recognized financial institution of its choice, reasonably approved by the City, to issue the Letter of Credit. The Letter of Credit shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney for the City. All fees incurred relating to the issuance and renewal of the Letter of Credit shall be paid by Janss IV, or paid from loan proceeds. 4. LENDER'S TITLE INSURANCE. The City shall require a lender's policy of title insurance on both the Moorpark Property and the High Street Property. 5. USE OF LOAN PROCEEDS. JANSS IV agrees that the Loan proceeds shall be used solely for the purchase price of the High Street Property, and for furnishings, fixtures, equipment, building permits, architectural fees and engineering costs regarding The Moorpark Property. 6. PREPAYMENT. No prepayment penalty will be charged to JANSS IV for payment of all or any portion of the unpaid balance prior to the date on which said amount is due. 7. EVENT OF DEFAULT. The Moorpark Playhouse shall be maintained as an operating theatre used for motion picture presentations and live musical and theatrical productions. The entertainment at the theatre shall be in accordance with the conditions of any City permit approval, and shall at no time provide "X" rated or adult movies or other forms of entertainment. Should The Moorpark Theatre cease its operations as a theatre for a period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive days or more (unless said cessation results from any casualty (i.e., fire, flood, earthquake, etc.)), or be found in violation of any City Code or permit by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the City shall provide written notice to JANSS IV of the default of this Agreement. JANSS IV shall have thirty (30) days from the date notice is received from the City to cure the default. In the event JANSS IV does not cure the default within this time period, the City may accelerate the Loan and declare the outstanding balance all due and payable. 8. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION. Janss IV shall obtain fire, hazard (including earthquake) and liability insurance on both the Moorpark Property and the High Street Property and shall maintain insurance coverage as required by City for the life of the Loan. Janss IV shall further indemnify the City and its officers, employees, servants and agents and independent contractors who serve in the role of City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Clerk, Director of Community Development, City Engineer, or City Attorney from any claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense, for any damage whatsoever, to any property and injury to any person resulting from or in any way connected with the properties assisted by this loan. 9. APPLICABLE LAW. This Agreement shall be interpreted under the laws of the State of California. 10. ATTORNEYS' FEES. Should it become necessary for either party to commence legal action to enforce the provisions of this Agreement, then the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to all costs of such attorneys' fees as a court may adjudge reasonable. 11. JOINT PREPARATION. Should interpretation of this Agreement, or any portion thereof, be necessary, it is deemed that this Agreement was prepared by the parties jointly and equally, and shall not be interpreted against either party on the ground that the party prepared the Agreement or caused it to be prepared. 12. VENUE. This Agreement is made, entered into, and executed in Ventura County, California, and any action filed in any court or for arbitration for the interpretation, enforcement or other action of the terms, conditions or covenants referred to herein shall be filed in the applicable court in Ventura County, California. 13. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE in this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of this day of September, 2002. CITY OF MOORPARK: JANSS IV RECREATION, INC.: Steven Kueny, City Manager Larry Janss, President ATTEST: lleborari Ii. 'rrarrensteat, city LlerK MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM q, g,__ CITY Of MOORP: ,kRK, CATJ ORNTA City Council "Meeting of _�eTNemloev- 18, _a &l ACTTO", : r JCS VV TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Dir cto By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Managerj�' DATE: September 5, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04, an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code Related to Lighting Regulations BACKGROUND On August 21, 2002, the City Council opened a public hearing on the proposed lighting ordinance. The City Council continued this hearing to September 18, 2002, asking for review of the proposed ordinance by staff of the Moorpark College Observatory. In addition, the City Council asked for laser light displays to be treated in a similar manner as searchlights. Staff has met with the staff of the Moorpark College Observatory and has made modifications to the proposed ordinance to address laser lights. DISCUSSION Community Development staff met with Hal Jandorf and Jim Somers of the Moorpark College Astronomy Department on August 23, 2002. Messrs. Jandorf and Somers noted that during this Fall 2002 Semester, eleven (11) classes are being held at the Observatory, six (6) nights a week, all with waiting lists. They expressed three (3) concerns regarding potential effects of nighttime lighting on the observatory: • That no drop -down lenses be permitted; • That construction lighting be shielded; and • That temporary sale or special event lighting not be exempt from the regulations. These three concerns are addressed below: C 3 0 01 9 Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 2 Use of Drop -Down Lenses The current code prohibits the use of drop -down lenses. The proposed ordinance would allow such lenses where the lenses are clear, non - diffusing, and the lamp is fully recessed in the fixture. The concern of Messrs. Jandorf and Somers is that any drop -down lens would spread the light above the horizontal plane. They felt this was the most important issue for night sky observing. Community Development staff included limited use of drop -down lenses in the proposed ordinance to allow greater flexibility in the choice of lighting, as was approved for use at the Moorpark Marketplace. The lenses on the light fixture for that project have a two -inch drop as a decorative feature of the fixture. Recommendation: The decision on the regulation of drop -down lenses involves tradeoffs between sky glow effects and flexibility in lighting fixture design. Many period and other decorative light fixtures include drop -down lenses, involving some degree of refraction of light upward, even with clear lenses. No change to the proposed ordinance amendment is recommended. However, should the City Council wish to maintain the current prohibition of drop -down lenses, proposed Section 17.30.050(F) should be amended to read "Drop down lenses." Construction Lighting The City's Municipal Code restricts construction to the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Saturday. Much of the nighttime construction that causes nuisance light spillover comes from activities outside the jurisdiction of the Zoning Ordinance such as nighttime freeway work. Recommendation: The current restrictions on construction work hours are sufficient to address this issue. Temporary Sale and Special Event Lighting The current code exempts temporary lighting from regulation, provided it is permitted through the issuance of appropriate permits. Messrs. Jandorf and Somers noted that classes are held at the observatory six days a week, and could even be affected by temporary lighting spillover. Recommendation: The Community Development Director has the authority to issue Temporary Special Use Permits. Lighting could be considered through the existing permitting process. S: \Community Development \Z 0 A \2002 \04 \Staff Reports \CC 020918 ZOA 2002 -04 Rpt.doc Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 3 The attached ordinance has been amended to incorporate Council's comments regarding laser lighting, otherwise the recommended ordinance is the same as previously presented at the August 21, 2002 City Council meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Continue with the open public hearing and accept additional public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2002- adopting the Negative Declaration prepared on behalf of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04. 3. Introduce Zoning Ordinance No. for first reading. Attachments: 1. City Council staff report, dated August 21, 2002 (without attachments). 2. Negative Declaration /Initial Study. 3. Draft Ordinance Amending Section 17.30 of the Moorpark Zoning Code. S: \Community Development \Z 0 A \2002 \04 \Staff Reports \CC 020918 ZOA 2002 -04 Rpt.doc MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Direct By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager DATE: August 1, 2002 (CC Meeting of August 21, 2002) SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04 Consider an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code Related to Lighting Regulations SUMb4ARY A draft resolution is attached for City Council consideration to adopt a Negative Declaration for proposed amendments to the lighting regulations contained in Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. A draft ordinance is attached for City Council consideration to amend Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. These are included in this report as Attachments 1 and 2. On March 20, 2002, the City Council adopted a resolution to approve the Moorpark Marketplace shopping center project at the southeast corner of New Los Angeles Avenue and Miller Parkway. In this resolution, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to initiate a study of lighting regulation amendments in Chapter 17.30 of the Zoning Ordinance and /or in the Carlsberg Specific Plan. Amendments to the Carlsberg Specific Plan lighting regulations were adopted by the City Council on May 15, 2002. This report provides the recommendations of the Planning Commission on potential changes to the Lighting Regulations in the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission discussed potential changes to these regulations at a public workshop on May 28, 2002 and at a public hearing on July 22, 2002. The staff report to the Planning Commission is included in this report as Attachment 3. A Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending to the City Council approval of amendments to the lighting regulations is included in this report as Attachment 4. CC ATTACHMENT 1 �• .. .. .. k'..... :,mac Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Meeting Page No. 2 Minor additional changes to the proposed ordinance have been added by staff after the Planning Commission hearing. These changes include requirements to place light poles in planters in parking lots, and for concrete light pole pedestals to be decorative when over six inched in height. DISCUSSION The intent of Moorpark's lighting regulations is to avoid: 1. nuisance impacts on abutting properties; 2. excessive glow in the night sky; and 3. wasteful use of energy resources. The development standards that address these goals should be understandable, measurable, and enforceable. In the case of lighting, some of the desirable results of the regulations cannot be easily measured, but rather rely on professional judgment. In such cases, guidelines can be used instead of standards. Changes to the City's lighting regulations recommended by the Planning Commission and staff include revised definitions, development standards, and guidelines. The Planning Commission discussed five main topic areas related to lighting regulations, including lighting values (brightness), types of lighting, energy efficiency, the use of drop -down lenses, and pole height. Summaries of the recommendations of the Planning Commission are as follows: Lighting Values: The Planning Commission discussed the limits of lighting modeling and the application of the current 7.0 maximum foot - candle standard for parking lots. The recommendations are to: 1. Keep the current 7.0 foot - candle maximum for parking lot lighting as a standard, but that it apply to "maintained" lighting (expected lighting when the lamp has reached half its expected life). 2. Require that 95% of the grid points on the photometric plan for maintained lighting be at or below this 7.0 foot - candle level. 3. Limit field verification to ensuring that the lighting is installed according to approved lighting plans. Testing with a light meter would be reserved for code enforcement activities. S: \Community Development \Z O A \2002 \04 \Staff Reports \CC 020821 ZOA 2002 -04 Rpt.doc C 30 caJ Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Meeting Page No. 3 Types of Lighting: The Planning Commission discussed the color of the different lamps available, and the use of searchlights and laser lights for commercial advertising. The recommendations are to: 1. Adopt a new guideline that the lighting color ne appropriate for the architecture of the building and surrounding area. 2. Permit the use of low - pressure sodium lighting, subject to the above guideline. 3. Prohibit the ongoing use of searchlights for commercial advertising, but allow them for temporary events, such as grand openings. 4. Prohibit laser lights aimed skyward. Energy Efficiency: The Planning Commission discussed current draft State energy efficiency standards that if adopted would take effect in 2005. The recommendations are to: 1. Replace the existing energy efficiency standard with a measurable standard that lamps over 100 watts have an efficiency of 60 lumens per watt, consistent with draft standards from the State Energy Commission. 2. Replace the existing standard to reduce lighting during the late night with one calling for a drop in energy use of 50% after midnight, consistent with draft standards from the State Energy Commission. Use of Drop -Down Lenses_: The Planning Commission recommended to permit drop -down lenses when the lamps are fully recessed in the fixtures and the lenses are clear. Pole Height: The Planning Commission discussed appropriate pole heights for limiting the number of poles needed in a parking area while minimizing the spread of the light into residential areas. The recommendations are to: . 1. Allow pole heights of up to 25 feet in all commercial, industrial, and institutional zones, except within 100 feet of residential zones where a maximum of 20 feet should be permitted. 2. Allow pole heights up to 20 feet on multi- family projects in the RPD Zone, subject to review as part of the RPD permit. 3. Maintain the 14 -foot maximum height limit in all other residential zones. S: \Community Development \Z 0 A \2002 \04 \Staff Reports \CC 020821 ZOA 2002 -04 Rpt.doc Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Meeting Page No. 4 The Planning Commission also discussed and recommended amendments to the definitions, standards, and guidelines. Definitions that are not used in the regulations would be removed, and definitions for correlated color temperature, initial lighting values, and maintained lighting values would be added. The definitions of lamp and luminaire would be clarified. The regulations would be reorganized to include a distinction between measurable standards and guidelines that require professional judgment. The attached draft ordinance (Attachment 2) includes the complete recommendations of the Planning Commission and staff. Public Notification The public hearing before the City Council was noticed with a 1/8- page publication in the Moorpark Star on August 9, 2002, in accordance with Sections 65854 and 65090 of the Government Code. Environmental Documentation An Initial Study was prepared for the proposed amendments. No substantial evidence was found that the project would have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration was prepared and published for public review in the Moorpark Star. The public review period extended from July 12, 2002 to August 1, 2002. No comments were received on the Negative Declaration. A copy of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration are included in this report as Attachment 5. STAFF RECO14MENDATION 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2002- to adopt the Negative Declaration prepared on behalf of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04; and 3. Introduce Ordinance No. for first reading approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04. Schedule second reading and adoption for September 4, 2002. Attachments: 1. Draft City Council Resolution to Adopt Negative Declaration Prepared on behalf of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Case No. 2002 -04. 2. Draft City of Moorpark Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. 3. Report to the Planning Commission dated July 16, 2002. S: \Community Development \Z 0 A \2002 \04 \Staff Reports \CC 020821 ZOA 2002 -04 Rpt.doc Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Meeting Page No. 5 4. Planning Commission Resolution PC 2002 -427 recommending to the City Council Approval of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. 5. Negative Declaration and Initial Study S: \Community Development \Z O A \2002 \04 \Staff Reports \CC 020821 ZOA 2002 -04 Rpt.doc t. .. +A u ",r�`E MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 517 -6200 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: The City of Moorpark, after having conducted an Initial Study, has prepared a Negative Declaration for the following project: Amendments to Lighting Regulations contained in Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code The project is located at: Moorpark. Ventura County The proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study are forwarded to you for possible comments relating to your area of interest. All documents referenced therein are available for review during normal business hours in the Community Development office, City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, 93021. Information on public hearings or meetings for the proposed project can be obtained from the Community Development Department at (805) 517 -6200. Written comments should be directed to: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6281 Written comments will be accepted in the Community Development Department office for a period of twenty (20) days after publication of this notice. Public Notice Published: July 12, 2002 Negative Declaration Comment Period: July 12, 2002 to August 1. 2002 Ventura County Clerk CC ATTACHMENT 2 C 3 t PATRICK HUNTER ROSEANN MIKOS CLINT HARPER KEITH F MILLHOUSE JOHN E+WOZMAK NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6200 The following Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Procedures of the City of Moorpark. Public Review Period: July 12, 2002 - August 1, 2002 Project Title /Case No.: Amendments to Lighting Regulations in Moorpark Municipal Code Project Location: Project Description: Project Type: Moorpark, Ventura County Minor amendments to Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code related to lighting regulations addressing lighting values, pole heights, types of permitted and prohibited lamps and luminaires, and energy efficiency. Private Project X Public Project Project Applicant: City of Moorpark Finding: After preparing an Initial Study for the above - referenced project, it is found that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City of Moorpark, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (Initial Study Attached) Responsible Agencies: None. Trustee Agencies: None. Attachments: Initial Study Contact Person: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California, 93021 (805) 517 -6281 SACommunity Development\Z O A 12002- 041Environmental\Proposed ND ZOA 2002- 04.doc �•+ � QA> iii Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6200 Project Title: Amendments to Lighting Regulations Case No.: ZOA 2002 -04 Contact Person and Phone No.: David A. Bobardt (805) 517 -6281 Name of Applicant: City of Moorpark Address and Phone No.: 799 Moorpark Ave, Moorpark, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6281 Project Location: Citywide General Plan Designation: n/a Zoning: n/a Project Description: Minor amendments to Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code related to lighting regulations addressing lighting values, pole heights, types of permitted and prohibited lamps and luminaires, and energy efficiency. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: n/a North: South: East: West: Responsible and Trustee Agencies: None. 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 Si nificant Impact "or Potentially Significant Unless Mtigated, "as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology /Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use /Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population /Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance X None DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Prepared by: /// • 7 Reviewed by. Date: (r oCo? Date: .r , Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact A. AESTHETICS — Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X 2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but X not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 3) Substantially degrade the eAsting visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? 4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Response: The revisions to the lighting ordinance include standards to avoid light and glare spillover from a project site. Increased light pole heights would be permitted, along with restricted use of drop -down lenses, however, cutoff of light emission at or above the horizontal plane located at the bottom of the light fixture would be required, thus avoiding adverse light or glare impacts. - Sources: Outdoor Lighting Code Handbook, Version 1.13, January 2002, International Dark -Sky Association; Mitigation: None required. B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, the City of Moorpark may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of statewide Importance (Farmland), as shows on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources agency, to non - agricultural use? 2) Conflict with eAsting zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? 3) Involve other changes in the e)isting environment which, X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? Response: This ordinance does not affect agricultural resources. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. C. AIR QUALITY — Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: 1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? 2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X substantially to an eAsting or projected air quality violation? 2 w,Y'�v 3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 4) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 5) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact x X X Response: By limiting the maximum amount of outdoor lighting, this ordinance has the potential to reduce energy consumption, along with related emissions. No adverse air quality impact is expected. Sources: nla Mitigation: None required. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or x through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or bythe California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 2) Have a substantial adverse elect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or bythe California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? 3) Have a substantial adverse elect on federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? 4) Interfere substantiallywith the movement of any native X 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? 5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation Ian? Response: This ordinance does not affect biological resources Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. 3 Q FTe '!- Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact E. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project: 1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifcance of X a historic resource as defined in §15064.5? 2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 3) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? 4) Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Response: This ordinance does not affect cultural resources. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project: 1) E )pose 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 Nquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismio- related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? 2) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 3) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project. and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 4) Be located on a )passive soil, as defined in Table 1 8-1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Response: This ordinance does not affect geology or soils Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. In X X X X X X X X Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS — Would the project: 1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 3) Emit hazardous emission or handle hazardous or acutely X hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 4) Be located on a site which is included on a list of X 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? 5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X 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? 6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 7) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 8) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Response: This ordinance does not affect hazards or hazardous materials Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. 1 vrtVLVV T rarvv YYAI CK WILIALl1 Y — woulo the project: 1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.. the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner Mich would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or of -site? 5 X X X Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Less Than With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impact 4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? 5) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X 7) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other food hazard delineation map? 8) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which X would impede or redirect food flows? 9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving fooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 10) Inundation byseiche, tsunami, or mudtow? X Response: This ordinance does not affect hydrology or water quality Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project: 1) Physically divide an established community? X 2) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specifc plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 3) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Response: This ordinance would modify existing lighting regulations contained in the Municipal Code, however, the revised standards are consistent with the stated purpose and intent of these regulations, to avoid impacts on astronomical resources and abutting properties, and to avoid the wasteful use of energy. This ordinance is consistent with Goal 8 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, 'Provide for new commercial development which is compatible with surrounding land uses" and Policy 8.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, "Commercial development shall incorporate design features such as walls, landscaping and setbacks, and include height and lighting restrictions so as to minimize adverse impacts to adjacent uses and enhance the visual characteristics of the area." The ordinance would prohibit light and glare spillover, thus implementing this general plan policy. Sources: City of Moorpark General Plan, City of Moorpark Zoning Ordinance Mitigation: None required. 0 Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact J. MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the project: 1) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? ' 2) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Response: This ordinance does not affect mineral resources. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. F.. rwrac — vvuuw uie project result In: 1) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 2) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? 3) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 4) A substantial temporaryor periodic increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X 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? 6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Response: This ordinance has no potential to create noise impacts. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. L. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: 1) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly ( for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly ( for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 2) Displace substantial numbers ofepsting housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Response: This ordinance does not affect population and housing Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. M. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perbrmance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Response: This ordinance does not change the maximum lighting levels currently established. These levels allow sufficient light for security and do not prevent a project from meeting recommended average maintained foot- candle levels of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America ( IESNA). Sources: GE Lighting Systems Technical Data 9030, Dec. 1995: Illumination Recommendations - Outdoor (extracted from IESNA Lighting Handbook) Mitigation: None required. N. RECREATION 1) Would the project increase the use ofebsting X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 2) Does the project include recreational facilities or require X the construction or wpansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the Response: This ordinance exempts sports fields from the outdoor lighting standards, recognizing that such special uses require unique lighting design. No effect on recreational resources is expected. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. 8-`,) F X X X X X Response: This ordinance does not change the maximum lighting levels currently established. These levels allow sufficient light for security and do not prevent a project from meeting recommended average maintained foot- candle levels of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America ( IESNA). Sources: GE Lighting Systems Technical Data 9030, Dec. 1995: Illumination Recommendations - Outdoor (extracted from IESNA Lighting Handbook) Mitigation: None required. N. RECREATION 1) Would the project increase the use ofebsting X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 2) Does the project include recreational facilities or require X the construction or wpansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the Response: This ordinance exempts sports fields from the outdoor lighting standards, recognizing that such special uses require unique lighting design. No effect on recreational resources is expected. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. 8-`,) F Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the project: 1) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation X 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 capacityratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 2) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 4) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or Incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 5) Result in inadequate emergency access? 6) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 7) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, biavde racks)? X X X X X Response: Recommended maximum lighting levels are sufficient for traffic safety, and will prevent glare to motorists. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SY5TEM5 — would the project: 1) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 2) Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 3) Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 4) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 5) Result in a determination bythe wastewater treatment X provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? 6) Be served by the landfill with sufficient permitted capacity X to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Lighting Regulations ZOA 2002 -04 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 7) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Response: This ordinance will not affect water supplies, wastewater, or solid waste. Sources: n/a Mitigation: None required. Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of 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? 2) Does the project have impacts that are individuallylimited, X but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental efect of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the efects of other current projects, and effects of probable future projects)? 3) Does the project have environmental efects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Response: This ordinance is limited in scope to amending lighting regulations. Sources: n/a Earlier Environmental Documents Used in the Preparation of this Initial Study None Additional Project References Used to Prepare This Initial Study One or more of the following references were incorporated into the Initial Study by reference, and are available for review in the Community Development Office, City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021. Items used are referred to by number in the Response Section of the Initial Study Checklist. 1. The City of Moorpark's General Plan, as amended. 2. The Moorpark Municipal Code, as amended. 3. The City of Moorpark Procedures for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines adopted by Resolution No. 92 -872 4. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. & California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section 15000 et. seq. 5. Draft changes to Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code (Lighting Regulations). 10 NEGATIVE DECLARATION RESPONSE TO COMMENTS CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6200 1. CASE NUMBER: ZOA 2002 -04 2. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: _ July 12 2002 to August 1. 2002 3. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS: There were no comments received during the Negative Declaration public review period. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 17.30 OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO LIGHTING REGULATIONS WHEREAS, on March 20, 2002, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to study, set a public hearing, and provide a recommendation pertaining to amendments to the Zoning Code related to lighting regulations; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan includes policies for lighting restrictions in commercial and industrial development to minimize adverse impacts on adjacent uses (Policies 8.2 and 10.2); and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public workshop on the lighting regulations contained in Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2002, the Planning Commission after holding a duly noticed public hearing adopted Resolution PC- 2002 -427 recommending that the City Council approve an Ordinance to amend the Lighting Regulations in the Moorpark Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the Planning Commission recommendation and all comments received on the proposed amendments to the lighting regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council on August 21 and September 18, 2002, conducted a public hearing, took public testimony, closed the hearing, and reached its decision; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after having considered the Proposed Negative Declaration and comments received on the Negative Declaration for the lighting regulation amendments, adopted Resolution No. 2002- J, finding no substantial evidence that the amendments would have a significant effect on the environment and that the Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. CC ATTACHMENT 3 s,. ,� Ordinance No. Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 17.30, "Lighting Regulations" of Title 17, Zoning, of the Municipal Code of the City of Moorpark is hereby revised in its entirety as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. 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 3. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. SECTION 4. 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 records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published once in the Moorpark Star a newspaper of general circulation, as defined in Section 6008 of the Government Code, for the City of Moorpark, and which is hereby designated for that purpose. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk Exhibit A: Amendments to Chapter 17.30 (Underline /Strikeout) S: \Community Development \Z 0 A \2002 \04 \Ordinances and Resolutions \CC 020918 Chapter 17.30 Ordinance.doc Chapter 17.30 LIGHTING REGULATIONS Sections: 17.30.010 Purpose and intent. 17.30.020 Definitions. 17.30.030 Applicability. 17.30.040 General requirements. 17.30.050 Prohibited lighting. 17.30.060 Plans required. 17.30.065 Design standards 17.30.070 Design guidelines. 17.30.080 Certification/testing. 17.30.090 Exemptions. 17.30.100 Violation -- Penalties. 17.30.110 Nonconforming systems. Section 17.30.010 Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to provide regulation of lighting systems constructed on properties within the various zones in the city. The city recognizes that lighting has both a practical and aesthetic value and is an integral portion of any development. The city also recognizes that improperly installed lighting, illegal lighting, or improperly maintained lighting, creates impacts upon astronomical resources within the community and creates conflicts and nuisance impacts upon abutting properties and is wasteful of energy resources by causing energy to be expended without producing additional useful light. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.020 Definitions. Words and terms as used in this chapter shall have the meanings set forth in this section. Words or terms not defined herein shall have the generally accepted meaning as defined elsewhere within this title. "Correlated color temperature" is the temperature, measured in Kelvin (k), to which one would have to heat a "black body" source to produce light of similar spectral characteristics as specified by the lamp manufacturer or if not specified in accordance with the CIE 1960 standard. Low color temperature implies warmer (more yellow /red) light while high color temperature implies a colder (more blue) light. "Drop down lens" means a light directing diffuser or lens which is shaped so that it lays or falls below the horizontal plane of the bottom of the fixture, thus, - � * the lens from .,1 eve the her-;. a ftt.,1 plane. "Glare" means the effect produced by lighting sufficient to cause annoyance, discomfort, or loss in visual performance and visibility. For the purposes of this chapter, glare occurs when the ithflinaife (^" asseeiated lens` of a li& fi*tufe a lamp is directly viewable from a location off the property that it serves. "Human scale" means the proportional relationship of a particular building, structure, or streetscape element to human form and function. "Initial lighting values" refer to the lumens or foot - candles predicted or measured from a lamp or lighting system at initial installation. EXHIBIT A Lamp" means the light- producing element or light source of a ligl-A fix4tife luminaire. Examples are bulbs and tubes. than one thousand (1,000) ItHnens per- fixvar-e is undesiffi le. Seeendai=y lufniiiairv. Fe. the p e of Ns ,.hapte f n aiffids ng lens between the bulb and the viewer- is not eensidered an ebsti=uefien to the difeet view of a sifigle lufninaife an center " eeeadafy l " Luminaire" is the complete lighting unit, often referred to as a light fixture. It consists of the lamp, optical reflector and housing, and electrical components for safely starting and operating the lamp. "Maintained lighting values" refer to the lumens or foot - candles predicted or measured from a lamp or lighting system at the mid -life of the lamp, and shall account for the expected drop in lumen output from the lamp, as well as normal dust on the lens of the luminaire. . "Spillover" occurs when the illumination intensity outside the property boundaries exceeds one (1) foot - candle. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.030 Applicability. The regulations contained within this chapter shall apply in all zones and specific plan areas within the city. These regulations sha4l apply to all speeifie plan areas and are intended to augment lighting standards and regulations ee.. ai ea -.,ithi, .,,,.. in adopted specific plans. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.040 General requirements. A. Lighting permitted shall be limited to those levels necessary to provide safety and security to the site. B. Use of low intensity lighting for aesthetic purposes in order to enhance or accent building features, public art, or landscape architectural features of a project is encouraged. Such lighting shall not spill over onto, or extend beyond the property -line or into adjacent public right - of -way. C. All lighting systems shall meet adopted uniform codes and standards of the city. D. All lighting system components shall be kept in good repair and service. Periodic cleaning, painting and servicing of supports, globes, fixtures and foundations is required. Poor maintenance shall be considered a public nuisance. E A JI lighti ftg a e.,4.. shall be deeer-e iye .,n shall be n e 1JUL1 b V with 4lL,lt e .,ti,;4e.,4„ .,l style of the bttildiiigs ;d, n the pf'ejeet l.. n4; . (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.050 Prohibited lighting. The following types of lighting shall be prohibited within the city: A. Any outdoor lighting system erected, installed, modified or reconstructed without proper plans and permit approvals; B. Flashing, alternating, e —blinking. or moving lights, other than traffic or hazard lights or those permitted under the sign regulations contained in Chapter 17.40; C. , as an ebsefvater-y, is appr-epfiate to minimize light Lmpaets on the adjaeefA use whieh would otherwise limit the fitnet °„ of the light sensitive land use -Unshielded pack lighting and areawide flood lighting; D. High intensity discharge mercury vapor seeth-it lights (with fix4twe not pr-epeF45 theprepeA-f) in other than rural residential or open space /agricultural area zones; E. elemetA, other- than bar-e bulbs, tube lighting, or- approved neon lighfing Searchlights or laser lights used on an ongoing basis for the purpose of commercial advertising F. Drop down lenses, except where the lenses are clear, non - diffusing, and do not permit viewing of the lamp at or above the horizontal plane located at the bottom of the fixture ;: G. Any lighting that causes glare or spillover as defined by this chapter. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.060 Plans required. All commercial , industrial, and institutional projects with twenty (20) or more parking spaces; and multi - family residential projects of five (5) or more units, except addit; °��, �� °� °a shall have plans for the outdoor lighting system , approved by the city's community development director or designee prior to issuance of building permits for that project. shall eemply with the pr-evisiens ef this ehapter- te the extenA feasible, eensistent with Seefien 17.30.110. Each lighting plan shall ineefpefate eleetfieal plafis end sti=uettlfal plafts w1l detail the provision of lighting systems for exteriors of all buildings, parking lots, loading areas, walkways, public use areas, public art displays, fountains, or landscape areas. Lighting plans shall be prepared, signed and certified by a civil or electrical engineer or other person licensed and/or registered within the state of California to prepare and certify lighting system designs /plans. Lighting plans shall, as a minimum, include and exhibit the following: A. Style, size, height and location of any poles used to support ligWing fixtafes or ele luminaires; B. Style, size, height and location of any foundation systems (i.e. pedestals) upon which light poles may be erected; C. Style, type, location and quantity of fixtures and' of eleetfelie luminaires, whether pole mounted, bollard mounted or building mounted; D. - goer -- and Type, wattage, lumens, and correlated color temperature of i„„,: „„r:°. n,tAbs eIee eh lamps, ° the , ° of 400 inn r °t°. E. Shields, cut -off mechanisms, or diffusers used with each €ixIttre luminaire; F. Construction structural and mounting details for all installations; G. All exterior lighting plans shall be include photo -metric calculations consisting of a point by point foot -candle layout based upon a minimum twenty -five (25) foot grid center aftd extended to twenty -five (2-0 25) feet beyond the property line for both initial lighting values and maintained lightin g values,- H. Lighting plans shall be prepared to scale, and shall be accompanied by dimensioned detail sheets, materials catalogues, and specifications to aid in the identification and evaluation of proposed lighting system components. The application for such lighting plans should be made on the form provided by the community development department. A fee, as established by city council resolution, is required to accompany each application for a lighting plan. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.065 Design standards A. Lamps shall be shielded or recessed within the luminaire to prevent visibility or the emission of light at or above the horizontal plane located at the bottom of the fixture. B. Luminaires shall be directed away from all adjacent properties and streets /rights- of -way to avoid glare and spillover as defined in this chapter. C. Maintained lighting values for outdoor parking areas shall not exceed seven (7) foot - candles on 95% or more of the grid points within the parking area on the photometric plan. D. Light poles shall not exceed 25 -feet in height in all commercial, industrial, and institutional zones, except within 100 feet of residential zones, where the maximum height shall be 20 feet. Light poles in residential zones shall not exceed 14 feet in height except in the RPD zone where light poles for multi - family residences may be up to 20 feet in height if permitted by the City Council. E. All lighting within parking lots shall be located in curbed planters. Concrete pedestals, bases; or foundations for the light pole within the planters over six (6) inches in height shall be decorative. Light poles placed in hardscape areas shall be mounted flush with the surrounding hardscape. F. The following minimum horizontal clearances shall be maintained from light poles and pedestals: 1. From sidewalks: two (2 ) feet. 2. From curb faces, drive aisles, or trash enclosure approaches: three (3 ) feet; 3. From handicap parking spaces or ramps: five 5) feet; G. The following minimum vertical clearances shall be maintained by luminaires and light pole arms: 1. Over driveways /aisles: fourteen (14 ) feet; 2. Over walkways: eight (8 ) feet. H. All lamps over 100 watts shall emit 60 lumens or more of light per watt of electrical power. I. All outdoor lighting systems shall be designed to include an automatic shutoff control with manual override capability to reduce at least fifty percent (50 %) of the energy usage of the system from 12:00 AM until one hour before dalight, unless otherwise approved by the community development director for safety or security reasons. Section 17.30.070 Design guidelines. Comnliance with the following euidelines shall be determined by the community development director: 4.A. Lighting shall be consistent among fixtures used throughout the project so that single fixtures or small groups of fixtures shall not be of unusually high intensity or brightness such that hot spots are created. C 5-.B. All lighting fixtures, including luminaires, poles, and pedestals shall be decorative, compatible with, and appropriate in scale, intensity and height to the architecture and use of the building(s) on the site and in the surrounding area to C. The correlated color temperature of the lamps shall compatible with the architecture and use of the building(s) on the site and in the surrounding area. 6-.D. All walkway lighting, public space lighting, and patio area lighting shall be kept to human scale. Bollard style lighting is preferred. 9. All lighting fixtures shall ineer-pefate ffill euteff feattifes stieh that the himinair- be r-estr-ieted in height a-ad bulk te that fleeessafy te pfevide adequate, safe aneher-age ' . a-Rd fi*ttffes, btA shall in fie ease exeeed the heights speeified iii Seefien 17.30.070D. Aj! eenefete °1°.,. leas or- t„ blend with the 1.,.,. se . hieh they are nstfuet °,1 B. Lighting ti,,, pole height: , 2. CeaHnefeiah twenty (20) feet,* 3. ln&stfial: twenty five (25) feet-, 4. Instit„ti °.,.,1, t... °.,t., (20 feet. G. Lighting Values--. Exterior- ,.v Seven (7) feet eandles tnaxiffium, 2. h4er-ier- „,,,.1,;.,,.., Ten (10) feet -e lPS- mifti�u�i 3. Bitte metal halide euid high pr-esstir-e sediafn eleet-feliefs: fi3uf hundr-ed (400) w 4 F-11 ereseeiA lighting units: ene htmdr-ed (100) wcA49 per- ligh4 fix4ttry Stieh titiAs shall be shielded so theA tubes ef lenses afe not viewable etAside the ifAell ed i-IIIII—Imint-Atted afea. D D °,1°st.,ls D °,1°.,t.,ls used to provide gfeend .., .,ti.,.. f ,,.,d tie s f lig tin poles and fixtufes shall net exeeed si�E (6) inehes in height when plaeed adjaeeal to 1 within f of within pafkiag lets. Ligh4 fix4ttr-es when plaeed ift a hardseape afea shall E. Pole end pedestal eleafanees! 1 . Cttrb faee: thfee i2\ feet; 2 Palk ng S. Dfive aisles! dffee (3) feet; Sh 1, ing /S .-, uds n 11 l;,.l,ti„R fi. t,,. °s shall be d°..;,,.,°.] .,n inst.,ll °,1 � „l, tha4 vniczal' irg7'vravaaa- �'arzrgxxcm�zrrcar ., .,...... ..... ,.... .b.....,. »........,.. »........, ».... ,.. », fle light will be emitted above e hefizental plane. Integral eut eff deviees er- shields aftwef: th-e I -mill MIMM"I" OWN MOMM Section 17.30.080 Certification/testing. Each lighting plan shall meet the standards and guidelines of this chapter and title, as well as those structural and electrical codes adopted by the city which may apply. The applicant's engineer shall prepare and certify that the plan has been prepared in accordance with this chapter eit-y's light' The city's lighting engineer shall review and approve the plans and certify to their compliance with this chapter and any applicable design guidelines. The city's lighting engineer shall sign all zoning clearances necessary to issue building permits for the implementation of the lighting plans. Prior to final inspection, or where applicable, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the city lighting engineer shall cause to be performed a phe -field inspection of the approved lighting system for the project. The inspection shall verify the proper construction and installation of materials within the approved plan, , and determine the extent of any errant lighting. Deviations and/or violations shall be corrected prior to the final clearance for the project. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.090 Exemptions. The criteria of this chapter shall not apply to any of the following: A. One (1) Incandescent bulb of lamps totaling one hundred (100) watts or less or comparable compact fluorescent lamps used in decorative fixtures at entrances /exits of residences in lew .]ensi4y « e si ef4i l a 1 .i, +:.... � ,;de, eh fim -,.e shielded � net to , f B. Low - intensity lighting used for aesthetic purposes in order to enhance or accent building features public art or landscape architectural features, provided that such lighting does not result in glare or spillover as defined by this chapter and is not part of a project for which a lighting plan is required. B C. Athletic field lights within a public parkon or school campus established pursuant to special plans meeting recognized standards for such facilities constructed in accordance with a photometric plan for these facilities. -Neil ewzei4a fix4 ,,.es are a;we,,...,ged, E.D. Navigation beacons, aircraft warning lighting upon towers or similar structures, hazard markers, railroad signals and crossing warning devices; 13:E. Security lighting for prisons, jail facilities, medical facilities or special health care facilities; &F. Traffic control devices; 6 Cf#ry r °!!G -1 ,-, 'a:' '> c1-0 n liG. Seasonal lighting displays used in conjunction with special holidays or religious celebrations so long as the glare is not sufficient to pose safety hazards to pedestrians and motorists, or cause sufficient attraction to result in creation of a nuisance or hazard to vehicular traffic; 6-H. Temporary sale or special event lighting as permitted through the issuance of appropriate permits by the city; HJ. Repair or replacement of individual lighting fixtures exisfing prior- to the provided that the fixture and/or the luminaire repaired or replaced does not exceed the intensity of the original lighting fixture and L.J. Safety or security lighting within single- family residential neighborhoods recommended by police or special security inspections as part of a neighborhood watch program provided such lighting shall not create a nuisance to abutting properties as a result of spillover. To the extent that the prescribed lighting is not diminished in effectiveness, all such lighting shall incorporate motion detectors, photocells or similar devices to activate the special light fixtures, but shall be provided with a manual switching device to override the fixture when necessary. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.100 Violation -- Penalties. It shall be unlawful for any person to install, replace, reconstruct or intensify any lighting system, for which a permit is required, upon any commercial, industrial, institutional or residential property within the city not in compliance with the provisions of this chapter. Any person who violates any provision of, or fails to comply with any requirement of this chapter is guilty of an infraction and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished in accordance with Chapter 1.12 of this code. It shall be the responsibility of each occupant, property owner, home owners' association, tenant association, or property management association having jurisdiction over property to ensure compliance with the intent and provisions of this chapter. Covenants and conditions for any property association shall contain provisions for the design, review, approval and continued maintenance of lighting systems within the boundaries of such association. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) Section 17.30.110 Nonconforming systems. Lighting systems, for which valid permits have been issued, existing upon properties within any zone prior to the effective date of the ordinances codified in this chapter shall be considered legally nonconforming. As such, repair, maintenance, and replacement with like fixtures of these lighting systems shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided for within this chapter. Replacement, repair or reconstruction of twenty -five percent (25 %) or more of the fixtures within an existing legal nonconforming lighting system, as determined by the dir-eeter e€ community development director, shall require that the system be brought into conformity with the provisions of this chapter. Lighting systems within single- family projects found to create a nuisance to abutting residences, adjacent open -space areas, or upon the public right -of -way, shall be corrected in such a manner as to remove the nuisance. Alterations to existing legal nonconforming lighting systems shall not be permitted except for those which result in a lighting system for the property which is more conforming, with these provisions or which reduce the level of nonconformity. Whenever a project site is the subject of a major modification to the approved development plan as defined by this code, the major modification application shall incorporate a revised lighting system plan in order to bring the property into conformance with this chapter. (Ord. 266 § 2 (part), 1999) ITEM q. 0, - -mmunummuft C,TTV OF MOORPARK. C.AT TrORNTA. City Council Mcetinll ACTION :apprL)vej C} k4 �nmmet MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL 4W AGENDA REPORT $Y: TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager Pf DATE: September 4, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change No. 2002 -03 on the Application of Toll Brothers, Inc. and the City of Moorpark to Amend the Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map, in order to: 1) Align Land Use Designations and Zones with Lot Lines in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928; 2) Allow for a Lot Line Adjustment with an Adjacent Piece of Land for the Development of a Water Tank Site; and 3) Clarify Policy Related to the Separation of Residential Uses from Agricultural Uses BACKGROUND In 1996, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and subdivision for the Moorpark Country Club Estates project on the application of Bollinger Development, Inc. At the time, the project included two 18 -hole golf courses and 216 houses. Toll Brothers, Inc. subsequently acquired the project and applied for a modification to the subdivision design, but not to the General Plan or Zoning boundaries. The revised project still proposed 216 houses, with a single 27 -hole golf course instead of two 18 -hole courses. This modification was approved in February 2000, leaving the new lot boundaries inconsistent with the General Plan and Zoning approved in 1996. Toll Brothers, Inc. is now seeking amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Maps to provide consistency between these maps and the approved subdivision. Along with these proposed amendments is a request to amend the General Plan and Zoning designations at the northwest corner of the property to allow for a reclaimed water tank. Finally, at the direction of the City Council, an amendment to the Land Use Element text is proposed to clarify policy on setbacks between agricultural and residential uses, an issue that recently arose on this project. Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 2 On August 26, 2002, the Planning Commission discussed these three potential changes to the General Plan Land Use Element and Map and Zoning Map. The Planning Commission recommended one minor change to the proposed language in Policy 11.2, removing the word "surrounding," and adopted Resolution No. PC- 2002 -429 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment Case No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change Case No. 2002 -03. DISCUSSION Issues associated with the three proposed changes are highlighted below and addressed in detail in the attached Planning Commission staff report. Consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Maps and Approved Subdivision Currently, eighty -four (84) of the 216 residential lots are either partially or completely zoned for Open Space. In addition, about twenty -nine (29) acres of open space are residentially zoned. A change of the General Plan and Zoning Maps to follow the lot lines of the approved subdivision would allow the subdivision to be completed as approved and would result in a net gain of about 6.0 acres of Open Space, coming from the residential and institutional zones. It should be noted that the proposed boundaries take into account a proposed lot line adjustment to allow for three property line fences to be located downslope of the pads, similar to the Council - approved fence location for other lots in the project, to provide a rear yard view. Amendments to General Plan and Zoning Maps for Proposed Reclaimed Water Tank Site The project currently includes a 1.22 -acre site for a reclaimed water tank immediately adjacent to Championship Drive and the clubhouse site, approximately in the center of the project. The applicant is proposing to adjust the lot lines with a neighboring property owner to the northwest ( Husted family) to relocate the tank site to a less - prominent location farther away from Championship Drive. The new location would place the tank in an area only visible from within the Toll and Husted properties. The land exchange involves 2.65 acres on each property and would not change the total acreage of either property. In order to adjust the lot lines, a General Plan Amendment and a Zone Change are needed to place the tank site in an institutional zone. As proposed, the 2.65 acres of land to be transferred to the Husted site would be designated for Rural Exclusive (RE -5) uses, consistent with the rest of the Husted property. Land to be transferred to the Toll Brothers site would be designated for Institutional (1.72 acres) and Open Space (0.93 acres) uses. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \cc 020918 .doc ,fti ?,.Cp�F� Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 3 Combined with the previously described General Plan and Zoning Map amendments that adjust the boundaries to be consistent with the lot lines, the total map changes would add 3.9 acres of Open Space and 0.6 acres of institutional land. Land designated for residential uses would decrease by 4.5 acres. Amendment to Land Use Element to Clarify Policy on Residential /Agricultural Setbacks The goal of the General Plan policy related to residential /agricultural setbacks is to "identify and encourage the preservation of viable agricultural resources in the City and its Area of Interest." (Goal 11) The focus of the goal is on the preservation of commercial agriculture. The following amendments would clarify the intent of the policy: Policy 11.2: When new residential development is adjacent to existing commercial agricultural uses, a 200 -foot minimum width setback shall be provided to minimize compatibility conflicts. No setback is required from ornamental, fruit - bearing, tree groves within a Residential Planned Development (RPD) project when such groves are provided to emulate the character of commercial agriculture, based on a City- approved landscape plan. This modification to the policy would allow for ornamental groves in projects, like the Moorpark Country Club Estates, when they are part of an approved Landscape Plan. It would also continue to further the goal of preservation of existing commercial agriculture. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The public hearing before the City Council was noticed by publication in the Moorpark Star on Friday, September 6, 2002, in accordance with Sections 65854 and 65091 of the Government Code, and notices were sent to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and four Addenda were previously prepared for the approved Toll Brothers subdivision. This existing documentation fully addresses the component of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change related to adjusting the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to match the approved lot lines. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \cc 020918 .doc $1W Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 4 Amended language on the 200 -foot setback between residential and agricultural uses is merely clarifying existing policy and could not result in a physical change in the environment and therefore, does not require any further environmental documentation. The inclusion of the Husted property for the water tank site has not previously been analyzed. The California Environmental Quality Act allows an Addendum to an EIR to be prepared, when the modifications to a project would not require major revisions to the EIR, due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. The decision to prepare an Addendum must be supported by substantial evidence. In this case, grading would be extended less than two (2) acres into an area of disturbed grassland. The tank would only be visible from within the Country Club Estates and Husted properties. No significant impacts from this modification are expected. The application and its exhibits, along with the Planning Commission and City Council staff report, provide sufficient and substantial evidence to constitute a fifth Addendum to the Moorpark Country Club Estates EIR. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2002- to adopt the proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element and Map prepared on behalf of General Plan Amendment Case No. 2002 -03; and 3. Introduce Zoning Ordinance No. for first reading. Attachments: 1. Draft City Council Resolution to Approve General Plan Amendment Case No. 2002 -03. 2. Draft City of Moorpark Ordinance to Approve Zone Change Case No. 2002 -03 3. Report to the Planning Commission from August 26, 2002 meeting. 4. Planning Commission Resolution PC 2002 -429, recommending to the City Council Approval of General Plan Amendment Case No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change Case No. 2002 -03. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \cc 020918 .doc C,11 IfI!r30 .1 v" 1 �'': t RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2002 -03 TO ALIGN LAND -USE ELEMENT MAP DESIGNATIONS WITH APPROVED LOT LINES IN VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4928 (MOORPARK COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES), TO ALLOW FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A WATER TANK SITE, AND TO CLARIFY LAND USE ELEMENT POLICY RELATED TO RESIDENTIAL SETBACKS FROM AGRICULTURAL USES WHEREAS, on April 17, 1996, Resolution No. 96 -1197 was adopted by the City Council, approving General Plan Amendment No. 94 -1 to amend the Land Use Map for the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 2000, Resolution No. 2000 -1694 was adopted by the City Council, approving Minor Modification No. 1 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928, Residential Planned Development No. 94 -1, and Conditional Use Permit No. 94 -1 in order to allow changes to the lot and street layout and amenities associated with the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, Toll Brothers, Incorporated, has requested a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to align the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map boundaries with the approved Moorpark Country Club Estates subdivision and to allow for a reclaimed water tank on an adjacent piece of property; and WHEREAS, on August 21, 2002, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to study, set a public hearing, and provide a recommendation pertaining to amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element on setbacks between residential and agricultural uses; and WHEREAS, after holding a duly noticed Public Hearing on August 26, 2002, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC- 2002 -429 recommending to the City Council approval of amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map; and CC ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - Page 2 WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 18, 2002, the City Council conducted a public hearing, took public testimony, closed the public hearing, and reached its decision; and WHEREAS, the application, exhibits, and Planning Commission staff report have been read, reviewed and considered by the City Council and together provide substantial evidence that proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change No. 2002 -03 will not result in additional significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in environmental effects beyond those already identified in the environmental documentation for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The application, exhibits, and staff report on General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change No. 2002 -03, are adopted as Addendum No. 5 to the Moorpark Country Club Estates EIR. SECTION 2. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP: The General Plan Land Use Map is amended as proposed in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. SECTION 3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT: Policy 11.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element is amended to read as follows: Policy 11.2: When new residential development is adjacent to existing commercial agricultural uses, a 200 -foot minimum width setback shall be provided to minimize compatibility conflicts. No setback is required from ornamental, fruit - bearing tree groves within a Residential Planned Development (RPD) project when such groves are provided to emulate the character of commercial agriculture, based on a City- approved Landscape Plan. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \0rdinances and Resolutions \CC 020918 Reso .doc RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - Page 3 SECTION 4. 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 DAY OF , 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A: General Plan Land Use Element Map Amendment S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \0rdinances and Resolutions \CC 020918 Reso .doc of } ti 11;n l Proposed General Plan Land Use Desrgnatlons - VTTM 4928 OS-2 'QTT12 vxvm MAP Land Use Designation OS -2 Open Space 2 ML Medium Low Residential RL Rural Low Residential PUB Public Institutional ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2002 -03 TO ALIGN ZONE BOUNDARIES WITH LOT LINES IN VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4928 AND TO ALLOW FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A WATER TANK SITE FOR THE MOORPARK COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES WHEREAS, on May 1, 1996, Ordinance No. 215 was adopted by the City Council, approving Zone Change No. 94 -1 to establish zoning classifications for the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 2000, Resolution No. 2000 -1694 was adopted by the City Council, approving Minor Modification No. 1 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928, Residential Planned Development No. 94 -1, and Conditional Use Permit No. 94 -1 in order to allow changes to the lot and street layout and amenities associated with the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, Toll Brothers, Incorporated, has requested a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to align the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map boundaries with the approved Moorpark Country Club Estates subdivision and to allow for a reclaimed water tank on an adjacent piece of property; and WHEREAS, after holding a duly noticed Public Hearing on August 26, 2002, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC- 2002 -429 recommending to the City Council approval of amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 18, 2002, the City Council conducted a public hearing, took public testimony, closed the public hearing and reached its decision; and WHEREAS, On September 18, 2002, the City Council adopted Addendum No. 5 to the Moorpark Country Club Estates Environmental Impact Report for proposed General Plan Amendment 2002 -03 and Zone Change 2002 -03. CC ATTACHMENT 2 € t C; 0 � r", ORDINANCE NO. Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. 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 2. 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 3. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. SECTION 4. 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 records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published once in the Moorpark Star a newspaper of general circulation, as defined in Section 6008 of the Government Code, for the City of Moorpark, and which is hereby designated for that purpose. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A: Zoning Map Amendment S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Ordinances and Resolutions \CC 020918 Ord ZC.doc C , = s OS -500ac t RPD 1.48U Res.Planned Development RE -Sac Residential Exclusive I (j{ 4 no z-� A. F.> a Proposed Zon fng VT7V 49928 L-q j RES -Sac r Proposed LLA RPD 1.48U - 05 -500 Hr v Proposed, LLA OS -500ac OS -500ac I RPD 1.4 8U ' ls'A L OS -500ac RE-Sac ti a y .t•. t WE5TPOINTE PROPERTY i 4 z ci � i Zoning Designation OS -500ac Open Space RPD 1.48U Res.Planned Development RE -Sac Residential Exclusive I Institutional i CITY OF MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Directoe By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager �j DATE: August 22, 2002 (PC Meeting of August 26, 2002) SUBJECT: Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -03 and Zone Change No. 2002 -03 to Amend the Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map, in order to: 1) Align Land Use Designations and Zones with Lot Lines in Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928; 2 ) Allow for a Lot Line Adjustment with an Adjacent Piece of Land for the Development of a Water Tank Site; and 3) Clarify Policy Related to the Separation of Residential Uses from Agricultural Uses BACKGROUND In 1996, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM), Residential Planned Development (RPD), and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Moorpark Country Club Estates project on the application of Bollinger Development, Inc. At the time, the project included two 18 -hole golf courses and 216 houses. The project was subsequently acquired by Toll Brothers, Inc., who applied for a modification to the VTTM, RPD, and CUP. The project still included 216 houses, but involved changes to the grading, amenities, street layout, lot layout and phasing. The City Council approved this modification in February 2000. At that time, no changes were made to the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map, leaving the new lot boundaries inconsistent with the General Plan and Zoning Maps adopted for the project in 1996. Toll Brothers, Inc. is now asking for amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Maps to provide consistency between the land use designations and lot lines of the final recorded subdivision. CC ATTACHMENT 3 Planning Commission Agenda Report GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) August 26, 2002 Page No. 2 Along with these proposed amendments is a request by Toll Brothers to amend the General Plan and Zoning designations at the northwest corner of the property, including adjacent property owned by the Husted family, to allow for a reclaimed water tank in this area. Finally, at the direction of the City Council, an amendment to the language in the Land Use Element is proposed to clarify policy on setbacks between agricultural and residential uses, an issue that recently arose on this project. DISCUSSION Three (3) areas of change are discussed: • Consistency between the General Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Map and Approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map • Amendments to General Plan and Zoning Maps for Proposed Reclaimed Water Tank Site • Amendment to Land Use Element to Clarify Policy on Residential /Agricultural Setbacks Consistency between the General Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Map and Approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map Currently, eighty -four (84) of the 216 residential lots, approved by the modification to the subdivision, RPD, and CUP in February 2000, are either partially or completely zoned for Open Space. In addition, about twenty -nine (29) acres approved for Open Space, are in a residential zone. A change of the General Plan and Zoning Maps to follow the lot lines of the approved subdivision would result in a net gain of about 6.0 acres of Open Space, coming from the residential and institutional zones. These map amendments are recommended by staff to allow the subdivision to be completed as approved and to avoid future zoning issues, when accessory structures such as pools, are proposed. A lot line adjustment is currently being processed to move the rear lot line on three (3) of the residential lots further away from the houses (approximately 19 feet), taking land from a common Open Space lot. This lot line adjustment would allow for property line fences to be located downslope of the pads, similar to the Council - approved fence location for other lots in the project, to provide a rear yard view. To avoid the need for another General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, it is recommended that the new land use boundaries include this proposed lot line adjustment. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \PC 020826 GPA 2002 -03 ZC 2002 -03 Rpt(1).doc C v3; 0__ 5tiw Planning Commission Agenda Report GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) August 26, 2002 Page No. 3 Amendments to General Plan and Zoning Maps for Proposed Reclaimed Water Tank Site The project as approved includes a 1.22 -acre site for a reclaimed water tank immediately adjacent to Championship Drive and the clubhouse site, approximately in the center of the project. The applicant is proposing to adjust the lot lines with a neighboring property owner to the northwest ( Husted family) to relocate the tank site to a less - prominent location farther away from Championship Drive. The lot -line adjustment involves 2.65 acres on each property and would not change the total acreage of either property. In order to adjust the lot lines, a General Plan Amendment and a Zone Change are needed to place the tank in an institutional zone. Attachment No. 2 is a photograph, taken from Championship Drive looking northwest, of the proposed tank site showing the approximate location of the water tank. The 1.5 million - gallon tank, 30 feet high and 93 feet across, would be located in a small bowl between two ridges. Waterworks District No. 1 indicated that the tank would be tan - colored with a flat finish. Dirt would be brought in from other locations on the project site to elevate the bowl about 30 feet for the tank pad. The top of the tank would still be 50 feet below the lowest point on the ridge behind it, and would only be visible from within the Toll Brothers site and the adjacent Husted property. There is an existing project condition which requires landscaping for the tank site subject to the approval of the Community Development Director, to minimize visual impacts of the tank. The 2.65 acres of land to be transferred to the Husted site would be reclassified from Open Space to its current rural exclusive (RE- 5) uses, making it consistent with the rest of the Husted property. Land to be transferred to the Toll Brothers site would be reclassified from rural exclusive residential uses to institutional (1.72 acres) and Open Space (0.93 acres) uses. Combined with the previously described General Plan and Zoning Map amendments that adjust the boundaries to be consistent with the lot lines, the total changes would add 3.9 acres of Open Space and 0.6 acres of institutional land. Land designated for residential uses would decrease by 4.5 acres. Community Development staff believes the new tank location provides for better site design, and recommends approval of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change as proposed. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \PC 020826 GPA 2002 -03 ZC 2002 -03 Rpt(1).doc C C­11 131 10 Planning Commission Agenda Report GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) August 26, 2002 Page No. 4 Amendment . to Land Use Element to Clarify Policy on Residential /Agricultural Setbacks On July 17, 2002, the City Council raised concerns over policy in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, related to setbacks between agricultural and residential uses. Current General Plan policy reads as follows: Policy 11.2: When new residential development is adjacent to existing agricultural uses, a 200 -foot minimum width setback shall be provided to minimize compatibility conflicts. On August 21, 2002, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to study this policy and provide a recommendation on potential amendments. A copy of the City Council Resolution is included as Attachment No. 3. The goal under which this Land Use Element policy was formulated is to "identify and encourage the preservation of viable agricultural resources in the City and its Area of Interest." The focus of the policy should therefore be on the preservation of commercial agriculture. In order to clarify the intent of the policy, it is recommended that Policy 11.2 be amended as follows: Policy 11.2: When new residential development is adjacent to existing commercial agricultural uses, a 200 -foot minimum width setback shall be provided to minimize compatibility conflicts. No setback is required from ornamental, fruit - bearing, tree groves within a Residential Planned Development (RPD) project when such groves are provided to emulate the character of surrounding commercial agriculture, based on a City- approved Landscape Plan. This modification to the policy would allow for ornamental groves in projects, like the Moorpark Country Club Estates, when they are part of an approved Landscape Plan. It would also continue to further the goal of preservation of existing commercial agriculture. A proposed Resolution (Attachment No. 1) is provided for Planning Commission consideration, to recommend to the City Council approval of these amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element and Map and Zoning Map. A map showing the changes to the General Plan and Zoning boundaries is included with the Resolution as Exhibit A. If the General Plan Amendment is approved by the City Council, it would be the third of a maximum of four permissible amendments to S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \PC 020826 GPA 2002 -03 ZC 2002 -03 Rpt(1).doc F Planning Commission Agenda Report GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) August 26, 2002 Page No. 5 the Land Use Element this year under State law. The recent General Plan Amendment for the Vintage Crest Senior Apartments is not included in this count; it is exempt as an affordable housing project. Public Notification The public hearing before the Planning Commission was noticed by publication in the Moorpark Star on Friday, August 9, 2002, in accordance with Sections 65854 and 65091 of the Government Code, and notices were sent to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. Environmental Documentation An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and four (4) Addenda were previously prepared for the approved Toll Brothers subdivision. This existing documentation fully addresses the component of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change related to adjusting the Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map to match the approved lot lines. Amended language on the 200 -foot setback between residential and agricultural uses is merely clarifying existing policy and could not result in a physical change in the environment and therefore, does not require any further environmental documentation. The inclusion of the Husted property for the water tank site has not previously been analyzed. The California Environmental Quality Act allows an Addendum to an EIR to be prepared, when the modifications to a project would not require major revisions to the EIR, due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. The decision to prepare an Addendum must be supported by substantial evidence. In this case, grading would be extended less than two (2) acres into an area of disturbed grassland. The tank would only be visible from within the Country Club Estates and Husted properties. No significant impacts from this modification are expected. The application and its exhibits, along with this staff report, provide sufficient and substantial evidence to constitute a fifth Addendum to the Moorpark Country Club Estates EIR. The City Council will consider adoption of the Addendum as the environmental record for the project. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \PC 020826 GPA 2002 -03 ZC 2002 -03 Rpt(1).doc 4': h M ;e "� r- fir' Planning Commission Agenda Report GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) August 26, 2002 Page No. 6 STAFF RECOPMNDATION 1. Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and close the public hearing; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. PC -2002- recommending to the City Council approval of the proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map. Attachments: 1. anning Commission Resolution PC -2002- recommen to the City Coun al of General P ments and Zone Changes, as reco�neral ded ding map showing proposed chan Plan Land Use Map and o ies. 2. Photograph of proposed tank location. 3. n No. 2002- regardin resi a Element. S: \Community Development \G P A \2002 \03 \Staff Reports \PC 020826 GPA 2002 -03 ZC 2002 -03 Rpt(1).doc Planning Commission Agenda Report GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros Approximate Location of Proposed Tank on Husted Property PC ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2002 -429 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2002 -03 AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2002 -03 TO ALIGN LAND -USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONES WITH LOT LINES IN VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4928, ALLOW FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A WATER TANK SITE, AND CLARIFY POLICY RELATED TO RESIDENTIAL SETBACKS FROM AGRICULTURAL USES WHEREAS, on April 17, 1996, Resolution No. 96 -1197 was adopted by the City Council, approving General Plan Amendment No. 94 -1 to amend the Land Use Map for the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, on May 1, 1996, Ordinance No. 215 was adopted by the City Council, approving Zone Change No. 94 -1 to establish zoning classifications for the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 2000, Resolution No. 2000 -1694 was adopted by the City Council, approving Minor Modification No. 1 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4928, Residential Planned Development No. 94 -1, and Conditional Use Permit No. 94 -1 in order to allow changes to the lot and street layout and amenities associated with the Moorpark Country Club Estates project; and WHEREAS, Toll Brothers, Incorporated, has requested a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to align the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map boundaries with the approved Moorpark Country Club Estates subdivision and to allow for a reclaimed water tank on an adjacent piece of property; and WHEREAS, on August 21, 2002, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to study, set a public hearing, and provide a recommendation pertaining to amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element on setbacks between residential and agricultural uses; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Public Hearing on August 26, 2002, the Planning Commission considered a Resolution recommending to the City Council approval of amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Map and Zoning Map; and CC ATTACHMENT 4 C4 lr . r- G C 'r RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2002 -429 GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) Page 2 WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 26, 2002, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing, and after receiving oral and written public testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. exhibits, and Addendum to the read, reviewed, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The application, staff report, constituting a proposed fifth Moorpark Country Club Estates EIR, have been and considered by the Planning Commission. SECTION 2. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP: The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map as proposed in Exhibit "A ". SECTION 3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT: The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council amendment of Policy 11.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element to read as follows: Policy 11.2: When new residential development is adjacent to existing commercial agricultural uses, a 200 -foot minimum width setback shall be provided to minimize compatibility conflicts. No setback is required from ornamental, fruit - bearing tree groves within a Residential Planned Development (RPD) project when such groves are provided to emulate the character of commercial agriculture, based on a City- approved Landscape Plan. SECTION 4. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: The Community Development Director shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. L� ' 1_4 RESOLUTION NO. PC- 2002 -429 GPA 2002 -03, ZC 2002 -03 (Toll Bros.) Page 3 The action of the foregoing direction was approved by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners DiCecco, Haller and Parvin, Vice Chair Landis NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Chair Otto PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2002. William F. Otto, Ch it ATTEST: rr�K. / Y nity De elopment Director Attachment: Exhibit A k 5 N W H MOORPARK COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES z CITY OF MOORPARK Zoning /General Plan Land Use Designation Existing Zoning Map Acreage With V1TM 4928 Minor Mod 1 Acreage With Proposed LLA Acreage Difference (in Acres) RPD -1.46u (Residential Planned Development) /ML (Medium Low Density Residential) 150.7 146.2 146.2 —4.5 OS (Open Space) / OS -2 (Open Space 2) 496.8 502.8 * 500.7 +3.9 1 (Institutional) / PUB (Public Institutional) 4.3 2.8 «« 4.9 +0.6 RE -5 Ac. (Husted Property) 38.9 38.9 38.9 0 Total 690.7 690.7 690.7 0 * THE 1.58AC INSTITUTIONAL AREA AND THE RE -5AC AREAS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF VTTM 4928 ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED WATER TANK WOULD BE OPEN SPACE WITHOUT THE LLA. «« THE 1.22AC WATER TANK SITE ADJACENT TO THE GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE WOULD REMAIN LEGEND INSTITUTIONAL WITHOUT THE LLA. AREAS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED FROM OPEN SPACE TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO OPEN SPA AREAS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED FROM RESIDENTIAL TO OPEN SPACE AREAS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED FROM RE -5 TO OPEN SPACE AREAS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED FROM OPEN SPACE TO INSTITUTIONAL ooaoo AREAS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED FROM RE -5 TO INSTITUTIONAL C'� 0 Vi ll- To- L4 • 4 IN, N, m '07161OLOC 16010 M OS-500/OS-2. I/PLjB 1.22ac ON A 19 MAO 0.79ac 0 .011fol RE-5ac Y. I ZONING PER ZC 99-01 kND USE DESIGNATIONS P�R G.P.A 99-01 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM q' 1)' CITY OF 7�100RPARK, CALIFOILNIA City Council Meeting TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Direct Prepared By: Scott Wolfe, Principal Planner V, DATE: September 5, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Minor Modification No. 1 to Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development No. 99 -01 to Modify the Conditions of Approval Pertaining to Drainage Matters. (APN 512 -0- 131 -070) Applicant: TR Partners, LLC SUMMARY The City Council, on December 1, 1999, adopted Resolution No. 99- 1681, approving Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development Permit (RPD) No. 99 -01. This Resolution included conditions of approval which the project applicant feels are excessive and inapplicable to a project of this scope and size. The applicant is requesting that the City Council delete two (2) conditions and amend another condition to bring the development requirements more in line with a project of this scope and size. BACKGROUND On July 12, 1999, the Planning Commission considered the request for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development (RPD) No. 99 -01 by Manuel Asadurian. This small, 8 -lot in -fill project consists of construction of eight (8) single- family, detached homes within an existing neighborhood, adjacent to Flory Elementary School. During the Planning Commission meeting, staff raised the issue that certain conditions were erroneously included in the Planning Commission draft Resolution and that they would be removed or appropriately amended, prior to the final Resolution being presented for approval. The applicant was satisfied with this notation and testimony continued which focused on other matters. CC11z_;0G"I Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 2 On December 1, 1999, the City Council concluded its public hearing on this project, approving the Tentative Tract Map and the RPD permit, subject to the conditions included in Resolution 99 -1681. However, the conditions, which were supposed to be removed as part of the Planning Commission action, were still included in the Council Resolution. These conditions remained unnoticed until the property was sold to the current applicant (TR Partners, Inc.), who noted the extreme expense of complying with these conditions, as well as, the apparent inapplicability of the conditions to this project. The applicant requested relief from these conditions through the Minor Modification process. DISCUSSION In analyzing the applicant's request, staff reviewed the video tape and found that the comments removing and amending the conditions in question were in fact made by Mr. Loftus, the then Community Development Director. Staff then reviewed the video tapes of each of the subsequent meetings of both the Planning Commission and the City Council to ensure that any further discussion of these items was consistent with the position of the applicant. No further discussion of these items, which had been marked for removal or amendment, took place at these hearings. The applicant's request identifies three (3) conditions which were to have been removed, prior to the final draft Resolution being forwarded to the Planning Commission. These are Condition numbers 25, 28(N), and 29. Condition number 25 reads: All development areas and lots shall be designed so that surface drainage is collected by the on -site storm drain system prior to connecting to an appropriate existing flood control channel. The applicant requests that this condition be deleted. This condition was identified to be removed at the first Planning Commission hearing because the project is a small, 8 -lot, infill Tract with no adjacent storm drain facilities. Adherence to this condition would require a significant expenditure to construct storm drain facilities between the subject site and the nearest available storm drain facility at Los Angeles Avenue. The cost of this improvement would render the project economically infeasible. S: \Community Development \M MOD \t5181,RPD 99 -1 Minor Mod 1 (TR PARTNERS) \CC Staff Report.doc �C ,(`i A p .; " C... ., �,;' O 'er O Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 3 Condition number 28(N) reads: A hydraulic /hydrology study shall be prepared which analyzes the hydraulic capacity of the drainage system, with and without the storm drain system for the proposed development. The developer shall make any downstream improvements, required by the Ventura County Flood Control and the City of Moorpark, to support the proposed development. The applicant contests this condition because again, the condition would make the project infeasible. Downstream improvements may indeed be necessary to accommodate increased flows, to which this development would be a contributor; but the condition places the entire burden of any improvements on the developer, rather than simply requiring the contribution toward the improvements on a pro - rata share basis. The condition was identified as an item in need of amendment, to reflect the requirement of an obligation to contribute to the improvements on a pro -rata share basis, at the first Planning Commission meeting. Condition number 29 reads: The applicant shall demonstrate that surface drainage from the site shall not drain over the sidewalk or driveways. The applicant requests that this item be deleted because compliance would be prohibitively expensive. With no existing storm drain facilities on or near this site (which has been graded flat and must drain to the streets), this condition cannot reasonably be implemented. Additionally, recent changes in NPDES guidance highly discourage the use of curb coring (the alternative to meet the condition)for drainage in favor of surface drainage which allows flows to be filtered through grass or some other bio- filtration medium and then over sidewalks and driveways to the street. Staff has reviewed the applicant's request, investigated the claims regarding the indication that the conditions should be removed or amended, and re- evaluated the conditions in light of existing conditions. The Community Development Department and the City Engineer concur that the conditions are not necessary or appropriate as currently written, and that deletion of Condition numbers 25 and 29 and the amendment of Condition number 28(N) to reflect an obligation to contribute a pro -rata share toward required improvements is appropriate. S: \Community Development \M MOD \t5181,RPD 99 -1 Minor Mod 1 (TR PARTNERS) \CC Staff Report.doc C. y A 1 ' , f? ,f k (- , u .r O as w.-)'7 Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page No. 4 The attached draft Resolution makes the following changes to the conditions of approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development No. 99 -01: Condition number 25 is deleted. Condition number 28(N) is amended to read: A hydraulic /hydrology study shall be prepared which analyzes the hydraulic capacity of the drainage system, with and without the storm drain system for the proposed development. The developer shall pay a pro -rata share, prior to the approval of the final map, for make any ,.,eiv- 9 - a improvements,- required by the Ventura County Flood Control and the City of Moorpark,- to support the proposed development. Condition number 29 is deleted. With the above amendments, the remaining conditions of approval are unchanged. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION This project has been determined to be exempt from CEQA as a Class 5 Exemption (Minor Changes in Land Use Limitations). STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2002- approving Minor Modification No. 1 to Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development No. 99 -01. Attachments: 1. Excerpts from City Council Resolution No. 1999 -1681. 2. Draft Resolution No. 2002- amending Resolution No. 1999 -1681 Conditions of Approval. S: \Community Development \M MOD \t5181,RPD 99 -1 Minor Mod 1 (TR PARTNERS) \CC Staff Report.doc Resolution No. 99 -1681 Page No. 13 conditions due to construction activity. These measures will apply to temporary grading activity that remains or is anticipated to remain unfinished or undisturbed in its altered condition for a period of time greater than thirty (30) days or the beginning of the rainy season whichever comes first. 23. The maximum gradient for any slope shall not exceed a 2:1 slope inclination except where special circumstances exist. In the case of special circumstances where steeper slopes are warranted, plans will be reviewed by a certified soil engineer and their recommendations will be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and the Director of Community Development. 24. All graded slopes shall be planted in a timely manner meeting the approval of the Director of Community Development with groundcover, trees and shrubs that will stabilize slopes and minimize erosion. 25. All development areas and lots shall be designed so that surface drainage is collected by the on -site storm drain system prior to connecting to an appropriate existing flood control channel. Geotechnical /Geology Review 26. The Developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, detailed Geotechnical Engineering Report certified by a California Registered Civil Engineer. The geotechnical engineering report shall include an investigation with regard to liquefaction, expansive soils, and seismic safety. Also, the report shall discuss the contents of the soils as to the presence or absence of any hazardous waste or other contaminants in the soils. Note: Review of the geotechnical engineering report, by the City's Geotechnical Engineer, is required. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs including the City's administrative fee for this review. 27. All recommendations included in the approved geotechnical engineering report shall be implemented during project design, grading, and construction in accordance with the approved project. The City's geotechnical consultant shall review all plans for conformance with the soil engineer's recommendations. Prior to the commencement of grading plan CC ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. 99 -1681 Page No. 14 check, the Developer's geotechnical engineer shall sign the plans confirming that the grading plans incorporate the recommendations of the approved soil report(s). Storm Water Runoff and Flood Control Planning: 28. The Developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, drainage plans, hydrologic and hydraulic calculations prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete public improvements and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of all improvements. The plans shall depict all on -site and off -site drainage structures required by the City. The drainage plans and calculations shall indicate the following conditions before and after development: a. Quantities of water, water flow rates, major water courses, drainage areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps, sump locations, detention facilities, and drainage courses. Hydrology shall be per the current Ventura County Standards except as follows: b. All storm drains shall carry a 10 -year frequency storm; C. All catch basins shall carry a 10 -year storm; d. All catch basins in a sump condition shall be sized such that depth of water at intake shall equal the depth of.the approach flows; e. All culverts shall carry a 100 -year frequency storm; f. Drainage facilities shall be provided such that surface flows are intercepted and contained in a storm drain system prior to entering collector or secondary roadways; g. Under a 10 -year frequency storm, local, residential and private streets shall have one dry travel lane available on interior residential streets. Collector streets shall have a minimum of one dry travel lane in each direction; Resolution No. 99 -1681 Page No. 15 h. Drainage to adjacent parcels shall not be increased or concentrated by this development. All drainage measures necessary to mitigate storm water flows shall be provided by the Developer; i. All drainage grates shall be designed and constructed with provisions to provide adequate bicycle safety to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; j. If the land to be occupied is in an area of special flood hazard, the Developer shall notify all potential buyers in writing of this hazard condition. The grading plan shall also show contours indicating the 50- and 100 -year flood levels. k. All flows from brow ditches, ribbon gutters and similar devices shall be deposited into the storm drain system prior to entering streets. If necessary, the storm drain system shall be extended beyond the public right -of -way through easements to eliminate surface flow between parcels. Both storm drain and easements outside the right -of -way are to be maintained by the owners unless otherwise approved by the City Council. 1. Concrete drainage structures shall be tan colored concrete, as approved by the Director of Community Development, and to the extent possible shall incorporate natural structure and landscape to reduce their visibility. M. Drainage for the development shall be designed and installed with all necessary appurtenances to safely contain and convey storm flows to their final point of discharge, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. n. A hydraulic /hydrology study shall be prepared which analyzes the hydraulic capacity of the drainage system, with and without the storm drain system for the proposed development. The Developer shall make any downstream improvements, required by Ventura County Flood Control and the City of Moorpark, to support the proposed development. The hydrology study shall determine the development's pro -rata share of the cost to construct Fremont Drain Resolution No. 99 -1681 Page No. 16 (total cost estimate $428,000) based on City of Moorpark Master Plan of Drainage (April 1995). The cost estimate shall be adjusted based on the latest Quarterly State Highway Bid Price Index Chart from Engineering News - Record, The Construction Weekly Magazine. 29. The applicant shall demonstrate that surface drainage from the site shall not drain over the sidewalk or driveways. 30. The Developer shall demonstrate for each building pad within the development area that the following restrictions and protections can be put in place to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: a. Adequate protection from a 100 -year frequency storm; b. Feasible access during a 50 -year frequency storm. C. Hydrology calculations shall be per current Ventura County Standards. 31. All structures proposed within the 100 -year flood zone shall be elevated at least one foot above the 100 -year r -F flood level. 32. The Developer shall provide for all necessary on -site and off -site storm drain facilities required by the City to accommodate upstream and on -site flows. Facilities, as shown on existing drainage studies and approved by the City, shall be delineated on the final drainage plans. Either on -site retention basins or storm water acceptance deeds from off -site property owners must be specified. These facilities (if applicable) must also be acceptable to the Ventura County Flood Control District. National Pollutant Discharqe Elimination System ( NPDES) 33. Prior to the issuance of any construction /grading permit and /or the commencement of any clearing, grading or excavation, the applicant /owner shall submit a Stormwater Pollution Control Plan (SWPCP) , on the form provided by the City for the review and approval of the City Engineer. a. The SWPCP shall be developed and implemented in accordance with requirements of the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management Program, NPDES Permit No. CAS063339. RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 1 OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 5181 AND RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 99- 01 TO DELETE CONDITION NUMBERS 25 AND 29, AND TO AMEND CONDITION NO. 28(N) FOR A 1.2 ACRE SITE, LOCATED AT 284 BARD STREET, ON THE APPLICATION OF TR PARTNERS, LLC (ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 512- 0 -131- 070) WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Public Hearing on September 18, 2002, the City Council considered Minor Modification No. 1 to Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development (RPD) No. 99 -01 to delete Condition numbers 25 and 29, and to amend Condition No. 28(N) for a 1.2 acre site, located at 284 Bard Street, on the application of TR Partners, LLC (Assessor Parcel No. 512 -0- 131 -070); and WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 18, 2002, the City Council conducted a public hearing, and after receiving public testimony closed the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on September 18, 2002, the City Council, after review and consideration of the information contained in the City Council staff report, and testimony received, has reached a decision on this matter. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council makes the following findings: A. The request is consistent with the intent and provisions of the City's General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and applicable titles of the Moorpark Municipal Code. B. The request is compatible with the character of surrounding development because the changes proposed enable the subject project to reflect conditions similar to the surrounding neighborhood. CC ATTACHMENT 2 Resolution No. 2002- Page 2 C. The proposal would not be obnoxious or harmful or impair the utility of neighboring property or uses because the proposed alterations to the existing use are consistent with the development standards, including setbacks, of the Municipal Code. 4. The proposal would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare, because the proposed action results in no changes which would cause or worsen hazards or other adverse conditions. SECTION 2. That the City Council adopts the following California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) findings: A. That the project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act as a Class 5 exemption. SECTION 3. That the City Council hereby approves Minor Modification No. 1 to Tentative Tract Map No. 5181 and Residential Planned Development (RPD) No. 99 -01 for a change in conditions of approval as follows: A. Condition number 25 is deleted. B. Condition number 28(N) is amended to read: A hydraulic /hydrology study shall be prepared which analyzes the hydraulic capacity of the drainage system, with and without the storm drain system for the proposed development. The developer shall pay a pro -rata share, prior to the approval of the final map, for any improvements required by the Ventura County Flood Control and the City of Moorpark, to support the proposed development. C. Condition number 29 is deleted. SECTION 4. 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. Ct ,-•' * 1- 1 i, 7 Resolution No. 2002 - Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk f- , ; C °� -: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM - 'I, C - CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIF'ORNTA City Covtncil Meeting of ACTTON: `�. C$ P °t'rrn ma4t oh R 1 n I V,)" 34 BY: TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Mary K. Lindley, Director of Community Services / DATE: September 5, 2002 (Meeting September 18, 2002) SUBJECT: Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Testimony to Update the City's Library Facility Fee and Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -_, Approving the Revised Library Facility Fee SUMMARY With the recent inclusion of capital improvements in the definition of "Library Facilities" in the City's Municipal Code, Chapter 3.36, Library Facility Fee, the Council is being asked to consider updating the fee to account for the cost of future capital improvements associated with new development. Updating the fee would result in an increase. The Council is being asked to receive public testimony and adopt the attached Resolution, which would adjust the rate of the Library Facility Fee. BACKGROUND On October 1, 1997, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 238, which established a Library Facilities Fee imposed on new development. The Ordinance was modeled on the City's fire and police facilities Ordinances. In summary, these Ordinances require new development to pay for, and offset, their impacts on these services, based on a pro -rata share. On July 17, 2002, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 283, which amended the definition of "Library Facilities" by broadening it to include capital improvements. Previously, the definition covered library materials and excluded capital building improvements and acquisitions. This action did not update or adjust the fee, but merely Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Page 2 allowed the City to spend the revenue collected from the fee on building improvements and expansions to the Moorpark Library. On August 21, 2002, the Council set the date of September 18 for a Public Hearing to receive testimony on revising the rate for the Library Facility Fee to account for capital improvements associated with new development. DISCUSSION The action to broaden the definition of "Library Facilities" was taken to allow the City to address the future space deficiencies of the Moorpark Library. The Library is currently undersized for a population the size of Moorpark. Nationally accepted per capita Library square footage standards indicate that libraries should consist of between .5 square feet per capita in very rural areas to 2.5 square feet per capita in heavily urban areas. It is being proposed that the Council set a goal of 1 square foot per capita for the Moorpark Library. Currently, the Moorpark Library is approximately 7,000 square feet. With an estimated population at build -out of 42,000 (excluding the proposed North Park project), it is reasonable to expect that a library consisting of 42,000 square feet would be required to adequately meet the needs of Moorpark residents. The objective is to either add approximately 35,000 square feet onto the existing library facility or potentially build a new one. Using data and cost information supplied by the Ventura County Library Agency, which has been assisting the cities of Ojai and Camarillo complete new library construction studies, as of January 2002, the cost estimate to construct a library was $200 per square foot. The County has stated that for every month beyond January 2002, construction costs increase by .002 percent. Projecting two years out, the cost of constructing library space is $204 per square foot and $7,140,000 for the additional 35,000 square feet of library space in Moorpark's case. Potential sources include the City's Library Facilities Fee, General Fund Reserves, and Library Grants. It is anticipated that a combination of all these sources will be necessary. M:\MLindley\LIBRARY\Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc 6 3 10J Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Page 3 When the City Council initially set the existing Library Facilities Fee, it only included the cost to purchase library materials, collections, computers, and the like to meet the needs of anticipated new population from the effective date of the Ordinance. The fee calculation developed did not include any cost associated with capital improvements. Staff is recommending that the City Council indicate its desire to update the Library Facilities fee to include capital improvements. As with the original fee, the calculation used can only include anticipated costs associated with the impacts of new development. It cannot include the cost of addressing existing library deficiencies, for which the City will have to find other revenue sources. The fee must be proportional with the impact of new development. The data used to calculate an updated Library Facilities Fee to include capital improvements is as follows: • The current population estimate is 33,000. The estimated population at build -out is 42,000, excluding the proposed North Park Project. This represents a growth of 9,000 residents. • Moorpark's recommended target square foot goal for library space is 1 foot per capita. The Moorpark Library is currently 7,000 square feet. Based on the target goal, the library should be 33,000. At build - out, the targeted square footage is 42,000. Of the additional 35,000 square feet of future space, 9,000 is attributable to new development. • The estimated cost to construct a library facility is $204 per square foot. The total cost to add the 9,000 square feet attributed to new construction is $1,836,000. • With the estimated 9,000 population growth, it is estimated that there will be approximately 1,985 additional residential housing units and 1,708,948 square feet of commercial /industrial space. As previously identified, the City's goal at build -out would be to have a library consisting of 42,000 square M:\MLindley\LIBRARY\Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Page 4 feet. This will require an addition of 35,000 square feet to the existing 7,000 square foot Moorpark Library facility. As indicated above, it is estimated that the construction of 35,000 square feet of new space will cost $7,140,000. Of that amount, only $1,836,000 should be borne by new development. The formula for computing the revised Library Facility Fee is designed to ensure that each new development bears only its estimated pro -rata share of new library facility costs under the expanded definition. No change is recommended with the City's initial findings that the ratio between new residential and commercial /industrial development impacts on the library to be 75 percent residential and 25 percent commercial /industrial. Based on the estimated population at build -out, the estimated square footage cost of constructing library facilities and recommended revised fee is as follows: The existing Ordinance (Ordinance No. 283) includes an administrative fee of $25.00. It is recommended this fee remain the same. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Open the Public Public Hearing, Library Facility be effective 60 2002. Hearing to receive testimony, close the adopt Resolution No. 2002 -_, revising the Fee as identified in the Agenda Report to days hereafter, which will be November 18, M:\MLindley\LIBRARY\Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc �.,, EXISTING FEE INCREASE REVISED FEE Single Family $460.56 DU $465.12 DU $925.68 DU Multi Family $295.50 DU $301.41 DU $596.91 DU Mobile Home $303.00 DU $309.06 DU $612.06 DU Non - Residential .10 sq ft .27 sq ft. .37 sq ft The existing Ordinance (Ordinance No. 283) includes an administrative fee of $25.00. It is recommended this fee remain the same. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Open the Public Public Hearing, Library Facility be effective 60 2002. Hearing to receive testimony, close the adopt Resolution No. 2002 -_, revising the Fee as identified in the Agenda Report to days hereafter, which will be November 18, M:\MLindley\LIBRARY\Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc �.,, Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Page 5 RESOLUTION MOORPARK, FACILITY 97 -1394 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA, REVISING LIBRARY FEES AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 238 states that the City Council will determine from time to time the population to be served by a library facility, the service area, the values of the components used to calculate fees, and the administration fee for processing the library facilities fee; and WHEREAS, the Ordinance provides that the fees may be used solely to pay for such library facilities; and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2002, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 283, amending the definition of "Library Facilities" to include library capital improvements; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the current fee is not adequate to fund future library facility needs, including capital improvements, to serve the residents of the City of Moorpark and now wishes to revise the library facilities fee; and WHEREAS, on September 18, 2002, the City Council conducted a Public Hearing to receive testimony on a revision to the Library Facility Fee. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Resolution No. 97 -1394 is hereby rescinded. SECTION 2. Overextended Library Facilities. Based on the recognized library facilities standards of 5 volumes of collection materials per population, 1 public access computer per 2,000 population, and 1 square foot of library space per capita, the current Library budget will not accommodate new population growth to be served by the Moorpark Library. Therefore, the City Council finds that the Moorpark Library facilities are overextended pursuant to Ordinance No. 283. \\Mor _pri -serv\ home_ folders \MLindley \LIBRARY\Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Page 6 SECTION 3. Administration Fee. authorized by Moorpark Ordinance No. payment. The administration fee 283 shall be $25 per fee SECTION 4. Library Facilities Standards. The established standard for library facilities defined in Ordinance No. 283 shall be 5 collection volumes per capita, 1 public access computer per 2,000 population, and 1 square foot of library space per capita. SECTION 5. Formula Values. The values assigned to "A ", "B" \ \C" \ \D" "E" "F" and "G" set forth in City Ordinance No. 283 shall be computed as follows: (A) The value "A" is the number $3,654,000. This number equals the estimated cost in dollars of providing library facilities collection, public access computers, and capital improvements. (B) The value "B" is the number 9,000. This number is the total estimated new population growth to be served by the library facilities between the effective date of this Ordinance and the year 2010. (C) For the purposes of computing the value "C ", the estimated average number of residents per dwelling units is 3.04 for single- family residences, 1.97 for multi- family units and 2.02 for mobile home units. (D) The value "D" is the number 75. This number equals the estimated portion, expressed as a decimal, of the standard library facility needed to provide service to residential buildings and mobile homes, as opposed to non - residential buildings. (E) The value "E" is the number 1,70.8,948. This number equals the estimated new square footage of non - residential building floor space which will be served by a library facility in the year 2010. (F) The value "F" is a variable and represents the number of square feet of floor space in the non - residential buildings for which the permit is issued. (G) The value "G" is the number 1 minus the value of "D ". This number equals the estimated portion, expressed as a decimal, of the standard library facility needed to provide service to non- residential buildings, as opposed to residential buildings. SECTION 6. Building Permit Fee. The Building Permit fee computed applying the preceding values shall be: \\ Mor _pri_serv\home_folders\MLindley \LIBRARY \Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc Honorable City Council August 21, 2002 Page 7 Single - family dwelling: Multi - family dwelling: Mobile home: Non - residential: $925.68 times the total number of dwelling units $596.91 times the total number of dwelling units $612.06 times the total number of dwelling units $ .37 per square foot SECTION 7. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect 60 days after approval and adoption, which shall be November 18, 2002. SECTION 8. 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 day of , 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk \\Mor _pri —serv\ home_ folders \MLindley \LIBRARY\Library Fee Revision Public Hearing.doc MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 517 -6200 SENT BY FAX September 12, 2002 Rondi Guthrie, Deputy Director Building Industry Association 23801 Calabasas Rd Suite 1004 Calabasas, CA 91302 Dear Ms. Guthrie: ITEM Reid a G6 me,, .Aq This letter is written in response to the questions you asked me in our telephone conversation on September 10, 2002. To date, the City has collected approximately $198,000 in Library Facility Fees from various developments. As of June 30, 2002, the City had allocated approximately $62,000 from the Library Facility Fund for library materials (books, subscriptions, reference materials, computers, etc.). Additionally, the City's approved FY 02/03 budget includes an expenditure allocation of $120,000, from the Library Facility Fund for library materials. I hope this answers your questions. Sincerely, Mary Li dley Director of Community Services cc: Deborah Traffenstedt, City Clerk 40 PATRICK HUNTER ROSEANN MIKOS CLINT HARPER KEITH F. MILLHOUSE JOHN E. WOZNIAK Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 517 -6200 September 5, 2002 Rondi Guthrie, Deputy Director Building Industry Association, Ventura Chapter 24005 Ventura Blvd. Calabasas, CA 91302 Ms. Rondi Guthrie: ITEM �• c lx& Attached is a draft Agenda Report scheduled for the Moorpark City Council meeting of September 18, 2002. The Report will be discussed in conjunction with a Public Hearing regarding a revision to the City's Library Facility Fee, which has been scheduled for that date. If you have any questions regarding the Report, I can be reached at 805 -517 -6216. Sincerely, 61, 1 1 K Mary Lindle Y Director of Community Services Cc: City Clerks Office 0 PATRICK HUNTER ROSEANN MIKOS CLINT HARPER KEITH F. MILLHOUSE JOHN E. WOZNIAK Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember TO: FROM: DATE: ITEM 10-A. CTTY OF MOORPA", CALTFORMA City Council Meeting of A.CTION:. i C��� \i1 ACrI ;c� Cam, b� ►_` 'A, AQ63 - MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Direct r Prepared by Paul Porter, Principal Planne , September 9, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Proposed Sign Program for Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2001 -01 (Moorpark Marketplace - 357,621 Square Foot Commercial Center) Located South of New Los Angeles Avenue, East of Miller Parkway and West of the SR -23 Freeway on the Application of Zelman Retail Partners, Inc. (Assessors Parcel Nos. 512 -0- 260 -015, 085 and 105) BACKGROUND This matter which was originally scheduled for the City Council meeting of September 4, 2002, and continued at the request of the applicant to September 18, 2002. A copy of the sign program was provided to City Council in the packet for the September 4, 2002 meeting. The City Council agenda report for the September 4, 2002 meeting is attached for reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Master Sign Program subject to the staff recommended modifications. Attachment: Staff report for City Council for meeting of September 4, 2002. S: \Community Development \C P D \2001 -01 \Agenda Reports \CC 020918 Zelman signs.doc MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Direct Prepared by Paul Porter, Principal Planner DATE: August 26, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/4/02) SUBJECT: Consider Proposed Sign Program for Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2001 -01 (Moorpark Marketplace - 357,621 Square Foot Commercial Center) Located South of New Los Angeles Avenue, East of Miller Parkway and West of the SR -23 Freeway on the Application of Zelman Retail Partners, Inc (Assessors Parcel Nos. 512-0 - 260 -015, 085 and 105) BACKGROUND As part of the review process of the Commercial Planned Development Permit (CPD) No. 2001 -01, the applicant submitted a Conceptual Master Sign Program, which Council has previously reviewed. That program indicated the general location and style of monument and identification signs to be located both on and off -site. Condition No. 37 of the CPD and the Third Amendment to Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release that allows certain signs requires City Council approval of a Master Sign Program for the entire project. The Master Sign Program was submitted on August 1, 2002. The Council Ad Hoc Committee (Mayor Hunter and Councilmember Harper) reviewed the Master Sign Program on August 21, 2002. DISCUSSION The Master Sign Program objective is to establish standards to ensure tenant signage is harmonious, integrates with shopping center architecture, and provides for coordinated proportional signage exposure for all tenants. The program sets forth CC ATTACHMENT S: \Community Development \C P D \2001 -01 \Agenda Reports \CC 020904 Zelman signs.doc x'14 ti ''6.•'" -') L � Z t% Honorable City Council Meeting of September 4, 2002 Page No. 2 responsibilities for all tenants with respect to sign review approval and installation methodology. It allows for creativity in sign design and sets forth a process for the creation, review and approval of signage within the Moorpark Marketplace shopping center. Only signs that are considered consistent with the criteria within the Master Sign Program and approved by both the Landlord and the City of Moorpark are allowed. Prior to the submittal of the Master Sign Program, some Councilmembers asked staff to investigate existing pylon /pole signs in other communities; specifically, the McDonald's and Denny's pole signs at Kanan Road and the 101 Freeway. Both of these signs are located in the City of Agoura Hills and were approved prior to incorporation of the City. The signs are seventy -five feet (751) high, but no information was available on the square footage of the signs. In Oxnard, the auto mall sign at the 101 Freeway is seventy four feet (74 ") high and 900 square feet per sign face. In Ventura, the auto mall sign at the 101 Freeway is sixty -five feet (651) high; sign face square footage was not available. There are five (5) types of signs addressed in the Master Sign Program. They are: 1) monument signs; 2) pylon signs; 3) wall signs; 4) door signs; and 5) address signs. 1. Monument Signs: One (1) twelve foot (12') high monument sign of approximately fifty -four square feet (54 s.f.) per sign face (includes elevations, location, materials, number of tenants, and size of letters). Three (3) entry monument identification signs (No Tenant Signs) (includes elevations, location, number of tenants, materials and size of letters). These identification signs are proposed to have flood lighting located at the base of the sign, including: Two (2) six foot (6') high main entry monument signs having a sign face of approximately one hundred thirty -four square feet (134 s.f.) with maximum letter height of three feet (3'). S: \Community Development \C P D \2001 -01 \Agenda Reports \CC 020904 Zelman signs.doc (( '4.^. Honorable City Council Meeting of September 4, 2002 Page No. 3 One (1) four foot eight inch (4'8 ") high entry monument sign, at the corner of Miller Parkway and New Los Angeles Avenue, having a sign face of approximately one hundred thirty -four square feet (134 s.f.) with a maximum letter height of three feet (31). 2. Pylon Signs: One (1) twenty -four foot (24') high freestanding sign, containing approximately forty -eight square feet (48 s.f.) per sign face (includes elevations, location, materials, number of tenants and size of letters). One seventy -eight foot (78') high freestanding, freeway oriented sign, containing approximately two hundred seventy -nine square feet (279 s.f.) per sign face (includes elevations, location, limited to the name of the center and four major tenants, materials and size of letters). 3. Wall Signs: Building wall signs and under canopy signs for major and minor tenants (includes method of sign calculation, sign area, colors, letter height, use of logos, construction and installation. 4. Door Signs: Door signs (includes type of font, size of letters and color) . 5. Address Signs: Address location signs (includes sign heights, location and materials). Ad Hoc Committee Meeting of August 21, 2002 On August 21, 2002, the Ad Hoc Committee (Mayor Hunter and Councilmember Harper) met to discuss the sign program. The Committee did not discuss any particular details of the Master S: \Community Development \C P D \2001 -01 \Agenda Reports \CC 020904 Zelman signs.doc CI- a„',!_11), Honorable City Council Meeting of September 4, 2002 Page No. 4 Sign Program, but did ask for information on existing freeway signs in other cities, which is included above. Suggested Modifications Staff has reviewed the proposed Master Sign Program and suggests the following modifications: 1. Include the architectural background of a sign in the Sign Area Calculation. 2. Limit the number of sign colors for minor tenants to three (3) colors, with the exception of nationally- recognized logos. White and black would be considered a color in this instance. 3. Require the applicant to amend the Carlsberg Specific Plan to be consistent with the entry monument signage proposed at Miller Parkway, prior to the issuance of a sign permit. 4. Replace the flood lighting of the monument signage with low intensity, low voltage lights. 5. Restrict shopping center identification signs within the sight distance triangle, as determined by the City Engineer, to a total maximum height of three feet (31) from top of curb of the closest adjacent roadway or entry. 6. Allow shopping center identification signs, not within the sight triangle, to a maximum total height of six feet (61) from top of curb of the closest adjacent roadway or entry. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Master Sign Program subject to the staff recommended modifications. Attachment: Proposed Master Sign Program S: \Community Development \C P D \2001 -01 \Agenda Reports \CC 020904 Zelman signs.doc ... �: >�G' Moorpark Marketplace ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC. y 515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1230, Los Angeles, CA 90071 n z H MASTER SIGN PROGRAM 0 Prepared by PERKOWITZ+ RUTH ARCHITECTS 111 West Ocean Blvd., 21st Fir., Long Beach, CA USA 90802 562.628.8000 DATE: 1 ' 5.02 4 l� Moorpark Market,.,lace Tenant Signage Criteria The purpose of this sign criteria is to establish standards that assure tenant signage is harmonious, integrates with shopping center architecture, and provides coordinated proportional exposure for all tenants. This sign criteria also describes the responsibilities of the tenants with respect to sign review, approval, and installation. All work shall meet or exceed the minimum design intent and fabrication requirements shown in this document. Conformance will be enforced. A diversity of sign types within the parameters of these criteria is encouraged to allow for creative tenant signage. However, any non - conforming or disapproved signs will be brought into conformance at the expense of the tenant. Each Tenant shall provide a minimum of one primary identification wall sign in accordance with the approved Master Sign Plan herein provided. Tenant shall be responsible for the following expenses relating to signage for tenant's store: - Plan check, permit processing and application fees, - Fabrication and installation of signage, and final electrical connections. - Maintenance and repair, to include; all costs relating to signage removal, including repair of any damage to the building, or any portion of the shopping center. There is a formal process for the creation, review and approval of Tenant signs (see "Submittals and Approvals" section of this document). The tenant shall provide the following information: store name, logo image and colors, intended sign dimensions, materials, colors, finishes, and electrical connections. Only those sign types provided for and specifically approved in writing by the Landlord and the City of Moorpark will be allowed. The Tenant will be required, at his expense, to correct, replace or remove any sign that is installed without City or Land Lord's approval and /or that is deemed not to be in conformance with the plans as submitted and with require- , ments and documents referenced herein. Moorpark Marketplace Vicinity Map �o j CASEY e � a { < fvfRElT N l� ,`T 3 CHARLES 496 DOROTHY RUM irtCM <I g SARAH = �I _ �R 1 LASS. N u WI �� R BERT$ ESTNER r SNERMAN __ PRO J EC TE Lo ANGELE r MAJESTIC �I O PARK .ONITA H I Ni j[ Yz, MIL RION VISTA I. AN n Z BODE A GRA ISLE Wes' a PEACH HIL u \ _ BL ffj I 6 ANN E O _ _ N HONE 'BEE AMOK T HA P 3 G Q U 'i!' WILLIA S R S A O SUMMER n \' DONNY OK �� SILVER CREEK FIMAOCK �� blJ A r Moorpark Market. lace Site Plan QA 12' High Monument Sign BO 24' Freestanding Sign 78' Freestanding Freeway Oriented Sign 00 Entry Monument ID No Tenant Signs) IN Moorpark Marketplace A Double Faced — illuminated 12' Height Monument Sign Along New Los Angeles Ave. Note: Sign may encroach into 1/2 of the setback area. Min. landscaping setback is 4 feet on all sides. NI. W IIIS ANGI:I I S AVI NO SIDEWALK v v LANDSCAPE � �AR INC z IQ� I it I 0w i �N oQ ` �- W V) IN Moorpark Marketplace A Double Faced — illuminated 12' Height Monument Sign Along New Los Angeles Ave. Note: Sign may encroach into 1/2 of the setback area. Min. landscaping setback is 4 feet on all sides. I I Note: Maximum Letter Height 12 inches o Moorpark Market,,Jace A Double Faced — illuminated 12' Height Monument Sign Along New Los Angeles Ave. /o!oI 4' -6" 4' -6" rnLov MLT.OR E.I.F.S. CORNICE--- - - - - -� r---- - - - - -� IMlnor Tenant I IMinor Tenant I TEXTURED MLT r-- ----- -i -----I -- --- - -- -1 PANEL IMlnor Tenant I IMlnor Tenant 41 M_in_o_r_T_en_a_nt i i_M_in_o_r_T_en_a_nt ILLUMINATED--- - - - - -1 r--- - - - - -1 CHANNEL LETTERS Minor Tenant I IMlnor Tenant I IMinor Tenant i IMinor Tenant r---- - - - - -� r--- - - - - -� p, IMinor Tenant I IMlnor Tenant I 4' -6" SF EACH TENANT SIGN. 12 SIGNS PER SIDE = 54 SF PER SIDE -PRECAST TRIM CULTURED •-.. ,4 =STONE VENEER SCALE 1/4"= V -0" Hlor✓v.�l i✓s^ �6�V Max. Sign Area : 54 SF. (each side) Total of Both Sides = 108 SF. SIDEWALK�� �-� LANDSCAPE,-/y' LLJ c: Moorpark Marketplace B Double Faced — illuminated 24' Height Freestanding Sign Along New Los Angeles Ave. 4. ♦ _ t ,I "I�d Md x. i j Note: Sign may encroach into 1/2 of the setback area. Min. landscaping setback is 4 feet on all sides. fG METAL OR E.I.F.S. _ CORNICE CERAMIC TILE — INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS. MAX. SIGN AREA = 36 SF. 12 SF. EACH TENANT SIGN. 4 SIGNS PER SIDE = 48 SF.- )R E.I.F.S. TRIM 'URED METAL PANEL PRECAST TRINE ---- -b CULTURE STONE r� VENEER.V .' JVP" — Et.E ✓.trio^/ (-.Note: Maximum Letter Height 18 inches. (Major Tenant Panels) C� '.0 Moorpark Market-gace B Double Faced — illuminated 24' Height Freestanding Sign Along New Los Angeles Ave. S!o' ,- -t-- 6 04-/ Max. O I� Q Art6F,T , 17- 6, :. M " n I �jp- -I- -= CHANNEL _____ - LETTERS E2,11101, e M. IF ®r �Cp• /Lr r9CONT' 12' -0" E4EIIAr7" Total sign area: 84 S.F. (each side) Total of Both Sides = 168 SF. Moorpark Marketplace Four Faced internally illuminated channel letters INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS ON ■ NORTWSOUTH ELEVATIONS ES TO MATCH' .,.....,...,......�F TILES ■ ■ I� GFRC COLUMN OR SIMILAR ■ INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED – - - - CHANNELLETTERSON NORTH.'SOUTH ELEVATIONS ■ LIGHTING FIXTURES TO ACCENT ARCHITECTURAL ■ ELEMENTS CULTURED STONE VENEER PF -801S TEXTURE COATING TO MATCH BUILDING PIASTER -` VIII: 20' A- Moorpark Marketk dace I OC Four Faced — internally illuminated channel letters 78' Freeway Oriented Sign SEE NEXT PAGE (Elevation) FOR DIMENSIONS 78' �33' r7 ■ ' NnRTH R. Gn11TH 9=1 F \ /AT1 CLAYROOFTILES TOMATCH BUILDING ROOF TILES NOTE: TENANT NAMES ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY "MOORPARK PARKETPLACE" SIGN TO BE LOCATED ON EACH ELEVATIONS WIT' THETOTALOFFOUR GFRC COLUMN OR SIMILAR CERAMIC ACCENT TILE • 'l1Fi y; ltl� hr GGI�� 4 I LIGHTING FIXTURES TO —.— ACCENT ARCH•L. ELEIOIERTS� (LOCATION TO STUDY FUFllllq l ,: .. ".` "`�I''!r" .Lr,'r! I''6Hllliil!!; CULTURED STONE VENEER PF -8015 TEXTURE COATING TO ....... ..:... 1 - . MATCH BUILDING PLASTER I i A � I+ yl. 7 F I: r. CULTURE TONEVENEER a; 1 ��.. .. .. .. .. F D G T R. %A/ F G T F I F A T 1 n 1%1 c!-AI G Y•- !Y'•mI'R•- 36 S.F. LOGO+ 9 S.F. TENANT NAME = 45 S.F. TOTAL EACH TEXTURED MTL. 42 S.F. MAJOR TENANT FOUR PER SIDE = 168 S.F. TOTAL EAU 33 S.F. MINOR TENANT TWO PER SIDE = 66 S.F. TOTAL EACH ' 18' af Moorpark Marketplace Four Faced _ internally "• • ~� +ed channel letters vay Oriented Sign Dimension) Y -0" 1 . -0„ in Area Per Side: TARGET)+ 168(MAJOR) 5(MINOR) =279 S.F Total Per Side NEW LOS ANGELES AVENUE i 5'(150mm) CONCRETE MOW CURB - PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGN - PROPERTY UNE- CALTRANS R/W Q %O / W ,ir/ EXTEND EXISTING GARDEN WALL TO PROPERTY LINE J / , REMOVE EXLSTING 'GUARD SHACK' ` SIGNAGE FLOOD LIGHTING, EXACT NUMBER OF SsyJ FIXTURES AND LOCATIONS PER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER (T,. (T. AS SHOWN) e CORNER MILLER PRKWY & NEW LOSIANGELES AVE. SCALE 1' 20' 0 Moorpark Market, lace D Corner of Miller Parkway & New Los Angeles Ave Entry Monument I.D. Sign (No Tenant Signs) Moorpark Marketplace D Corner of Miller Parkway & New Los Angeles Ave Entry Monument I.D. Sign CONCRETE CAP (No Tenant Signs) IDENTIFICATION SIGN :: DENTIFICATION SIGNAGE - PLAN VIEW i� IDENTIFICATION, PIN MOUNT ON EPDXY ! ALL THREAD. MINIMUM 2 MOUNTS PER lit• 2'(SOmm)x2'(SOmm) SO ALUMINUM TUBE FR ATTACHED TO SHFAR PLATE AT SLAB 'J' BOLTS PER CONTRACTORS SHOP DRAWI FIBERGLASS REINFORCED CONCRETE BACK BOARD WITH 1 /2- (12mm)THICK GROUT. NOT TO SCALE SECTION ,RETE CAP E VENEER n VCRETE SLAB 24- (610mm) O.C. NOT TO SCALE Moorpark Marketw. ace p Corner of Miller Parkway & New Los Angeles Ave Entry Monument I.D. Sign (No Tenant Signs) 'ROFILE TRY - CORNER OF NEW LOS ANGELES AVE. & MILLER PARKWAY �1 NOT TO SCALE . __.._.._..._-.-_-._-_. 1l.AZ...M__.._.._.._._._.__._.. __ .4't00mmTHICK- CAST - ALUMINUM I.D.. -. SIGN .._ .............._........._ _.....,...___._ _.__ ......_..__.._.._..._....__.. POLISHED FINISH. FONT SHALL B� - CONGA- ........... 44 -e- _ I � 1J.61M I j 55 ..__ _ i I - _ .. ...... P_A. ... T: 330m T� _ 40 mm ..._. ........ 1 50 .._., _. ----- - -- _ - _...._ _ ._._ _,_. _ .. .... .... _.._ .. ; _. 150 10. mm 00 10 20 30 40 50 3.04M 6.09M 9.14M 12.19M 15.24M j4 REBAR O 1t- (450mm) O.C. E.W. FACE ALL SIDES WITH 3- (75mm) THICK CONCRETE CAP_/ FIBERGLASS REINFORCED TILE BACK BOAR CULTURED STONE VENEER - AUTUMN PRO -FR LEDCESTONE C \ V 'ROFILE TRY - CORNER OF NEW LOS ANGELES AVE. & MILLER PARKWAY �1 NOT TO SCALE r>� I� `d SIGN FLOOD LIGHTING, ACTUAL LOCATION AND QUANTITY PER Moorpark Marketplace OMain Entry Monument I.D. Sign. (No Tenant Signs) PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE (TYP 2 PLACES) MAIN ENTRY IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE PLANTING & LOCATION " g - SCALE I' - 20' 4'(200mm)CAST ALUMINUM 2' -4 OR FABRICATED ENTRY SKNNAGE. 711 mm FABRICATOR SHALL PROVIDE MOCK UP OF EACH FOR OWNER APPROVAL c«(7�Smm)It1(304mm) 014 m RREETT�� CAP CULTURED STONE VENEER 1._ `AUTUMN PRO -FIT 38 mm F� LEDGESTONE 1._6. 2' On 6' .74 11' .35 12' ELEVATION A TYPICAL — ALL ENDS OF SIGNS NOT TO SCALE 60 .._.. FINISH GRADE 55 ..._. - 4'(100mm) CONCRETE SLAB WITH 04 REBAR 24'(610mm) O.C. .cncra 'AUTUMN PRO -FR LEDGESTONE EASTERLY & WESTERLY ENTRY SIGN PROFILE NEW LOS ANGELES ENTRY c. f, Moorpark Market,.,lace E Main Entry Monument I.D. Sign. (No Tenant Signs) ................ _........... -.. - ... _. S—OF "SIGNS 510 m 1- NOT TO SCALE STONE 10.43M IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE - PLAN VIEW TYPICAL EAST AND WEST SIDES - NEW LOS ANGELES ENTRY b, NOT TO SCALE PLANTER(TYP 2'z2'(5Omm z SOmm) 50. TUBE ALUMINUM FRAMING. MEMBER ATTACHMENT PER SIGNAGE CONTRACTORS SHOP DRAWINGS, TO BE APPROVED BY CALTRANS.(TYP) 6'(130mm) THICK MISC. BREAK AWAY MOUNTING PLATE, ATTACHE TO SLAB WITH 'J BOLTS' --' PER SHOP ORAWINGS.(TYP) NATIVE SOIL. COMPACTED TO SECTION Moorpark Marketplace OMain Entry Monument I.D. Sign IDENTITY SIGNAGE —MOUNT TO ALL THREAD MOUNTS. MOUNTS SHALL BE ATTACHED TO SHEAR PLATE. MIN. (2) MOUNTS PER LETTER. CULTURED STONE VENEER 1/4'- 1/2'(7 —l3mm) THICK MORTAR 1 /4'- 1 /z'(7 -1Smm) THICK FIBERGLASS REINFORCED TILE BACKBOARD(TYP) R - U FISER114—ASS REINFORCED TILE BACKBOARD(TYP) 4'(1130mm) THICK CONCRETE SLAB WITH axe 10/10 EWWF. CENTER IN SLAB.(TYP) fmm EtOmm 702mn YP TYP TYP NOT TO SCALE Moorpark Market,, dace Buildings: D1,D2,Pads 1,2,3,4. Method of Sign Area Calculation: Sign Area shall be determined by the total area of a box, or multiple boxes, containing all letterforms comprising the sign. Architectural backgrounds are allowed and are subject to landlords review and approval. Area of architectural back- grounds are not included in sign area calculation. 1 1/2" $„ 5" Section 0 'Typ" Note: Letter Strokes May Exceed Max. Allowed Letter Height, Typical. f� Sign Area Letters Logo Optional - -� A I Architectural background (Not Included in Sign Area Calculation) Moorpark Marketplace Major Tenants (Greater Than 8.000 S.F. Buildings A. B. C1, C2. E. and F): a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. Architectual background, if any, not included in sign area. b: Signs on Side Building Elevations: Each tenant allowed one sign total. Additional ancillary signs allowed. Maximum size of signs is One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area (excluding architectual backgrounds) per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage to max. of 220 s.f. per tenant per sign. Foodcourt Tenant Arcade (Building D1. D2): a: Signs on Front Arcade Elevation: Two (2) square feet of sign area (excluding architectual backgrounds) per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage to a max. of 36 s.f. per tenant per sign. a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: Two (2) square feet of sign area (excluding architectual backgrounds) per one (1) lin- eal foot of building frontage to a max. of 36 s.f. per tenant per sign. Under Canopy Signs (Building D1. D2)(012tional): Signs area determined by the total area of a box, or multiple boxes, containing all letterforms comprising the sign. (see example; 'Method of Sign Area Calculation') max. of 20 s.f. per tenant. One sign per tenant. Pad (Building 1. 2. 3. and 4.): a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: Two (2) square feet of sign area (excluding architectual backgrounds) per one (1) lin- eal foot of building frontage to a max. of 40 s.f. per sign. b: Signs on Side and Rear Building Elevations(Optional): Each tenant allowed three signs in addition to front elevation, max. 40 s.f. each. c: Pad / Drive -Thru Restaurant and Other Restaurant: Dirve -thru restaurant and other restaurant pads are permitted to have approved illuminated menu boards, directional signs, speaker pedestals, take -out window signs, and other minor indentifica- tion signs, max. 25 s.f. per sign. Retail Shop Tenants (Building D1 and D2): a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: Two (2) square feet of sign area (excluding architectual backgrounds) per one (1) lin- eal foot of building frontage to max. area of 36 s.f. per tenant. b: Signs on Side Building Elevation (optional) : Same as front. Signage Design. Materials, Attachment(AII Buildings): Creativity and quality are encouraged in the design of tenant wall signs. a C:) cli Moorpark Market, lace Sign design will be evaluated on the basis of compatibility with the overall project architectural theme. However, at a minimum tenant wall signs will be internally illuminated individual pan - channel letters. (Raceways not permitted) Minimum .040 aluminum with 3/16 "' plastic face; no cross -over neon or wiring permitted. Sign canisters may be allowed for tenant logos only when any such logo constitutes a registered trademark or is part of the D.B.A. All sign colors, lettering styles, graphics treatments, and mounting attachments will be considered against overall compatibility with the development and architectural theme. Specialty background panels are encouraged and will not be calculated as part of sign area. The final design and size of signs will be approved or disapproved at the discretion of the Landlord and must be approved by the City. All decisions will be based on architectural compatibility. Miscellaneous Tenant Building Sianaae: Each tenant shall be permitted to place upon each entrance of its store (inside storefront glass) not more than 144 square inches of gold leaf or decal application lettering not to exceed 2 inches in height, indicating hours of busi- ness, emergency telephone numbers, etc. (see page 36). No advertising place cards, banners, pennants, names, insignias, trademarks, or other descriptive material shall be affixed or maintained upon the glass panes and supports of the show windows and doors, or upon the exterior walls of buildings without the written previous approval of the Landlord and the City, and must be in compliance with City Codes. No permitted banners shall be affixed to the front, rear or sides of the buildings unless approved by landload and the City. A maximum twenty percent (20 %) of interior window area may be used for temporary promotional and sales signage, subject to Landlord and City review and approval. Receiving doors may have a two inch (see page 35) high block letter sign identifying the Tenants' name. Landload shall shall install addresses above the door in six (6) inch high block letters. Letters shall be Dark Bronze applied directly to the door. No white or other background color allowed. Landload shall install addresses numbers for each building on the front building wall, 12 inches clear to the parapet or cornice and top -right of the main building wall. Letter style to be Helvetica Regular, height to be six (6 ") inches, securely mounted to the wall, and approved by the Building and Fire Departments (see page 37). Signage Construction and Installation: Letter fastening and clips are to be concealed and be galvanized, stainless steel, aluminum, brass or bronze metals. s� North Elevation SIGN AREA: TARGET LETTERS - 145 sq. ft. BULLSEYE - 36 sq. ft TOTAL - 181 sq. ft CONSTRUCTION: ALUMINUM RETURNS & BACKS FLAT 3/16" THICK ACRYLIC FACES ALUMINUM MOLDINGS NOTE: Bullseyes is comprised of two pieces; outer ring and inner dot. ice► 6' # 28' COLORS: FACES - ROHM &HAAS #2283 RED RETURNS - PAINT TO MATCH FACES MOULDING - PAINT TO MATCH FACES ILLUMINATION: 15 mm CLEAR RED NEON NOTE: Transformers are located inside letters. (see detail) ELECTRICAL: 120V PROPOSED SIGN AREA 181 S.F.(includes logo) 0 T 1 Moorpark Marketplace Sign Specifications: Major A Wall Sign — Target The standard identification package for the P type stores is an interior illuminated channel letter display at the main entrance as shown, that consists of a 6' -0" Partial North Elevation bullseye combined with a set of 5' -0" TARGET letters. An alternative location Building Frontage: 394' Lineal Feet for the display may be considered in cases of unusual visibility requirement. Consistency of Brand image is critical to TARGET'S success, therefore, any Maximum Letter Ht: 60" variation must be approved by TARGET. Maximum Logo Ht.: 72" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 591 S.F Total Proposed Sign Area For North Elevation: 181 (TARGET)+ 60(PHARMACY) + 7 5 (GARDEN CENTER) =316 S.F. Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One - and - one -half (1.5) TOP OF RIDGE 12 square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. North Elevation SIGN AREA: TARGET LETTERS - 145 sq. ft. BULLSEYE - 36 sq. ft TOTAL - 181 sq. ft CONSTRUCTION: ALUMINUM RETURNS & BACKS FLAT 3/16" THICK ACRYLIC FACES ALUMINUM MOLDINGS NOTE: Bullseyes is comprised of two pieces; outer ring and inner dot. ice► 6' # 28' COLORS: FACES - ROHM &HAAS #2283 RED RETURNS - PAINT TO MATCH FACES MOULDING - PAINT TO MATCH FACES ILLUMINATION: 15 mm CLEAR RED NEON NOTE: Transformers are located inside letters. (see detail) ELECTRICAL: 120V PROPOSED SIGN AREA 181 S.F.(includes logo) 0 T 1 Moorpark Market lace Sign Specifications: Major A Ancillary Sign — Target TARGET store includes a Pharmacy, and it is identified with a set of internally illuminat- ed channel letters. The preferred location for the letters is near the center of the front Partial North Elevation of the building on P type stores. However, an alternative location for the letters may be Building Frontage: 394' Lineal Feet considered on cases of unusual visibility requirements. Consistency of Brand image is Maximum Letter Ht: 30" critical to TARGET'S success, therefore, any variation must be approved by TARGET. Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 591 S.F. Total Proposed Sign Area For North Elevation: 181 (TARGET)+ 60(PHARMACY) + 75(GARDEN CENTER) =316 S.F. Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One - and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. TOP OF RIDGE 12 C _� 4 46' PROPOSED SIGN AREA 60 S.F. a. -ft. M 11 �" \�--24' OPEN t. North Elevation SIGN AREA: 60 sq. ft. CONSTRUCTION: ALUMINUM RETURNS & BACKS FLAT 3/16" THICK ACRYLIC FACES 1" TRIMCAP RETAINERS COLORS: FACES - ROHM &HAAS #2283 RED RETURNS - PAINT TO MATCH FACES MOULDING - PAINT TO MATCH FACES ILLUMINATION: 15 mm CLEAR RED NEON NOTE: Transformers are located inside letters. (see detail) ELECTRICAL: 120V If 24' Moorpark Marketplace Major A Ancillary Sign — Target Partial North Elevation Building Frontage: 394' Lineal Feet Maximum Letter Ht: 24" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 591 S.F Total Proposed Sign Area For North Elevation: 181 (TARGET) +60(PHARMACY) +75(6ARDEN CENTER) =316 S.F. Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One - and - one -half (1.5) DDnonCCn Cir_ni ADCA -7r C c square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. North Elevation SIGN AREA: 75 sq. ft. CONSTRUCTION: ALUMINUM RETURNS & BACKS FLAT 3/16" THICK ACRYLIC FACES 1" TRIMCAP RETAINERS 0 COLORS: FACES - ROHM &HAAS #2283 RED RETURNS - PAINT TO MATCH FACES MOULDING - PAINT TO MATCH FACES ILLUMINATION: 15 mm CLEAR RED NEON NOTE: Transformers are located inside letters. (see detail) ELECTRICAL: 120V letter detail Moorpark Market,.Jace Sign Specifications: Major A Wall Sign — Target The standard identification package for the P type stores is an interior illuminated channel letter display at the main entrance as shown, that consists of a 6' -0" Parcial West Elevation bullseye combined with a set of 5' -0" TARGET letters. An alternative location Building Frontage: 289' Lineal Feet for the display may be considered in cases of unusual visibility requirement. Consistency of Brand image is critical to TARGET'S success, therefore, any Maximum Letter Ht.: 60" variation must be approved by TARGET. Maximum Logo Ht.: 72" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 434 S.F. Proposed Total Sign Area: 181 S.F. PROPOSED SIGN AREA 181 S.F. (includes logo) West Elevatiori SIGN AREA: TARGET LETTERS - 145 sq. ft. BULLSEYE - 36 sq. ft TOTAL - 181 sq. ft CONSTRUCTION: ALUMINUM RETURNS & BACKS FLAT 3/16" THICK ACRYLIC FACES ALUMINUM MOLDINGS )COTE: Bullseyes is comprised of two pieces; outer ring and inner dot. f, y C) IL i COLORS: FACES - ROHM &HAAS #2283 RED RETURNS - PAINT TO MATCH FACES MOULDING - PAINT TO MATCH FACES ILLUMINATION: 15 mm CLEAR RED NEON NOTE: Transformers are located inside letters. (see detail) ELECTRICAL: 120V Q Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One- and -one- half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. Moorpark Marketplace Major B Wall Sign — T.J.Maxx North Elevation Building Frontage : 150' Lineal Feet Maximum Letter Ht: 72" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 225 S.F Proposed Total Sign Area: 150 S.F. Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One - and - one -half (1.5) eet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. North Elevation Major Tenants (Greater Than 8.000 S.F. Buildings A. B. C1. C2. E. and F): a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. b: Signs on Side Building Elevations: Each tenant with a side building elevation which exceeds fifty (50) feet allowed one signs total. Additional ancillary signs allowed, provided maximum allowable sign area is not exceeded. �.a UP Moorpark Market, lace Major C -1 Wall Sign —Michaels North Elevation - Building C -1 Building Frontage: 118' Lineal Feet Maximum Letter Ht.: 72" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 177 S.F Proposed Total Sign Area: 132.5 S.F. Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One -and- one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. North Elevation Major Tenants (Greater Than 8.000 S.F. Buildings A. B. C1. C2. E. and F): a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. b: Signs on Side and Rear Building Elevations: Each tenant with a side building elevation which exceeds fifty (50) feet allowed two signs total. Additional ancillary signs allowed, provided maximum allowable sign area is not exceeded. PROPOSED SIGN AREA 120 S.F. North Elevation East Elevation '1 S.F Moorpark Marketplace Major C -2 Tenant Wall Sign - Famous Footwear Building C -2 Building Frontage : 82' Lineal Feet (North) 119' Lineal Feet (East) Maximum Letter Ht: 60" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 123 S.F (North) 179 S.F (East) Proposed Total Sign Area: 120 S.F(North) 171 S.F.(East) Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One - and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. nants (Greater Than 8.000 S.F. Buildinas A. B a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: One - and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. b: Signs on Side Building Elevations: Each tenant with a side building elevation which exceeds fifty (50) feet allowed two signs total. Major A allowed three signs total. Additional ancillary signs allowed, provided maximum allowable sign area is not exceeded. Moorpark Marketk iace Major Tenants (Greater Than 8,000 S.F. Buildings A B C1 C2 E and Major E Wall Sign — Kohl'$ Fl- a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: One - and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. b: Signs on Side Building Elevations: Each tenant with a side building elevation which exceeds fifty (50) feet allowed two signs total. Major A allowed three signs total. Additional ancillary signs allowed, provided maximum allowable sign area is not exceeded. Partial West Elevation Building Frontage : 320' Lineal Feet Maximum Letter ht: 72" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area: 234 S.F Proposed Total Sign Area: 195 S.F. Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. ....,....... -� ,.._ -• - - -- -�5 S.F. West Elevation r+*. Aa Building Letter Installation The following information is a step -by -step procedure for installing KOHL'S letters. Please follow this procedure at all times. A copy of this drawing, the construction detail drawing of the letters manufactured by Federal Sign and a copy of the building elevation drawing must be onsite when doing the installation. If you arrive on site for a scheduled install and a problem arises, you must call V.Munch at 630487 -6814 to resolve pWor to leaving site._If not avallable call Jackie Rosiak, 262 - 703 -1895 or Bill Schwalbach,262 -54 &0627 or Natalie Martin, 262- 703 -1697 before leaving site. 1. When letters are delivered to your shop, test pght all letters prior to trudc leaving. There are 12'- whips on the back of each letter. The method we use to crate the loam allow you to test light them without entirely uncrati ng the letters. 2. Contact Federal Slgn at 630. 887 -6814 Immediately If you suspect any Internal or hidden damage to the letters that would have occurred during shipping. Any damage not noted on the freight waybill tl�,yggi�ponslblgtyto repair. Moorpark Marketplace Major E Wall Sign — Kohl's 5. Layout your mounting and electrical bad holes using the running dimensions shown on the Federal Sign construction detail drawing. fastening and electrical holes are In horizontal Imes with all measurements from lefttaright. iators _dslllylg l rlltfofAft11ig2troohe.makesure 6. Once holes are set -up and drilled, mount the wal I dips sent with the letters. Make sure orientation of cllps Is correct, thla will be Important when doing your Anal adjustments to the letters once they are onthewall. See Federal Sign cons tructioa detail drawing showing proper orientation of the dips. 7, ttefore putting letters on thewall, determine what the local codeallows for the type of conduityou can use to place wires through the wall. Conmect conduit to nipple connector provided on letter back. put wire whips in conduit and prepare letters to Ilft Into place, Federal Sign provides IIR rings on each letter. 8, UR letters Into place and put electrical leads thru wall. Donotcompletely tighten boltson dips, aflail adjustmeatmust be made. Completely sal ELECTRICAL LEAD hobs with clearslliconecaulk, 9. **Note +9Whsn mounted properly, the top of the letter will be spaced 4" from the building and the 3. To begin Installing the letters, determine what type of wag you will be mounting to. Concrete block, bottom will be 4- 1 /Cilrom the building. This is done so that the water will run offtowards the back of masonry, dryvly etc- This will determinewhat type of mounting hardware you will need to use. Wall the letter Instead running toward the front and under the retainer pushing dirt down on the inside of anchors, through bolts, sleeved, ate, theletterfaces, 4. Perthadesign drawing andbulldingeleystion drawings supplied, besorro letters are centered between 10. Once all letters are In place and adjusted, If possible, test light the letter. TAk QZMpjU. §f the brick accent bands, K mounting on a brick wall. Do not dwlate from this placement unless you completed Installation, Havejgbskes uon4sor sign theinstallation completed form, have prior approval. Occasionally, a roof scupper or light may not appear on the building elevation drawings and we would have to move placement of the letter set, but you would still need prior 11, Theon-ilteelectriclan for Kohl's will do the final electrical connection totheletters. approval. 12. With the UL 2161 ruling regarding GFI transformers, to operate properly, each letter set must have a separate ground and neutral wire. No otherequipmentis to be connected to Mal otter set, SJl • W & 'C' CLIPS WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE BACK OF THE LETTERS W THE PLANT. • V CUPS WILL BE SHIPPED WITH LETTER TO BE INSTALLED ON WALL • 'C' CUP WILL HOLD BOTTOM OF LETTER OUT TO ALLOW WATER TO RUN OFF THE TOP OF LETTER AND DOWN THE BACK WSTEAD OF THE FACE. L' LL - __. .... ._._ W43MV -• p :BEY3aMTeua�wrArmewwBi<L3rTaM ....,�.•.,•.• •0MOr0[nN,�un�wmiRi.lNiwwMint .WAM IMRiLRL .AOin[R,M"RI AYMLIfiL0R1i01NdtYN,lq •10.Nt10.M,17W Z� 1 Moorpark Market, :ace Major E Wall Sign — Kohl's a,:r ALM. CT~ ►AM SAM SLACK v[• . T /a.i •• $ro. n" 11"0015 yr ALNT W( vftm TO 0 FtAf-AAQO TLC PAClt V Pict. 0 mmu) *- 00 VW& t0. *a K-4 CAS A/0 s — ea "min tucmwss ALL MEW* OOMS N RAFRA 11 w.ow ro tsna.• xt 001AL r Yr LaLk"s w F OF 0A" VtOn 7ANCLH 1/0• .• LOM10 N TO" OF PAM# .000• ALLn DAM PANT SAM tLAm .0100 CLASS HUMS •30 Y,MP TI ANSNO" '"[n4L1 NACTM F WWI on OF LATTNL S wm yr u" Mt, 0T "TALLtL [tCHiO S y SVRLN ON 0011011 YO IWLNVFC 14AWWAM . WALL MOUNTIRO A33EMSLY FORTOP OF LETTERS /8 WALL �. MOORTIMO ASSEMBLY FOR BOTTOM OF LETTERS Moorpark Marketplace Major F Wall Sign — Linens N Things West Elevation Building Frontage :150' Lineal Feet - - - - -- - - -- North Elevation Building Frontage :200' Lineal Feet Maximum Letter Ht.: 72" Maximum Total Allowed Sign Area : 225 S.F (West) 300 S.F (North) Proposed Total Sign Area: 197 S.F. (West) 197 S.F. (North) West Elevation North Elevation I� Maximum Allowed Total Sign Area based upon: One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. Maior Tenants ( Greater Than 8.000 S.F. Buildinas A. B. C1. C2. E. and F): a: Signs on Front Building Elevation: One - and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage. b: Signs on Side Building Elevations: Each tenant with a side building elevation which exceeds fifty (50) allowed two signs total. Additional ancillary signs allowed. •gyp. +,��r ,�I�;��s'��''�i� E3 ,aw.1 9� rw- 11i J����Xi:' e rsv� - � J"" GgCvaawll - 'ROIECT INDENTIFICATION SIGN - 48 S.F. MAX. Unip rA A I 91 i p j —'—T at-- r Moorpark Marketplace Foodcourt Tenant Arcade Signs Buildings D -1 & D- 2 North West Elevation MAX. TENANT SIGN AREA 36 S.F PER SIGN 6 SIGNS = 216 S.F. TOTAL (INCLUDING LOGO OR ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUND). LOGO, INDIVIDUAL LETTER STROKES AND BACKGROUND MAY EXCEED 24" HEIGHT 48 S.F. (ID)+216 S.F(TENANT)=264 S.F. TOTAL ONE SIDE ONLY Foodcourt Tenant Arcade (Buildings D1and D2)• a: Signs on Foodcourt Arcade: One- and - one -half (1.5) square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage to a max. of 30 s.f. per tenant per sign. Moorpark Market, !ace Retail & Foodcourt Tenant Window Signs - Building D -1 &D -2 POWER RACEWAY LOCATED IN THE MULLION OF STOREFRONT SIGNS MOUNTED TO RACEWAY ON EXTERIOR OF STOREFRONT MAX. SIGN 30 S.F. PER TENANT. MAX. LETTER HEIGHT 24" ' ( NOT INCLUDING LOGO OR ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUNC LOGO, INDIVIDUAL LETTER STROKES AND BACKGROUND MAY EXCEED 24" HEIGHT +:9 'fit 'r+•` 1 ?.� Y • 1 • a ' .13' MIN. EA CE O Reta urt Tenant Window Signs (Building D1. it & Foodco a: Signs on Store Front Windows: One -and- one -half (1.5) .,• ti . x ,i , ^, R square feet of sign area per one (1) lineal foot of building frontage to a max. of 30 s.f. per tenant per sign. .North Elevation D1 & West Elevation D2 Moorpark Marketplace Under Canol2y Signs (Building D1. D2): Under Canopy Signs And Signs area determined by the total area of a box, or multiple Wall Signs (Optional) boxes, containing all letterforms comprising the sign. (see exam- ple; 'Method of Sign Area Calculation') max. of 12 s.f. per tenant. One sign per tenant. Non-illuminated TENANT TO PROVIDE PAINTED BLACK METAL BRACKET, PER DEVELOPER'S SPECIFICATION: SIGN AREA - 12 S.F. MAX. YCC G m C 00 VAI 3 4' -0" Max. a, - 0 L Wall Signs 7X V.1NT' ."+CX --v rtawr� BOTTOM OF CANO BACKING SIGN AREA - 12 S.F. MAX: CABLE - OR ROD )C< G m a, 0 L 41 LM 1 %I Under Canopy Signs 6"T--:::1.2.34 (BY L 3» - Z=ENANT NAME (E APPROVED FONT. HELVETICA Moorpark Market, lace Shop & Foodcourt Tenant Delivery Door Buildings D -1 & D- 2 DESCRIPTION: All letters and number's color shall distinctly contrast with their background, either light on dark or dark on light NOTE: No other signage is allowed on delivery side of building t Moorpark Marketplace Shops —Store frontage Sign Buildings D -1 & D- 2 APPROVED FONT: HELVETICA DESCRIPTION: 6" height tenant suite number in white vinyl above glass door tenant entry information sign to be white vinyl applied to glass with 12" x12" max. area. To be installed by the Landlord. tl � �: i ",�'.� ,_river- i.��war���i���w����_ Wit• �+ + +�+••�• 'r +•,,�� ��� r I I ! i Wi i �� �l�.m.. .rF_.� �� y r++� la�rl,..t�/L � III,�:• ✓.���■ I ►..�� � ii�r�l�. {',../ ,.� -!:'� f� a� � - - � ,f� //�j�l,.�a..,,...�sal�•�L/' c� no 38 Moorpark Marketplace Prior to submittal to the City for plan check and Tenants sign fabrication, Tenant or his sign contractor shall submit for Landlord approval three (3) sets of complete and fully dimensioned and detailed sign drawings. These drawings shall include: - Elevation of storefront showing design, location, size and layout of sign, drawn to scale, indicating materials, colors , and dimensions, attachment devices and construction detail. - Section through letter and /or sign panel showing the dimensioned projection of the face of the letter and /or sign panel and the illumination. Drawings (3 sets) should be mailed to: ZELMAN RETAIL PARTNERS, INC. 515 South Figueroa St., Suite 1230 Los Angeles, California 90071 Phn: (213) 533 -8100 Fax: (213) 533 -8118 Attn: Bob Exel / Sandy Kopelow All Tenant sign submittals shall be reviewed by Landlord and /or its agent for conformance with the provisions of the City approved Master Sign Program Plan. Within ten (10) business days after receipt of Tenant's drawings Landlord shall either approve the submittal, contingent upon any required modifications, or disapprove Tenant's sign submittal. Approval or disapproval shall remain at the sole right and discretion of Landlord. A full set of final plans must be approved in writing by Landlord prior to permit application to the City or sign fabrication. Following Landlord's approval of proposed signage, Tenant or his agent shall submit to the City sign plans signed by Landlord and applications for all permits for fabrication and installation by sign contractor. Tenant shall be solely responsible for the cost of City plan check fees and permits, and shall furnish Landlord with a copy of said permits prior to installation of Tenant's sign(s). Fabrication and installation of all signs shall be performed in accordance with standards and specifications outlined in these criteria and in the final plans and shop drawings approved by Landlord and the City. Any work deemed unacceptable shall be y_ rejected and shall be promptly corrected or modified at Tenant's expense as required by the City, Landlord or its agent. sdl Moorpark Market,_ lace The Tenant sign contractor is responsible to do the following: - Provide to the Landlord, prior to commencing sign fabrication and installation, an original certificate of insurance naming the Landlord as 'Additional Insured'. - Submit to Landlord and City for approval prior to fabrication complete and fully- dimensioned shop drawings. - Obtain approved sign permits ( stamped as approved by the City )from the City prior to sign fabrication and deliver copies of same to Landlord. - Repair and /or replace any damage or destruction to any portion of the shopping center (i.e.; buildings and site improve ments caused by contractor, its employees, or agents during the installation, repair, or removal of tenants sign(s). - Promptly remove any equipment, debris, and unused sign materials after installation, repair, or removal of tenants sign(s). { C1,, C� fa N pt CUSTOMTMMWAT [0ALUIMN MEL, MCMAMTULLT IT"LMO SEAMS I [OLIO ALV— @ACM. x' VI!!►NOIall, ROw M lRTai, T ISM lRTl11 EO %- 11Y11CYMIAMSIIMIIMM %•LLYWMw leMSW! lO W[ON TIM[ MMPORT O aARNYCWT AC —CH... I" Of ELIC1110MlO IMOM V ECTM A I SU Yl AIPIIOVEp COMMECIOR l W IYlA1PIO 1001 O 6161"IN ATO10ILLLYW6 lO OIIAM MW.EI IIr W. O O•FITT OIICOMNlET OR F Nam .011 MM11 MSTTMAM STOIIMlNlON fO MIOR TUII ® FAITINFM TO WALL M.O nM LETTEMI �iMOa Qi oALwwaE. vEMr[s TMAAMMONYIM ION ® LMTED FLEX IMETAL ANWNMM AIM Una CEO EARL[ ®LSICOMOMF ANNE "LEI. 1MP INAMf011YEJ1, YA. LMIAR ® MWANTILICTMICALIOIMCI Moorpark Marketplace Approved Sign Section Details p CUITOMFARNNESTEDALYAMMYMCNAMMEL tO NIY CII'TMM[ADEO P00 MTTN cIOAREAR .0 AcMW1e vcEMI Of ALUNNUML[TT[OFAC[ O MII` GLEAM LEMAN EACM LENS O a. ROIOS MOH YOLTAOI aw& U.L. APMOKO COMMWTOM © 1]ST8 OTO ILEOYMO pi M' METAL PLEXISLE CONCHAE SO GTO-6 O MEOM TV" P�yq(AITEMEM TO WALL 174 PER LETT[IO Oiiro. �1 OAIVARM[D. N[M7E0 TIIARAORMEIL NOx ® "low Tun SUPPORT © 3C.. TNARIFOMMIR V.L. LMTEO © WgyAILIIYMMTITMVCTw[ O K A1Y ® {AIET'OMCOMNECT.WRC. ON WALL ON FIRM 1 MANMOMMEN OI CUSTOM PASWCATID ALYYO41M CHANNEL O %•TMMKN AR•AMF WNMM %`ALYWNw PCM[N[ TO ]I1f•DMYET[PE i•111MEADND MOD WTM CLEAR ACMM MMCEMS O TMARNYClNT •CPTLM:IRI[M IM.! O VIVCLLARLA— RACNLSNS 0 cu:crMDWTM •Flave c oNMNN GTTCWW OANNE uTn. OTO SLUIRMD O VMETAL F—LS COMOMT fO OTOWMNE ® N[OMTVa 1Q FASTENER TO MOLL 13.9 MR LITTIRI © ON.WWTlD.KNTlD TDAM[IDNw. NDT Q KOR Tuft -MONT O 20 —TMARI /OHMS.. MA.VRa. ® WNLnYIronllNUCIwE �1* 1 ® 4YITTWICOMxEt!lMRCM 0M ETALL 011 FMST TMARYDMMM ® IMIEMLM:MIMYMY!«.M City of Moorpark ITR- A _lo .8 Community Services Department ee e&a ee4c-f'1'--"r MEMORANDUM CC meefiT TO: Honorable City Council Steven Kueny, City manager FROM: John Brand, Senior Management Analyst DATE: September 6, 2003 U� SUBJECT: FYI Solid Waste Rate History An overview of solid waste collection rates in Moorpark, dating back to 1992. Moorpark Solid Waste Collection Rates Solid Waste Collection Rates With rate com onents 2003 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998 2003 A 2000 2001 2002 2003 A Residential 16.35 17.05 17.22 17.40 16.30 17.12 17.33 17.51 17.87 18.49 19.06 19.24 21.41 Senior 13.05 13.85 13.96 14.10 13.04 13.80 13.96 14.10 14.40 14.90 15.37 15.52 16.07 Citizen Hauler 13.47 13.86 13.97 14.14 10.47 11.08 11.28 11.45 Super _ _ _ _ 13.04 13.80 13.96 14.10 14.40 14.90 15.37 15.52 16.07 Rec cler Landfill 1 4.05 4.25 4.25 4.25 Com'l _ _ _ _ 96.60 96.91 98.16 99.26 101.53 104.85 108.25 108.96 108.96 bin 3 yd 14.52 15.33 15.53 15.70 16.03 16.47 17.01 17.14 19.20 Base Moor ark Solid Waste Collection Rates With rate com onents 2003 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 A Landfill 34.80 36.80 35.95 35.95 36.30 38.10 38.10 38.10 38.23 38.23 39.15 39.27 39.27 Rate er ton Hauler 13.47 13.86 13.97 14.14 10.47 11.08 11.28 11.45 11.76 12.20 12.64 12.75 14.81 Operating Landfill 1 4.05 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.27 4.27 4.37 4.39 4.39 Recycling 1.35 1.65 1.70 1.70 Hauler 14.82 15.51 15.67 15.84 14.52 15.33 15.53 15.70 16.03 16.47 17.01 17.14 19.20 Base Franchise .53 .54 .55 .56 .58 .59 .60 .61 .64 .82 .85 .90 1.01 Fee AB 939 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 Residential 16.35 17.05 17.22 17.40 16.30 17.12 17.33 17.51 17.87 18.49 19.06 19.24 21.41 total C: Mary Lindley, Director of Community Services Solid Waste Rate History Sep02 ITEM 1a• 4• CITY OF s,1,onRPAR>K, CALIFORNIA Cif-V colancil "Mr.etinR ACTTON:Glpnr - i �1ii aSu�1G�r Ci�� ice. Moorpark City Counci r • AGENDA REPORT BY: TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: John Brand, Senior Management Analyst DATE: September 12, 2002 (CC meeting of September 18, 2002) SUBJECT: Consider Solid Waste Franchise Agreements, and Resolution No. 2002- , Rescinding Resolution No. 2001 -1924, Updating Solid Waste Collection Fees for 2003. SUMMARY This item was continued from the September 4, 2002 regular meeting. At the December 6, 2000, meeting, the City Council appointed an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Mayor Pro Tem Mikos and Councilmember Harper to explore issues surrounding the City's solid waste franchises. At this and other meetings, the Council expressed interest in establishing an automated collection system for solid waste, recyclables, and yard trimmings. The Ad Hoc Committee, staff, and the City's two franchise haulers met several times since then to secure a new Agreement based on the direction from Council. The result is a proposed Franchise Agreement with an eight -year term and a possible two -year extension. Key features of the proposed Agreement include the introduction of fully automated solid waste collection service in 2002 -2003, more bulky item pick- ups for residents, greater environmental liability protection for the City, and a new landfill fee adjustment methodology that reduces the impact of landfill tipping fee increases on Moorpark residents. The current Franchise Agreement expires September 30, 2002. DISCUSSION The Ad Hoc Committee set several objectives for a new solid waste franchise, including: • Responsive Customer service and problem resolution • Automated collection service at an economical cost • Litter reduction from collection activities (spills Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 2 from cans and trucks) • More bulky item pick -ups • Increase Franchise Transfer Fees The hauler negotiations produced an Agreement that meets these objectives. Automated Collection If approved, automated collection would be implemented at the additional cost of $1.99 per residence, the lowest implementation cost in the region for this service. The implementation plan is to convert the City to automated collection in phases. The entire City would be converted to automated collection by the end of June 2003. There would be no cost increase associated with automation until the month after the new service begins. In other words, there would be no pro rating of the increase for residents that are converted to automated service and the haulers have agreed not to charge an increase until January 2003 for all residents that are converted during 2002. Automated collection is a technologically advanced system that employs a specially fitted refuse truck. Automated refuse collection trucks are equipped with specially designed hydraulic arms that grasp, lift, and empty the special containers issued to residents. After dumping the material into the truck, the robotic arm returns the container to the curb. As proposed, residents will receive a 64- gallon discards cart, a 64- gallon commingled recycling cart, and a 96- gallon Yard Trimmings cart from their hauler. The 64- gallon carts hold the same volume of material as two conventional 32- gallon trash cans that most residents typically now use. The total capacity of the new automated carts is 224 gallons. Currently residents are allowed 180 gallons of solid waste and yard trimmings plus a 32- gallon recycling container for a total of 212 gallons. Residents may put out unlimited additional recycling containers at no cost. Very few customers currently take advantage of this. Other cities have found that providing a single, larger - sized cart increases the volume of residential recycling. The proposed carts are specially designed for automated collection. Automated trash collection is cleaner, safer, and more efficient than traditional manual collection. It is cleaner because the carts have attached lids and reduce litter and spilled material. It is safer for the driver because the lifting arm prevents injury, and the stability of the carts makes them less prone to topple and create a hazard to the public. On average, the dwell time at each Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 3 stop is reduced 25 %, producing greater efficiency that leads to a shorter duration of time that the trucks and their attendant noise and emissions are present on City streets. The new automated containers are equipped with wheels and are easy to maneuver. The benefits of automated solid waste collection include: • Improved neighborhood appearance on collection day • Faster and more efficient service • Wheels on the carts allows easy maneuverability • Attached lid protects against flies, rodents, and other vectors • More volume per container, fewer containers to pick up, less storage floor space needed during the week • Litter, spills, and wind -blown trash less likely due to greater stability in wind and attached lid • Increase in worker safety since containers are mechanically emptied • Carts provide space for disseminating information on proper disposal • Carts have a long -life expectancy • Residents never have to buy trash cans The disadvantages of the proposed automated collection system are: • Discard volume is specifically defined by the cart size. Currently the haulers have accommodated occasional excess loads. Residents may have to hold some items over to the next week if they have a spike volume of material. • Oversize items will have to be cut down to fit in cart, or removed using a Bulky Item pick up. An odd -sized item like an ironing board cannot simply be placed next to the cart; it has to be inside the cart. • If household discard volume increases, a larger cart will have to be ordered at an additional cost. Trash cart exchange from 64- gallon to 96- gallon costs $3.00 more per month, a second 64- gallon trash cart costs $5.00 per month, a second 96- gallon trash cart costs $8.00 more per month. A second 96- gallon yard trimmings cart costs $3.00 per month. Recycling cart exchange from 64- gallon to 96- gallon costs $1.00 more per month, a second 64- gallon recycling cart costs $2.50 per month, a second 96- gallon recycling cart costs $3.00 more per month. Currently there has been lax enforcement of volume limits. Extra charges are rarely applied. to 3 J Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 4 • The larger carts may take up more storage space. • More collection day parking enforcement may necessary if parked vehicles interfere with automated collection. • Residents may try to avoid changing cart sizes by improperly placing discards in the yard trimmings or recycling carts. Residents may request additional carts and carts of different sizes. The service cost is adjusted up or down when the cart size is changed. The haulers have agreed to allow residents to make as many cart size changes as the need for the for the first six months of service, plus one additional cart exchange during the remainder of 2003. The $5.00 cart exchange charge would not be implemented until 2004. After January 1, 2004, the $5.00 cart trade -in charge would apply. Residents can request a different level of service depending on need. For example, upgrading from a 64- gallon to a 96- gallon refuse cart would cost $3.00 additional each month. The cost of a 96- gallon recycling cart would be $1.00 more per month. Downsizing to the Super Recycler Rate would reduce the monthly cost $5.29 per month (plus the 2003 annual adjustment). The complete residential automated collection service rates are shown on "Exhibit A." Educational material based on successful automated program conversions across the nation will be distributed to all residents. It will include instructions explaining how to use the new carts. It will also explain that the haulers will pick up a resident's old containers free, and it will also include innovative alternative uses for the old containers. The old containers can be converted for many uses around the house, including: turning them into compost bins; earthquake /emergency supply storage; and even a back yard cistern to collect rainwater for irrigating your garden. The haulers will collect unwanted old containers at no cost during the first month of service. The City's haulers are experienced at automated collection conversions. They are committed to quickly resolving the concerns of residents. If approved, the proposed conversion to automated collection service would take place in ten phases, one phase for each service day(Monday - Friday) that each of the City's two haulers provide residential service. By implementing automated service in these ten phases over six months, the haulers will be able to focus their resources and respond rapidly to the problems as they may arise. The most common problems are allowing enough space between the carts when placing the carts out at the top of N.: !..` .A.. i.d iko Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 5 the curb, and parked cars blocking the carts. Typically, neighbors adapt on the weekly collection days. The City of Thousand Oaks reports that education and public information were key aspects for successful implementation and that there was little or no need for extra code enforcement or parking citations to mitigate problems with automated collection. A professional journal on managing Municipal Solid Waste, MSW Management, recently published a study on the public reaction to automated solid waste collection. A summary of some of the key residents' responses are shown in Exhibit "B." The alternative to the proposed automation collection would be to retain the existing, manual collection system. The other major changes to the proposed Franchise Agreements are discussed in the next section. Agreement Provisions The proposed new Agreement doubles the number of bulky item pick- ups from two items once a year, to four items up to twice a year. The Agreement raises the franchise transfer fee to a minimum of $50,000 with annual adjustments at the same percentage rate as the collection fees that are adjusted each year. The transfer fee is paid to the City if either franchise hauler is sold or otherwise acquired by new ownership. The new Agreement also has a number of technical updates. Most noticeable is the fact that each hauler now has two Agreements: one for residential service and a second for non - residential service. The reason for this and many of the other technical changes is to reduce the City's potential for exposure to Superfund liability. If the federal EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) declares that a disposal site is a Superfund site for environmental cleanup, all past users of the site face enormous clean up costs on a "joint and several" basis. This means that the cleanup costs may be imposed based on an entity's ability to pay, not based on the volume or toxicity of the materials disposed of in the landfill. Municipal governments have been severely impacted by Superfund liability. The City Attorney has carefully reworked a number of passages to reduce the City's potential exposure to liability for Superfund clean up of a facility where solid waste from the City has been disposed. Additional technical changes are made to the Agreement to reflect changes in solid waste law and current court decisions. A technical change was established in January 2002 at the time of - 1; ��o Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 6 the last annual rate adjustment. It is the way that the landfill tipping rates are calculated. The old rate adjustment formula was not based on tonnage, and it imposed disproportionately higher cost increases on residential customers and smaller commercial customers. The new landfill adjustment methodology uses real tonnage to allocate the landfill cost increase in proportion to disposal. The most notable change is in the residential landfill rate. The January 2002 increase in the landfill- tipping fee of 92G per ton would equate to a 33� per month increase for each residential account under the old formula. Using the new formula, the rate increase is only 10� a month, a savings of 23G per household per month for Moorpark residents. The new landfill formula will continue to work for Moorpark residents because the Simi Valley Landfill already has $3.00 in tipping fee increases pending approval with the County of Ventura. It is anticipated that these increases will be implemented in the next few years. As Moorpark residents expand their source reduction and recycling, disposal tonnages are lowered and the amount of a landfill disposal increases allowed also goes down in the new formula. The new rate adjustment formula is included in the proposed Agreement. If approved, the residential rate adjustment for automated collection would occur only after January 1, 2003 even for those areas where automated collection is implemented before the end of the current year. For the other areas, the automated collection rates will not be charged until automated collection is implemented in that particular area. When automated collection is implemented, the residential automated rate will be $21.41 which includes the 2003 annual adjustment, and the senior citizen and super recycle rate would be $16.07 per month including the annual adjustment. A summary comparison of the current and proposed residential collection rates is shown on Exhibit "A." The annual rate adjustment is discussed later in this report, and the full new rate structure is shown in Exhibit "G" of the Franchise Agreements distributed to Council separately. Among other changes in the new Agreement, the haulers agreed to maintain a billing system that allows for notices and message inserts. The haulers requested a minimum term of eight years, citing that it is necessary so that they can recover the capital outlay and justify the expense of new trucks and containers. The Agreement obligates the haulers to implement new programs that the City may adopt in the future. Specifically, the haulers agreed to re- configuring the commercial rates to create greater incentives to recycle at businesses and multi - family residential complexes, if C,121 41], F 31 Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 7 the City Council adopts such a program. In conclusion, staff feels that the new Solid Waste Franchise Agreements are beneficial to the community and represent the successful accomplishment of the goals and objectives that the City Council set for the City's solid waste franchises. However, as stated previously, the City Council can elect to retain the existing manual collection system in place of the proposed automated system. The other provisions discussed in the Agenda report can go forward. A complete copy of the Residential Agreement in legislative format and a clean copy of the Commercial Agreement were provided to the Council separately for review. Annual Rate Adjustment Also submitted for consideration is the annual adjustment to solid waste collection fees as specified in the Franchise Agreements between the City and the haulers. Rate adjustments are proposed for both manual and automated residential collection. This year the increase in the July -July Consumer Price Index (CPI) Less Housing was 0.75 %. The landfill rate for franchise haulers also increased 12� per ton to $39.27 per ton. The rate formula factors the increases into the rate structure in accordance with the Agreements. As proposed, the manual residential solid waste rate would increase 18� per month, to $19.24. The senior citizen and super recycler rate would increase 15G per month to $15.52. If approved, the residential rate for automated service would be an additional $2.17 for a total of $21.41, and the senior citizen rate would increase 55� for a total of $16.07 per month. Commercial rates would increase proportionately but only for the annual adjustment. The new rates would become effective January 1, 2003. STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Roll Call Vote) 1. Approve the City's Franchise Agreements with Moorpark Rubbish Disposal and GI Industries, subject to final language approval by the City Manager and City Attorney. 2. Adopt attached Resolution No. 2002- , updating the Solid Waste Collection Fees effective January 1, 2003. 1 3 -IL 3 5 2002 Manual 2003 Manual 2003 Automation Regular Residential 19.06 19.24 21.41 Senior /Super Recycler 15.37 15.52 16.07 STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Roll Call Vote) 1. Approve the City's Franchise Agreements with Moorpark Rubbish Disposal and GI Industries, subject to final language approval by the City Manager and City Attorney. 2. Adopt attached Resolution No. 2002- , updating the Solid Waste Collection Fees effective January 1, 2003. 1 3 -IL 3 5 Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 8 A. Regular Monthly Rate: Trash - 64- gallon cart Recyclables - 64- gallon cart Yard Trimmings - 96- gallon cart B. Senior Monthly Rate: Trash - 32- gallon cart Recyclables - 64- gallon cart Yard Trimmings — 64- gallon cart C. Super Recycler Rate Trash - 32- gallon cart Recyclables - 64- gallon cart Yard Trimmings — 64- gallon cart EXHIBIT A Automated Collection Service Automated 2003 Manual 2002 Manual $21.41 $19.24 $19.06 D. Service options Trash cart exchange from 64 to 96 Additional 64 gallon trash cart Additional 96 gallon trash cart Additional 96 gallon yard trimmings cart Recycle cart exchange from 64 to 96 Additional 64 gallon recycle cart Additional 96 gallon recycle cart E. Limited Service w/o Yard Trimmings Trash - 32- gallon cart Recyclables - 64- gallon cart No Yard Trimmings service $16.07 $15.52 $15.37 $16.07 $15.52 $15.37 3.00 /mo 5.00 /mo 8.00 /mo 3.00 /mo 1.00 /mo 2.50 /mo 3.00 /mo 15.40/mo F. Service Changes Customer may change service levels as needed during the first six months and one additional time during the first year of new service at no charge. Subsequent service changes 5.00 per request. Honorable City Council Regular Meeting of September 18, 2002 Page 9 EXHIBIT B Residents' Responses to the SWANCC Pilot Program (Steven Schilling, P.E., MSW Management, July /August 2002 p.54 -57) In general, the residents' reactions to the program were overwhelmingly positive. When asked how convenient the recycling cart was to use, 91.4% of the respondents said it was very convenient. The study area was a section of suburban Cook County Illinois served by the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC). This area has some demographic similarities to Moorpark and Ventura County. The study area implemented automated collection of recyclables using the same size carts proposed for Moorpark. Here is the survey: If your recycling bins you do with your extra Throw in garbage Place next to bin Drop off Save for next week What is your opinion recycling cart? Too Large Too small Convenient size No opinion were full before collection day, what did recyclables? 28.3% 12.1% 1.9% 57.7% on the size and dimensions of the new Describe the frequency of new recycling cart. None Periodic Twice a month Weekly 7.2% 4.0% 87.8% 1.0% your household's participation with the 2.7% 1.8% 12.8% 82.7% Overall, how convenient is the new cart to use? Not convenient 2.5% Moderately 6.1% Very 91.4% How would you rate the program using the new carts? Failure 0.4% Program needs help 1.1% Moderate success 13.4% Huge Success 85.1% Exhibit "C" RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, UPDATING SOLID WASTE COLLECTION FEES AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION 2001 -1924. WHEREAS, it is appropriate for the City to establish fees relative to collection and management of solid waste collection; and WHEREAS, the City provides residential and commercial solid waste and recycling collection services; and WHEREAS, on December 20, 1995, the City Council granted exclusive franchise agreements with G.I. Industries and Moorpark Rubbish Disposal for the collection, transportation, recycling, and disposal of solid waste in residential, commercial, and industrial areas within City limits; and WHEREAS, the Franchise Agreements provide for adjustments to the service fee schedule pursuant to a specified formula; and WHEREAS, the City Council declares its intention of maintaining reasonable rates for collection, management, and disposal of solid waste and recyclables within the City limits; and WHEREAS, on December 19, 2001 the City Council adopted Resolution 2001 -1924 establishing solid waste collection fees effective January 1, 2002. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Effective January 1, 2003, the monthly residential solid waste, recycling, and green waste collection rate shall be as shown in Exhibit "G" of the City Franchise Agreement. SECTION 2. Effective January 1, 2003, the commercial, industrial, and multi - family solid waste, recycling, and composting bin collection rates shall be as shown in Exhibit "G" of the City Franchise Agreement. SECTION 3. Effective, January 1, 2003, the temporary bins and roll- off /drop box rates for solid waste, recycling, and composting bin services shall be as shown in the Exhibit "G" of the City Franchise Agreement. Resolution No. 2002 -0000 Exhibit "C" SECTION 4. Effective January 1, 2003, the annual Solid Waste Management Fee for exemption to the required solid waste collection service mandate shall be $24.40. SECTION 5. This resolution shall be effective January 1, 2003. SECTION 6. This Resolution hereby rescinds Resolution 2001 -1924 in its entirety upon the effective date of this resolution. SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of the resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original Resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk ITEM 10- C. CITY OF MOORPARIK. CALIFORNIA City Councii Meeting of 11Ki awa, ACTION-. Woe ACTION-QWo4ed aiaB mcammtncL6 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL - -�- AGENDA REPORT BY. TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: John Hartnett, Recreation Superintendent T DATE: September 4, 2002 (CC Meeting of September 18, 2002) SUBJECT: Consider Ordinance to Amend Municipal Code 12.16, Parks, and Adopt a New Park Reservation Fees and Policies Resolution to Limit the Use of Amplified Sound in City Parks and other Use Revisions SUMMARY The City Council is being asked to amend Section 12.16 of the Municipal Code, Parks and to rescind Resolution 2000 -1786, Park Reservation Fees and Policies, and adopt a new Resolution revising the park reservation policies. This action would revise the City's existing policies on the use of amplified sound in City Parks and expand the number of Parks where special attractions are allowed. Attachments A and B are copies of the proposed Ordinance and Resolution revisions shown in legislative format, illustrating the existing language and the changes being recommended. DISCUSSION The City's parks are open for public use between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; park restrooms are closed at dusk (except when City sponsored and organized sports activities are scheduled) . While the public can use the parks after dusk, the City's current policy restricts the reservation of park amenities between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and dusk,(again with the exception of organized sports activities) . Additionally, the use of amplified sound is restricted to between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. or dusk, whichever occurs earlier. The City has electrical outlets available in many of its park pavilions that park users can use, for a fee, for amplified sound. These two restrictions, the limited rental hours and use of amplified sound, were implemented in November 2000 after the City 1 �'•� �^•, F• A Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 2 heard from a number of residents living around Poindexter Park and Griffin Park. These parks are very popular for large gatherings that include amplified music. The surrounding residents complained about the continual noise that occurred every Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. By limiting the hours that amplified sound could be used, it was hoped that the residents would have an opportunity to enjoy quiet evenings. Throughout the past few summers, the City has continued to receive complaints about noise levels and the use of amplified sound from residents surrounding certain parks. In particular, the complaints involve Poindexter Park, Griffin Park, Miller Park, Campus Canyon Park, and Campus Park. The complaints include the use of amplified sound past 6:00 p.m. and even late into the evening. The Moorpark Police Department has been called out on a number of occasions to address the problem. Staff also surveyed the surrounding jurisdictions for information on their amplified sound policy. Staff found that the City of Agoura Hills, City of Oxnard, and Pleasant Valley Park District do not permit amplified sound for picnic rentals. Rancho Simi Park District permits amplified sound only when played in the designated amphitheater. Conejo Park District authorizes the use of amplified sound, provided the renter pays for District staff to supervise the rental. To address the immediate concern, staff took administrative action and discontinued issuing amplified sound permits in October 2001. On November 5, 2001, staff presented the Parks and Recreation Commission with a recommendation to revise the Park Policy by discontinuing the use of amplified sound permits for private parties and events. This would allow the City to grant amplified sound permits for City sponsored, co- sponsored events or events deemed to have community benefit. Additionally, the City retains the ability to authorize amplified sound for youth sports organizations through the separate use agreements. The Commission concurred with the staff recommendation. It has become clear that a number of the groups using amplified sound do not have authorized permits, or they have extended their use of sound beyond the authorized period of time. In a number of these cases, the park user brings a generator to operate sound amplification equipment. In order to facilitate the City's efforts to effectively put a stop to the unauthorized use of amplified sound in City parks, staff proposes to amend the City's Ordinance, Section 12.16.050 (Parks- Excessive Noise Prohibited). The proposed amendment would prohibit the use of amplified sound without a City - issued permit. Violations of this section could result in misdemeanor charges. As proposed above, the Park Policy would only allow amplified sound permits for certain approved uses. 2 Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 3 Special attractions such as bounce tents and other inflatable devices are currently only allowed at Arroyo Vista Community Park, Peach Hill Park, Griffin Park, Tierra Rejada Park and Poindexter Park. These facilities have been selected because of the availability of a flat turf area adjacent to a parking lot, which provides for easy access and preserves and protects the Park property. Staff recommends amending the Park Policy to add Campus Canyon Park and Mountain Meadows Park to the availability list to provide more options for public use. Both parks provide for similar access and layout conducive to special attraction use. The Parks and Recreation Commission and staff recommend that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance revising the City's existing policies on the use of amplified sound in City Parks and adopt the attached resolution expanding the number of Parks where special attractions are allowed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Introduce Ordinance No. for first reading and adopt Resolution No. 2002 - Attachments: Draft Ordinance Draft Resolution 91 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 12.16, PARKS OF TITLE 12, STREETS, SIDEWALKS & PUBLIC PLACES; OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, Chapter 12.16, Title 12 of the Moorpark Municipal Code set forth the requirements for City Parks; and WHEREAS, the City Council determined that Sections 12.16.050 (Excessive Noise Prohibited) of the Moorpark Municipal Code should be amended to clarify the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Moorpark Municipal Code, Section 12.16, Parks of Title 12, Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places, shall be hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 12.16.050 Excessive noise prohibited. No person shall make excessive noise through the use of amplifying equipment, or any other means in any public park, public open space or public recreation grounds that tends to distract or disturb patrons or nearby residents. No person shall use amplified sound without an amplified sound permit issued by the city. Persons with a city issued permit, using sound amplification equipment shall keep the sound volume of such equipment at a level that avoids disturbing other people using the park or nearby residents. SECTION 2. 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 3. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. Ordinance No. Page 2 SECTION 4. 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 records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall, within (fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published once in the Moorpark Star, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined in section 6008 of the Government Code, for the City of Moorpark, and is hereby designated for that purpose. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2002. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk r .� " . �j 4-i RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -1786 AND ESTABLISHING PARK RESERVATION FEES AND POLICIES WHEREAS, a Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee has recommended revisions to the Rules and Regulations Governing the Use of the Facilities in Public Parkland, group classifications and fees; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of November 1, 2000, the City Council considered and concurred with the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendation; and WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 2000 -1786 (Park Reservation Fee Schedule) shall be rescinded and replaced with the Resolution herein. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. City Council Resolution No. 2000 -1786 (Park Reservation Fee Schedule) is hereby rescinded and replaced with the Resolution herein. SECTION 2. The general Regulations Governing the Use Parkland shall read as follows: Section 2.1 Purpose provisions of the Rules and of the Facilities in Public The purpose and intent of the City Council in adopting the within Rules and Regulations Governing the Use of the Facilities in Public Parkland shall be to provide directory guidelines for staff and the public relating to the use and rental of City park facilities. In the event of any non - compliance with, or violation of, any provision herein, such shall not be deemed to affect the validity of any action taken, unless otherwise specifically provided by law. Resolution 2002 - Page 2 Section 2.2 Enforcement The City Manager or his /her designee is hereby authorized to implement and administer the policies and regulations contained herein. Section 2.3 Hours All parks and park facilities operated by the City are available for public use from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Parks and park facilities are available for rent from 8:00 a.m. to dusk, with the exception of sporting tournaments, which are addressed in the tournament package. Parks and park facilities are available for rent for a two -hour minimum, all rental time will be rounded to the nearest half -hour. Parks and park restrooms shall be closed at dusk and may be closed in the event of inclement weather. The parks are closed from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Section 2.4 Terms of Rental The Park Fee and Policy addresses private or personal rental activities. This policy excludes City sponsored or co- sponsored events or other agreements the City may enter into. Park facilities are available for the private or personal reservation and use by individuals or groups subject to the issuance of a permit and payment of fees. All applications must be signed by an adult of 21 years or older who shall agree to be responsible for said use. Permits are immediately revocable if false statements are made in reserving a facility or if an individual or groups willfully violates any rule or regulation established by the City. Fees shall be retained in the event the activity is terminated due to the violation of any rule or regulation, or the falsification of the application. Groups of over fifty people are required to obtain a permit and make a deposit to cover damage caused by the rental. Section 2.5 Application Window Applications for the use of public parkland may be made up to 6 (six) months prior to the event. Applications for use submitted any earlier must be Resolution 2002 - Page 3 approved by the Director of Community Services or his /her designated representative. A deposit as identified in the fee structure is required to secure the reservation. The deposit will be applied toward use fees, which must be paid in full thirty (30) calendar days prior to the rental date. All requests are handled on a first come, first served basis. Requests received less than thirty (30) calendar days may be considered by the Director of Community Services, or his /her designated representative. A fee may be levied on rentals providing less than fourteen (14) calendar days notice, and must be paid in full with cash, money order, cashier's check, or valid /acceptable credit card. Section 2.6 Deposits A refundable deposit may be required for an activity to be held in a public park facility. The deposit may be retained for clean up of facilities, any damage to the premises and any additional staffing not included in the fees paid. Should charges exceed the amount of deposit, the permittee shall be billed for the difference and allowed thirty (30) days in which to make payment. Section 2.7 Additional Charges Additional charges may be levied beyond the basic rental rate if staff is needed to set up or clean up, supervise activities, or if the rental request contains unusual activity or accommodation requests.. Additionally, permittee must provide liability insurance for certain types of attractions such as pony rides or bounce tents. Section 2.8 Refunds and Credits Park permit fees are non - refundable except for cancellations due to inclement weather. Such conditions include rain, fog, wind, or temperatures below 55° Fahrenheit or above 95° Fahrenheit. In the event of illness, unexpected absence or accidental overbooking, permittees are eligible for a credit for a future rental up to the amount paid. It is the responsibility of the permittee to contact the City of f '° �? 3 7 11-1 Resolution 2002 - Page 4 Moorpark to cancel the reservation and request a credit before the rental date. Failure to do so will negate any consideration for a credit or rescheduling. Section 2.9 Requesting a Reduction or a Waiver Of 'F,- P R - A non - profit organization may request a reduction or a waiver of fees for the use of City park facilities by forwarding the request in letter form to: Director of Community Services 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 All requests should include the organization's non- profit number as well as the name of the organization, purpose of the gathering, expected attendance, requested facility, time and date. All requests will be considered on a case by case and a first - come /first- served basis and depend upon facility availability. Teachers or classes within Moorpark Unified School District (MUSD) may request the use of park facility for a year -end party provided the responsible party guarantees a supervision ratio of no less than 1:30, and ensures that the facility is cleaned after use. Park rental fees for MUSD year -end parties, will be waived provided the MUSD submit the City with a hold harmless and indemnification agreement, in a form approved by the City, each year. Waivers or reductions in fees cannot exclude clean up or repair costs. A deposit may be required. All other park rules and ordinances apply. The City reserves the right to deny any such request. Section 2.10 Right of Appeal A permittee has the right to appeal the decision by City staff to revoke a permit, levy additional charges and /or deduct a portion of a deposit. An appeal must be filed in writing to the City of Moorpark, 799 Moorpark Avenue within five (5) days of receiving your notification. The City Manager or his /her designee Resolution 2002 - Page 5 will affirm or deny the appeal in five (5) days. Any further appeal must be made in writing to the City Council within ten (10) days upon notification of the decision on the appeal. Such appeal shall be considered at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. Section 2.11 Liability In order to rent a City facility, the permittee must agree in writing to hold the City harmless and indemnify the City from liability for injury to persons or property occurring as a result of the rental. The permittee also agrees to be liable to the City for damage to the park, equipment, buildings or facilities caused by any person at the activity. Section 2.12 Special Use of City Equipment Groups or individuals requesting the use of City equipment not listed on the rental fee Schedule should forward the request in a letter to: Director of Community Services 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 All requests will be considered on a case by case basis. The City reserves the right to deny any such request. Section 2.13 Use of Special Attractions Persons planning to have a special attraction at their event are required to notify the City of Moorpark before the event and include such information on their rental application. Activities that create loud or distracting noises are not permitted. No amplified sound is permitted without an approved Amplified Sound Permit. Such a permit will only be issued for City sponsored or co- sponsored events,or event deemed to be a community wide benefit. Persons using sound amplification equipment shall do so consistent with Moorpark Municipal Code 17.53. An Resolution 2002 - Page 6 additional security deposit may be required, and shall be paid in advance. Bounce tents and other such inflatable attractions are only allowed at Campus Canyon Park, Mountain Meadows Park, Arroyo Vista Community Park, Peach Hill Park, Griffin Park, Tierra Rejada Park, and Poindexter Park. Such devices are restricted to an area near the parking lot. Vehicles cannot be used to transport or set up special attractions on the turf without prior approval. Violators may be fined for damage to landscaping, sprinklers and /or turf as applicable. Pony rides are only allowed at Arroyo Vista Community Park, and are restricted to the parking lot. Ponies are not allowed on the turf. Violators may be fined for damage to landscaping, sprinklers and /or turf. Pony rides may be restricted during certain seasons. An additional security deposit is required, to be paid in advance. For special attractions including but not limited to bounce tents and pony rides, the renting party must provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance and endorsement of insurance with limits of bodily injury and property damage of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), with the City of Moorpark named as additionally insured, a minimum of seven (7) days prior to their event. Section 2.14 Decorations All decorations must be approved by the City and must comply with Section 13 -143 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California as to flame proofing of all decorations and materials. The City shall also pre- approve location and method of installation. Section 2.15 Clean Up It is the responsibility of the renting party, to clean up decorations and debris from their event. In the event that excessive debris is left after the rental, a fee will be deducted from the security /clean up deposit at a rate of no less than the City's direct cost as identified in the applicable fee schedule. The Resolution 2002 - Page 7 Director of Community Services shall make the final decision whether security /clean up deposit will be returned. Section 2.16 Responsibility for Damages to the Facility and Equipment The use of nails, staples, screws, etc. on park walls, lights or other facilities is not permitted. If the facility or any portion thereof, or any equipment shall be damaged, marred or defaced by the act, default or negligence of the renting party, his /her employee or employees, patron, guests or any person admitted to the event by the renting party, the renting party will pay to the City from the cleaning /damage deposit such sums as the City shall determine to be necessary to restore the facility or such equipment to its condition prior to such damage. Should charges exceed the amount on deposit, the renting party shall be billed for the difference and allowed thirty (30) calendar days in which to make payment. Section 2.17 Park Rules The renting party, his /her employee or employees, patron, guests or any person admitted to the event by the renting party, is responsible to comply with the Moorpark Municipal Code 12.16, governing use of parks. Permits are immediately revocable if any individual or group willfully violates any rule or regulation established by the City. Section 2.18 Complaints Your complaints and comments are welcome. Please forward your concerns in writing to: City of Moorpark Community Services Department 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 SECTION 3. The Park Rental Group Classification shall read as follows: Resolution 2002 - Page 8 Section 3.1 Purpose The purpose and intent of the City Council in adopting the Park Rental Group Classifications shall be to provide directory guidelines for staff and the public relating to the classification of groups and individuals renting City Park facilities. Section 3.2 Group Classification Definition GROUP 1 City sponsored programs or co- sponsored programs. GROUP 2 Residents of the City of Moorpark and organizations that are tax exempt under Section 501 (C) (3) of the U.S. Revenue Code chartered within the City limits of the City of Moorpark, and other qualifying non - profit organizations. This includes such uses as recreation /youth serving organizations, Homeowners Association meetings and political fund - raisers for the City of Moorpark elections or other political offices where the candidate is a City resident. Other governmental agencies (the County, School District, for example), and their commissions, boards or departments. GROUP 3 Residents of the Moorpark Unified School District boundaries that reside outside of the City limits; non - profit service organizations not covered under Group 2; and City of Moorpark business and commercial for profit organizations for activities where no admission fee is charged and no product is sold (i.e.: for recreational purposes). GROUP 4 City of Moorpark businesses and for profit organizations (for business purposes), and non City residents, organizations and businesses (for recreational purposes). GROUP 5 Non City residents, organizations and businesses for business purposes. a $ _?'.. 5' Me Resolution 2002 - Page 9 SECTION 4. read as follows: Section 4.1 The Park Rental /Use Fee Schedule shall Purpose The purpose and intent of the City Council in adopting the Park Rental /Use Fee Schedule shall be to provide directory guidelines for staff and the public relating to the fees and deposits required to rent City park facilities and amenities. The City shall reserve the right to make adjustments or impose additional fees on a case -by -case basis. Section 4.2 Park Facilitv Permit Fees A. Ballf Group Group Group Group Group iel 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: d: No $10 $15 $20 $30 Charge per hour per hour per hour per hour B. Ballfield Preparation: Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $25 Group 3: $35 Group 4: $35 Group 5: $35 C. Softball /Baseball Base Rental Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $7* Group 3: $10* Group 4: $10* Group 5: $20* *$100 deposit required D. Ballf Group Group Group Group Group ield 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: Lights No Charge $20 per hour $25 per hour $30 per hour $40 per hour Resolution 2002 - Page 10 E. Ballfield (Softball /Baseball) Tournament Package #1* Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $600 Group 3: $1,200 Group 4: $1,600 Group 5: $2,000 *Includes rental fee, surcharge for large group, one (1) staff, one -time concession fee for two (2) ballfields, for two (2) consecutive days for ten (10) hours per day (Except Mountain Meadows Park which is only available from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). Any additional park amenities are subject to the established Park Facility Permit Fee. Tournaments shall be limited to one (1) per year per group. F. Ballfield (Softball /Baseball) Tournament Package #2* Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $1,800 *Includes rental fee, surcharge for large group, one (1) staff, one -time concession fee for six (6) ballfields, for two (2) consecutive days for ten (10) hours per day. (Except Mountain Meadows Park which is only available from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). Any additional park amenities are subject to the established Park Facility Permit Fee. Tournaments shall be limited to one (1) per year per group. G. Horseshoe Pit Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $5 per hour Group 3: $10 per hour Group 4: $15 per hour Group 5: $25 per hour H. Horseshoes Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $7* Group 3: $10* Resolution 2002 - Page 11 Group 4: $10* Group 5: $20* *$50 deposit required I. Athle Group Group Group Group Group tic 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: Field No Charge $8 per hour $12 per hour $15 per hour $25 per hour J. Athletic Field (Soccer Tournament) Tournament* Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $1,250 Group 3: $1,750 Group 4: $2,250 Group 5: $3,250 *Includes rental fee, surcharge for large group, one (1) staff, one -time concession fee for five (5) athletic fields, for two (2) consecutive days for ten (10) hours per day. Any additional park amenities are subject to the established Park Facility Permit Fee. Permittee is responsible to supply and service portable restroom facilities for the duration of the tournament. These facilities must be approved by the City, and removed at the conclusion of the tournament. The quantity of restrooms required would be based on a minimum ratio of 1:100 (1 restroom per 100 attendees). Tournaments shall be limited to one (1) per year per group. K. Outdoor Basketball Court Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $8 per hour Group 3: $12 per hour Group 4: $15 per hour Group 5: $25 per hour Resolution 2002 - Page 12 L. Outdoor Basketball Court Lights) Court Group Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $18 per hour Group 3: $22 per hour Group 4: $25 per hour Group 5: $35 per hour M. Tennis Court Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $6 per hour Group 3: $9 per hour Group 4: $12 per hour Group 5: $15 per hour Tournament:$120 per day* (Night Use With *For Moorpark non - profit groups only. Includes six (6) courts for five (5) hours per day,at Arroyo Vista Community Park. Limited to no more than three consecutive days. Tournaments shall be limited to four (4) per year per group. No surcharge for "Large Groups" will be levied in addition to the regular use fee. No more than three - fourths of the tennis courts at any park location can be rented at any one time. N. Multipurpose Court Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $10 per hour Group 3: $15 per hour Group 4: $25 per hour Group 5: $35 per hour O. Roller Hockey Goals Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $7 Group 3: $10 Group 4: $10 Group 5: $20 P. Roller Hockey Border Patrol Group 1: No Charge (:.p�+ Z_J.11. S IE'll Resolution 2002 - Page 13 Group 2: $45 per hour* Group 3: $60 per hour* Group 4: $75 per hour* Group 5: $85 per hour* *$36 set up fee and $100 deposit required Q. Picnic Pavilion No Charge Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $10 per hour Group 3: $15 per hour Group 4: $20 per hour Group 5: $30 per hour R. Gazebo Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $6 per hour Group 3: $10 per hour Group 4: $15 per hour Group 5: $25 per hour S. Picnic Area Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $5 per hour Group 3: $10 per hour Group 4: $15 per hour Group 5: $25 per hour T . Open j Group Group Group Group Group U. Snack Group Group Group Group Group krea 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: Bar 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: No Charge $5 per hour $10 per hour $15 per hour $25 per hour No Charge $10 per hour* $15 per hour* $20 per hour* $30 per hour* *$100 deposit fee required Resolution 2002 - Page 14 V. Electricity Group 1: No Charge Group 2: $2 per hour* Group 3: $4 per hour* Group 4: $6 per hour* Group 5: $16 per hour* *Electricity charge shall be based on the duration of the rental agreement. Section 4.3 Security Deposit Requirements A. Special Attraction Deposit Amplified Sound: $100 deposit Pony Rides: $100 deposit B. Softball /Baseball Base Rental: $100 deposit C. Horseshoes: $50 deposit D. Roller Hockey Border System: $100 deposit E. Large Group Deposit 50 -100 deposit 100 -150 people: $150 151 -200 People: $200 201 -500 people: $250 Groups of over 500: $350 F. Snack Bar: $100 deposit Section 4.4 Additional Fees people: $100 deposit deposit deposit deposit A. A staff fee of no less than $18 per hour, per additional staff required, may be levied if the rental event extends beyond the rental period and requires staff assistance or coverage. B. A surcharge for large groups may be levied in addition to the regular use fee. The number of people in a group is a calculation based on the attendance at the height of the event. These fees are as follows: Resolution 2002 - Page 15 Under 100 people: 101 -150 people: 151 -200 People: 201 -500 people: Groups of over 500 No surcharge Add $10 per hour Add $20 per hour Add $30 per hour Add $50 per hour SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of the resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ATTEST: day of Patrick Hunter, Mayor Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk 2002. MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Hugh Riley, Assistant DATE: September 11, 2002 (CC cTTY oF'4 noRPARK. C AT,TrOR*-ffA ('ity Cnnnfi) MretinjZ h" - -�--� � 11' - ACTTON: g�,i -�, bL wok�.kd f4 r City Manager' ll c Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Scheduling a Council Workshop to Review and Discuss Design of New Police Services Center. BACKGROUND The City Council has listed among the City's top ten priority projects, the construction of a new police services center. On November 7, 2001, the City Council approved a Development and Financing Plan for new civic facilities including City Hall, Police Services Center and Public Works /Parks Corporation Yard. Sites for these new facilities were identified in the plan and the City's Redevelopment Agency has acquired the property at the northeast corner of Spring Road and Flinn Avenue as the designated site for the new Police Services Center. On April 17, 2002 the City Council awarded a contract for design services for the new facility to WWC OT Architects of Santa Monica, California. DISCUSSION Over the last several months City staff has be working with the architect to develop recommendations for the conceptual design for the facility. In doing so, new developments with regard to law enforcement services in the City and in the east Ventura County region have been considered. Staff is now prepared to present its concept design recommendations and project cost estimates to the City Council. Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 2 Staff suggests the Council schedule a public workshop to review and discuss these recommendations and alternatives and to provide direction for the completion of the design and construction of the new building. Staff suggests October 9, 2002 at 6:30 p.m. as the date for the work session. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Schedule work session to review concept design recommendations for the Police Services Center for October 9, 2002 at 6:30 p.m. C.TTY OT, MOORPARK, CALTFCIRNTA City co»nc;l INfrefing 1 Of . et)�ettitb?r ld, ^pica Rea; Yr1V1'MeA,clW,A MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, Cali=ia April 3, 2002 BY: egu r meering of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on April 3, 2002, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. 2. INVOCATION: Pastor Dave Wilkinson, Moorpark Presbyterian Church, gave the invocation. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Councilmember Millhouse led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, and Mayor Hunter. Absent: Councilmember Wozniak. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Captain Robert LeMay, Sheriff's Department; Walter Brown, City Engineer; Dana Shigley, Administrative Services Director; Mary Lindley, Community Services Director; Dave Bobardt, Planning Manager; Nancy Burns, Senior Management Analyst; Joseph Fiss, Principal Planner; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS: A. Introduction of New Employee, David Bobardt, Planning Manager, Community Development Department. Mayor Hunter introduced Mr. Bobardt and welcomed him to the City staff. s'v w.: i f Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Pa 6. PUBLIC COMMENT: FA April 3, 2002 Margarita Riley, Simi Valley resident, addressed the Council and announced the upcoming Moorpark Arts Commission events. Daniel Assael, representing the Moorpark Arts Council (no address provided), spoke about the community outreach programs of the Moorpark Arts Council that are being offered within the Moorpark Unified School District. Cecelia McRoberts, Simi Valley resident, spoke on behalf of the visual arts program that is being offered at the Arts Council Fair at Flory School on April 27. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the City Council recessed to convene a meeting of the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. The time was 6:47 p.m. The City Council meeting reconvened at 7:02 p.m. 7. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: Councilmember Mikos requested that Item ll.G. be pulled for individual consideration. Councilmember Harper requested that Item 11.H. be pulled for individual consideration. Mayor Hunter requested that Item 10.A. be considered as the last Presentation /Action /Discussion item. 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Councilmember Mikos requested that the next meeting agenda include a discussion of the unmet transit needs finding summary that has been released recently. She requested that this item be considered to allow Councilmember Wozniak, the City's representative on the Ventura County Transportation Commission, to have the benefit of that discussion prior to the Commission's next meeting. Councilmember Mikos requested a future agenda item regarding whether the City should consider joining into the Eastern Ventura County Conservation Authority, which is a joint powers agency between the County and Santa Monica If 1.1 •03 :3 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 3 April 3, 2002 Mountains Conservancy (SMMC) for Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park. She referenced Specific Plan No. 2 and trail connections with Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park as a reason for consideration of a joint powers conservation authority, and also suggested review of the other similar joint powers conservation authority between Thousand Oaks and the SMMC. Councilmember Mikos announced that on April 13 there will be a hike in Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park. Councilmember Millhouse requested that the community provide funding assistance for the Moorpark High School Decathlon team to attend the national competition. He acknowledged those who had already contributed. Councilmember Harper requested that staff obtain a copy of the Port Hueneme Access Study that was prepared by the Ventura County Transportation Commission in 2000 and provide it to the Councilmembers. Councilmember Harper requested a future agenda item to discuss a recent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) update to the flood plain management program that may result in the requirement to elevate building pads for new construction in the downtown area. Councilmember Harper suggested that an alternative to this proposed FEMA requirement would be to form an assessment district to build levies along the Arroyo Simi with proposed builders being assessed to meet the funding requirements. Councilmember Harper requested that the Council review the nature of the invocation that is presented at City Council meetings. He requested that the Council review with City Attorney guidance the invocation relative to the diversity of those providing the invocation. In response to Councilmember Harper's concern relative to the proposed FEMA requirements in the downtown area, Mr. Kueny stated that he recommends that this issue be addressed and placed on the agenda for the scheduled Joint Meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council on April 24. I Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 4 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ril 3, 2002 A. Consider Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -01, a Request to Allow the Sale and Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages, Other than Beer and Wine, (Liquor) in Conjunction with Dining Where Beer and Wine is Currently Sold at The Coffee Grinder Restaurant, 1 West Los Angeles Avenue, on the Application of Reza Yassini. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2002 - conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -01. Joseph Fiss gave the staff report. Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing. John Newton, 165 High Street, Suite 163, addressed the Council as the applicant's representative. Mr. Newton requested that the following conditions be modified as follows: 1) Condition No. 2 which currently reads: "Security Personnel shall be provided to monitor the parking areas (s) designated for use by customers of the restaurant during any activity that may require the need for additional security. The applicant shall work with the Police Department and Community Development Department staff to determine which activities shall require additional security. The owner /manager shall be required to obtain Temporary Use Permit approval from the City of Moorpark when a scheduled activity could create a need for increased police presence." Mr. Newton requested that Condition No. 2 be modified by adding a final sentence that would read: "The only exception shall be for special events held by Moorpark based non - profit groups." Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 5 April 3, 2002 2) Condition No. 11 which currently reads: "The renting party shall provide two security guards for up to 100 attendees and one additional security guard for each additional 50 attendees or portion thereof, up to the maximum occupancy allowed by Code. The security guards are to be hired from the time alcohol is served until all guests have vacated the property. Proof that security guards have been hired must be provided no less than 2 (two) weeks prior to the event. The applicant shall pay for all costs related to providing security guards to the security company in advance of the event. The only exception shall be for special events held by Moorpark based non- profit groups." Mr. Newton requested that Condition No. 11 be deleted with the proviso that the applicant will have no concern if that condition is added back in by the City of Moorpark if it becomes apparent that there is a demonstrated problem. Mayor Hunter asked if the applicant is accepting Condition No. 2 providing that the last sentence from Condition No. 11 is added at the bottom of the condition. Mr. Newton confirmed Mayor Hunter's statement. 3) Condition No. 6, which currently reads: "There shall be no 'cover' charge, admission or entry fee for special event uses." Mr. Newton requested that this condition be modified as follows: "There shall be no 'cover' charge, admission or entry fee for special event uses except for big screen pay per view events from time to time." 4) Condition No. 8, which currently reads: Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 6 ril 3, 2002 "No person under the age of twenty -one (21) shall sell or package alcoholic beverages." Mr. Newton requested the following addition: "Table servers of alcoholic beverages must be 18 years of age or older." 5) Condition No. 12, which currently reads: "Sales, service or consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted only between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. each day of the week." Mr. Newton stated that the applicant is requesting that the hours of operation be 6:00 a.m to 12:00 midnight. 6) Condition No. 13, which currently reads: "The quarterly gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed fifty percent (500) of the gross sales of food during the same period. The Coffee Grinder Family Restaurant shall at all times maintain records which reflect separately the gross sale of food and the gross sales of alcoholic beverages of the business. Said records shall be kept no less frequently than on a quarterly basis and shall be made available to the Moorpark Police Department upon demand." Mr. Newton requested that the 50% figure in the second line of this condition be deleted. He stated that this is not a proper measure to be used to distinguish a restaurant from a bar. In response to Council question, Mr. Newton agreed that this item needs to be reviewed and modified in a different manner. Councilmember Millhouse asked if the term "Pay per View" is too restrictive relative to the proposed wording of Condition No. 6. He stated that a Super `r k h Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 7 ril 3, 2002 Bowl party would not be a "Pay per View" event and would not be included as a special event use. Mr. Kueny stated that the issue of when a Temporary Use Permit is required should be clarified in the Conditions of Approval, if it is not stated in the Code, and should not be left to the applicant's sole determination. He stated the easiest way to determine a special event use is to require a Temporary Use Permit any time there is a charge or entry fee. Councilmember Mikos asked if there are other circumstances when a Temporary Use Permit would be required in addition to the "Pay per View" and cover charge for special events. Ms. Traffenstedt clarified that, based on their normal operations there would not be other circumstances requiring a Temporary Use Permit, unless an event occurred that requited additional security and that modified their normal operations. Councilmember Harper questioned why the City is attempting to regulate the use of the facility if the activities are confined to the building and are not a public issue. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kueny stated that the City needs to have the ability to require security and he referred back to Condition No. 11. He stated that it should not necessarily be deleted in its entirety, but, as stated by the applicant's representative, can be imposed unilaterally by the City if there is a problem. He stated the two reasons to require security are to protect the property owner and to not allow the security to become a drain on the City�s police resources. He continued by stating that if the Council decides to modify staff's recommendation, that Council see if the issue becomes problematic !,and, if it does, staff will bring it back for the tncil to consider invoking the Condition No. 11 cla e. Councilmember Harper stated that he would support deleting Condition No. 11 and Condition No. 6 and Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 8 April 3, 2002 providing more authority to staff and the Police Department by way of a modified, stronger Condition No. 2. Gerald Goldstein, a Moorpark resident, discussed a prior Council approval of a liquor license for another project on Princeton Avenue. Mayor Hunter stated that he is not certain that the City should place onerous restrictions on this business owner. He stated that if Conditions No. 2 and 11 are left in the Conditions of Approval, they would be inconsistent with Conditional Use Permit Finding No. 8, which states "the use will not create the need for increased police services." Councilmember Harper suggested that, since Condition No. 2 provides a great deal of latitude to City staff and to the Sheriff's Department to assess the situation, Condition No. 11 does not appear to be necessary. He requested that the Sheriff's Department be consulted to offer additional language to Condition No. 2 to alleviate the need for Condition No. 11. He suggested that Condition No. 6 also be deleted. Mr. Kueny stated that this is a Conditional Use Permit and that these conditions will run with the land in perpetuity. He also stated that the City's ability to change the conditions in the future would be limited, unless that ability is specifically addressed in these conditions of approval. Mr. Kueny continued by stating that another item that is not addressed is that of live music at the facility. He reminded Council that this is a one -time opportunity to establish the conditions for this use on this site. Captain Robert LeMay asked for clarification as to what the reasoning is for including Conditions No. 2 and 11. Councilmember Harper asked if the City Attorney has suggested language that would give the City the unilateral ability to bring this back as a public hearing and recondition the Conditional Use Permit if the need arises. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 9 April 3, 2002 Mr. Montes responded that, in accordance with Code and with the State Law, the Council has the ability to bring the Conditional Use Permit back for examination and further conditioning if there are changed circumstances, but that does not expressly include changed ownership or management. Mr. Montes suggested that the Council may want to include language that the City reserves the right to review the CUP and the conditions in the event that changed circumstances occur including, but not limited to, changed ownership and /or management. Councilmember Mikos asked that if there is a change of ownership could the Council review the conditions at that time. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Montes confirmed that with the added language the Council could review the conditions at the time of a change of ownership and recommended that the Council get the applicant's concurrence to include the new language. Mayor Hunter recommended that the final sentence in Condition No. 11 be moved to become the final sentence in Condition No. 2; that Condition No. 11 be deleted, and that additional language be added as recommended by the City Attorney. Mr. Newton, as the applicant's representative, stated that the applicant agrees with Mayor Hunter's stated changes to the conditions. Mayor Hunter summarized that the Council was in consensus to: 1) Delete Condition No. 6; 2) modify Condition No. 8 to add "table servers of alcoholic beverages must be 18 years of age or older "; 3) modify Condition No. 12 to modify the hours of operation to be 6:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight of each day. In response to Mayor Hunter, relative to Condition No. 13, Mr. Kueny stated that this condition is consistent with a condition that was imposed on Bauducco's Restaurant in the City. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 10 April 3, 2002 Councilmember Millhouse stated that this condition is over regulatory to the business. Mr. Kueny stated that with the addition of new language addressing changed conditions, staff concurred with revising Condition No. 13 by deleting the first sentence. By consensus, the Council determined to delete the first sentence of Condition No. 13. Mr. Newton stated the applicant agreed to the changed conditions. Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Millhouse seconded a motion to: 1) Delete Condition No. 6 from the Conditions of Approval; 2) modify Condition No. 8 to add "table servers of alcoholic beverages must be 18 years of age or older "; 3) modify Condition No. 12 to modify the hours of operation to be between 6:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight of each day; 4) delete the first sentence of Condition No. 13; 5) include language that the City reserves the right to review the CUP and the conditions in the event that changed circumstances occur including, but not limited to, changed ownership and /or management; and 6) adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1958 as modified conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -01. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. 10. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: B. Consider Reconsideration of Item No. 10.A. on March 20, 2002 Agenda and Reconsideration of Vote on Item 10.A. (Deferring General Plan Amendment Prescreening Application Processing for Two Applications Filed in 2001, GPA Prescreen 2001 -02 and 2001 -03, One Application Filed in 2000, GPA Prescreen 2000 -02, and any other Developer- Initiated GPA Prescreening Application until the November 2002 Application Filing Period). Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. p_� J. , Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 11 April 3, 2002 Councilmember Mikos provided the background relative to this item and stated that it was placed on the agenda at her request. She stated that the applicant, Deewayne Jones, has made the effort to comply with the direction that he received from the Affordable Housing /Community Development Committee. She recommended that the Council reconsider this item and take action that, with the exception of Mr. Jones' application, the other GPA prescreening applications be postponed until November 2002. She stated that this would maintain Mr. Jones' application in the queue and allow the further processing of it at such time when the City's staffing level is adequate to do SO. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that the Council took action at the March 20, 2002 meeting to defer all General Plan Amendment Pre - Screening Applications to the November, 2002 cycle. She explained that there is an upcoming Spring cycle and these applications would not be accepted in that cycle; the next application period would be November of 2002. Ms. Traffenstedt confirmed to the Council that there are additional applications on file and that filing fees have been paid by those applicants. Councilmember Mikos stated that Mr. Jones' application is more advanced in the review process than the others and, when staff is able to review it further, she wants his application to not be deferred to November for processing. Mr. Kueny stated that Councilmember Mikos' suggestion is acceptable that staff will work on Mr. Jones' application based on staff availability, and would defer the other applications to November 2002. He also stated that refunds of deposits already paid by those applicants could be made at their request, based on staff time expended to date. Councilmember Mikos stated that she agrees that the refund of fees be included as part of a motion that is considered relative to this item. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 12 April 3, 2002 MOTION TO RECONSIDER: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to reconsider the City Council's vote of March 20, 2002 relative to Item 10.A. on that agenda, Deferring General Plan Amendment Prescreening Application Processing for Two Applications Filed in 2001, GPA Prescreen 2001 -02 and 2001 -03, One Application Filed in 2000, GPA Prescreen 2000 -02, and any other Developer- Initiated GPA Prescreening Application until the November 2002 Application Filing Period) . The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Montes stated that the City Council could rescind the prior vote on this item and take new action in the form of a single motion. Councilmember Mikos asked if the refund of applicant fees needs to be included in the motion. Ms. Traffenstedt stated that, regardless of the vote of the Council, the applicants can request a refund at any time. She stated that any staff time that had been expended on their applications would be deducted from that application fee refund. MOTION: Councilmember Mikos moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to: 1) Defer all pending General Plan Amendment (GPA) Pre - Screening applications to November 2002, with the exception of the application filed by Deewayne Jones, which would be processed at such time that City staffing level permitted; and 2) waive staff processing time periods for GPA Prescreening Applications as established by the City Council. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. C. Consider the Review of the Moorpark Municipal Code Section 12.08 and 12.12, Regarding Trees and the Peach Hill HOA Tree Removal Request. Staff Recommendation: Appoint two Councilmembers to serve on an Ad Hoc Committee to review the Moorpark Municipal Code Sections 12.08 and 12.12, and concur with staff's intent to approve the removal of ten (10) Eucalyptus trees adjacent to the back of Peach Hill School and ( . 3 e- T as Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 13 April 3, 2002 the Peach Hill Homeowners Association's obligation to plant ten (10) replacement trees, species and location to be approved by staff. Mary Lindley gave the staff report. Errol Hale, 4330 Deepwell Lane, addressed the Council as a representative of the Peach Hill Homeowners Association. He stated that the eucalyptus trees in the common area of their development pose problems because they are messy, vegetation will not grow underneath them, they are too close together, and they require costly maintenance. He stated that they are requesting to remove 64 of the total 131 trees in the development. In response to Council question, Mr. Hale stated that the Homeowner's Association could afford to remove approximately one -third of the 64 trees in the upcoming 24 months. Councilmember Mikos stated that, according to an article in the January 2002 issue of Audubon Society magazine, eucalyptus trees are considered to be America's largest and deadliest weed. Mr. Hale stated that new trees will be planted in the parkway along Peach Hill Road and in the trail corridor. Councilmember Mikos stated she would like to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee. Councilmember Millhouse stated he concurred with the staff recommendation. Councilmember Harper discussed the need to review the tree protection ordinance and recommended that a different method be initiated relative to tree removal within the City. He recommended that, if an HOA requests permission from the City to remove a tree that a second signature of the property owner be required on the tree removal permit. Councilmember Harper further suggested that a third signature of any affected property owner within the dripline of the Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 14 April 3, 2002 tree be required on the permit as well. Councilmember Harper volunteered to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee. Mayor Hunter stated that he supports the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee to review the two sections of the Code, but that this specific request should be excluded from that revision process, so that the Peach Hill HOA can proceed with some of the tree removal. He proposed that an Ad Hoc Committee be created to review the two identified sections of the Municipal Code; that this application be allowed to proceed for tree removal of up to 22 trees every 24 months; that for every three trees removed, one would be replaced; and that the balance of the landscaping to be installed on Peach Hill Road satisfy the requirement for the balance of the required tree replacement. Councilmember Harper stated that he wants the concurrence of the property owner and affected property owners to be a requirement of this process. Mr. Hale stated that the trees to be removed are on common Homeowners Association property and are not located on private property. Mayor Hunter stated his concern that this issue is under the jurisdiction of the Homeowners Association and he questions the City Council's involvement with it. Mr. Hale stated that the Peach Hill Homeowners Association would be willing to gain the necessary signatures prior to the removal of the trees, but that it would entail more effort on their part. Mr. Kueny suggested the Council approve the removal of 64 specifically identified trees and move forward with Mayor Hunter's previous suggestion relative to this removal. Mr. Kueny stated that staff will issue permits consistent with the Council's direction of gaining the homeowners' signatures. He stated that staff will work with the HOA to determine the precise location of the trees to be removed and the trees to be replaced. 4) 131 d S Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 15 April 3, 2002 MOTION: Mayor Hunter moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to direct staff to issue a permit for the Peach Hill Homeowner's Association to remove a total of 66 trees with the tree replacement to be 1 tree replaced for every three trees removed, the tree removal to be limited to no more than 22 trees every 24 months, subject to signatures being obtained from affected property owners to concur with each tree removal. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the Council took a recess. The time was 8:27 p.m. The Council meeting reconvened at 8:40 p.m. Mayor Hunter noted that there is one remaining action to be completed relative to Item 10.C. and that is the creation of the Ad Hoc Committee. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Council determined that Councilmember Harper and Councilmember Mikos will serve on an Ad Hoc Committee to review the Moorpark Municipal Code Sections 12.08 and 12.12. D. Review and Discuss Feasibility of Increasing Operations at the SR -118 Truck Inspection Station to a 24 -Hour Basis. Staff Recommendation: Discuss the feasibility of increased commercial traffic enforcement in Moorpark including increasing operating hours at the SR -118 Inspection Facility. Hugh Riley stated that Councilmember Millhouse requested this item be on the agenda and he deferred to Councilmember Millhouse for further information. Councilmember Millhouse stated that he is concerned that the truck traffic on State Route 118 is increasing due to expansion of the Port Hueneme shipping operations. He stated that he is seeking information relative to the cost of maintaining the SR -118 truck inspection station on a 24 -hour basis. He stated that it would serve to reduce the number of trucks coming through the City of Moorpark, since a certain percentage of truckers would want to avoid the delays of the station, and it would help ensure that J. � Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 16 ril 3, 2002 the trucks that do travel through the City are vehicles that are operating safely. Councilmember Millhouse stated that the personnel cost to operate the station for an 8 -hour shift is approximately $690.00 with an additional $210 per day for fixed costs. He stated that the total cost for one year would be approximately $236,000 for an 8 -hour shift. He suggested that funding can be sought from the County, State, and Federal government, and potentially the Port of Hueneme, to assist with expenses related to extending operating hours. Councilmember Mikos stated that she needed more information prior to making a decision. Councilmember Harper stated that he shares Councilmember Mikos' need for additional and more complete information. He also requested that the Council learn what percentage of trucks are actually inspected. He noted that the State is going to fully fund a permanent station to be opened in the year 2007 and he stated he would like the City to investigate the possibility of accelerating that timetable with the use of local funding. He stated that if the City can share in the revenues from the permanent station, then he would support using local funding to assist with the construction of it to get it in place sooner than the year 2007. Councilmember Millhouse explained that his request is for the Council to define what is desired relative to the hours of operation and then to approach the State with a specific proposal. Councilmember Harper suggested that it may be appropriate for a subcommittee to be appointed. He suggested that Councilmember Millhouse and Councilmember Wozniak would be possible members of such a subcommittee. Councilmember Harper recommended that the subcommittee could address short -term and long -term goals. He provided an example of a short - term goal being the expansion of hours of operation and possibly staggering the hours of operation to make it less predictable for the truck operators. The Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 17 April 3, 2002 second would be a long -term goal of considering and accelerating the establishment of a permanent weigh station. Mayor Hunter stated that he will not abandon the goal of eliminating trucks on State Route 118. He requested definition of a Class C weigh station. Mr. Riley responded that it is determined by the number of lanes and the capacity of the facility. He will provide the City Council with a technical definition as an inbox item. Mayor Hunter asked why the State is proposing to relocate the station. Mr. Riley stated that the State is anticipating that they will acquire more land than they may really need. Councilmember Mikos suggested that the State may have a plan to widen SR -118 to establish four lanes from Moorpark to Port Hueneme and it is being done under the guise of purchasing right -of -way to assist with the establishment of the weigh station. Mayor Hunter reminded the Council that the CHP is the only agency authorized to stop traffic to conduct inspections. He suggested that legislation is needed to allow police departments to conduct safety inspections on trucks. He requested that it be a part of any motion that is considered relative to this item. Councilmember Millhouse concurred with Mayor Hunter's suggestion. He asked that the Council state a position to set a policy requesting the appropriate State, County, and Federal authorities to operate the vehicle inspection station on an established basis. He does not want to delay this item at the committee level. Councilmember Harper suggested that the letter that was sent by Mayor Hunter to the CHP in May of 2001 be updated and sent again to all of those concerned. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 18 ril 3, 2002 Mayor Hunter suggested that the Council consider adoption of a formal resolution addressing that issue as opposed to letters being sent to the representatives of the various agencies stating the City's position. Councilmember Harper concurred with Mayor Hunter's recommendation. Mayor,Hunter stated that he on the subcommittee, but Councilmember Wozniak who is Councilmembers Harper and Mayor Hunter be a member of Councilmember Wozniak be transportation issues. has an interest in serving does not want to exclude absent this evening. Millhouse concurred that the subcommittee and that consulted on the various MOTION: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution in support of the State Route 118 inspection station being operated either full time or on a consistent basis each day; that an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Mayor Hunter and Councilmember Millhouse be created to develop goals pertaining to reducing or eliminating truck traffic on SR -118 through Moorpark. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. A. Consider a Temporary Use Permit for Recreational Vehicle Storage on Coast Auto Salvage Property (198 Lorraine Lane) . Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Ms. Traffenstedt gave the staff report. John Newton, 165 High Street, Suite 103, addressed the Council as the applicant's representative. He requested approval of the Temporary Use Permit based on the non - conforming change of use provision. Mr. Newton explained a concern that has been expressed is, if the Temporary Use Permit (TUP) is issued, what criteria will determine when it is to be terminated. Mr. Newton explained that Calleguas Municipal Water District is required to provide notice to the 1.1 r%. -j e-*j 0-0, . 6 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 19 April 3, 2002 recreational vehicle (RV) tenants when it is time for them to move. He further explained that he is tasked to find an alternate site to store the 35 RV units when those tenants receive that notice. He read the following suggested language that could be incorporated into the TUP to ensure that the 35 recreational vehicle units are removed from the Coast Auto Salvage site when Calleguas gives the notice to the tenants: "Notice be provided to all tenants and any prospective tenants during the temporary use period (meaning all tenants on the RV storage site and, during the construction period, any prospective tenant entering the storage site would receive this notice) that the temporary use permit site is for temporary parking of up to 35 recreational vehicles during construction of Calleguas Municipal Water District's waterline estimated to be six months in duration. Once construction is certified to the City by Calleguas Municipal Water District that it is complete, the TUP is terminated. Any recreational vehicle remaining on the TUP site after the use permit is terminated, may be removed by the City, towed to an impound yard and stored there, all at the RV owner's expense. Said notice to be acknowledged with copies provided to the City prior to the use inauguration." Mayor Hunter asked staff if the question of approval is that of an expansion of a non - conforming use. Ms. Traffenstedt confirmed that statement. In response to Council question, Mr. Montes stated that the question is whether or not the City Council can authorize the requested use via a TUP. He stated that the TUP language allows a broad interpretation. He continued by stating that the Council is treating this request as a non - conforming use and that this type of use would require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and that the TUP is not available to give someone a use that otherwise requires a CUP. He continued by stating that there appears to be a question of determination as to whether or not this is an expansion of a nonconforming use, or whether or not ti `'_k' Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 20 April 3, 2002 this is a change of a nonconforming use, or whether or not the existing use is nonconforming at all. He explained that there is some latitude to accomplish a temporary arrangement if that is the Council's inclination given the circumstances. Councilmember Harper stated that the question is by what method the Council will accomplish the granting of the TUP legally, with least cost impact, and have it terminate/" sunset" legally. He stated that Mr. Newton's suggested language is reasonable with one change that, at the conclusion of the Public Works project, the tenants are provided a reasonable time to vacate. Councilmember Harper expressed concern that the pads that have been created for this temporary use will not suddenly be occupied by other vehicles. He expressed support of the City Attorney's advisement that this issue be addressed as a TUP. Mr. Montes stated that in response to the proposed condition by the applicant, the City does not want to be in the position to enforce the removal of the recreational vehicles to the greatest extent possible. He recommended instead that a condition be added to require that in the event the units are not removed, the owner of the facility be required to remove and store them at an alternate location. He also suggested that the City consider a bonding requirement to cover the cost of the removal if the owner does not remove the units and the City is forced to remove them. If the property owner does not honor that obligation, then the City has the legal right to call in the bond. Mayor Hunter asked Mr. Montes if a TUP can be allowed under the given circumstances, if appropriately conditioned. Mr. Montes stated that based on the circumstances of the proposed project site, including that there are two parcels involved and it is unclear whether it is an expansion of use of one parcel or a change of use Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 21 ril 3, 2002 of another parcel, he felt this situation presents the opportunity to use a TUP. Mr. Montes stated that it is very difficult to sunset a CUP. He explained that once the use has commenced and the property owner has obtained the vested right under California Law, and unless the property owner has violated the conditions, it is very difficult to terminate that CUP. He concluded by stating that a TUP has an established deadline for termination of the temporary use. He stated that the TUP is preferred in this situation. In response to Council question, Mr. Montes stated that anyone can challenge the Council's decision to issue this permit, but he does not believe this is likely, since the potential challengers are the same entities that are now applying for the permit. Mr. Montes addressed that the exposure of the Council will be at the expiration of the permit life and how the owners of the recreational vehicles at that site are being treated at that time. Mr. Montes recommended that the City include an indemnity clause as a requirement to limit the City's liability exposure. Councilmember Harper asked if there are any residents attempting to use these units as residential homes. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Newton indicated that none of the units are being utilized as residential homes. MOTION: Mayor Hunter moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to: 1) authorize a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) ; 2) that the TUP be valid for a specified period of time, specifically beginning 30 days prior to the initiation of the Calleguas Municipal Water District public works project and concluding 30 days following the certified completion of that project; 3) that the applicant be required to post a bond to ensure removal of any recreational vehicle units that remain on the property after 30 days and that the site be restored to its original condition; 4) that staff be authorized to add other 4 I _) :1 t3 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 22 April 3, 2002 conditions as deemed appropriate, including the City Attorney recommended requirements; and 5) that this item come back to the Council for final approval. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. 11. CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar, with the exception of Items ll.G. and Item ll.H., which were pulled for individual consideration. The motion carried by roll call vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. A. Consider Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Julv 18, 2001. Consider Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of December 19, 2001. Staff Recommendation: Approve minutes as processed. B. Consider Approval of Warrant Reaister for Fiscal Year 2001 -2002 - April 3, 2002. Manual Warrants 108816 - 108821 $2,573.00 Voided Warrants 108697 & 108797 & $(16,295.07) 108819 Payroll Liability 108822 - 108827 $ 8,762.38 Warrants Regular Warrants 108828 - 108911 & $ 21,353.25 108912 - 108949 $ 264,639.99 Staff Recommendation: Approve the warrant register. C. Consider a Resolution Appropriating Funds for a Summer Beach Bus Program Providing Public Transportation From Moorpark to Zuma Beach County Park. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 2002 -1959, and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute a new Agreement with Durham Transportation to operate the Summer Beach Bus and to proceed with plans for a transit service to the Ventura County Fair on a trial basis. ( "Cs '2 �..r 1-1 c a+• h Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 23 April 3, 2002 D. Consider a Resolution Authorizing Submittal of a Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act Grant Application to the California Department of Conservation Division of Recycling. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1960. E. Consider a Resolution Authorizing Submittal of a Three Year (2002/2005) Used Oil Recycling Block Grant Application to the California Integrated Waste Management Board. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1961. F. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Directing the Planning Commission to set a Public Hearing and Provide a Recommendation on a Zoning Code Amendment Related to Signs for the Promotion of New Businesses. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1962. The following Consent Calendar items were pulled for individual consideration. G. Consider Adoption of a Resolution Directing the Planning Commission to set a Public Hearing and Provide a Recommendation on a Zoning Code Amendment Related to Second Dwellings. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1963. Councilmember Mikos pulled this item to give focus and direction to consider the approval of second dwellings on large lots as a method of meeting the affordable housing needs of the community. MOTION: Councilmember Mikos moved and Councilmember Harper moved to adopt Resolution 2002 -1963. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. H. Consider Recognition Awards and Insurance Services Office (ISO) Rating for the Moorpark Building and Safety Division. Staff Recommendation: Receive and file the report. Councilmember Harper stated he pulled this item to allow the City Engineer staff to report relative to this item. 8 4 �; C _� Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 24 April 3, 2002 Walter Brown summarized the recognition of awards that were recently provided to the Moorpark Building and Safety Division staff. CONSENSUS: By consensus. the Council determined to receive and file the report. 12. ORDINANCES: None. 13. CLOSED SESSION: Mr. Kueny announced that the City Council would be going into closed session for discussion of Item 13.B (4 cases), Item 13.E., and Item 13.H. MOTION: Councilmember Mikos moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to adjourn to closed session for a discussion of Item 13.B. (three cases), Item 13.E., and Item 13.H. The motion carried by voice vote 4 -0, Councilmember Wozniak absent. B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to Subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code: (Number of cases to be discussed - 4) E. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Title: Assistant City Manager, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, City Engineer, Chief of Police, Director of Administrative Services, Director of Community Development, Director of Community Services, and Director of Public Works. H. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: APN 511 -0- 050 -080, Moorpark, CA 93021 Agency Negotiator: Steven Kueny, City Manager Negotiating Parties: The City of Moorpark and Monte L. Abbath Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the City Council meeting was recessed to convene the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency r OP, S' Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 25 April 3, 2002 closed session. The time was 9:25 p.m. The Council reconvened into closed session at 9:50 p.m. Present in closed session were Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, and Millhouse and Mayor Hunter; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. The Council reconvened into open session at 10:52 p.m. Mr. Kueny stated that three cases under Item 13.B., Item 13.E., and Item 13.H. were discussed and that there was no action to report. 14. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Hunter adjourned the meeting at 10:52 p.m. ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk Patrick Hunter, Mayor CF, 1011, SI'J' TO: FROM: DATE: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council ITEiVI I I • 8• C:TT)' nr MnnRPARK. CALtFnRNTA City Council Meeting of ACTTON: r� ..._.........,., Deborah S. Traffenstedt, ATCM /City Clerk September 10, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) "D5-i SUBJECT: Consider Reconsideration of Approval of March 6, 2002, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes and Reconsideration of Vote on July 17, 2002 BACKGROUND On July 17, 2002, the City Council approved the minutes for the March 6, 2002, regular City Council meeting. Staff subsequently found that an error had been made in the summary of the City Council's action on Public Hearing Item 9.D. (jointly heard with Redevelopment Agency Item 4.A.), and also found that other minor editorial corrections were appropriate, and is now recommending reconsideration of the prior approval, reconsideration of the vote, and adoption of the corrected minutes attached to this report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Reconsider approval of July meeting minutes; 2. Reconsider vote on July 17, 3. Adopt the corrected March 6, 17, 2002, Regular City Council 2002; and 2002 minutes. Attachment: Revised Minutes for March 6, 2002 v cf:j a p MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California March 6, 2002 A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on March 6, 2002, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. 2. INVOCATION: Reverend Errol Hale, from Shiloh Community Church, gave the invocation. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Councilmember Wozniak led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Wozniak, and Mayor Hunter Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager, Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Mary Lindley, Community Services Director; Dana Shigley, Administrative Services Director; Walter Brown, City Engineer; Captain Robert LeMay, Sheriff's Department; Nancy Burns, Senior Management Analyst; Paul Porter, Principal Planner; Laura Stringer, Senior Management Analyst; Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk; La -Dell VanDeren, Deputy City Clerk 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS: B. Introduction of New Employee, Tracy Martin, Secretary I, in the Assistant City Manager's Department. Mayor Hunter provided a summary of Ms. Martin's experience and welcomed her as a new employee to the City of Moorpark. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 2 March 6, 2002 A. Recognition of the Retirement of Sergeant Terry Hughes, Ventura County Sheriff's Department. Mayor Hunter deferred this item until later in the meeting since Sergeant Hughes was delayed in his arrival at the meeting. 6. PUBLIC COMMENT: A. Robert Coughlon, 11955 Silvercrest Street, spoke as President of the American Cancer Society Moorpark and Simi Valley Chapter. He requested the Council put on their agenda a proclamation to declare the month of March as Colon Cancer Awareness Month. Mayor Hunter requested staff to prepare a proclamation and place it on the March 20th City Council agenda. B. Gerald Goldstein, 11932 Los Angeles Avenue, addressed the Council relative to law enforcement and traffic issues in the City. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, Mayor Hunter noted that Sergeant Hughes was present to receive his recognition. Mayor Hunter provided a summary of Sergeant Hughes' accomplishments and presented him with a City of Moorpark proclamation and a plaque. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, Mayor Hunter announced that the City Council would hold a joint public hearing with the Redevelopment Agency to consider City Council Item 9.D. and Agency Item 4.A. The time was 7:01 p.m. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: D. Consider Relocation Plan /Impact Conversion Report for Proposed Relocation of Residents of Moorpark Mobilehome Park. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open public hearing and receive public testimony on the Relocation Plan for the High Street Project; and 2) Continue public hearing to March 20, 2002. Ms. Burns gave the staff report. Mayor /Chair Hunter opened the public hearing for both the Redevelopment Agency and City Council. I 1 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 3 March 6, 2002 David J. Richman, 100 W. Broadway, Long Beach, representing Pacific Relocation Consultants, stated that he was present to answer any questions. In response to Mayor /Chair Hunter, Mr. Richman clarified the conditions under which the Last Resort Housing Assistance would be utilized. He explained that the intent of the Relocation Plan is to allow the displaced persons to upgrade their housing and that the Last Resort Housing Assistance is based upon on the individual circumstances of each one. JOINT CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MOTION: Councilmember /Agency Member Wozniak moved and Councilmember /Agency Member Mikos seconded a motion to continue City Council Item 9.D. and Agency Item 4.A. to the regular meeting of March 20, 2002, with the public hearing to remain open. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the Redevelopment Agency Meeting was adjourned. The time was 7:16 p.m. 7. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: Mayor Hunter requested that due to the number of public hearings on the agenda that Item 12.A., the second reading of the ordinance, be reordered immediately prior to the public hearings. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Council determined to reorder Item 12.A. to be considered immediately prior to the consideration of the public hearings. 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Councilmember Millhouse reinforced what Mr. Coughlon had stated earlier in the meeting and emphasized the need for colon cancer testing for those persons over 50 years of age. He also stated that members of Rotary International are present in the audience and that their organization recently distributed money to various civic organizations. Councilmember Millhouse requested that the consideration of the City's purchase of traffic signs that contain radar equipment be placed on the City Council agenda for March 20, 2002. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 4 March 6, 2002 Councilmember Harper requested that a review of the City's tree protection ordinance be placed on a future agenda. 12. ORDINANCES: A. Consider Ordinance No. 278 Regulating Wireless Communications Facilities within the City of Moorpark by Adding Chapter 17.42 and Amending Chapters 17.08 and 17.20 of Title 17, Zoning, of the Moorpark Municipal Code, and Repealing Ordinance No. 275 upon the Effective Date of this Ordinance. Staff Recommendation: Declare Ordinance No. 278 read for the second time and adopted as read. Mr. Montes read the title of Ordinance No. 278. MOTION: Councilmember Wozniak moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 278. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. MOTION: Councilmember Wozniak moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to declare Ordinance No. 278 read for a second time and adopted as read. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Consider an Ordinance to Rescind Existing Chapter 15.24 and Replace with New Chapter 15.24, Regarding Flood Damage Prevention. (Continued open public hearing from City Council Meeting of February 6, 2002.) Staff Recommendation: Introduce Ordinance No. 279 for first reading. Walter Brown gave the staff report. There being no public speakers, Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Mr. Montes read the ordinance title. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to waive further reading. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. (- . « „� ,�; .w Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 5 March 6, 2002 MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to declare the ordinance introduced for first reading. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. B. Consider Proposals for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds ($197,623) for FY 2002/2003. (Continued closed public hearing from City Council Meeting of February 6, 2002.) Staff Recommendation: 1) Discuss funding allocations for FY 2002/2003; 2) Authorize the following allocations from FY 2002/2003 CDBG funds: (A) $143,400 for a Mini -Park in the Downtown Residential Area; (B) $29,643 for Public Service projects with the following allocations: (i.) Catholic Charities $7,643; (ii.) Senior Center Operations $12,000; (iii.) Senior Nutrition $10,000; (C) $24,580 for Administration costs with the following allocations: (i.) City Staff $22,580; (ii.) Fair Housing $2,000. Nancy Burns gave the staff report. Councilmember Mikos questioned if, due to the potential budget shortfall from the State, the Council can consider different direction for the funds at a later point in time. Councilmember Mikos gave the example of the Senior Olympics. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kueny explained that the intent of the Budget and Finance Committee was that the City would fund the Senior Olympics out of the General Fund during the budget process. Mr. Kueny explained that changes can be made to the allocations of the CDBG funds, but that another public hearing would have to be conducted before reallocating the funds. Councilmember Millhouse asked if the Senior Olympics are funded through the budget process, what is the expected timeframe for that to take place. Ms. Lindley stated that it would depend upon what activities would be funded and what the Council direction would be. Mr. Kueny explained that groups applying for the funding were aware that the CDBG funds do not become Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 6 March 6, 2002 available until after the new fiscal year begins on July 1, 2002. Councilmember Harper suggested that the City consider setting aside an equivalent amount of approximately $20,580 during the budget deliberations to fund some additional public service proposals in addition to those selected for CDBG funding. He explained the possibility of taking a like amount for what is being used for City staff costs out of the General Fund to augment the Block Grant funds. MOTION: Councilmember Mikos moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to authorize the following allocations from FY 2002/2003 Community Development Block Grant funds: (A) $143,400 for a Mini -Park in the Downtown Residential Area; (B) $29,643 for Public Service projects with the following allocations: (i.) Catholic Charities $7,643; (ii.) Senior Center Operations $12,000; (iii.) Senior Nutrition $10,000; (C) $24,580 for Administration costs with the following allocations: (i.) City Staff $22,580; (ii.) Fair Housing $2,000. The motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. C. Consider Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2001 -01 for Construction of a 357,621 Square Foot Commercial Center, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map Ho. 5321 for Subdivision of Approximately Twenty Nine (29) Acres into Eight (8) Lots Located South of New Los Angeles Avenue, East of Miller Parkway, and West of the SR -23 Freeway on the Application of Zelman Retail Partners, Inc. (Continued open public hearing from February 27, 2002.) Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, discuss issues identified in staff report, and close the public hearing; 2) Consider that the Environmental Impact Report for the Amended Carlsberg Specific Plan adequately addressed the impacts of the proposed commercial project; and 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2002 - conditionally approving Commercial Planned Development No. 2001 -01 and Vesting Tentative Map No. 5321, and directing the Planning Commission to initiate study of modifications to Chapter 17.30 of the Zoning Ordinance and /or Ordinance No. 195 related to revisions to lighting standards. Mr. Porter gave the staff report. e Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 7 March 6, 2002 Mayor Hunter asked if undergrounding of the utilities on the north side of Los Angeles Avenue has been added as a condition for this project. Mr. Kueny responded that the issue was discussed during the Master Tract Map for the Carlsberg Specific Plan and the Council declined not to require it at that time. He stated that the previous determination does not preclude conditioning this applicant to provide undergrounding of the utilities. Mayor Hunter stated that the public hearing remains open. Robert Exel, 515 S. Figueroa Suite 1230, Los Angeles, addressed the Council representing Zelman Retail Partners. Mr. Exel presented a modified plan for the retail center. He stated that the current proposed/ interested tenants include Kohl's, Target, TJ Maxx, Michael's, Linen's & Things, Quiznos, Baja Fresh, Cupid's Ice Cream, Starbucks, Pan Express, Coffee Bean and Tea, Cingular Wireless, Famous Footwear, Bath & Bodyworks, and Dress Barn. He also stated that the anticipated benefits to the community will be the creation of approximately 600 new jobs and the generation in excess of $600,000 in sales tax revenue the first year. Mr. Exel stated that timing is a critical element for their anchor stores. Chris Moore, representing Kohl's Department Stores, N56 W17000 Ridgewood Drive, Menomonee Falls, WI, addressed the Council. He provided a brief description of their stores' merchandise and quality of facilities. Brian Wolfe, representing P &R Architects, 111 W. Ocean Boulevard, 21st Floor, Long Beach, CA, as architect for the applicant addressed the Council. Mr. Wolfe presented the proposed architectural plan for the retail center. Chuck Foley, representing Hirsch & Associates, 320 Loma Avenue, Long Beach, CA, addressed the Council as Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 8 March 6, 2002 landscape architect for the applicant. Mr. Foley presented the proposed landscape plan for the retail center. Councilmember Millhouse questioned the term "gathering destination" for families in the area relative to this shopping area. In response to Councilmember Millhouse, Mr. Exel stated that the food court and the music will be the enticement for a gathering destination. He stated that there is a proposed fountain, and an outdoor gathering area that will include music. Also, Mr. Exel explained that there is an area at the end of building D -1 to be set aside for community events. Councilmember Wozniak stated his concern that fast food drive - through restaurants in the project are not acceptable. He stated that they cheapen the integrity of the project. Councilmember Wozniak expressed his desire to have a dramatic treatment to the gateway at Miller Parkway and New Los Angeles Avenue that makes a strong statement about the retail center. Additionally, he stated that he wants to see more and larger trees incorporated along the perimeter and closer to the buildings. Councilmember Harper agreed with Councilmember Wozniak about the entryway treatment and stated that it needs to be significant and more inviting. He stated that he wants an enhancement of the pedestrian walkways from the commercial /industrial projects and to the other parts of the City and the Center. He explained that he envisions employees from the surrounding areas walking to have lunch in the retail center. Councilmember Harper suggested that the majority of the trees planned for the landscaping should be evergreen instead of primarily deciduous trees to provide a consistent canopy and a more pleasing effect in the asphalt parking areas year round. He also stated that the proposed structure to house the Target store is not pleasing and yet the Target chain has stated that the cost for the project is already over budget. Councilmember Harper stated that this concern will have to be addressed. L Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 9 March 6, 2002 In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Exel replied that a meeting would be arranged with the City and Target's architect to work the issue out. Councilmember Harper stated that he wants to see more established restaurants incorporated into the development rather than fast food restaurants. He also suggested that some of the asphalt should be replaced with stamped concrete to make the food court area more attractive. Mr. Exel responded that the fast food restaurants are not easily visible from the street and that the proposed non -fast food restaurants are proposed to be located at the entrance to the Center. Councilmember Mikos expressed her concern that the bookstore chain Borders is electing to establish a store in Simi Valley and not as a tenant in the retail center in Moorpark. She stated that she is disappointed due to the fact that Moorpark is a college town and that a bookstore would be a good draw to the center. Councilmember Mikos asked Mr. Exel if this information has been communicated to the management of Borders. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Exel stated that Borders had very little interest in becoming a tenant of the Center. Councilmember Mikos suggested that since there is a pedestrian walkway connection to the business park and open space trail system, an interpretive type treatment to that area that includes a history of the area or an explanation of the flora and fauna would be a creative way to enhance it and make it a destination for the community. She also expressed concern about the brightness of the lighting and how it might impact the night environment. Mr. Exel stated that the project will stay within the limitations set forth in the Municipal Code for lighting. Mayor Hunter stated that the proposed development appears to be based upon what the applicant can C ?iv, u "* Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 10 March 6, 2002 achieve as far as willing tenants and not necessarily on what the community needs or desires. He stated that he agrees with the lack of an entry statement and that the project needs to be modified. He also noted that the architecture is too linear with little interest or height variation across the top of the building lines. Mayor Hunter asked what changes have been made to the design that are different from what was originally proposed. Brian Wolfe stated that the following changes have been made: 1) the width of the pedestrian walkways has been changed from the original 15 feet to 24 feet average; 2) the pedestrian arcades on the north side of the project and the west side of Kohl's and Target have been extended to be 12 and 14 feet in depth with trellised landscaping; 3) the stone veneer columns are on every building; 4) decorative sconces and enhanced trim treatments have been added throughout the project; 5) the Target structure has a more articulated garden center and colonnades; 6) the TJ Maxx building has more variation in the design plan and has a forty -foot setback between Buildings B and C -1; and 7) the food court has tendrils that extend out into the center to a transit bus stop center that will be treated with a tile background, trellised landscape separation, and botanical garden. Mayor Hunter questioned why this project does not meet the design quality similar to that of The Commons in Calabasas and The Promenade in Westlake, which offer more interest and are less linear in architectural design and layout. Mr. Wolfe explained the details that are being offered in the design plan to allow for variation in depth and height of the project. Mayor Hunter stated his concern about the number and size of the signs that are proposed for the development. Mayor Hunter noted that the public hearing remained open. Ruth Fritkin, a Moorpark resident, addressed the Council. She expressed concern that the retail center . � . .. �x e Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 11 March 6, 2002 be of such quality that it will not become a retail failure. Scott Green, 33 E. High Street, expressed concern that the City not overburden the developer to the extent that they will decide not to pursue the project. Charles Devlin, 5148 Commerce Avenue, spoke in favor of the proposed retail center. Bryce Eddy, a Moorpark resident, expressed concern about the caliber of the anchor stores that have been attracted to the center. Mr. Eddy stated that a higher quality of tenant should be pursued for the center. Mary Roberts, a Moorpark resident, spoke in support of the proposed retail center. Linda Plaks, a Moorpark resident, spoke in support of the project and encouraged the City to work with the developer to make it successful. She also stated that the center needs a restaurant that is unique to the area that would entice visitors to the center. Pat Gilhooly, 4525 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 202, spoke representing The Clover Company, a retail real estate company that specializes in site selection and market strategies for local and national retailers. Mr. Gilhooly stated that he is representing Kohl's Department Stores and T. J. Maxx. He requested the City's support for the project. Mark DiCecco, a Moorpark resident and Planning Commissioner, spoke in favor of the retail center. Bill Bauman, spoke representing Colliers Seeley Company, 444 S. Flower Street, #2200, Los Angeles, the marketing agent for the project property. He explained the factors that are used to determine what type of retailers will locate in a community. He stated that the retailers that are being proposed for this center are appropriate for the City's profile and citizens. He encouraged the City to support the retail center. In response to Councilmember Millhouse, Mr. Bauman stated that Barnes & Noble was not interested in being Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 12 March 6, 2002 a tenant in this center because the company has a store in Thousand Oaks. He continued by stating that Borders Bookstore also declined tenancy in this proposed center due to a lack of population density in the geographic area. Pat Gilhooly stated that Borders decided to locate in Simi Valley due to the greater population density and the access that it would allow to the Porter Ranch area as well. Councilmember Millhouse commented that the freeway access to this proposed retail center would allow for easier access to a bookstore than a location on a surface street such as Tapo Canyon located in the center of Simi Valley. Steve Sill, a Moorpark resident, spoke in favor of the project and encouraged the City to support it. Scott Mosher, 200 Casey Road (Moorpark Boys and Girls Club) , spoke in favor of the project and stated that it would be a major asset to the community. Dina Nelli, a Moorpark resident, expressed concern about the caliber of the tenants that are being attracted to the center. She stated that she wants a high - quality center. Jim Stueck, a Moorpark resident, spoke in favor of the project and stated that the employment opportunities are needed within the City. Mayor Hunter noted that late speaker cards were submitted to the City Clerk. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Council determined to waive their rules of procedure and accept the late speaker cards. Gerald Goldstein, 11932 Los Angeles Avenue, spoke relative to the quality of construction of the proposed center. Kipp Landis, a Moorpark resident and Planning Commissioner, stated that the center's architectural design should contain Western elements. He also stated that the design has too many linear elements Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 13 March 6, 2002 and the freeway signage is undesirable. Mr. Landis suggested that this center should be an attraction for visitors from other cities. Bernardo Perez, a Moorpark resident, provided a brief history of the property and various land use proposals that were considered over the years. He encouraged the City to take action and support the project. Councilmember Mikos stated that she has visited the Kohl's Department Store in another state and that Kohl's would be a desirable tenant for this retail center. She also stated that she wants a bookstore included in the tenant mix at the center. Thomas K. Stoddard, spoke representing Cypress Land Company, 10940 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles. He stated that they are a contiguous landowner to the proposed development. Mr. Stoddard explained that his company is currently preparing a proposed design for a master planned business park. He spoke in favor of the proposed retail center. Mayor Hunter requested the City Clerk to summarize the contents of three written speaker cards that were submitted. Ms. Traffenstedt responded that the submitters of the speaker cards are in support of the retail center. The persons submitting the written statement cards were: John Newton, 165 High Street, Suite 103, Moorpark; Carla Robertson, 165 High Street, Suite 103, Moorpark; and Pam Justin, a Camarillo resident. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the Council took a recess. The time was 10:00 p.m. The Council reconvened at 10:25 p.m. Mayor Hunter called the meeting back to order and stated that one additional speaker card had been submitted. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Council determined to waive their rules of procedure and accept the late speaker card. Lauren S. Schwartz, a Moorpark resident, expressed her concern about the high crime rate of fast food Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 14 March 6, 2002 restaurants and a concern about the light pollution that may result from this proposed retail center. Ms. Schwartz also stated her concern about the quality of merchandise sold by some of the proposed tenants of the center. Mayor Hunter noted that the time has come to reorder the agenda. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Council determined to continue Items 10.B. and 10.C. to the regular City Council meeting of March 20, 2002. Robert Exel addressed the Council in response to Council and public comment relative to the proposed retail center. He stated that the reasons for their being able to attract certain tenants and not others are based upon certain demographic data. He provided the comparative details for the cities of Thousand Oaks, Calabasas, and Moorpark based on 3- and 5 -mile radius statistics. He stated that the average population for Moorpark, Thousand Oaks and Calabasas within a 3 -mile radius is 25,000, 46,000, and 69,000, respectively. Additionally, Mr. Exel stated that the average annual income within a 3 -mile radius for each of the cities is $97,000 (Moorpark), $114,000 (Thousand Oaks), and $113,000 (Calabasas). He further stated that the average population within a 5 -mile radius of Moorpark, Thousand Oaks, and Calabasas is 81,000, 113,000, and 174,000, respectively. Mr. Exel cited the average annual income within a 5 -mile radius of Moorpark, Thousand Oaks, and Calabasas as being $96,000, $107,000, and $100,000 in that order. Mr. Exel explained that the number of college degrees in a community also determines where certain retailers will locate their establishments. He stated that due to the lower population density in Moorpark that number is lower and may be a partial reason for some of the retailers not wanting to locate here. He stated that the applicant will approach Borders and Barnes & Noble bookstores again in the next few days to provide them the opportunity to become a tenant at the center, and, if not, find out the reasons that they are electing not to locate in Moorpark. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 15 March 6, 2002 In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Exel stated that the applicant would welcome any assistance from the City relative to communication with the two bookstore companies. Councilmember Mikos commented that the statistics Mr. Exel just provided to the Council are based on the 1990 census and it would be helpful to have current demographic information when speaking to the prospective tenants. Mr. Exel said they will also pursue higher quality restaurants as tenants. Relative to the design standards, Mr. Exel stated that the applicant will review the corner treatment at Miller Parkway and New Los Angeles Avenue and the need for the pylon sign on Miller Parkway. He stated that the pylon sign on New Los Angeles Avenue and on the freeway are necessary since the trees within the center will grow and make the signs on the stores themselves less visible to potential customers. He explained that a tradeoff in return for more landscaping in the center and around the perimeter would be more signage along the perimeter of the center. Relative to the lighting issue, Mr. Exel assured the Council that the applicant will not present an excessive lighting situation. He also commented that the issue of the main entrance treatment will be reviewed by the center designers to explore an enhanced and more interesting appearance based upon this evening's Council comments and upon approval by Caltrans. Mr. Exel said the applicant will review what can be done to make the pedestrian walkway from the back more attractive, but they are limited with what can be done, since it also is designed as a service road and traffic cannot be blocked. He expressed concern that time is critical for moving forward with the project. He stated that Kohl's may decline to be a tenant if their timeframe for opening the store is not met. Mr. Exel explained that if I-`, � 171 ew n Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 16 March 6, 2002 Kohl's is not a tenant then Linen's, Michael's and TJ Maxx will also decline to become tenants. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Exel explained that the fast food restaurants play a large role in the financing approval for the entire project. He clarified that the fast food restaurants are granted ground leases which means that they construct their own buildings and are a positive element to financiers because of their investment commitment. Additionally, Mr. Exel stated that the fast food restaurants are financially profitable and are an essential part of providing a good economic basis on which the financing is approved. He explained that initially a car wash, service station, and delicatessen were proposed for the center, because they also are considered to be financially viable. However, he stated that those uses of the pads were considered by the City to be undesirable for the center, so the fast food restaurants were considered as the better alternative. Chuck Foley, the landscape architect, addressed the Council and responded to the landscape comments made this evening. He agreed that the corner of New Los Angeles Avenue and Miller Parkway needs to be revised to make it more interesting and creative. He explained that the use of some deciduous trees is being proposed for the landscaping to provide a seasonal effect rather than strictly green foliage year round. In response to Councilmember Wozniak, Mr. Foley explained that the landscape designers will be developing a specific planting plan to incorporate the larger specimen trees. Councilmember Mikos asked if the artist's renderings or the photographs are the actual representation of what the project should look like upon completion. Mr. Foley clarified that the photographs are the designers influence, but that the renderings should match closely to details in the project submittal package. Councilmember Mikos commented that City staff should review discrepancies that appear between the f' � , :-�,2 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 17 March 6, 2002 photographs and the artist's rendering to identify details that may have been overlooked. Councilmember Millhouse volunteered to meet with higher quality restaurants to invite them to become tenants. He stated that it is important to solicit such higher quality restaurants now to ensure that the center does not ultimately contain only fast food restaurants. Councilmember Harper commented that the applicant is meeting with the architectural representative from Target Stores in one week. He recommended that the Ad Hoc Committee be involved in that meeting and that Planning Commissioner DiCecco should be requested to attend as a City representative. Councilmember Harper stated that a review should be done at that meeting to determine why the cost of the Target building has risen. He also commented he wants to see a bookstore included as a tenant. He suggested that the possibility exists that instructors at Moorpark College would order textbooks through a local bookstore to allow a more reasonable price for their students. Councilmember Millhouse requested clarification on how the Council wishes to proceed with meeting with restaurants and the bookstores as potential tenants for the retail center. Mr. Kueny stated Exel to contact established with stores and Mr. Councilmembers t� meeting. that one possibility would be for Mr. him when a meeting time has been the company personnel of the various Kueny would then notify individual D see who is available to attend the Mr. Exel agreed with Mr. Kueny's suggestion. MOTION: Councilmember Wozniak moved and Councilmember Millhouse seconded a motion to continue this item to the regular City Council meeting of March 20, 2002, with the public hearing to remain open. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 18 March 6, 2002 10: PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider Appointment of City Council Ad Hoc Committee with Cardservice, International. Staff Recommendation: Appoint an Ad Hoc Committee. Mr. Kueny stated a staff report was not necessary. Councilmember Millhouse and Mayor Hunter volunteered to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Council determined that Councilmember Millhouse and Mayor Hunter will serve on the Ad Hoc Committee with Cardservice International. B. Consider Deferring General Plan Amendment (GPA) Prescreening Application Processing for Two Applications filed in 2001 (GPA Prescreen 2001 -02 and 2001 -03), One Application Filed in 2000 (GPA Prescreen 2000 -02), and any other Developer- Initiated GPA Prescreening Application until the November 2002 Application Filing Period. (Continued from City Council Meeting of February 6, 2002.) Staff Recommendation: 1) Direct staff to defer processing and consideration of GPA Prescreening Applications (except for GPA Prescreen 2000 -02 Applicant: DeeWayne Jones, until the November 2002 filing period; and 2) Direct staff to process GPA Prescreen 2000 -02 (Applicant: DeeWayne Jones) when resubmitted, with the understanding that if authorized for General Plan Amendment processing, the application would be prioritized behind those GPA applications already on file. C. Consider Minor Modification No. 3 to Amended Carlsberg Specific Plan dated September 7, 1994 (SP92 -1) to Allow Pylon Signs for the Proposed Commercial Shopping Center located South of New Los Angeles Avenue and East of Miller Parkway and West of the SR -23 Freeway. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 - approving Minor Modification No. 3 to the Amended Carlsberg Specific Plan. Mayor Hunter reported that Items 10.B. and 10.C. have been continued by previous Council action to the City Council meeting of March 20, 2002. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 19 March 6, 2002 D. Consider Approval of the Preliminary Design of the Intersection of Moorpark Road, Tierra Rejada Road and Miller Parkway. Staff Recommendation: Approve the conceptual design shown on agenda report Exhibit 3, "Proposed Option 3." Mr. Brown gave the staff report. In response to Mayor Hunter, the City Clerk confirmed there were no public speakers for this item. Mayor Hunter commented that he can support Option 3 as presented in the staff report with the exception that the use of Bots dots be eliminated. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Brown stated that judiciously located painted dots or stripes could be used instead of the Bots dots. Mayor Hunter explained that his concern rests with the aesthetics of the dots and with the additional noise. Mr. Kueny clarified that the City Engineer is recommending painted dots or stripes and he wants to ensure an understanding of the Council on what the recommended alternative is. Mayor Hunter stated that he is in agreement to use painted tracking marks. Councilmember Mikos asked the cost consequences if the Bots dots are installed later. Mr. Brown stated that the cost would be approximately $1,200 - $1,500. He stated that it can be typically done with maintenance services without outsourcing it. Councilmember Millhouse recommended that when this new design is implemented it may be helpful to have a traffic officer present at commuter times to help orient drivers to the new traffic patterns. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to approve the conceptual design shown on stamped page 359 of the agenda report Exhibit 3, "Proposed Option 3." The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. p 9;- . Minutes of the City Council Moorpark. California Paae 20 March 6, 2002 E. Consider Authorizing the City Manager to Sign Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Agreement between the City of Moorpark and Professional Design Associates for Additional Work in the Preparation of Landscape Design Guidelines. Staff Recommendation: 1) Provide additional recommendations on the content of the guidelines as deemed appropriate; and 2) Authorize the City Manager to sign Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Professional Design Associates to develop Landscape Guidelines, Appendix and Optional Standards for a not to exceed amount of $14,170. Ms. Stringer gave the staff report. Councilmember Harper expressed that the list of trees recommended for streets and parking areas be reviewed to ensure that it does not include such specimens as the ornamental plum tree which are extremely undesirable for vehicle parking areas. Councilmember Mikos agreed that the list of trees needs to be reviewed to preclude the use of undesirable trees for specific landscaping uses. In response to Mayor Hunter, the City Clerk stated that there are no public speakers for this item. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded a motion to 1) provide additional recommendations on the content of the guidelines as deemed appropriate; and 2) authorize the City Manager to sign Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Professional Design Associates to develop Landscape Guidelines, Appendix and Optional Standards for a not to exceed amount of $14,170. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 11. CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. A. Consider Approval of Warrant Register for Fiscal Year 2001 -2002 - March 6, 2002. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 21 Manual Warrants Voided Warrants Payroll Liability Warrants Regular Warrants 108578 - 108581 108409 108671 - 108679 108582 - 108670 March 6, 2002 $935,659.87 $ (213.84) $ 11,285.16 $179,946.29 Staff Recommendation: Approve the warrant register. B. Consider Moorpark Little League and Moorpark Girls Softball Use Agreements. Staff Recommendation: Approve five -year use agreements with Moorpark Little League and Moorpark Girls Softball Association and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreements on behalf of the City. C. Consider Award of Contract for Metrolink Station Landscape Design. Staff Recommendation: Approve a contract with Meeks and Associates for the design and specification for landscape improvements at the Metrolink Station at a cost not to exceed $11,050 and authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City. D. Consider a Resolution to Amend the City Budget to Reflect the Total Final Cost for the Remodeling of 798 Moorpark Avenue for Offices for the Public Works Department. Staff Recommendation: Approve budget amendment and adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1949, amending the City budget. E. Consider Resolution Revising the Amount of the Appropriation and Budget for Traffic Signs [Gas Tax Fund 2605, Division 8310, Object 9303] to Acquire G7 -1 Style Street /Road Name Guide Signs and Adjust Account. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1950 revising the amount of the appropriations and budget for the Sign Maintenance account. F. Consider Notice of Completion for the Construction of a Double Left -Turn Lane [West -to- South] and Other Improvements in the Vicinity of the Intersection of Los Angeles Avenue and Tierra Rejada Road [Albertson's]. Staff Recommendation: Accept the work - Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 22 March 6, 2002 as completed and authorize the exoneration of the bond on file for the construction of these improvements. G. Consider Notice of Completion for the Construction of the 2001 Parkway & Median Landscaping Project [Projects 8019 & 8025]. Staff Recommendation: Accept the work as completed. H. Consider Approval of a Resolution Adopting a Revised Benefit Program for Management Employees and Rescinding Resolution No. 2001 -1884. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 -1951. 13. CLOSED SESSION: Mr. Kueny announced that the City Council would be going into Closed Session for discussion of Item 13.E, Item 13.F. and Item 13.G. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded a motion to adjourn to Closed Session for a discussion of Item 13.E., Item 13.F., and Item 13.G. The time was 11:24 p.m. E. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: APN 511 -0 -101 -380, Moorpark, CA 93021 Agency Negotiator: Steven Kueny, City Manager Negotiating Parties: The City of Moorpark and Byron - Nellie Rainey Trust Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment F. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: APN 511 -0- 090 -340, Moorpark, CA 93021 Agency Negotiator: Steven Kueny, City Manager Negotiating Parties: The City of Moorpark and Margaret Gisler - Cullen Trust Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment G. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Title: Assistant City Manager, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk, City Manager, City Attorney, City Engineer, Chief of Police, Director of Administrative Services, Director of Community Development, Director of Community Services, and Director of Public Works. S I. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 23 March 6, 2002 Present in closed session were all Councilmembers; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. The Council reconvened into open session at 11:44 p.m. Mr. Kueny stated that Items 13.E., Item 13.F., and Item 13.G were discussed and that there was no action to report. 14. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Hunter adjourned the meeting at 11:39 p.m. ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk Patrick Hunter, Mayor VOIDED WARRANTS SUBTOTAL REGULAR WARRANTS TOTAL CITY OF MOORPARK WARRANT REGISTER TES I I. cl CiTV Of MOORPARK, CALI City Council Meeting ACTION:...' �•� ��� FOR THE 2001 -2002 FISCAL YEAR BY. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2002 SEQUENCE From To 109788 & 110375 110527 - 110528 & 110559 - 110565 AMOUNT $ (39.58) $ (128,926.55) $ (128,966.13) $ 25,599.24 $ 105,084.59 $ 1,717.70 09/11/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 13/01 MANUAL CHECK ACTIVITY FUND — 2200 — COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUDGET UNIT ACCOUNT VENDOR 1099 PURCHASE ORDE TRANSACT PROGRAM CASH ACCT SALES TAX CONTROL DESCRIPTION T/C INVOICE CHK DATE ACCOUNT CHECK NO USE TAX 220064300000 9220 DRIVERS LICENSE GUID N 08/11/02 1101 0.00 AP062602 02 ID CHECKING GUIDE 20 382862 06/26/02 109788 V 0.00 TOTAL CODE ENFORCEMENT CHECK AMT TOTAL CODE ENFORCEMENT NET PAYABLE TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CHECK AMT TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NET PAYABLE TOTAL REPORT CHECK AMT TOTAL REPORT NET PAYABLE 'c w RUN DATE 09/11/02 TIME 08:59:06 PAGE 1 DISC DATE CHECK AMT DISC AMT NET PAYABLE 02/28/02 —39.58 0.00 —39.58 PENTAMATION — FUND ACCOUNTING —39.58 —39.58 —39.58 —39.58 —39.58 —39.58 09/11/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 13/01 MANUAL CHECK ACTIVITY FUND - 2200 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUDGET UNIT ACCOUNT VENDOR 1099 PURCHASE ORDE TRANSACT PROGRAM CASH ACCT SALES TAX CONTROL DESCRIPTION T/C INVOICE CHK DATE ACCOUNT CHECK NO USE TAX 2200 3806 BONTERRA CONSULTING N 08/11/02 1101 0.00 AP82102 NORTH PRK ADMIN REVE 20 2435 08/21/02 110375 V 0.00 TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CHECK AMT TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NET PAYABLE TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CHECK AMT TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NET PAYABLE .zw a RUN DATE 09/11/02 TIME 09:16:32 PAGE 1 DISC DATE CHECK AMT DISC AMT NET PAYABLE 06/30/02 19338.98 0.00 19338.98 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING 19338.98 19338.98 19338.98 19338.98 09/11/02 DISC DATE CHECK AMT CITY OF MOORPARK, CA NET PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 13/01 06/30/02 - 128926.55 MANUAL CHECK ACTIVITY 0.00 FUND - 6534 - NORTH PARK VILLAGE 06/30/02 - 19338.98 0.00 0.00 BUDGET UNIT ACCOUNT VENDOR 1099 PURCHASE ORDE TRANSACT PROGRAM CASH ACCT CONTROL DESCRIPTION T/C INVOICE CHK DATE ACCOUNT CHECK NO 6534 2751 BONTERRA CONSULTING N 08/11/02 1101 AP82102 NORTH PRK SPECIFIC P 20 2435 08/21/02 110375 V 6534 2734 BONTERRA CONSULTING N 08/11/02 1101 AP82102 NORTH PRK ADMIN FEE 20 2435 08/21/02 110375 V TOTAL VENDOR CHECK AMT TOTAL VENDOR NET PAYABLE TOTAL NORTH PARK VILLAGE CHECK AMT TOTAL NORTH PARK VILLAGE NET PAYABLE TOTAL NORTH PARK VILLAGE CHECK AMT TOTAL NORTH PARK VILLAGE NET PAYABLE TOTAL REPORT CHECK AMT TOTAL REPORT NET PAYABLE X1,1 RUN DATE 09/11/02 TIME 09:16:32 PAGE 2 SALES TAX DISC DATE CHECK AMT USE TAX DISC AMT NET PAYABLE 0.00 06/30/02 - 128926.55 0.00 0.00 - 128926.55 0.00 06/30/02 - 19338.98 0.00 0.00 - 19338.98 - 148265.53 - 148265.53 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING - 148265.53 - 148265.53 - 148265.53 - 148265.53 - 128926.55 - 128926.55 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 09:56:46 CHECK REGISTER FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9251 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9220 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9171 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9171 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9171 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9221 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9241 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9225 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9102 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9236 110527 1101 09/04/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 TOTAL CHECK 110528 1101 09/04/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9414 TOTAL FUND TOTAL REPORT q ~i DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- SUPERWINCH, INC ATTAINMENT CO -SR CTR TEEN TRIP -MAGIC MTN TEEN TRIP -MAGIC MTN TEEN TRIP -GOLF NSTUFF AMER SOCIETY PUBADMIN MPK CHAMBER MTG -2 1ST CA BANK -ECDEV MTG SCAN - ADELPHIA MTG HARBOR FLORIST- VOLKE, EOC1- 01DESIGN &FUNCTIO 5/7 -9 ESCB1-01 LODGNG 06/02 EZ2 INTERNET LEAGUE - BUDGET &FIN AD MAYOR BUSINESS LUNCH CITYWIDE ELEC BILLS PAGE NUMBER: 1 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 AMOUNT 14.81 17.16 1,536.71 52.99 228.00 18.50 20.00 62.55 40.00 61.67 350.00 463.56 45.00 175.00 27.75 3,113.70 22,485.54 25,599.24 25,599.24 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 09:56:49 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND FUND TITLE AMOUNT 0100 INTERNAL SERVICES FUND 45.00 1000 GENERAL FUND 2,991.34 2300 AD 84 -2 CITYWIDE 22,485.54 2605 GAS TAX 14.81 2902 MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER 62.55 TOTAL REPORT 25,599.24 r� .. s PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 14:08:08 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 100559 1101 09/18/02 1070 BONTERRA CONSULTING CORP 2751 NORTH PRK SPECIFIC PL 66,254.43 100559 1101 09/18/02 1070 BONTERRA CONSULTING CORP 3806 NORTH PRK ADMIN REVEN - 9,938.16 100559 1101 09/18/02 1070 BONTERRA CONSULTING CORP 2734 NORTH PRK ADMIN FEE 9,938.16 TOTAL CHECK 66,254.43 100560 1101 09/18/02 1089 CA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVA 2603 06/02 SMIP FEES 2,910.26 100560 1101 09/18/02 1089 CA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVA 2603 03/02 SMIP FEES 1,945.88 TOTAL CHECK 4,856.14 100561 1101 09/18/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9230 6 /18WILLIAMS -CJPIA 7.38 100561 1101 09/18/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 TRAFFENS -D NEWMAN 12.63 100561 1101 09/18/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 6 /20LAFLEUR- AUSTIN FO 14.06 100561 1101 09/18/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 6 /17GARZA -BW &S 12.22 100561 1101 09/18/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 BRAND -FIRST TRANSIT 12.97 100561 1101 09/18/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 BRAND -FIRST TRANSIT 20.98 TOTAL CHECK 80.24 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 6/02C MGR PHONE 10.41 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 6 /02CITYWIDE PHONE 1,033.20 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 6/02C CLERK PHONE 10.41 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 6 /02CAMPUS CYN PAYPHO 59.84 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 6 /02CAMPUS PRK PAYPHO 59.84 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 6 /02VECTOR PHONE 23.11 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 6 /02FINANCE PHONE 10.40 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 6 /02GLENWOOD PRK PAYP 59.84 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 6 /02POINDEXTER PRK PA 59.84 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 6 /02MILLER PRK PAYPHO 59.84 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 6 /02COMM CTR PAYPHONE 54.00 100562 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 6 /02EMERGENCY MGT PHO 169.78 TOTAL CHECK 1,610.51 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02FINANCE PHONE 14.89 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02SR CTR PHONE 15.01 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02ST MAINT PHONE 47.73 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6/02C COUNCIL PHONE 9.16 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02MRA /ECO PHONE 2.74 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5 /02FINANCE LONG DIST 15.60 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC SELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6/02C MGR PHONE 25.80 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5 /02CH LONG DISTANCE 14.65 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5/02C MGR LONG DISTAN 20.69 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5 /02COMM SRVC LONG DI 29.52 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC SELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02CITY HALL PHONE 701.15 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5 /02REC LONG DISTANCE 46.38 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02RECREATION PHONE 60.80 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5 /02ST MAINT LONG DIS 58.25 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5 /02MRA /ECO LONG DIST 1.31 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 6 /02COMM SRVC PHONE 46.34 100563 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 5/02C COUNCIL LONG DI 7.18 TOTAL CHECK 1,117.20 J (:w100564 1101 09/18/02 2870 ROCK DESIGNS POOLS &WATERS 9632 ELECTRICAL PERMIT REI 210.00 " 100565 1101 09/18/02 1615 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTE 2602 06/02 FIRE PROTECTION 10,927.97 ;iI00565 1101 09/18/02 1615 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTE 2602 05/02 FIRE PROTECTION 4,650.20 FA100565 1101 09/18/02 1615 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTE 2602 01/02 FIRE PROTECTION 139.07 1100565 1101 09/18/02 1615 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTE 2602 04/02 FIRE PROTECTION 2,092.59 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 14:08:08 CHECK REGISTER FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 100565 1101 09/18/02 1615 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTE 2602 100565 1101 09/18/02 1615 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTE 2602 TOTAL CHECK TOTAL FUND TOTAL REPORT k � s tip'! ------- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- 03/02 FIRE PROTECTION 02/02 FIRE PROTECTION PAGE NUMBER: 2 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 AMOUNT 6,045.26 7,100.98 30,956.07 105,084.59 105,084.59 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 14:08:13 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND FUND TITLE AMOUNT 0100 INTERNAL SERVICES FUND 1,749.00 1000 GENERAL FUND 594.33 2151 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 210.00 2200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 25,888.11 2400 PARK MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 299.20 2605 GAS TAX 113.36 2902 MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER 4.05 5000 LOCAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS 8C 33.95 6534 NORTH PARK VILLAGE 76,192.59 TOTAL REPORT 105,084.59 (mow: CITY OF MOORPARK ,' Wit` (� WARRANT REGISTER AC FOR THE 2002 -2003 FISCAL YEAR 13Y: CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER I8, 2002 MANUAL WARRANTS VOIDED WARRANTS PAYROLL LIABILITY WARRANTS REGULAR WARRANTS TOTAL SEQUENCE From To 110451 & 110624 110551 - 110558 110529 - 110549 & 110566 - 110619 & 110620 - 110640 AMOUNT $ 0.00 $ (95.00) $ 13,228.90 $ 40,574.14 $ 11,515.92 $ 520,736.12 ,Al Ae 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2/02 MANUAL CHECK ACTIVITY FUND - 2902 - MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER BUDGET UNIT ACCOUNT VENDOR 1099 PURCHASE ORDE TRANSACT PROGRAM CASH ACCT SALES TAX CONTROL DESCRIPTION T/C INVOICE CHK DATE ACCOUNT CHECK NO USE TAX 290224100000 9223 CHICAGO TITLE COMPAN N 08/28/02 1101 0.00 AP082802 9 /12REAL ESTATE &ECON 20 H RILEY 08/28/02 110451 V 0.00 TOTAL MRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHECK AMT TOTAL MRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NET PAYABLE TOTAL MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER CHECK AMT TOTAL MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER NET PAYABLE TOTAL REPORT CHECK AMT TOTAL REPORT NET PAYABLE G xi RUN DATE 09/04/02 TIME 15:24:07 PAGE 1 DISC DATE CHECK AMT DISC AMT NET PAYABLE 08/26/02 -95.00 0.00 -95.00 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING -95.00 -95.00 -95.00 -95.00 -95.00 -95.00 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/11/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 11:08:12 CHECK REGISTER FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 110551 1101 09/13/02 2335 AMERICAN HERITAGE LIFE IN 2299 110552 1101 09/13/02 1886 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 2210 110552 1101 09/13/02 1886 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 2210 TOTAL CHECK 110553 1101 09/13/02 1888 S E I U LOCAL 998 2208 110554 1101 09/13/02 1891 SANDRA KUENY 2299 110555 1101 09/13/02 1889 UNITED WAY OF VENTURA COU 2207 110556 1101 09/13/02 1890 VENTURA COUNTY DISTRICT A 2299 110557 1101 09/13/02 1887 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F 2210 110557 1101 09/13/02 1867 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F 2210 TOTAL CHECK 110558 1101 09/13/02 1887 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F 2210 TOTAL FUND TOTAL REPORT tt ,4 y ti n� :i t,j ------- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- CANCER INSURANCE F/T REG DEFER COMP F/T REG DEFER COMP UNION DUES CASE #SD020444 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION ID #9600616061 F/T REG DEFER COMP F/T REG DEFER COMP P/T REG DEFER COMP PAGE NUMBER: 1 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 AMOUNT 114.32 1,046.81 3,294.39 4,341.20 387.08 2,172.50 118.00 168.46 3,899.67 1,564.58 5,464.25 463.09 13,228.90 13,228.90 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/11/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 11:08:16 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND FUND TITLE 1000 GENERAL FUND TOTAL REPORT �t AMOUNT 13,228.90 13,228.90 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING 15% ADMIN FEE REVENUE - 1,056.75 N. PK VLG SPECIFIC PL 7,045.00 DATE: 09/04/02 PURCH SPACE #3- GALVEZ 13,925.00 7/02 2 BUS SVC -69 HRS CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 10:35:36 EDC -VC BUS ASST PROG 10,000.00 13,000.00 CHECK REGISTER 74.96 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND 267.03 9/02 CITY MGR DENTAL 479.41 9/02 COBRA DENTAL 139.87 CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 110529 1101 09/04/02 1039 AUSTIN -FOUST ASSOCIATES, 2734 110529 1101 09/04/02 1039 AUSTIN -FOUST ASSOCIATES, 3806 110529 1101 09/04/02 1039 AUSTIN -FOUST ASSOCIATES, 2752 120.10 TOTAL CHECK 9/02 PUB WORKS DENTAL 66.17 9/02 NPDES DENTAL 3.42 9/02 XNG GUARD DENTAL 110530 1101 09/04/02 2873 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 9265 110531 1101 09/04/02 1136 COACH USA 435.01 9102 110532 1101 09/04/02 1204 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 9103 110532 1101 09/04/02 1204 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 9103 75.69 TOTAL CHECK LA AVE /BELTRAMO RD 2,292.50 FLINN AVE REALIGNMENT 2,746.50 SPRING RD WIDENING 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 3751 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 110533 1101 09/04/02 1684 FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE 9010 TOTAL CHECK 110534 1101 09/04/02 2823 HAMNER, JEWELL & ASSOCIAT 9610 .110535 1101 09/04/02 1765 HAWKS & ASSOCIATES INC 9601 { 110535 1101 09/04/02 1765 HAWKS & ASSOCIATES INC 9601 (11.r 110535 1101 09/04/02 1765 HAWKS & ASSOCIATES INC 9601 TOTAL CHECK PAGE NUMBER: 1 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 �1�Y�17!�IS�F�i7� e u Ali �4y 15% ADMIN FEE CHARGE 1,056.75 15% ADMIN FEE REVENUE - 1,056.75 N. PK VLG SPECIFIC PL 7,045.00 7,045.00 PURCH SPACE #3- GALVEZ 13,925.00 7/02 2 BUS SVC -69 HRS 2,706.18 2003 BOARD DUES 3,000.00 EDC -VC BUS ASST PROG 10,000.00 13,000.00 9/02 COM SVCS DENTAL 74.96 9/02 CITY CLK DENTAL 618.29 9/02 FINANCE DENTAL 267.03 9/02 CITY MGR DENTAL 479.41 9/02 COBRA DENTAL 139.87 9/02 ADMIN SVCS DENTL 106.44 9/02 ADMIN SVCS DENTL 258.59 9/02 HUMAN RES DENTAL 42.07 9/02 CDBG CD ENF DENT 3.91 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT DEN 8.97 9/02 SOLID WST DENTAL 42.05 9/02 PK MAINT DENTAL 275.73 9/02 PK MAINT DENTAL 120.10 9/02 COM FCLTY DENTAL 180.16 9/02 REC PRGRM DENTAL 214.32 9/02 MRA /EC DEV DENTL 162.14 9/02 TEEN PRGRM DENTL 42.07 9/02 SR CTR DENTAL 120.10 9/02 PUB TRST DENTAL 16.81 9/02 PUB WORKS DENTAL 66.17 9/02 NPDES DENTAL 3.42 9/02 XNG GUARD DENTAL 33.44 9/02 VECTOR CTRL DENT 240.20 9/02 PKG ENFC DENTAL 98.40 9/02 SOLID WST DENTAL 4.21 9/02 COM DVLP DENTAL 240.56 9/02 CODE ENFC DENTAL 138.52 9/02 PLANNING DENTAL 435.01 9/02 AD84 -2 LDSCP DEN 42.04 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT DEN .43 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT DEN .43 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT DEN 5.13 9/02 STR MAINT DENTAL 384.95 9/02 CDBG DENTAL 8.41 9/02 MRA HSNG DENTAL 75.69 4,950.03 LA AVE /BELTRAMO RD 2,292.50 FLINN AVE REALIGNMENT 2,746.50 SPRING RD WIDENING 7,476.00 FLINN AVE REALIGNMENT 2,746.50 12,969.00 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 2 DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 10:35:36 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110536 1101 09/04/02 3015 KIMLEY -HORN & ASSOCIATES, 9601 LA AVE &TR SIGNAL -PH #2 3,450.00 110536 1101 09/04/02 3015 KIMLEY -HORN & ASSOCIATES, 9601 LA AVE &TR SIG REIMBUR 250.00 110536 1101 09/04/02 3015 KIMLEY -HORN & ASSOCIATES, 9601 TR RD TRAFFIC SIGNAL 3,202.50 110536 1101 09/04/02 3015 KIMLEY -HORN & ASSOCIATES, 9601 LA AVE SIGNAL PROJECT 1,162.50 TOTAL CHECK 8,065.00 110537 1101 09/04/02 2217 PACIFIC RELOCATION CONSUL 9252 7/02 AMIGO'S JANITOR 275.00 110537 1101 09/04/02 2217 PACIFIC RELOCATION CONSUL 9103 5 &7/02 PRC ADMIN FEE 84.60 110537 1101 09/04/02 2217 PACIFIC RELOCATION CONSUL 9252 5/02 AMIGO'S JANITOR 289.00 110537 1101 09/04/02 2217 PACIFIC RELOCATION CONSUL 9102 7/02 HIGH ST PROJECT 2,160.00 TOTAL CHECK 2,808.60 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 CDBG MEDICAL 43.55 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 CDBG CD ENFC MED 21.29 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 MRA HSNG MEDICAL 424.44 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 PLANNING MEDICAL 2,149.02 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 MRA /EC DEV MEDIC 701.50 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 AD84 -S LDSCP MED 202.34 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 PUB TRST MEDICAL 135.38 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 SOLID WST MEDIC 45.12 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 SOLID WST MEDIC 406.10 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT MED 2.07 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT MED 2.07 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT MED 24.78 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 PK MAINT MEDICAL 1,397.28 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 PK MAINT MEDICAL 566.14 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 STR MAINT MEDIC 1,945.72 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 AD84 -2 STLGT MED 41.54 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 COM SVCS MEDICAL 420.80 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 VECTOR CTRL MED 1,101.48 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 SR CNTR MEDICAL 902.49 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 COM FCLTY MEDIC 945.92 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 REC PRGM MEDICAL 2,485.01 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 TEEN PRGM MEDIC 217.74 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 PUBLIC WKS MED 322.77 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 ADMIN SVCS MED 549.17 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 FINANCE MEDICAL 2,352.17 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 ADMIN SVCS MED 1,400.97 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 CITY CLK MEDICAL 577.99 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 HUMAN RSC MEDIC 783.88 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 CODE ENFC MEDIC 623.58 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 COM DEV MEDICAL 2,915.76 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 NPDES MEDICAL 20.02 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 PKG ENFC MEDICAL 546.11 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 XNG GRD MEDICAL 182.57 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 9010 9/02 CITY MGR MEDICAL 3,184.35 110538 1101 09/04/02 1466 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMEN 3751 9/02 COBRA MEDICAL - 787.17 TOTAL CHECK 26,853.95 110539 1101 09/04/02 3149 SKYVIEW ENGINEERING & DEV 9103 MODIFY TT5307- VALENZA 1,211.07 - -- 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 3019 0025 PH -TR 1,149.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02GLENHAVEN W INGL 49.00 ,a110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 VILLA CAMPESINA 284.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02MPK SQ IND PK 420.00 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 3 DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 10:35:36 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02CW PKWAY &MEDIANS 5,986.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02HOMEACRES BUFFER 315.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02MPK BUS CTR PLNT 53.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02COLMER TO PECAN 32.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02PECAN,BAMBI,BENW 84.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02SPRING,CHR BARR 2,823.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02PEPRML,BTR CRK 137.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02WMS RNCH PKWAYS& 268.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02MTN MDW PLN COMM 7,824.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 MONTE VISTA PK 326.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 PEACH HILL PARK 2,520.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 MILLER PARK 735.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 GLENWOOD PARK 1,018.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 MTN MDWS PARK 2,468.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 TR PARK LANDSC 2,520.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02COUNTRY TRAIL PK 1,680.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 GRIFFIN PARK 1,208.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 COMM CTR LANDSC 525.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 CAMPUS PARK 803.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 VIRG COLONY PK 315.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 AV PK &PED BRIDG 5,612.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 06/02 CAMPUS CYN PARK 2,520.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 COMM CTR PARK 194.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08 /02METROLINK LANDSC 299.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 POINDEXTER PARK 735.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9331 08/02 798 MPK AVE -PW 60.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9252 08/02 18 HIGH STREET 68.00 110540 1101 09/04/02 1555 SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINTE 9252 08/02 661 MPK AVENUE 42.00 TOTAL CHECK 43,092.00 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6ZONE 8 745.11 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6ZONE 10 14,812.54 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6ZONE 5 1,511.65 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6PRKWYS & MED 1,616.51 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6ZONE 4 122.66 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6COUNTRY TRAIL 4,291.13 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6 /11- 8 /6TIERRA REJADA 1,339.68 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6/11- 8 /6MTN MEADOWS 3,533.18 110541 1101 09/04/02 1620 VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS 9415 6/11- 8 /6AVRC & GYM 367.73 TOTAL CHECK 28,340.19 TOTAL FUND 167,258.52 TOTAL REPORT 167,258.52 t, -r i1 A� 1� PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 10:35:50 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND FUND TITLE AMOUNT 0100 INTERNAL SERVICES FUND - 787.17 1000 GENERAL FUND 18,722.86 2000 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 860.52 2200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 5,445.70 2300 AD 84 -2 CITYWIDE 7,846.89 2301 AD 84 -2 ZONE 1 84.00 2302 AD 84 -2 ZONE 2 2,825.50 2303 AD 84 -2 ZONE 3 137.00 2304 AD 84 -2 ZONE 4 390.66 2305 AD 84 -2 ZONE 5 2,663.15 2306 AD 84 -2 ZONE 6 49.00 2307 AD 84 -2 ZONE 7 420.00 2308 AD 84 -2 ZONE 8 1,060.11 2309 AD 84 -2 ZONE 9 53.00 2310 AD 84 -2 ZONE 10 22,666.45 2311 AD 84 -2 ZONE 11 32.00 2400 PARK MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 34,828.97 2501 LOS ANGELES A.O.C. 17,377.50 2502 TIERRA REJADA A.O.C. 3,202.50 2605 GAS TAX 2,381.18 2701 CDBG ENTITLEMENT FUND 77.16 2901 MRA LOW /MOD INC HOUSE /INC 18,444.80 2902 MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER 16,720.14 5000 LOCAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS 8C 3,157.37 5001 SOLID WASTE AB939 497.48 6534 NORTH PARK VILLAGE 8,101.75 TOTAL REPORT 167,258.52 W •� PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/04/02 TIME: 11:34:13 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA PAGE NUMBER: 1 CHECK REGISTER VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- ------ VENDOR_______ _______ ACCT ------- DESCRIPTION - - - - - -- AMOUNT 110542 110542 1101 1101 09/04/02 09/04/02 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES 3806 15$ ADMIN FEE REVENUE 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES 2755 MRPK MKTPLACE /ZELMAN -67.50 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES 2734 15% ADMIN FEE CHARGE 450.00 67.50 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES 2734 15$ ADMIN FEE CHARGE 67.50 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES DAHL, TAYLOR 3806 15$ ADMIN FEE REVENUE -67.50 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 & ASSOCIATES DAHL, TAYLOR 2752 USA PROP -PRK CRST APT 450.00 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 & ASSOCIATES DAHL, TAYLOR 3806 15% ADMIN FEE REVENUE -67.50 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 & ASSOCIATES DAHL, TAYLOR 2752 MRPK MKTPLACE /ZELMAN 450.00 110542 1101 09/04/02 2367 & ASSOCIATES DAHL, TAYLOR 3806 15% ADMIN FEE REVENUE -67.50 TOTAL CHECK & ASSOCIATES 2734 15$ ADMIN FEE CHARGE 67.50 1,282.50 110543 110543 1101 1101 09/04/02 09/04/02 1197 1197 DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES 9244 8/9/02 CMP MPK TRIP 407.82 TOTAL CHECK DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES 9244 8/02 CMP MPK 3 TRIPS 794.62 1,202.44 110544 1101 09/04/02 1303 IZADSEPAS, MINA G 9160 110544 1101 09/04/02 1303 IZADSEPAS, MINA G INSTRUCT CARDIO KICK 204.36 110544 1101 09/04/02 1303 IZADSEPAS, MINA G 9160 INSTRUCT FITNESS COMB 408.00 TOTAL CHECK 9160 INSTRUCT UCT HATHA YOGA 501.05 1,113.41 110545 1101 09/04/02 1429 PACIFIC SWEEP 110545 1101 09/04/02 1429 PACIFIC SWEEP 9351 8/02 CITY RTE SWEEP 6,711.53 TOTAL CHECK 9351 8/02 T. REJADA SWEEP 30.56 6,742.09 110546 1101 09/04/02 1948 TOTAL TENNIS ACADEMY 9160 INSTRUCT TENNIS CLASS 110547 1101 09/04/02 2283 VENCO WESTERN, INC. 9331 8/02 LANDSCAPE 3,212.70 SVC 3,778.50 110548 1101 09/04/02 3284 WWCOT 9601 7/02 -30$ DSGN PD CNTR 22,725.00 TOTAL FUND 40,056.64 �l Q � J PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 11:34:13 CHECK REGISTER FUND - 6194 - GREYSTONE HOMES CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 110549 1101 09/04/02 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES 2734 110549 1101 09/04/02 2367 DAHL, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES 2752 TOTAL CHECK TOTAL FUND TOTAL REPORT r1 wa r ------- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- 15% ADMIN FEE CHARGE GREYSTONE HOMES PAGE NUMBER: 2 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 AMOUNT 67.50 450.00 517.50 517.50 40,574.14 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/04/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 11:34:20 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND FUND TITLE AMOUNT 1000 GENERAL FUND 5,528.55 2200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - 270.00 2312 AD 84 -2 ZONE 12 3,778.50 2605 GAS TAX 6,742.09 4002 POLICE FACILITIES FUND 22,725.00 6194 GREYSTONE HOMES 517.50 6513 ZELLMAN /TARGET CENTER 1,035.00 6515 USA PROPERTIES 517.50 TOTAL REPORT 40,574.14 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:02:26 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110566 1101 09/11/02 1012 ACCURATE WELDING 9103 TRAILER JACK WELDED 15.00 110566 1101 09/11/02 1012 ACCURATE WELDING 9251 PARKS TRAILER REPAIR 15.00 TOTAL CHECK 30.00 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02PW PAGERS 15.38 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9/02C MGR PAGER 29.15 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9/02C COUNCIL PAGER 57.83 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02FACILITIES PAGER 5.29 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02COMM SRVC PAGER 5.76 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9/02C CLERK PAGER 5.76 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02EMERGENCY SRVCS 3.86 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02PRKNG ENF PAGER 5.29 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02COMM DEV PAGER 5.76 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02RECREATION PAGER 10.62 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02PRKS PAGER 8.66 110567 1101 09/11/02 2697 ARCH WIRELESS 9420 9 /02MRA PAGER 4.33 TOTAL CHECK 157.69 110568 1101 09/11/02 1037 ARROWHEAD DRINKING WATER 9205 8 /02CH BREAKROOM SUPP 110.94 110569 1101 09/11/02 3265 BADGE- A -MINIT 9244 BUTTON BENCH SYSTEM COMBO 283.90 110570 1101 09/11/02 1054 BELLASALMA, TONY 9103 7- 8 /02MILEAGE REIMBUR 56.21 110571 1101 09/11/02 1067 BOGOYEVAC, PETE 9244 ADULT SOFTBALL LEAGUE 292.50 110572 1101 09/11/02 3269 CEDC - VENTURA HOUSING CONF 9223 9 /13HOUSING CONFERENC 115.00 110573 1101 09/11/02 3178 COMPLETE PROPERTY MAINTEN 9252 FOUNTAIN REPAIR -TR&MT 24.75 110574 1101 09/11/02 1144 COMPUWAVE 9201 BELKIN GENDER,DVD MED 215.57 110575 1101 09/11/02 1167 D & D SHIRTS UNLIMITED 9244 ADLT SOFTBALL SWEATSH 748.18 110576 1101 09/11/02 2631 DALEY, MICHAEL 9244 ADLT BSKTBALL GAME 20.00 110577 1101 09/11/02 2115 DALLAS MIDWEST 9208 PLUSH TUFF MAT FREIGH 25.33 110577 1101 09/11/02 2115 DALLAS MIDWEST 9208 3 X 6' PLUSH TUFF MAT - B 91.83 TOTAL CHECK 117.16 110578 1101 09/11/02 1179 DIAL SECURITY 9103 9 /02SHADYRIDGE BUFFER 180.00 110578 1101 09/11/02 1179 DIAL SECURITY 9103 9 /02AVRC PATROL 180.00 TOTAL CHECK 360.00 110579 1101 09/11/02 1690 DOYLE SHAW ICE 9204 VECTOR DRY ICE 11.00 110580 1101 09/11/02 1196 DUNN- EDWARDS CORPORATION 9204 PARKS PAINT SUPPLIES 47.80 110580 1101 09/11/02 1196 DUNN - EDWARDS CORPORATION 9252 PCH HILL PRK PAINT 53.47 110580 1101 09/11/02 1196 DUNN - EDWARDS CORPORATION 9252 COMM CTR PAINT 53.48 -� 110580 1101 09/11/02 1196 DUNN - EDWARDS CORPORATION 9252 COMM CTR PRK PAINT 53.48 ' TOTAL CHECK 208.23 110581 1101 09/11/02 1197 DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES 9244 8 /16TEEN TRAVEL CAMP 362.16 110582 1101 09/11/02 3264 ECONOMY HANDICRAFTS 9244 REXLACE PLASTIC LACING 47.47 '� 110582 1101 09/11/02 3264 ECONOMY HANDICRAFTS 9244 PLASTIC LACING FREIGH 7.13 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING JOHNSTON -IS MGR PLATE 11.26 DATE: 09/12/02 7 /11RILEY -USA PROPERT 13.13 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 15:02:26 18.45 7 /10FRETZ -CITY OF CAL CHECK REGISTER 7 /12GARZA -MIKOS FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND 7 /29WILLIAMS -BOYLE EN 14.06 7 /15SHIGLEY -BNY WESTE CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 14.42 TOTAL CHECK 163.83 JBL OFFICIAL 110583 1101 09/11/02 1212 ENGRAVING WIZARD 9205 110583 1101 09/11/02 1212 ENGRAVING WIZARD 9205 79.68 TOTAL CHECK CAMPUS CYN TURF REPAI 43.83 POINDEXTER PRK SUPPLI 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 2733 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9236 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9601 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9230 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9231 110584 1101 09/11/02 1219 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 9230 TOTAL CHECK 110585 1101 09/11/02 2902 FITZWATER, RYAN D 9244 110586 1101 09/11/02 3025 FLAGS OVER AMERICA, INC. 9205 110587 1101 09/11/02 1230 FOSTER'S FIRE EXTINGUISHE 9103 110588 1101 09/11/02 1236 GALL'S INC 9020 110589 1101 09/11/02 3291 HANSEN, NICOLE 3862 110590 1101 09/11/02 2758 HARTMAN, JEFF 9244 110591 1101 09/11/02 3290 HARTNETT, JOHN 9224 110592 1101 09/11/02 1272 HERTZ EQUIPMENT RENTAL, C 9244 110593 1101 09/11/02 1283 HOME DEPOT -GECF 9252 110593 1101 09/11/02 1283 HOME DEPOT -GECF 9252 110593 1101 09/11/02 1283 HOME DEPOT -GECF 9252 110593 1101 09/11/02 1283 HOME DEPOT -GECF 9252 110593 1101 09/11/02 1283 HOME DEPOT -GECF 9208 110593 1101 09/11/02 1283 HOME DEPOT -GECF 9252 TOTAL CHECK 110594 1101 09/11/02 1286 HOUSE SANITARY SUPPLY 9204 110594 1101 09/11/02 1286 HOUSE SANITARY SUPPLY 9204 110594 1101 09/11/02 1286 HOUSE SANITARY SUPPLY 9204 110594 1101 09/11/02 1286 HOUSE SANITARY SUPPLY 9204 TOTAL CHECK 110595 1101 09/11/02 1305 J E CLARK II CORPORATION 9255 '110596 1101 09/11/02 3170 KEISLER, JOHN R. 9632 2110596 1101 09/11/02 3170 KEISLER, JOHN R. 9103 TOTAL CHECK *aj110597 1101 09/11/02 3183 LAMPPOST PIZZA 9244 b ^d PAGE NUMBER: 2 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 54.60 VALDEZ - NAMEPLATE 23.06 JOHNSTON -IS MGR PLATE 11.26 34.32 7 /11RILEY -USA PROPERT 13.13 7 /1TRAFFENS -J NESBITT 12.63 7 /11LAFLEUR -DAHL TAYL 18.45 7 /10FRETZ -CITY OF CAL 9.69 7 /12GARZA -MIKOS 37.64 7 /10BURNS -USA PROPERT 13.13 7 /29WILLIAMS -BOYLE EN 14.06 7 /15SHIGLEY -BNY WESTE 11.28 7/22C MIKOS RTN -GARZA 8.12 7 /15GARZA -MIKOS 14.42 7 /26SHIGLEY -BNY WESTE 11.28 163.83 JBL OFFICIAL ,40.00 COM FAC US FLAG 50.00 FIRE EXT INSPECTION 95.00 CITY SHIRT PATCHES 19.24 REFUND - PRESOCCER CLAS 24.00 ADLT BSKTBL LEAGUE 106.50 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 79.68 7 /12TEEN DANCE LIGHT 104.57 CAMPUS CYN TURF REPAI 43.83 POINDEXTER PRK SUPPLI 40.68 COM PAC SUPPLIES 3.06 AVRC SUPPLIES 47.79 PARKS SMALL TOOLS 83.52 CMPS CYN PRK FIELD SE 106.68 325.56 AVRC CLEANING SUPPLIE 212.74 COM FAC CLEANING SUPP 22.54 COM FAC CLEANING SUPP 42.44 COM FAC CLEANING SUPP 432.70 710.42 PARK FUEL 69.46 TREE CONSULTING SRVCS 180.00 TREE CONSULTING SRVCS 240.00 420.00 16 TEAMS JBL PIZZA PA 320.00 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 3 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:02:26 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110598 1101 09/11/02 2778 LEMAY, CAPTAIN ROBERT 9221 6/02 -8/02 ROTARY DUES 175.00 110599 1101 09/11/02 3292 LESSNER, SANDY 3862 REFUND- BABYSITTING BA 30.00 110600 1101 09/11/02 1361 MATILIJA WATER COMPANY, I 9205 8 /02AVRC WATER & EQUI 37.80 110600 1101 09/11/02 1361 MATILIJA WATER COMPANY, I 9205 8 /02ANNEX WATER & EQU 23.90 110600 1101 09/11/02 1361 MATILIJA WATER COMPANY, I 9205 8 /02PW BLDG WATER & E 16.95 110600 1101 09/11/02 1361 MATILIJA WATER COMPANY, I 9205 8 /02CH WATER & EQUIP 173.90 TOTAL CHECK 252.55 110601 1101 09/11/02 1366 MCMASTER -CARR SUPPLY 9252 SR CTR KITCHEN FAUCET 126.89 110601 1101 09/11/02 1366 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY 9252 TR PRK FAUCETS 127.15 110601 1101 09/11/02 1366 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY 9205 COM CTR CHAIN LEG TIP 142.85 TOTAL CHECK 396.89 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02AVRC CAR WASH 8.00 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02PARKS CAR WASH 24.00 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02CROSS GUARDS WASH 4.00 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02PW ADMIN CAR WASH 45.50 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02PW ST CAR WASH 53.50 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02PRKNG ENF CAR WAS 4.00 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02MPK PD CAR WASHES 325.00 110602 1101 09/11/02 1376 MOORPARK AUTO SPA & LUBE 9254 8 /02CEO CAR WASH 8.00 TOTAL CHECK 472.00 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9254 8 /02PW ADMIN CAR WASH 6.05 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9255 8 /02PW STREETS FUEL 27.92 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9254 8 /02PW ST CAR WASH 14.05 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9254 8 /02CROSS GUARD WASH 3.50 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9254 8 /02PARKS OIL CHANGES 76.94 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9254 8 /02PRKNG ENF CAR WAS 3.50 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9255 8 /02PW ADMIN FUEL 12.09 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9255 8 /02MPK PD FUEL 81.35 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9255 8 /02CROSS GUARDS FUEL 16.68 110603 1101 09/11/02 2537 MOBIL /GECC 9255 8 /02PRKNG ENF FUEL 16.68 TOTAL CHECK 258.76 110604 1101 09/11/02 1387 MOORPARK FEED & SUPPLY 9204 VECTOR LAY MASH 9.80 110605 1101 09/11/02 1417 NORTH OAKS AUTO PARTS 9254 TRAILER WELDER BATTER 41.77 110606 1101 09/11/02 1422 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 9252 PARKS OPERATING SUPPL 25.91 110607 1101 09/11/02 1423 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY 9205 SR GAMES & B -DAY SUPP 44.89 110607 1101 09/11/02 1423 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY 9244 SR GAMES & B -DAY SUPP 55.80 110607 1101 09/11/02 1423 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY 9205 SR GAMES & B -DAY SUPP 10.05 TOTAL CHECK 110.74 110608 1101 09/11/02 2073 PEACOCK, STEVE P 9102 PRKNG CITATION HEARIN 15.00 t`.'110609 . 110609 1101 1101 09/11/02 09/11/02 1451 1451 POSTNET AND COMMUNICATION POSTNET AND COMMUNICATION 9231 9232 RHF INC SHIPMENT 8 /21CITY COUNCIL PACK 42.00 576.58 ..- X110609 1101 09/11/02 1451 POSTNET AND COMMUNICATION 9232 FINANCE RECEIPTS 257.29 3,110609 1101 09/11/02 1451 POSTNET AND COMMUNICATION 9232 B/W LETTERHEAD 200.56 TOTAL CHECK 1,076.43 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 15:02:26 CHECK REGISTER FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 TOTAL CHECK 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 TOTAL CHECK 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 TOTAL CHECK 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 TOTAL CHECK 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1101 09/11/02 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 1464 3022 3022 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9204 COM CTR MAINT SUPPLIE PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 PW UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 COM CTR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9204 AVCP MAINT SUPPLIES PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 PARKS UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 PW UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 VECTOR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 VECTOR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 COM CTR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 VECTOR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 PARKS UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 VECTOR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 PW UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 COM CTR UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9204 AVCP MAINT SUPPLIES PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9020 PARKS UNIFORM MAINT PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9204 AVCP MAINT SUPPLIES PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9204 AVCP MAINT SUPPLIES PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 9204 COM CTR MAINT SUPP RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY 9205 CITY COUNCIL SUPPLIES RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY 9205 CITY COUNCIL SUPPLIES RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATIO 9211 VIRGINIA PRK EQUIP POINDEXTER EQUIP RENT AVCP EQUIP RENT CAMPUS PRK EQUIP PCH HILL EQUIP RENT CAMPUS CYN EQUIP GRIFFIN EQUIP RENT COUNTRY TRAIL EQUIP TR PRK EQUIP RENT MTN MEADOWS EQUIP RNT COM CTR EQUIP RENT GLENWOOD PRK EQUIP MILLER PRK EQUIP RENT 3293 SCESA 9221 CITY MEMBERSHIP 1571 THE GAS COMPANY 9416 8 /02MPK MOBILEHOME PR 1571 THE GAS COMPANY 9416 8 /02AVRC GAS 1571 THE GAS COMPANY 9416 8 /02PW BLDNG GAS 1571 THE GAS COMPANY 9416 8 /02COM FAC GAS 1593 U.S. POSTMASTER 9231 10 /02SR CTR NEWSLETTE 3204 VANDAVEER, DOROTHY J 9103 4 /03CITY COUNCIL MTG 1160 VENTURA COUNTY PUBLIC WOR 9212 9 /02VECTOR LEASE WALN 1836 VENTURA COUNTY TAX COLLEC 9252 01 /02MARSH PROPRTYTAX PAGE NUMBER: 4 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 Cffl 64.52 23.50 23.51 35.43 40.45 40.46 16.69 16.69 23.51 16.69 23.51 16.69 23.50 40.45 34.32 23.51 18.11 18.11 64.52 564.17 77.96 9.76 87.72 30.61 30.61 30.61 30.61 30.61 30.61 30.61 30.60 30.61 30.61 30.61 30.60 30.60 397.90 185.00 99.05 21.13 .74 52.44 173.36 340.00 115.00 320.65 586.80 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 15:02:26 CHECK REGISTER FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION 110619 1101 TOTAL FUND TOTAL REPORT ird 09/11/02 3294 VILLEGAS, ROBERT 9244 CARICATURE ARTIST PAGE NUMBER: 5 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 AMOUNT 150.00 11,515.92 11,515.92 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:02:35 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND FUND TITLE AMOUNT 0100 INTERNAL SERVICES FUND 724.87 1000 GENERAL FUND 7,721.11 2000 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 68.65 2111 ZONE DEVELOPMENT FEES 1 180.00 2151 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 24.75 2200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 13.76 2308 AD 84 -2 ZONE 8 180.00 2400 PARK MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 1,517.96 2501 LOS ANGELES A.O.C. 14.06 2605 GAS TAX 198.31 2901 MRA LOW /MOD INC HOUSE /INC 125.31 2902 MRA AREA 1 -INCA & OTHER 728.69 6513 ZELLMAN /TARGET CENTER 18.45 TOTAL REPORT 11,515.92 4� ir' ) PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:18:35 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02TRAFFEN CELLPHONE 13.45 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02JOHNSTON CELLPHON -5.81 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02KUENY CELLPHONE 51.65 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02MORGENS CELLPHONE 88.22 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02HUNTER CELLPHONE 47.50 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9208 NEW CELLPHONE CREDIT -69.38 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9208 JOHNSTON NEWW CELLPHO 69.38 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8/02H RILEY CELLPHONE 42.08 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02CHUDOBA CELLPHONE 13.45 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02LINDLEY CELLPHONE 40.87 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02AVRC CELLPHONE 16.25 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02HOGAN CELLPHONE 29.82 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8/02M RILEY CELLPHONE 26.30 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02WALTER CELLPHONE 26.18 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02GILBERT CELLPHONE 22.57 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02ADMIN CELLPHONE 5.81 110620 1101 09/18/02 1003 A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES 9424 8 /02MPK PD CELLPHONES 659.99 TOTAL CHECK 1,078.33 110621 1101 09/18/02 2690 ACCOUNTEMPS 9102 SZABO -WEEK END8/30 720.00 110621 1101 09/18/02 2690 ACCOUNTEMPS 9102 SZABO -WEEK END 8/2 720.00 110621 1101 09/18/02 2690 ACCOUNTEMPS 9102 SZABO -WEEK END8 /23 765.00 110621 1101 09/18/02 2690 ACCOUNTEMPS 9102 SZABO -WEEK END 8/9 585.00 TOTAL CHECK 2,790.00 110622 1101 09/18/02 2165 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORA 9601 LA AVE & BELTRAMO WID 2,726.20 110623 1101 09/18/02 1788 CANTWELL, ALICE A 9160 AWAY WE GROW PRESCH00 1,404.00 110624 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES VOID: MULTI STUB CHECK 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 91.530- 7/02SR23 BYPAS 453.70 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9144 7 /02PLAN CHECK NON -RE 13,955.69 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9103 92.016- 7 /02STEVE MCCO 8.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9103 91.102- 7 /02FORKERT EN 76.13 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2106 7 /02TOTAL BILLABLE FE - 36,676.17 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2106 7 /02TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 56,782.16 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9154 81.002- 7 /02TRAFFIC EN 219.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 91.421- 7 /02PCH HILL /M 29.25 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9154 81.002- 7 /02TRAFFIC EN 219.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9157 81.003- 7 /02ENCROACHME 676.90 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 86.370- 7 /02MORRISON 328.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 86.345- 7 /02PAC COMMUN 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 87.309- 7 /02WM LYON HO 1,788.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 91.520- 7 /02MILLER PKW 9.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9143 7 /02PLAN CHECK RESIDE 14,983.53 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 84.246- 7 /02CNTRY CLUB 2,906.09 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 89.212- 7 /02MPK PARTNE 204.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 92.030 -7/02 02 OVERLA 111.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 92.040- 7 /02SLURRY SEA 490.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 91.520- 7 /02MILLER PRK 21.61 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 85.063- 7 /02WEST AMERI 594.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 86.373- 7 /02MORRISON 224.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 90.150- 7 /02SELF STORA 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.041- 7 /02SHEA HOMES 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 90.020- 7 /02CYPRESS LA 511.50 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 2 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:18:35 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.305- 7 /02USA PROPER 496.25 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.500- 7 /02SHARMA IPD 112.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 92.200- 7 /02RJR ENGINE 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 87.336- 7 /02LENNAR HOM 1,506.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9153 81.001- 7 /02ENG RETAIN 347.63 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.304- 7 /02USA PROPER 962.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 92.220- 7 /02NORTH PRK 355.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 92.030 -7/02 020VERLAY 12,917.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9153 81.001- 7 /02ENG RETAIN 2,085.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 90.241- 7 /02MOOREHEAD 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 83.420- 7 /02LA E ALIGN 166.23 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9601 91.530- 7/02SR23 BYPAS 53.31 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9153 81.001- 7 /02ENG RETAIN 347.62 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 92.160- 7 /02WM LYON HO 1,327.25 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 92.170- 7 /02DON HOLMES 51.10 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.260- 7 /02SUNCAL PRO 489.86 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.261- 7 /02MPK 150 LL 97.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.291 -7/02D HARTMAN 437.62 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.333- 7 /02TRI CITY 194.25 110625 1101 09/16/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 89.055- 7 /02PCH HILL L 1,308.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 89.063 -7/02J FELSENTH 144.30 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 89.213- 7 /02MPK PARTNE 1,116.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 90.073- 7 /02AVRC ACCES 254.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 90.162- 7 /02TOLL -6685 41.30 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 92.172- 7 /02DON HOLMES 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.010 -7/02 6516 AFFI 886.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 92.180 -7/02D IWANSKI 51.10 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.011 -7/02 6516 AFFI 205.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.012 -7/02 6516 AFFI 26.45 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.309- 7 /02USA PROPER 39.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.336- 7 /02ZELMAN DEV 86.98 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.337- 7 /02ZELMAN DEV 3,320.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.338- 7 /02ZELMAN DEV 692.26 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.339- 7 /02ZELMAN DEV 1,762.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.383- 7 /02ADELPHIA 506.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.402- 7 /02CARD SRVCS 488.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.381- 7 /02ADELPHIA 738.14 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 89.214- 7 /02MPK PARTNE 250.29 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 1308 9 /02LOAN PAYMENT - 12,484.45 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.335- 7 /02ZELMAN DEV 8,030.91 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 87.328- 7 /02LENNAR HOM 9.75 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 87.341 -7/02M TAILLON 27.30 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.035- 7 /02KAUFMAN 570.36 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 87.324- 7 /02LENNAR HOM 19.50 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 88.037- 7 /02KAUFMAN 214.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 91.333- 7 /02ZELMAN DEV 477.00 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9147 7 /02NON- RESIDENT PERM 2,411.29 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 2711 87.322- 7 /02LENNAR HOM 318.90 110625 1101 09/18/02 1120 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES 9146 7 /02RESIDENTIAL PERMI 5,325.66 TOTAL CHECK 96,823.05 - 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 C MGR OFFICE SUPPLIES 80.57 >1110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 C MGR OFFICE SUPPLIES 30.57 10626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 C MGR OFFICE SUPPLIES 31.70 +.110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 C MGR OFFICE SUPPLIES 14.16 pp )110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 FINANCE OFFICE SUPPLI 6.16 irk PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 3 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:18:35 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 FINANCE OFFICE SUPPLI 26.79 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 FINANCE OFFICE SUPPLI 30.01 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 COMM SRVC OFFICE SUPP 16.08 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 COMM SRVC OFFICE SUPP 11.20 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9203 CITY HALL PAPER SUPPL 144.73 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 SLD WST OFFICE SUPPLI 102.09 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 CEO OFFICE SUPPLIES 71.20 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 COMM SRVC OFFICE SUPP 12.69 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9203 CITY HALL PAPER SUPPL 144.73 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 CITY HALL OFFICE SUPP 18.21 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 CITY HALL OFFICE SUPP 66.84 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 PW OFFICE SUPPLIES 1.42 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9208 PROJECTOR LENS 123.48 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 ENGINEERING OFFICE SU 47.45 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 SR CTR OFFICE SUPPLIE 9.56 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 PUB SAFETY OFFICE SUP 150.14 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 AVRC OFFICE SUPPLIES 52.79 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 PW OFFICE SUPPLIES 41.18 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 PW OFFICE SUPPLIES 69.39 110626 1101 09/18/02 1172 DATA BYTE CENTRAL INC 9202 PW OFFICE SUPPLIES 17.15 TOTAL CHECK 1,320.29 110627 1101 09/18/02 1289 HUGG, JOHN A 9160 GYMNASTICS INSTRUCTOR 1,218.19 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9102 7 /02INTERNET SRVCS 45.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 MPK CHAMBER MTG -STATE 200.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 BURNS -LEGAL ISSUES SY 435.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 ICMA CONF REGISTRATIO 495.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 MPK CHAMBER MTG 10.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9220 VTA CTY STAR SUBSCRIP 104.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 COFFEE GRINDER -PD FAC 62.99 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9223 MPK CHAMBER MTG -STATE 60.00 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9205 M &N INT -SR CTR SUPPLI 107.61 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9220 AMAZON.COM SUPERSTORE 118.94 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9201 HP RETURN REPAIR 106.18 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9201 DIGI KEY CORP 22.36 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9241 NORTHRIDGE FLOWERS -JO 48.71 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9205 BAUDVILLE -CC SUPPLIES 224.68 110628 1101 09/18/02 2529 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SER 9171 8/02 TEEN TRAVEL EVEN 2,466.92 TOTAL CHECK 4,507.39 110629 1101 09/18/02 2530 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES, IN 9103 8 /02GRAVES -ACCT SRVCS 12,112.50 110630 1101 09/18/02 2724 OAKBROOK ENGRAVING & AWAR 9632 9/11 PLAQUE FOUNTAIN 997.15 110630 1101 09/18/02 2724 OAKBROOK ENGRAVING & AWAR 9632 9/11 PLAQUE ART CHG 83.10 TOTAL CHECK 1,080.25 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 7 /02COMM CTR PAYPHONE 54.00 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 8 /02CITYWIDE PHONE 1,083.39 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 8 /02FINANCE PHONE 10.60 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 8/02C CLERK PHONE 10.60 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 8 /02MILLER PRK PAYPHO 59.84 ('---110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 8 /02COMM CTR PAYPHONE 54.00 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 8 /02POINDEXTER PRK PA 59.84 110631 r 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 8 /02VECTOR PHONE 23.26 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 8 /02CAMPUS CYN PAYPHO 59.84 ti 'ter PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING 8/02C MGR PHONE 10.60 8 /02CAMPUS PRK PAYPHO DATE: 09/12/02 7 /02GLENWOOD PRK PAYP 59.84 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 15:18:35 59.84 7/02C CLERK PHONE 10.48 CHECK REGISTER 59.84 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND 169.73 7 /02VECTOR PHONE 22.38 CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/16/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9421 110631 1101 09/18/02 1428 PACIFIC BELL 9420 TOTAL CHECK 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 110632 1101 09/18/02 1784 PACIFIC BELL /WORLDCOM 9420 TOTAL CHECK 110633 1101 09/18/02 1445 PICON, INC 9620 110634 1101 09/18/02 3200 ROLLINS CONSULTING, INC. 9103 110635 1101 09/18/02 2820 SCE 9413 110636 1101 09/18/02 1501 SECURITY ABOVE 9102 110636 1101 09/18/02 1501 SECURITY ABOVE 9102 TOTAL CHECK 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 = 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 Y 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 C,5.`:110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 �. 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 PAGE NUMBER: 4 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 - DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 8 /02EMERGENCY MGT PHO 171.86 8/02C MGR PHONE 10.60 8 /02CAMPUS PRK PAYPHO 59.84 7 /02GLENWOOD PRK PAYP 59.84 7 /02POINDEXTER PRK PA 59.84 7 /02MILLER PRK PAYPHO 59.84 7/02C CLERK PHONE 10.48 7 /02CAMPUS CYN PAYPHO 59.84 7 /02FINANCE PHONE 10.47 7 /02EMERGENCY MGT PHO 169.73 7 /02VECTOR PHONE 22.38 7 /02CAMPUS PRK PAYPHO 59.84 7 /02CITYWIDE PHONE 1,132.38 8 /02GLENWOOD PRK PAYP 59.84 7/02C MGR PHONE 10.48 3,372.63 7 /02SR CTR LONG DISTA 14.93 7 /02COMM SRVC LONG DI 44.32 7 /02CITY HALL LONG DI 662.99 7 /02FINANCE LONG DIST 15.38 7/02C MGR LONG DISTAN 20.77 7/02C COUNCIL LONG DI 4.95 7 /02MRA /ECO LONG DIST 2.82 7 /02ST MAINT LONG DIS 45.32 7 /02REC LONG DISTANCE 60.85 872.33 8 /02AVCP RR PROJECT 2,577.40 BETANCOURT PROJ MGMNT 2,448.00 9 /02PREV NOT BILLED 1,551.79 8 /02METROLINK GUARD 2,164.80 7 /02METROLINK GUARD 2,263.20 4,428.00 7/11 -8/12 VIRG COL PK 11.38 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 10 120.23 7/11 -8/12 CNTRY TRAIL 12.53 7/11 -8/12 CITY HALL 2,151.30 7/11 -8/12 VILLA CAMPS 92.34 7/11 -8/12 VECTOR CONT 78.92 7/11 -8/12 MPK MBL HM 277.77 7/11 -8/12 ARROYO VSTA 2,891.31 7/11 -8/12 TIERRA REJ 129.67 7/11 -8/12 MTN MDWS PK 193.47 7/11 -8/12 GRIFFIN PK 66.26 7/11 -8/12 PCH HILL PK 665.61 7/11 -8/12 CAMPUS PK 60.82 7/11 -8/12 CMPS CYN PK 29.64 7/11 -8/12 COMMTY CTR 2,413.81 7/11 -8/12 AV COM CTR 2,441.02 7/11 -8/12 798 MPK AVE 156.03 7/11 -8/12 REDEVLPMNT 132.33 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING PAGE NUMBER: 5 DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA VENCHK21 TIME: 15:18:35 CHECK REGISTER ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 FUND - 1000 - GENERAL FUND CHECK NUMBER CASH ACCT DATE ISSUED -------- - - - - -- VENDOR-------- - - - - -- ACCT - - - - - -- DESCRIPTION- - - - - -- AMOUNT 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7 /11- 8 /12PCHILL PK LT 1,738.35 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 STR MAINT 110.28 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 GLENWOOD PK 42.96 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 8 49.72 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9414 7/11 -8/12 TRFC SIGNLS 1,152.89 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 12 255.96 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9414 7/11 -8/12 METROLNK LT 159.26 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9414 7/11 -8/12 CTY LMTS 22,440.71 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 PKWY & MED 114.67 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9414 7/11 -8/12 SCHL PROP 7.46 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 1 16.71 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 2 40.06 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 4 13.92 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 5 13.09 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 6 12.10 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 7 38.02 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 9 2.01 110637 1101 09/18/02 1536 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 9413 7/11 -8/12 ZONE 11 12.53 TOTAL CHECK 38,145.14 110638 1101 09/18/02 3217 TASCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. 9620 8 /02AVRC RR /SNACK BAR 44,884.00 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02MIDDLE SCHOOL RES 9,237.25 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02SPEC ENF OFFICER 10,286.00 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02DARE OFFICER -5TH 9,237.25 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02HIGH SCHOOL RESOU 10,156.42 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02INVESTIGATIVE SRV 30,617.25 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9118 8 /020VERTIME -REG & CT 7,173.18 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9254 8 /02VEHICLE CHARGES 8,645.53 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9254 8 /02MINI VAN CHARGES 153.00 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02TRAFFIC SRVCS 23,311.26 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02PATROL SRVCS 171,810.82 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02COMM SRVCS 10,156.42 110639 1101 09/18/02 1616 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S 9117 8 /02ADMIN ASSISTANT 5,559.25 TOTAL CHECK 296,343.63 110640 1101 09/18/02 1787 WILLIS, PAMELA S 9160 PRESCHOOL INSTRUCTION 1,053.00 TOTAL FUND 520,736.12 TOTAL REPORT 520,736.12 t' a. 0 PENTAMATION - FUND ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/12/02 CITY OF MOORPARK, CA TIME: 15:18:39 CHECK REGISTER - FUND TOTALS FUND FUND TITLE AMOUNT 0100 INTERNAL SERVICES FUND 5,760.62 1000 GENERAL FUND 312,145.11 2002 CITY -WIDE TRAFFIC MITIGAT 567.62 2100 COMMUNITY WIDE 47,461.40 2151 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 1,080.25 2200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 60,371.58 2300 AD 84 -2 CITYWIDE 22,562.84 2301 AD 84 -2 ZONE 1 16.71 2302 AD 84 -2 ZONE 2 40.06 2304 AD 84 -2 ZONE 4 13.92 2305 AD 84 -2 ZONE 5 13.09 2306 AD 84 -2 ZONE 6 12.10 2307 AD 84 -2 ZONE 7 38.02 2308 AD 84 -2 ZONE 8 49.72 2309 AD 84 -2 ZONE 9 2.01 2310 AD 84 -2 ZONE 10 120.23 2311 AD 84 -2 ZONE 11 12.53 2312 AD 84 -2 ZONE 12 255.96 2400 PARK MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 6,372.36 2501 LOS ANGELES A.O.C. 2,892.43 2502 TIERRA REJADA A.O.C. - 12,484.45 2603 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SA 13,519.75 2605 GAS TAX 1,638.78 2609 OTHER ST /FEDERAL GRANTS 15,998.25 2901 MRA LOW /MOD INC HOUSE /INC 3,160.77 2902 MRA AREA 1 -INCR & OTHER 135.15 5000 LOCAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS 8C 4,587.26 5001 SOLID WASTE AB939 102.09 6005 UW /CCB TR4340,1,2,3 &4792 1,571.54 6015 SUNCAL 587.36 6047 WEST AMERICA 594.75 6148 PACIFIC COMMUNITIES 19.50 6193 CARLSBERG FINAN. /LENNAR 1,506.50 6281 TAILLON /ASPEN 27.30 6291 FAR WEST /KAUFMAN BROAD 803.86 6302 FELSENTHAL, JERROLD S. 144.30 6360 ASADURIAN JR., MANUEL 213.75 6367 HARTMAN 437.62 6375 PEACH HILL LLC /CREATIVE W 1,308.00 6385 RICHMOND AM H 348.15 6399 TOLL BROS /BOLLINGER RESI 2,947.39 6431 CARDSERVICE 488.50 6437 CYPRESS LAND COMPANY 511.50 6460 PERFORMANCE NURSERY /SCE 254.00 6480 M &M DEVELOPMENT 19.50 6513 ZELLMAN /TARGET CENTER 14,369.65 6515 USA PROPERTIES 1,497.25 6534 NORTH PARK VILLAGE 355.50 6541 SHARMA GENERAL 112.00 6546 WILLIAM LYON HOMES 3,115.25 " 6548 PARDEE CONSTRUCTION 552.50 6566 RJR ENGINEERING 19.50 6902 FRED REITZ 1,118.45 6908 ADELPHIA 1,244.64 6917 HOLMES ENTERPRISES 70.60 6918 DNA ELECTRIC 345 BARD 51.10 TOTAL REPORT 520,736.12 gk,➢ L � PAGE NUMBER: 1 VENCHK21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/02 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM. I I - 001 CTTv nF mnnRPARK. C'AT,TFnR,4TA City Cmincil Meeting VIV TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Hugh Riley, Assistant City Mana e DATE: September 4, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of Policy Resolution Regarding Local Government Involvement in the Adelphia Bankruptcy Proceedings. BACKGROUND On June 6, 1984, The City Council of the City of Moorpark adopted Resolution No. 84 -99 granting a 15 -year, Non - exclusive Franchise for the operation of a cable television system to serve the Urban West Communities' Mountain Meadows Housing Development to Mountain Meadows Cable Television, L.P. This franchise was scheduled to expire on June 6, 1999. The franchise agreement for this system (`Mountain Meadows System ") was extended to December 20, 2000 by Resolution No. 98 -1550 on December 2, 1998. On November 21, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 134 granting a ten -year renewal of a non - exclusive franchise to operate a cable television system in Moorpark to The Chronicle Publishing Co. doing business as Ventura County Cable Vision ( "the Moorpark System "). This franchise was in operation when the City incorporated in 1983. In the interim period between November 21, 1990 and 1999 a series of action control for these franc the telecommunications were completed resulting both cable franchises to s were taken to approve the hise agreements to various companies were purchased or in the transfer of operating Adelphia Communications. August 18, transfer of entities as as mergers control of Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 2 On July 18, 2001 and December 19, 2001 the City Council approved the interim extensions of both Cable TV Franchise Agreements with Adelphia. The term of the latest extension expired on June 30, 2002. On June 25, 2002, Adelphia and more than 200 of its subsidiaries, including Adelphia Communications, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to allow a court - supervised reorganization of the company and a restructuring of its debt. DISCUSSION The National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors ( NATOA) and the States of California and Nevada chapter of NATOA (SCAN NATOA), of which the City of Moorpark is a member, is seeking the formation of a local government committee to act on behalf of the member government before the United States Trustee overseeing the Adlephia bankruptcy. Bankruptcy law provides for the formation of "committees" of parties sharing like interest in a bankruptcy proceeding. While most committees are formed to represent the interest of debtors and creditors, the bankruptcy of a cable television provider is unique in that results of its bankruptcy proceedings can have a major impact on local franchising authorities and their residents. With approximately 3,500 local governments potentially affected by the Adelphia bankruptcy, NATOA and SCAN NATOA, on behalf of its members, is coordinating an effort to gather support from local governments served by Adelphia to petition the bankruptcy court to approve a local government committee. If the bankruptcy trustee appoints an official committee of local government entities, the bankruptcy estate (Adelphia) would pay the professional fees incurred by the committee. On July 16, 2002, NATOA and SCAN NATOA sent a letter to Adelphia soliciting their support before the bankruptcy trustee to appoint a local government committee (Attached as Exhibit A. On August 15, 2002, Adelphia responded by indicating that Adelphia would remain neutral (not oppose) regarding the committee's formation (Attached as Exhibit B). As a result of a motion filed by another local government, a hearing has been scheduled on October 9, 2002, before the bankruptcy trustee regarding the formation of the local government committee. In order to Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 3 demonstrate local government support for the committee's creating, the City of Moorpark and all Adelphia local franchising authorities have been requested to adopt a resolution to expressing support for the committee. All adopted resolutions will be forwarded to the United States Trustee in New York for presentation at the hearing. Because Adelphia is the only cable provider in Moorpark, serving approximately 8,600 residences, and because Adelphia's level of and quality of service may be affected by the results of its bankruptcy proceedings, it is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution supporting the formation of a local government committee. If approved, the committee will develop and implement a strategy for protecting the interests of Moorpark, its residents and all Adelphia subscribers. This effort will be coordinated at the national level by NATOA and there will be no costs to the City. If the committee is approved to be formed, the City may be asked to participate in various activities to protect the interests of the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 2002 - Attachments: Exhibit A - Letter from SCAN NATOA Exhibit B - Letter from Adelphia Resolution No. 2002- The National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors® 1595 Spring Hill Rd, Suite 330 Vienna, Virginia 22182 (703) 506 -3275 (703) 506 -3266 Fax www.natoa.org Exhibit A July 16, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Randall D. Fisher Vice President, Legal Affairs General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Adelphia Communications 1 North Main Street Coudersport, PA 16915 Re: In re Adelphia Company, Inc., et. al. ( "Debtor ") Dear Mr. Fisher: 01 � � f I.I&IIL Of CA LIfolmia Qt SCAN NATOA c/o City TV 525 Broadway Suite 100 Santa Monica, CA 90401 (909) 387 -5967 (909) 387 -9613 The purpose of this letter is to solicit Debtor's support in permitting the United States Trustee to appoint a separate official Committee of governmental entities ( "Municipalities ") pursuant to the provisions of Section 1102(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. The States of California and Nevada Chapter of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (SCAN NATOA) and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA), as the representatives of Municipalities, have been authorized by their respective Board of Directors to organize and recommend such a committee to represent the interests of similarly situated constituents in the Debtor's Chapter 11 Case. August 16, 2002 Page 2 The Municipalities have interests at stake, which are NOT common to all creditors of the Debtor. The appointment of an additional committee of creditors is necessary to assure adequate representation of the Municipalities. Cable access serves vital functions for numerous Municipalities and their citizens. Cable access is part of an overall local communication network, which serves very specific regulatory, economic, health and safety concerns. Any possibility of an interruption of this service could have serious effects on local communities. By the same token, cable service subject to the franchise agreements of the Municipalities throughout the United States represents the core business of the Debtor. The Debtor and the Municipalities have had a long term and mutually vital relationship. To continue that relationship and to assist the Debtor in preserving the value of Debtor's franchise assets, the Debtor needs and stands to benefit from strong and effective participation from Municipalities in the Debtor's reorganization process. Municipalities have a vested interest in the success of Debtor's reorganization. Municipalities intend to consult with the Debtor concerning the administration of its core business. Municipalities intend to participate in the formulation of a plan and lend expertise where applicable to the administration of the estate as well as the reorganization process. With your written consent, pursuant to the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, we will request the Office of the U.S. Trustee to appoint such an additional creditor's committee. We recognize that the decision to appoint additional committees is generally made on a case -by -case basis. Considerations such as the ability of the existing committee to function, the nature of the case, and the standing and desires of the various constituencies assume significance. In cases such as this, where there are a significant number of separate debtors, a strong inference arises that additional committees may be well appropriate. At least one case in Northern District of Ohio has held that such appointment is required as a matter of law. Although, this per se rule has not been adopted in the Southern District of New York, several judges have signaled that multi - debtor, multi- business cases may be the appropriate set of circumstances to appoint additional committees. Although it is true that conflicting interests are common in any reorganization case, circumstances here make it impossible for even the most diligent committee to adequately represent the interests of the Municipalities. Another factor the courts consider is the timeliness of the request for an additional committee. Here the Municipalities are making the request within the first 120 days of the case. No plan has been proposed, in fact, it is the plan process in which the Municipalities, with the help of their counsel, wish to participate. We believe the appointment of a separate Municipalities Creditors Committee is appropriate to insure adequate representation of the Municipalities. We will be pleased to provide any additional information you require and will meet with you at your convenience. y �. A' 1 August 16, 2002 Page 3 Your courtesy and cooperation are greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, Lori Panzino President, SCAN NATOA Libby Beaty Executive Director, NATOA cc: Board of Directors Exhibit B From: Randy Fisher Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 3:49 PM To: Elizabeth Beaty Cc: Seth Davidson Subject: Unsecured Creditors Committee Dear Libby: Erkie Kailbourne asked me to get back to you regarding Adelphia's position on the proposal of certain local franchising authorities for the formation of a franchise committee. After further consideration, despite anything you might have heard, Adelphia has decided that it will not submit an opposition to such a request. Randall D. Fisher Vice President and General Counsel Adelphia Communications Corporation RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR AND PARTICIPATING IN A COALITION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITIES THAT ARE LOCAL FRANCHISING AUTHORITIES IN COMMUNITIES WHERE ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS IS A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISEE, WHICH COALITION WILL DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A STRATEGY FOR PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, ITS RESIDENTS, AND ALL ADELPHIA CABLE TELEVISION SUBSCRIBERS IMPACTED BY THE ADELPHIA BANKRUPTCY WHEREAS, Adelphia Communications hereinafter referred to as Adelphia, is a City of Moorpark cable television franchisee; and WHEREAS, in recent months, Adelphia has undergone well - publicized financial difficulties, including the disclosure of approximately $3.1 billion in previously undisclosed off - balance sheet obligations, the commencement of a Securities and Exchange Commission and two federal grand jury investigations, allegations of widespread corporate fraud, substantial defaults on bondholder debts, numerous shareholder lawsuits against Adelphia, and the arrest of five former Adelphia corporate executives; and WHEREAS, on June 25, 2002, Adelphia, and more than two hundred (200) of its subsidiaries, filed for bankruptcy protection; and WHEREAS, recent press reports and other information indicate that Adelphia has obtained $1.5 billion in debtor -in- possession financing to sustain its operations while the bankruptcy is proceeding; and WHEREAS, in the context of a bankruptcy, Adelphia will be required to assume, assign, or reject the current franchise agreement with the City of Moorpark, and during that process, the City of Moorpark should play an active and important role so as to ensure that all franchise obligations are satisfied and local cable television subscribers receive the highest quality, uninterrupted, cable television service; and Resolution No. 2002 Page 2 WHEREAS, Adelphia is currently in renewal negotiations with the City of Moorpark whereby it seeks to extend its contract rights, which negotiations may be complicated by the bankruptcy filing; and WHEREAS, complicated legal and practical issues will arise during the course of the bankruptcy, which will require: (i) extensive analysis of local government's rights and obligations; (ii) preparation of financial documents and correspondence explaining the practical ramifications of the various proposals, including debt and equity restructurings that may arise; and (iii) a careful attention to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare, the quality and range of cable television services, and the financial and performance based rights of local government; and WHEREAS, the anticipated bankruptcy may result in tension between local government's authority to control its public rights -of -way and duty to protect subscribers, Adelphia's creditors' desire to obtain maximum value from the Adelphia franchises with minimum delay, potential asset purchasers' desire to pay the lowest possible price and incur the minimum possible obligation when seeking to buy cable franchises from the bankruptcy estate, and the bankruptcy court's desire to quickly administer the case and confirm a bankruptcy plan; and WHEREAS, by forming a coalition, local government can present a united front in the anticipated bankruptcy case, which will likely allow local government to assert more influence over the ultimate conditions under which Adelphia or some other cable operator will provide services to cable subscribers on a going - forward basis; and WHEREAS, bankruptcy law provides, in some circumstances, for the formation of "committees" of parties sharing like interests in a bankruptcy proceeding; and WHEREAS, press reports and Adelphia's management, as well are currently mapping out their and committee formations, which fundamental objectives of local television franchises; and other information indicate that as Adelphia's major creditors, respective bankruptcy strategies are not likely. to align with the government with respect to cable Resolution No. 2002 Page 3 WHEREAS, if an official committee of local government entities were appointed by the United States Trustee, the professional fees incurred by the committee would be paid by the bankruptcy estate; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 2002, the Executive Director of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (hereinafter referred to as NATOA) and the President of the States of California and Nevada Chapter of NATOA (hereinafter referred to as SCAN NATOA) , of which the City of Moorpark is a member, sent a letter to Adelphia's General Counsel soliciting Adelphia's support before the United States Trustee to appoint a local government committee; and WHEREAS, on July 31, 2002, the County of St. Port Lucie, Florida, filed a motion in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York for the creation of an official committee of local franchise authorities and a hearing date has been set for September 17, 2002; and WHEREAS, on August 15, 2002, Mr. Fisher responded to the NATOA /SCAN NATOA letter (Exhibit B) and indicated that Adelphia would remain neutral (neither support nor oppose) on the formation of a local government committee. NOW, THEREFORE, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Recitals above are hereby declared to be true, accurate, and correct. SECTION 2. Based upon and through the actions described in the above Recitals, as well as other written and oral evidence submitted at the Hearing, it is hereby determined that the City of Moorpark will benefit from participating in a coalition of cities, counties, and special districts that act as the local government committee, which would strive to protect local government, its residents, and all Adelphia cable television subscribers impacted by the Adelphia bankruptcy. SECTION 3. The for the entities appointment of by the United City Council hereby expresses support an official committee of local government States Trustee. Resolution No. 2002 Page 4 SECTION 4. The City Council approves participation of the City of Moorpark in the event such an official committee of local government entities is appointed by the United States Trustee. SECTION S. 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 18th day of September, 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 1m I I • F• CITY nF' 400RFARX, C;ALTFORNTA City Cmincil Meefing of —LIP 1rS a a�t�S -- ACTION': ,I pc 6yy-% fnev) a- iuy1. • r The Honorable City Council DISCUSSION John Hartnett, Recreation Superintendent -i" September 6, 2002 (CC Meeting of September 18, 2002) Consider Moorpark Soccer Club (MSC) Use Agreement In 1997, the City Council approved use agreements with the major youth sports organizations in Moorpark. The agreements were for a term of five years, and among other things, they identified parks and facilities amenities, use dates, site and amenity improvements, and maintenance responsibilities granted to each organization. The use fee charged to each group for park amenities was $1.00 per year. Moorpark Basketball Association was charged a discounted rate of $12 per hour for use of the Gymnasium. Moorpark Girls Softball Association, American Youth Soccer Organization and Packer Football also pay for the use of the Concession facilities at AVCP, from the proceeds of their snack sales. The Moorpark Soccer Club (MSC) agreement is the final contract to expire this year. Once approved, all local sports organizations will have five -year agreements with the City. Staff has drafted a new agreement for MSC based on the previous agreement and provided it to them for review and comment. MSC has indicated that the provisions of the new agreement are acceptable. The agreement addresses the following conditions: If the proposed agreement is approved, MSC will have use of Campus Canyon Park between August through November, of each year. Use of the facilities will be $1 per year, each year the agreement is in effect. The field portion of the premises will be used for MSC's authorized games, practices, and training sessions. A schedule of games and practices shall be furnished Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 2 to the City prior to July 10 of each year, taking into account City recreation needs as well as the needs of MSC. MSC agrees to perform routine maintenance, including marking field lines as needed and pick up and disposal of trash after scheduled activities The agreement also indicates that MSC, in order to retain the rights under the agreement, will maintain a membership of no less than 75 players with 80 percent living within Moorpark's City limits. SUNIIKARY As stated, the agreement is consistent with MSG's previous use agreement and agreements the City has with other youth sports groups. The dates, fees, and maintenance requirements have not changed. MSC agrees to insure and indemnify the City, refrain from making any improvements without City authorization, abide by facility rules established by the City, and acknowledge that the City retains the right to use the parks and facilities granted for use under the agreement, with prior notice by the City. The proposed agreement is attached to this Agenda Report. The Council is being asked to approve the agreement for Moorpark Soccer Club. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve five -year use agreement with Moorpark Soccer Club as submitted subject to final language approved by City Manager and City Attorney and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. Attachments: Moorpark Soccer Club Agreement AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOORPARK AND MOORPARK SOCCER CLUB THIS USE AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement ") is made and entered into as of this day of , 2002 by and between the CITY OF MOORPARK (hereinafter "City ") and Moorpark Soccer Club, Inc. a non profit corporation (hereinafter "MSC "). THE PARTIES AGREE THAT: Section 1. PREMISES City, in consideration of the fees to be paid and of the indemnification, covenants, and agreements agreed to herein, hereby grants to MSC, and MSC hereby accepts from City, the use of certain real property and associated facilities and equipment including but not limited to the athletic field and park area at Campus Canyon Park (hereinafter "CCP ") described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, together with any and all improvements thereon (all of which are hereinafter referred to as the "Premises "). Section 2. TERM The term of this Agreement shall be for five (5) years, commencing on December 1, 2002 and ending on November 30, 2007, provided however, that City's obligations hereunder shall be contingent upon MSC's payment in full of all use and related fees and fulfillment of all obligations as set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated by either party with or without cause by providing written notice no less than thirty (30) days in advance of such termination. Section 3. USE FEES MSC further agrees to pay the City at time of execution of Agreement, in total, annual use fees as follows: A. One Dollar ($1.00) for the period of December 1, 2002, through November 30, 2007, and for every year thereafter on December 1 through the term of Agreement for the use of Park Area; and B. In order for MSC to retain the rights granted under the Agreement, it must maintain a membership (players) that consists of no less than 75 (seventy -five) members and at least 80 (eighty) percent of the membership must live within the Moorpark City limits. Section 4. ADJUSTMENTS OF USE FEES For the year December 1, 2002, and for each year this Agreement is in effect, the City may adjust the Use Fees, referenced in Section 3.A, by giving MSC written notice prior \\ mor_ pri _sery \home_foldersVHartnett\MSC Agreement.doc to July 1, of each year. If no such notification is given, the Use Fees for the next year shall be the same amount as the prior year. Section 5. USE The Premises shall be used for the following specified purposes only and shall not be used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of the City: A. The field portion of Premises shall be used for MSC's authorized games, practices, and training sessions for coaches and referees tied specially to official seasons, held during the months of August through November (Fall Season) each year. A schedule of said games and practices shall be furnished to the Director of Community Services for the City's written approval prior to July 10 of each year, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. B. At all times, City retains the right to use Premises at its discretion for City sponsored and co- sponsored events upon no less than thirty (30) days written notice to MSC. During the Fall season, the general public shall have access to and use of said Premises at a time of day and or on a day that is not included in the schedule submitted by MSC in writing and approved in writing by the City. MSC shall not have priority use of Premises outside of the approved schedule. At all times, the City also reserves the right to restrict use of certain fields on Premise to manage and protect the conditions of the turf. Any requests for additional use not authorized in this agreement shall be made in writing to City. C. The sale and consumption of food and beverages shall be at the discretion of MSC with the exception that no alcoholic beverages shall be sold or consumed on Premises. MSC shall obtain all required health and other permits for the preparation and sale of food and beverages. D. In the event the turf is too wet to conduct soccer games or practices without causing damage, as solely determined by the City, MSC agrees to cancel its scheduled game or practice. E. MSC agrees not to drive any vehicle, or allow any vehicle to be driven onto the Premises or any area of Campus Canyon Park with out the written consent of the City. Section 6. SIGNS MSC agrees not to permit the construction or placement of any sign, signboard or other form of outdoor advertising on the Premises without the prior written consent of the City. In the event of a violation of this provision by MSC or any one claiming under MSC, MSC hereby authorizes City as MSC's Agent, to enter the Premises and to remove and dispose of any such sign, signboard or other advertising, and to charge the cost and expense of any such removal and disposal to MSC who agrees to pay the same upon 2 demand. This provision does not exclude the use of identification banners for individual teams and sponsors, which may be displayed during games and shall be removed following the end of each game. Section 7. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS MSC hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify City, its officers, agents, and employees, and its successors and assigns, from and against all claims, loss, damage, actions, causes of actions, expense and /or liability arising or growing out of loss or damage to property, including City's own personal property, or injury to or death of persons, including employees of City, resulting in any manner whatsoever directly or indirectly, by reason of this Agreement or the use of the Premises by MSC or any person claiming use under or through MSC unless such loss, damage, injury, or death is due to the sole negligence of the City. MSC shall also hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, including costs of investigation arising out of or incurred in the defense of any claim, proceeding, or action brought for injury to persons or damage to property, resulting from or associated with the use of said Premises under this Agreement and shall further save and hold harmless the City from any and all orders, judgements, and decrees which may be entered in any and all such suit or actions. MSC and all others using said Premises under this Agreement hereby waive any and all claims against the City of damage to persons or property in, or about said Premises. The City does not, and shall not, waive any rights that it may have against MSC by reason of this Section, because of the acceptance by the City, or the deposit with the City, of any insurance policy or certificate required pursuant to this Agreement. Said hold harmless and indemnification provision shall apply regardless of whether or not said insurance policies are determined to be applicable to the claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense described in this Section. The provisions of this Section 7 shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. Section 8. LIABILITY INSURANCE As a condition precedent of the effectiveness of this Agreement, MSC shall procure, and thereafter maintain in full force and effect at MSC's sole cost and expense, a public liability insurance policy written with a company acceptable to City and authorized to do business in the State of California. Such policy shall provide for a minimum coverage of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury or death of any person or persons in any one occurrence, and Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) for loss by damage or injury to property in any one occurrence and shall include automobile coverage. The policy shall contain a provision providing for a broad form of contractual liability, including Product Liability coverage if food and beverages are dispensed on Premises. The policy or policies shall be written on an occurrence basis. The policy shall name MSC as the insured and the City as an additional insured. The policy shall also provide that the City shall be notified in writing, at least thirty (30) days prior to any termination, amendment cancellation or expiration thereof. MSC shall furnish City 3 evidence of all insurance policies required by this Agreement in the form of a Certificate of Insurance and Endorsement Certificate. Section 9. CASUALTY INSURANCE The parties each specifically acknowledge that City shall not be obligated to keep the Premises insured against fire, or any other insurable risk. MSC hereby and forever waives all right to claim or recover damages from City in any amount as the result of any damage to the Premises by fire, earthquake, flooding, storm or any other cause. Section 10. IMPROVEMENTS MSC shall not make any alterations, additions, or improvements upon the Premises without the prior written consent of the City. All alterations, additions and improvements shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner and diligently prosecuted to completion, and shall be performed and maintained in strict accord with all Federal, State, County, and local laws, ordinances, codes and standards relating thereto. Performance of work shall be subject to City monitoring and inspection. At City's sole discretion, work may be stopped if it does not conform to City specifications and standards. Unless otherwise expressly agreed to in writing by 'the City, any alterations, additions and improvements shall remain on and be surrendered with the Premises upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement. MSC shall timely pay all costs associated with any and all improvements, and shall keep the Premises free and clear of all mechanics liens. MSC agrees to and shall indemnify, defend and save City free and harmless against all liability, loss, damage, costs, attorney's fees and other expenses of any nature resulting from any MSC alterations, additions or improvements to the Premises. At such time as MSC vacates Premises, all improvements to Premises not already owned by City shall become the property of the City unless otherwise authorized by City in writing. Section 11. FLAMMABLE MATERIAL, WASTE AND NUISANCES MSC agrees that it will not place or store any flammable materials on the Premises, that it will not commit any waste or damage, nor suffer any to be done. MSC also specifically agrees that it will not allow others to take such actions on the Premises. MSC further agrees that it will keep the Premises clean, free from weeds, rubbish and debris and in a condition satisfactory to City. MSC shall also provide adequate controls for dust, odors, noise which may emanate from the Premises or from MSC's activities on adjacent property and take appropriate steps necessary to prevent dust contamination of City's facilities located on, near or adjacent to the Premises. MSC agrees to take preventative action to eliminate such dust, odor, noise or any other nuisance which may disturb the adjacent or nearby community and agrees to be responsible for and to assume all liability for such dust, odor, noise or other nuisance M 6 St disturbances. MSC also agrees that it shall not use amplified sound or field lighting on Premises for any reason, without the prior written consent of City. Notwithstanding the above, MSC shall not install, operate or maintain, or cause, or permit to be installed, operated or maintained any electrically charged fence on the Premises. Section 12. PESTICIDES AND HERBICIDES MSC agrees that prior to any application of either pesticides or herbicides, it shall receive written consent from City, and further any pesticide or herbicide applications on the Premises shall be made in accordance with all Federal, State, County and local laws. MSC further agrees to dispose of any pesticides, herbicides or any other toxic substances, which are declared to be either a health or environmental hazard in such a manner as prescribed by law. This shall include, but shall not be limited to, contaminated containers, clothing, equipment or any other contaminated material. Section 13. STORAGE TANKS Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Agreement, MSC shall not have the right to install underground or above ground storage tanks, as defined by any and all applicable laws or regulations, without the prior written consent of the City. Section 14. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INDEMNITY MSC hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless City, and its respective officers, employees, and agents, from and against any and all claims, actions, losses, liabilities, costs and expenses: (a) including, without limitation, all foreseeable and all unforeseeable consequential damages, directly or indirectly arising out of the use, generation, storage or disposal of Hazardous Material on the Premises by MSC; and (b) including, without limitation, the cost of any required or necessary repair, cleanup, or detoxification and the preparation of any closure or other required plans, to the full extent that such action is attributable, directly or indirectly, to the presence, or use, generation, storage, release, threatened release, or disposal of Hazardous Materials on the Premises by MSC. As used in this Section, Hazardous Materials means any flammable explosives, radioactive materials, asbestos, PCBs, hazardous water, toxic substances of related materials, including, without limitation, substances, defined as "hazardous substances ", "hazardous materials ", or "toxic substances" in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 USC, Section 9601, et seq.; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 USC, Section 6901, et seq.; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 USC, Section 2601, et seq.; any other Federal, State or local law applicable to the Premises; and in the rules and regulations adopted or promulgated under or pursuant to any of said laws. The provisions of this Section shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. Section 15. UTILITIES E MSC agrees to pay a pro rata share of all charges and assessments for or in connection with electricity, water, and sewer and any other utilities which may be furnished to or used upon the Premises by MSC during the period covered by this Agreement with exception of those addressed in Section 3 of this Agreement. It is further agreed that in the event MSC shall fail to pay the above mentioned charges when due, City shall have the right to pay the same on demand, together with interest thereon at the maximum rate allowed by law and to charge the cost and expense to MSC who agrees to pay the same upon demand. City shall bill MSC for said charges, which shall be in addition to Use Fee identified in Section 3. Section 16. MAINTENANCE Except as specifically provided for in the Agreement, all maintenance of, and repairs to Premises shall be done at City's sole discretion and shall be performed by City force account or by City's authorized agent unless approved by City in writing. All maintenance and repair authorized to be performed by MSC shall adhere to City specifications and standards. All improvements shall meet City and other applicable codes, regulations, and standards including but not limited to building and zoning codes. During the period of August 1 through November 30 MSC shall be responsible to perform the following maintenance on Premises: Mark soccer field lines using only white, water -based acrylic paint manufactured specifically for marking lines on sports turf and athletic fields. Athletic field paint should not contain calcium carbonate, vinyl copolymers, herbicides, or pesticides. 2. Pick up trash on and around Premises and provide for additional trash containers if needed and so directed by City. On each day of use following the last scheduled game or practice, empty contents of trash containers into trash dumpster. 3. In the event MSC desires additional field maintenance, such as, but not limited to, weeding, aeration, mowing, and fertilization, above and beyond that which is routinely provided for by the City, it shall first seek the written approval of the City. Any such additional maintenance work approved by the City in writing shall be provided and paid for solely by MSC and any such approved work shall comply with City standards. City shall not be obligated to repair, replace or maintain the Premises in any manner throughout the term of this Agreement. City shall not be obligated to perform any precautionary or preventative measures with respect to the Premises, including, but not limited to drainage and flood control measures. Should City perform any of the foregoing, such services shall be at the sole discretion of City, and the performance of such services shall not be construed as an obligation or warranty by City of the future or ongoing performance of such services. m Section 17. ENTRY BY CITY City may enter upon the Premises at all reasonable times to examine the condition thereof, and for the purpose of providing maintenance and making such repairs as City desires to make. Section 18. GOVERNING LAW MSC agrees that in the exercise of its rights under this Agreement, MSC shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, County and City laws and regulations in connection with its use of the Premises. The existence, validity, construction, operation and effect of this Agreement and all of its terms and provisions shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Section 19. DISCRIMINATION MSC agrees not to discriminate against any person or class of persons by reason of race, color, creed, or national origin in the use of the Premises. Section 20. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING MSC shall not assign this Agreement, or any interest therein, and shall not assign use of the Premises or any part thereof, or any right or privilege appurtenant thereto, or suffer any other person (the agents and servants of MSC excepted) to occupy or use the Premises, or any portion thereof, without the prior written consent of City. A consent to one assignment, subletting, occupation, or use by another person shall not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment, subletting, occupation, or use by another person. This Agreement shall not, nor shall any interest therein, be assignable, as to the interest of MSC, by operation of law, without the written consent of City. Any assignment or subletting without such consent shall be void, and shall, at the option of the City, terminate this Agreement. No legal title or interest in Premises is created or vested in MSC by this Agreement. 21. INSOLVENCY OR BANKRUPTCY If MSC shall be adjudged bankrupt or insolvent, this Agreement shall thereupon immediately terminate and the same shall not be assignable by any process of law, or be treated as an asset of the MSC under such adjudication, nor shall it pass under the control of any trustee or assignee by virtue of any process in bankruptcy or insolvency, or by execution or assignment for the benefit of creditors. If any such event occurs, this Agreement shall immediately become null and void and of no effect, and City may thereupon repossess said Premises and all rights of the MSC thereupon shall cease and terminate. 7 CR r� 1171 Section 22. DEFAULT OR BREACH Except as otherwise provided, at any time one party to this Agreement is in default or breach in the performance of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the other party shall give written notice to remedy such default or breach. If default or breach is remedied within 30 days following such notice, then this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. If such default or breach is not remedied within 30 days following such notice or if the nature of the default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within 30 days, if MSC fails to commence to cure within the 30 day period, the other party may, at its option, terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not be considered a waiver of damages or other remedies available to either party because of such default or breach. Each term and condition of this Agreement shall be deemed to be both a covenant and a condition. Section 23. INTERPRETATION Should interpretation of this Agreement, or any portion thereof, be necessary, it is deemed that this Agreement was prepared by the parties jointly and equally, and shall not be interpreted against either party on the ground that the party prepared the Agreement or caused it to be prepared. Section 24. WAIVER A waiver by either party or any default or breach by the other party in the performance of any of the covenants, terms or conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute or be deemed a waiver of any subsequent or other default or breach. Section 25. ACQUIESCENCE No acquiescence, failure or neglect of any party hereto to insist on strict performance of any or all of the terms hereof in one instance shall be considered or constitute a waiver of the rights to insist upon strict performance of the terms hereof in any subsequent instance. Section 26. PARTIES BOUND AND BENEFITED The covenants and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns of all the parties hereto; and all of the parties hereto shall be jointly and severally liable hereunder. Section 27. CONDEMNATION If the whole of the Premises should be taken by a public authority under the power of eminent domain, then the term of this Agreement shall cease on the day of possession by the public authority. If a part only of the Premises should be taken under eminent domain, MSC shall have the right to either terminate this Agreement or to continue in possession -N of the remainder of the Premises. If MSC remains in possession, all of the terms hereof shall continue in effect, with the fees payable being reduced proportionately for the balance of the Agreement term. Section 28. TIME Time is of the essence of this Agreement. Section 29. REMEDIES In case of the failure or refusal of MSC to comply with and perform each and all of the terms and covenants on its part herein contained, this Agreement and all rights hereby given shall, at the option of City, cease and terminate, and City shall have the right forthwith to remove MSC's personal property from the Premises at the sole cost, expense and risk of MSC, which cost and expense MSC agrees to pay to City upon demand, together with interest thereon at the maximum rate allowed by law from the date of expenditure by City. Section 30. NOTICES AND PAYMENTS All notices required under this Agreement including change of address shall be in writing, and all notices and payments shall be made as follows: A. All payments and notices to MSC shall be given or mailed to the current MSC President /Commissioner. It is the responsibility of MSC to notify City when there has been a change with regard to the individual serving as President/ Commissioner and to provide the City with name, address, and 24 -hour contact phone number of the new President /Commissioner: Moorpark Soccer Club 3865 Huntercrest Ct. Moorpark, CA 93021 24 -Hour Emergency Contact Person: Jay Greene Phone Number: 523 -2753 B. All payments and notices to City shall be given or mailed to: City of Moorpark Director of Community Services 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Phone Number: 529 -6864 9 Section .31. PARTIAL INVALIDITY If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement is found by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated thereby. Section 32. GENDER AND NUMBER For the purpose of this Agreement wherever the masculine or neuter form is used, the same shall include the masculine or feminine, and the singular number shall include the plural and the plural number shall include the singular, wherever the context so requires. Section 33. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS Paragraph headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in interpreting or construing the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement. Section 34. MODIFICATION This Agreement may be terminated, extended or amended in writing by the mutual written consent of the parties hereto. Such amendments may be executed by the City Manager on behalf of the City. Section 35. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties, and supersedes all previous negotiations and understandings between the parties. There are no representations, warranties or commitments, oral or written, other than those expressly set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representative as of the date first written above. City of Moorpark Moorpark Soccer Club LIM By: Steven Kueny, City Manager President/Commissioner Attest: C. Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk 10 1TEM I I • U • C!I7t- O ,iOOJRP1RK, CALiF0RNIA C� Council ;Meeting ACTH. ": Cx Stc'a 7 ieC�mm att; MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Julie C.T. Hernandez, Senior Management Analyst -'t, DATE: September 11, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Resolution No. 2002- Authorizing Access to Sales and Use Tax Records BACKGROUND The State Board of Equalization collects confidential sales and use tax information from local businesses. Access to this information is restricted by Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7056 to officers or employees, and also to contracted firms, of local jurisdictions who are designated by a resolution of the legislative body of the jurisdiction. Resolution 95 -1108, adopted April 5, 1995, was the last update to the list of City officers or employees who are allowed access to this information. As this list is outdated due to changes in City staff position titles and duties, an updated resolution is necessary. DISCUSSION The proposed updated resolution reflects the titles of those City officers or employees who may need access to the confidential sales and use tax information in order to effectively carry out their job duties. It also continues to contain the name of the City's contracted firm, HdL and Associates, that receives, reviews and analyzes this information on the City's behalf. The proposed resolution limits the use of this information to municipal revenue forecasting and verification. Sales Tax Access Resolution 09/11/02 Page 2 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve Resolution No. 2002- updating the list of City positions that are authorized access to confidential sales and use tax records, and rescinding Resolution No. 95 -1108. RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING ACCESS TO SALES AND USE TAX RECORDS PURSUANT TO REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 7056 AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 95 -1108. WHEREAS, it is necessary for city officials to receive and review sales and use tax information from the State Board of Equalization: NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following City officials are hereby authorized to receive and review sales and use tax information from the State Board of Equalization: Administrative Services Director Assistant to the City Manager /City Clerk Assistant City Manager Budget and Finance Manager City Council Members City Manager Deputy City Manager Economic Development /Redevelopment Manager Finance Officer Senior Management Analyst SECTION 2. The following independent contractor for the City of Moorpark is hereby also authorized to receive and review sales and use tax data received from the State Board of Equalization: Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates SECTION 3. The City of Moorpark hereby certifies that Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates: A. Has a current confidentiality contract with the City to receive and examine sales and use tax records; and, Resolution No. 2002 - Page 2 B. Is required by that contract to disclose information contained in or derived from, those sales and use tax records only to an officer or employee of the City who is authorized by the resolution to examine the information; and, C. Is prohibited by that contract from performing consulting service for a retailer during the term of that contract, and, D. Is prohibited by that contract from retaining the information contained in, or derived from, those sales and use tax records after that contract has expired. SECTION 4. Information obtained by examination of Board records shall be used only for purposes related to the collection of local sales and use taxes by the Board for municipal revenue forecasting and verification. SECTION 5. Resolution No. 95 -1108 is hereby rescinded. SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original Resolutions and send a certified copy to the State Board of Equalization. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September, 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk � I. 4. CaTS:' OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNTA City Council Meeting of 1*QmbtA- i �� ` a6(;), ACTION: CIV� f „`xeS LO AA amm Yhenf -, �U YeP1 i�. MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director 19 Prepared by: David A. Bobardt, Planning Mana ��`) DATE: September 9, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) �' / /N., 1 SUBJECT: City of Moorpark General Plan Annual Report Including Housing Element Progress Report - September 2001 to August 2002 BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 65400(b) requires the planning agency of each local government to provide an annual report to the legislative body on the status of the General Plan and progress in its implementation. Also included in the annual report is information about progress in meeting the community's share of regional housing needs with information concerning City efforts to remove local governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. This annual report must be provided to the legislative body, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development on or before October lst of each year. The following information is provided in compliance with the above Government Code provisions. DISCUSSION: Status of General Plan and Implementation Progress Land Use Element - A comprehensive update to the Land Use Element was adopted in May 1992. A number of substantial amendments have been made to this element since this time. These include the conversion of about 1,000 acres of rural residential designated land to higher residential densities and open space, the adoption or substantial amendment of three specific plans (Carlsberg, Downtown, and Moorpark Highlands), and the approval of a voter - initiated City Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB). The Community Development Department has The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 2 projected a comprehensive update to this element, along with the Circulation Element, to begin in the later portion of Fiscal Year 2002 -2003. Recently Approved Amendments to the Land Use Element Map The Archstone Apartments project, approved on June 16, 1999 and recently completed, involved the reclassification of about 18 acres of land planned and zoned for commercial uses to high - density residential uses, allowing the construction of 312 apartments, 50 of which are affordable to households with very - low and low incomes. Specific Plan No. 2 (Moorpark Highlands, Tract 5045) was adopted on September 15, 1999, approving up to 562 residential units including an affordable housing component. The affordable housing provisions for this project require 25 on -site units for low income households, and set -aside funding to assist the City in developing very low income housing units off -site. The West Pointe Homes project, Tract 5187, was approved by the City Council in February 2002, altering the General Plan and Zoning density to increase total permitted dwelling units from 66 to 250 single- family dwelling units. As part of this project, 20 additional units will be provided that will be affordable to households having very low, low, or moderate incomes. The Colmer project (Tract 5307), approved by the City Council in May 2002, involved a redesignation of 2.4 acres on the Flory School site from "Schools" to "Very High Density Residential." This project when built will include 22 houses, with three affordable by low and very -low income households. The City is in the process of extending this subdivision to construct three additional affordable houses. The Vintage Crest Senior Apartments, approved in July 2002, redesignated about 9.5 acres from "general commercial" to "very high density residential ", in order to provide 190 senior housing units, all affordable to low and very -low income levels. Proposed Amendments to the Land Use Element Map in Process The SunCa1 project, Tract 5130, (formerly Specific Plan No. 10) proposes to modify existing General Plan land use and zoning to S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 3 increase density from a General Plan overlay that permits one (1) dwelling unit per each five (5) acres to 1.62 dwelling units per acre to accommodate 107 single- family homes. The current project has completed environmental review and Planning Commission review. Action by the City Council on this project is expected later this year. The project is subject to a minimum fifteen (15 %) percent affordability inclusionary requirement. The Specific Plan No. 1 (Hitch Ranch) project proposes 605 residential units, of which approximately 77 units would be affordable to low and very -low income households. An Environmental Impact Report is currently being prepared for this project. The North Park Village project proposes housing units and 150 affordable units on the City of Moorpark. It would requ: Amendment, including an extension of Restriction Boundary, which requires voter is presently in the unincorporated County designated for open space uses. 1,500 market rate 3,547 acres outside Lre a General Plan the City's Urban approval. The land of Ventura, and is Pre - Screening Applications for General Plan Amendments City Council Resolution No. 99 -1578 requires pre- screening of all requests for General Plan Amendments, based on adopted criteria, to evaluate those requests that the City should accept as a formal General Plan Amendment application at a later date. The General Plan prescreening process establishes certain time periods for application and consideration. The application and procedures have been streamlined and clarified to provide more in -depth analysis of potential projects and allow the prioritization of applications that support City goals and policies relating to its Housing and Land Use Elements. Three (3) applications are under consideration at this time: 1) PS 2000 -02: This is a request to increase permitted density on a 41 -acre residential parcel from one unit per five acres to a density that would permit 30 units on a hillside area. The project has been reviewed by the Affordable Housing and Community Development Committee. The City Council considered the report of the Committee and referred the application back to the Committee for additional S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 4 changes and information. The application remains incomplete. 2) PS 2001 -02: This is a request to redesignate 4 acres along Los Angeles Avenue from "general commercial" to "high - density residential" to permit the construction of 66 townhouses on the site. Action on this application has been deferred to the November 2002 cycle. 3) PS 2001 -03: This is a request to redesignate 4.8 acres along Los Angeles Avenue from "Rural High Residential" to "Medium Industrial to permit the construction of a recreational vehicle storage facility. Action on this application has been deferred to the November 2002 cycle. Circulation Element - An updated General Plan Circulation Element was adopted in May 1992. Further analysis of circulation system alternatives continued in 1999 with the approval of Specific Plan No. 2. The adoption of Specific Plan No. 2 included a circulation system amendment to allow for the construction of an extension of Spring Road to function as a connecting arterial between Los Angeles Avenue and Walnut Canyon Road through the central portion of the City establishing an additional north /south corridor. Specific Plan No. 2 also includes right -of -way reservations for the SR -23 and SR -118 Arterials across the project site. Specific Plan No. 1 has completed preliminary reviews to address environmental and design issues relating to an east /west arterial roadway (formerly SR -118 Arterial bypass), Casey Road, and Gabbert Road. The plan, which is currently being drafted, will provide for continuation of the alignment of these roadways consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element. Although not a part of the Circulation Element network of arterial and collector roadways, a public road ( "A" Street) was added to the West Pointe project to connect the proposed Hitch Ranch Specific Plan (SP -1) and Walnut Canyon Road. This project will also provide continuity for equestrian and multi - purpose trails. The city -wide equestrian and bicycle trails were expanded by the adoption of a Class 1 and Class 2 bicycle trail within Specific Plan No. 2, and addition of a segment of the city -wide and S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc C 1_ ter It it The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 5 regional connection of equestrian trails to serve the northern portion of the community. Modification No. 2 to Tract 4928 (Toll Brothers), approved in 1999, included an alignment alteration to provide an expanded "C" Street (now Championship Drive) right - of -way which will include an equestrian /multi - purpose trail alignment. The West Pointe project provides an additional multi- use trail along "A" Street. The City is presently undertaking two projects to widen Los Angeles Avenue: one between Spring Road and Moorpark Avenue, and the other between Beltramo Ranch Road and a point east of Maureen Lane. The widening will provide six lanes of traffic as called for in the Circulation Element. Noise Element - The Noise Element was amended in 1998. Mestre- Greve consultants prepared the element. Hearings were conducted in late 1997, with adoption in March 1998. The 1998 update satisfied Implementation Measure No. 2 in the Land Use Element that required an update of the Noise Element to reflect the City's land use and circulation plans. A noise ordinance was also adopted. Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation (OSCAR) Element - The OSCAR is a combined element, meeting State mandates for an Open Space Element and Conservation Element, and providing an optional Recreation Element. The City adopted the OSCAR Element in August 1986. Implementation Measure No. 2 in the Land Use Element requires an update of the OSCAR Element to ensure consistency of open space and park designations and policies with the Land Use Element. In 1996, the City Council approved a contract with a consultant to prepare an updated OSCAR Element. A final draft was prepared and received staff review and was anticipated to go to public hearing late in 1999. However, due to the adoption of a Voter Initiative Measure "S ", several areas of the OSCAR have required revision. The Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission held a joint workshop on the draft element in May 2000. The Parks and Recreation Commission gave further review to the document in July 2000. The rewritten element was discussed at public workshops before the Planning Commission in June and August 2001. Hearings were held by the Planning Commission in September 2001. In October 2001, the City Council considered the draft element and referred it to an ad -hoc committee for S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc b_'E IL `.t k.' isJ cep. The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 6 further study. The Element is presently being redrafted by staff, and will follow a decision on the North Park Village project in 2003 in order to include this project in the element if necessary. Housing Element - The current Housing Element was approved by the City in December 2001, and subsequently certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The City's progress to date in implementing the Housing Element is discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Safety Element - The Safety Element was approved in April 2001. This update includes information and environmental studies related to the West Simi Valley Alquist- Priolo Zone. The adopted Safety Element includes the most recent information on earthquake faults, including identification of active faults and policies on setbacks and development constraints. Also, current information on flooding and drainage improvement needs is included in the updated element. Progress in Implementing the Housing Element, Including Meeting the Local Share of the Regional Housing Needs Share of Regional Housing Need - The City's fair share for affordable housing units under the 1998 -2005 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) requirements is shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 CITY OF MOORPARK LOCAL SHARE OF REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS: 1998 -2005 Income Group Number Percentage Very Low 269 21.0% Low 155 12.0% Moderate 383 30.0% High 448 36.0% TOTAL 1,255 100.0% Progress in Meeting Local Share - Table 2 is a list of housing units that either have been completed or have started construction since January 1, 1998 This table included number of units affordable by households with incomes categorized as eery Low (less than 50 percent of Ventura County median income), S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 7 Low (50 -80 percent of County median income) , Moderate (80 -120 percent of County median income), or High (greater than 120 percent of County median income) , based on estimated original sales or rental price. Units affordable to very -low and low - income residents were secured through development agreements with the City. TABLE 2 NEW DWELLING UNITS COMPLETED OR STARTED CONSTRUCTION JANUARY 1. 1998 TO AUGUST 30. 2002 Table 3 Affordability Project/ Very are not yet under construction, with expected affordability by Tract Map No. Low Low Moderate High Total Tr.4340 regional housing needs for all but very -low income households. S: \Community (Deauville) - - - 15 15 Tr.4637 (Mirabella) - - - 23 23 Tr.4975 (Greystone /Lyon) - - - 127 127 Tr.4976 (Greystone) - - - 160 160 Tr.4977 (Richmond American) - - - 109 109 Tr.4980 (Western Pacific) - - - 138 138 RPD 97 -01 (Archstone) 29 21 262 - 312 Tr. 4928 (Toll Brothers) - - - 216 216 Tr.5161 (Cabrillo) 4 11 44 - 59 Tr.5201 (Wilshire Builders) - - - 10 10 Total units (Percent of Local 33 32 306 798 1,169 Share of Regional Needs through 2005) (12.3 %) (20.6 %) (79.9 %) (178 %) (93.1 %) Table 3 shows residential projects that have been approved but are not yet under construction, with expected affordability by household income. With these additional projects, it is expected that the City of Moorpark will meet its local share of regional housing needs for all but very -low income households. S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 8 Program No. 3 in the Housing Element calls for a monitoring of progress toward compliance with RHNA by the end of 2002, and rezoning if necessary. It should be noted most of these projects have been approved as a result of rezoning, either through the upzoning of land planned from lower densities, or through the rezoning of commercial land to allow residential uses, as called for in the City's Housing Element. After all these projects were approved, only relatively small areas of land remain within the City to provide additional opportunity for rezoning for additional residential development. The City will, nonetheless, continue to seek opportunities to rezone land to provide for housing, where possible. TABLE 3 APPROVED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc ,h k � 0-,% r t Total Expected Income Tract Units Applicant Category Served High (Market Rate) plus 20 Very 5187 250 William Lyon Low /Low Mod units off -site High (Market Rate) plus 25 Low 5045 562 Pardee Units plus fee for Very Low Pacific Moderate (Market Rate) plus 22 5053 247 Communities Low plus fee for 15 Very Low Pacific 5204 37 Communities Moderate (Market Rate) Moderate (Market Rate) plus 7 5133 79 Shea Low plus fee for 5 Very Low Moderate (Market Rate) plus 1 5181 8 TR Partners Low Moderate (Market Rate) plus 2 5307 22 Colmer Low, 1 Very Low USA - 190 Properties Low /Very Low Seniors Total Units 1,395 S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc ,h k � 0-,% r t The Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 9 City Efforts to Remove Governmental Constraints to the Maintenance, Improvement, and Development of Housing Units - The City of Moorpark has taken the following steps to remove governmental constraints that hinder the development of affordable housing units: 1. Continued implementation of the City's General Plan, as discussed previously in this report. 2. Continued processing of Specific Plans that include affordable housing components as a portion of the project Development Agreements. 3. Continued revisions to the Zoning Ordinance to allow more flexibility in affordable housing projects. 4. Compliance with the affordable housing provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law. 5. Use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for housing services in lower income neighborhoods. 6. Provision of priority processing to projects that include affordability components. 7. Support of changes of land use designation from non- residential to residential uses with high to very -high density under Residential Planned Development provisions. 8. Support of upzoning of land planned for lower residential densities 9. Support of density bonuses for residential projects that provide an affordability component within the project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive and file the report. 2. Direct staff to forward a copy of this report to: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Department of Housing and Community Development County of Ventura- Planning Division S: \Community Development \General Plan Elements \Annual Report \GP Annual Report 2002.doc J� #mot' ) i 1 TAM CITY OF MOORPARK __ _ ✓ . _ _ CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Bob LeMay, Acting Chief of Police DATE: September 10, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: California Law Enforcement Equipment Program (CLEEP) Expenditures BACKGROUND In October of 2001, the City of Moorpark received additional funds from a state grant, the California Law Enforcement Equipment Program (CLEEP), in the amount of $39,908. The original objective of the program was to provide one -time competitive grants to law enforcement agencies for the acquisition of high -tech equipment used for both criminal justice and emergency response. Subsequent to the original grant, an additional grant was awarded to the City of Moorpark providing it with this supplementary amount. DISCUSSION During the budget meeting for this fiscal year, the Council and staff discussed some possible suggestions on how to spend some of this money. Together with City staff, the department has formulated a list of needed items to be purchased. Item #1 - Hybrid Vehicle During last year's budget, the City Council approved adding a first -ever field report writer (Sheriff Service Technician), which is a non -sworn position. This individual's primary duties are to respond to and take non - emergency report calls, thus allowing patrol deputies more active patrol time in the community. CA0111-7%V11 Honorable City Council September 10, 2002 Page 2 During the last year, this position has been a success in the department's operation, and it is expected to play a larger role in the future. The field report writer has been sharing a marked pick -up truck with the cadet. On numerous occasions, scheduling conflicts have limited the availability of this vehicle. To address this situation, staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase /lease of another vehicle to accommodate both employees' workloads. The recommended vehicle is a hybrid (gas /electric) that will be environmentally friendly, while being frugal with gas consumption. A breakdown of costs for this purchase is as follows: Vehicle Purchase: $23,500 Monthly Maintenance and Replacement Charges: $ 1,494 ($166 for 9 months) Monthly Mileage Charges: $ 585 ($65 for 9 months) Subtotal $25,579 Item #2 - Radar Unit One (1) new replacement radar unit was originally scheduled to be purchased during last year's budget through other CLEEP funding. As the year progressed, it became essential to purchase other needed equipment instead. The City Council approved amending the grant program to purchase these other items. Now, with the additional funds available, staff would like to resume the practice of replacing existing units every five years by purchasing this new radar unit. Estimated Costs: $2,524 Item #3 - Computer Monitors Last year, the Police Department began updating some of its outdated and slower computer equipment, as well as providing new equipment for additional staff. To continue the process of timely replacement, the department would like to replace several 14" monitors with three (3) 15" flat screens and two (2) 17" flat screens for individuals that work with spreadsheets. Estimated Costs: $2,713 Honorable City Council September 10, 2002 Page 3 Item #4 - Alco- Sensor Printer Currently, the Police Department deploys three (3) ALCO- SENSOR IV intoximeters in Moorpark. When an ALCO- SENSOR IV is used in the field to test a person's blood alcohol level, the ALCO- SENSOR IV records the results. The current practice is to handwrite the results in a log. The log must be presented as evidence each time an ALCO- SENSOR is utilized in determining an individual's blood alcohol level. Several deputies mentioned that defense attorneys are attacking the current practice. To reduce the possibility of human error, the Police Department proposes purchase of a printer for the ALCO- SENSOR. This way, the information can be captured and then downloaded directly to the printer. This should eliminate the possibility of human error that is now being challenged by defense attorneys. Estimated Costs: $600 Item #5 - Automated External Defibrillator To increase the number of Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) in Ventura County, the City is exploring the feasibility of placing AEDs in City facilities where large numbers of people or at -risk citizens gather (such as the city hall, community center, recreation center, and senior center). Staff is looking at funding and liability issues, as well as joint use (since the County plans to place an AED in the Moorpark Library) . As a first step, staff recommends purchasing an AED for the community center and user training. Estimated Costs: $3,281 Item #6 - Miscellaneous Emergency Operations Center Equipment Last year, the City began a major upgrade of its Emergency Operations Center (EOC) . To further enhance readiness, staff recommends purchasing additional tools: Computer for EOC 17" Monitor for Digital Copier Fax Machine (2) 13" Color TV /VCR Subtotal Director $ 976 EOC Director $ 174 $3,137 $ 603 Combo (2) $ 333 $8,504 Honorable City Council September 10, 2002 Page 4 Proposed expenditures total approximately $39,920, about $12 more than CLEEP funds. The balance can be paid with Emergency Management Division funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION (ROLL CALL VOTE) Approve purchase of listed equipment with CLEEP funds. ,.s %' x �3 t +rs TO: 07V 9 DATE: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Tv- Cm' or mooRPARK. CAT,TroR -,;TA City Coaneil Meeting ACTTON: at) Lc,V -eS 2 C C rec esmmer�da��s,_ Doty' Aire l�n tG Rv: Direct2V11f_1 September 10, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02) SUBJECT: Review and Consideration of Issues Relating to 323 Casey Road Regarding Grading, Retaining Walls and Driveway Installation BACKGROUND At the September 4, 2002 City Council meeting Mr. Andrade, of the Los Angeles City- County Native American Indian Commission, spoke to the City Council regarding problems that the residents at 323 Casey Road were having relative to improvements which they wish to make to their property. Specifically, concern was raised relative to the construction of a retaining wall and to the installation of a replacement driveway. The City Council directed staff to prepare a report regarding this issue. The 27,250 square foot property is located on the north side of Casey Road in the RE -5acre zone (minimum 5 acre single family lots) . There is one single family home on the site. On July 19, 1999, the Community Development Department issued a Zone Clearance to construct a 1 to 7 -foot high wall. The plans submitted as part of the Zone Clearance indicate that approximately 90 cubic yards of soil would be moved and the fill would be less than 36- inches. The Zone Clearance was issued subject to the requirement of a building permit and other permits which may be necessary, i.e. electrical, plumbing, grading, etc. The applicant submitted plans to the Building Division, which were plan checked and a grading plan was requested since the proposed grading exceeded 50 cubic yards. The applicant met with the City Engineer to discuss the grading permit requirement. No building permit or grading permit has ever been issued. Approximately one year later the retaining wall and the grading work have been completed and still there is 3;-z' SZI Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 2 no building permit or grading permit. A plan check is good for 180 days, after which it expires and the plans, following standard procedure at the time, were purged. Subsequently, the applicant decided to remove the existing driveway to the residence. Since there was still an open code violation case on the subject property the applicant was told to clear the violation before the City would consider approving additional improvements on the subject property. While a permit for paving or repaving a driveway is not required on private property an encroachment permit is required for work in the public right -of -way. Additionally, it appears that additional grading, without the benefit of a grading permit was done in the removal of the driveway. DISCUSSION Following a meeting with the City Engineer, the applicant's engineer submitted a grading plan for City review. The grading plan was submitted on September 4, 2002, more than two years after it was required. The plans were returned to the applicant on September 9, 2002, since it only showed the existing conditions of the site and was not a grading plan. Additionally, the applicant was informed that the plans were not on the correct size sheets (22 -inch x 36- inches). What our investigation has found is that the necessary plans have not been filed with the City in order to resolve the outstanding issues. What needs to be done to resolve the outstanding issues? The following items need to be provided to the City: 1. A grading plan, prepared on 22 -inch x 36 -inch sheet size showing the grading proposed. This plan needs to be submitted to the City Engineer and the double plan check fee paid. (Double fees are required when work is done without permits.) 2. A structural plan for the retaining wall needs to be submitted to the Building Division showing, in sufficient detail, in accordance with the building code, how the existing retaining wall was constructed and the double plan check fee paid. S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COUNCIL \Misc Reports \Tessier cc Agenda Report.doc Honorable City Council September 18, 2002 Page 3 3. Once the plan checks for both item 1 and 2 have been completed and the plans have been changed to meet code requirements, the grading permit, encroachment permit and building permit can be issued. 4. After the issuance of a grading permit, encroachment permit and building permit any grading and /or construction shown on the plans that remains to be done can be performed and inspected by Building and /or Engineering staff. 5. Upon satisfactory completion of the work permitted the City will sign off on the permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Receive and file. S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COUNCIL \Misc Reports \Tessier cc Agenda Report.doc :..$ 1b�r 1 Ali of AC MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT To: The Honorable City Council From: Kenneth Gilbert, Director of Public Works Date: September 11, 2002 (Council Meeting of 9- 18 -02) SUBJECT: A Resolution Designating the Intersection of Millard Street and Roberts Avenue to be a Stop Intersection and Directing the Placement of STOP signs at All Entrances Thereto DISCUSSION A. Committee Discussion At a recent meeting of the Transportation and Streets Committee, traffic issues in the vicinity of the subject intersection were discussed. It was the recommendation of the Committee that a three -way STOP be approved for the subject intersection. B. Traffic Conditions Certain conditions exist at and in the vicinity of the subject intersection, which, in the view of staff, justify the installation of a three -way STOP at said intersection. Those conditions are set forth in the attached Resolution and re- stated here as follows: 1. Millard Street is a local street designed to primarily serve the residents of the immediate residential neighborhood; 2. Millard Street is used by non -local traffic as a short- cut route to and from destinations outside of the immediate residential neighborhood; 3. Said use generates traffic volumes at the Intersection in excess of the traffic volume typically found on a residential street; Stop_0209c fj 12 hey F?e S @A 'l., ai' +�.` A�,.t Li' Stop: Millard Street / Roberts Avenue September 11, 2002 Page 2 4. There is an entrance to a school located in the vicinity of the Intersection; 5. There is also a School Bus stop located in the vicinity of the Intersection; 6. The Intersection also lies on a pedestrian "Route to School ". C. Yellow Crosswalks If the subject Resolution is adopted, it is the intent of staff to install yellow crosswalks at the subject intersection. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No 2002- Attachments Exhibit 1: Resolution stop_0209c RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE INTERSECTION OF MILLARD STREET AND ROBERTS AVENUE TO BE A STOP INTERSECTION AND DIRECTING THE PLACEMENT OF STOP SIGNS AT ALL ENTRANCES THERETO WHEREAS, Section 21354 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) authorizes the City to designate any intersection under its jurisdiction a stop intersection and erect STOP signs at one or more entrances thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that in order to better provide for the safe movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the vicinity of the intersection of Millard Street and Roberts Avenue, it is necessary install certain STOP signs. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That certain conditions exist at and in the vicinity of the intersection of Millard Street and Roberts Avenue (herein "Intersection ") which justify the placement of STOP signs, said conditions being summarized as follows: a. Millard Street is a local street designed to primarily serve the residents of the immediate residential neighborhood; b. Millard Street is used by non -local traffic as a short- cut route to and from destinations outside of the immediate residential neighborhood; c. Said use generates traffic volumes at the Intersection in excess of the traffic volume typically found on a residential street; d. There is an entrance to a school located in the vicinity of the Intersection; e. There is also a School Bus stop located in the vicinity of the Intersection; f. The Intersection also lies on a pedestrian "Route to School "; g. These and other factors are causes for the generation of a high volume of school -age pedestrians in the vicinity of the Intersection. Resolution No. 2002 - Page 2 SECTION 2. That the intersection of Millard Street and Roberts Avenue, as identified on Exhibit `A' attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby designated a stop intersection and that STOP signs shall be erected at all entrances thereto. SECTION 3. That the City Manager is hereby directed to provide for the installation and maintenance of appropriate signs and markings to effectuate these requirements. SECTION 4. 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 day of ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk Exhibit `A': Diagram 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor G 3, [!� +LSD Resolution No. 2002 - Exhibit 'A' Legend S70P sk( N 7-3771"1-11 �.. �'•. ��-S. ••�•�• +++ —sr., -ate IGY.�tCC.,[w._`1su...xe.r,.f c`i'ry nr mooRTARX, CALTFnRNi Citv Cmincil Meeting ORDINANCE NO. 284 of eniPm)CtN Iii, awS L A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE "ENN: °t Or�iilla '�° OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING - ,841; —�=- CHANGE NO. 2002 -01 TO CHANGE THE ZrgNIPT.G- ----- /�-- DESIGNATION FROM CPD (COMMERCIAL PL ZJ;-- DEVELOPMENT) TO RPD -20 DU /AC (RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 20 dwelling units /acre) FOR A 9.48 ACRE SITE (ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 506 -0- 050 -185 AND A PORTION OF 506- 0 -050- 475) LOCATED ON PARK CREST LANE AT PARK LANE, ON THE APPLICATION OF USA PROPERTIES FUND WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing of the Planning Commission on June 24, 2002, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC- 2002 -426, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2002 -01; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Public Hearing on July 10, 2002, the City Council considered Zone Change No. 2002 -01 for a change in the Zoning Designation from CPD (Commercial Planned Development) to RPD -20 du /ac (Residential Planned Development 20 dwelling units /acre) for a 9.48 acre site located on Park Crest Lane at Park Lane (Assessor Parcel No. 506 -0 -5- 050 -185 and a portion of 506 -0- 050 -475) on the application of USA Properties Fund; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 10, 2002, the City Council opened the public hearing and took public testimony, and after receiving public testimony closed the public hearing; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing of the Planning Commission on June 24, 2002, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC- 2002 -426, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2002 -01; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after review and consideration of the information contained in the City Council staff reports and testimony, has made a decision on this matter. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: t,p Sri � 111 k�7i 3 1 Ordinance No. CC -284 ZC 2002 -01 Page 2 SECTION 1. Environmental Documentation A. The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for USA Properties Fund project serves as the environmental document for Zone Change 2002 -01. B. In order to reduce the potential adverse impacts of this project, mitigation measures discussed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the project and to the extent that they relate to the zoning for the site shall apply to Zone Change No. 2002 -01. C. A Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program prepared in compliance with Assembly Bill 3180 and considered in the various decisions regarding these projects applies to Zone Change No. 2002 -01. D. The City Council finds that based upon the whole record before it, including the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration represents the independent judgement and analysis of the City of Moorpark. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Zone Change will be in conformance with the City's General Plan, subject to adoption of a Resolution approving General Plan Amendment 2002 -01, and is in conformance with the City Municipal Code, including Title 17, Zoning. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby finds that approval of this Zone Change request is in accord with public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice and that for those reasons it is appropriate to reclassify the property to RPD 20 dwelling units per acre, as the RPD designation would provide a suitable location for residential land uses that are compatible with property located in the vicinity of the property. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby approves Zone Change No. 2002 -01, subject to the approval of RPD 2002 -02, changing Ordinance No. CC -284 ZC 2002 -01 Page 3 the zoning designation on the property from CPD (Commercial Planned Development) to RPD 20 du /ac (Residential Planned Development 20 units per acre maximum), as further described in Exhibit A. SECTION 5. The City Council hereby directs staff to amend the City Zoning Map to reflect the approved zone change. SECTION 6. That 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 sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, parts or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. SECTION 8. 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 order of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council as which the same is passed and adopted; and shall, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published once in the Moorpark Star, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined in Section 6008 of the Government Code, for the City of Moorpark, and which is hereby designated for that purpose. Ordinance No. CC -284 ZC 2002 -01 Page 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk EXHIBIT A: Zone Change Exhibit Map ZONING EXHIBIT MAP CPD TO RPD -20 DU /AC A APN 506 -0- 050 -18 and Parcel B of Parcel Map 5316 EXHIBIT A a / CTTV OF'MOORPARK. C,A1,TFORNTA ORDINANCE NO. 285 City Cnvancil N[eeting of �P� \'ntex- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE AFf:OF�1 MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOORPRRF AND VINTAGE CREST SENIOR APARTMENTS, L.P., CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (USA PR8YE- R � FUND, INC.) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark on June 24, 2002, did adopt Resolution Nos. PC 2002 -426 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -01, Zone Change 2002 -01, Residential Planned Development 2002 -02 and adoption of the project Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on July 10, 2002, the City Council considered the application filed by USA Properties Fund Inc. for the following project (APN'S 506 -0- 050 -185 and a portion of 506 -0- 050 -475): GPA 2002 -01, Zone Change 2002 -01, and RPD 2002 -02 for 190 affordable senior apartments located at Park Lane and Park Crest Lane, including a change in the zoning and land use from commercial to residential with a density of 20 units per acre; and WHEREAS, the City Council on July 10, 2002, adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project as having been completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA procedures; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark on August 26, 2002, did adopt Resolution No. PC 2001 -428 recommending to the City Council approval of Development Agreement No. 2002 -01 submitted by Vintage Crest Senior Apartments, L.P., a California Limited Partnership; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed hearing on September 4, 2002, the City Council considered Development Agreement No. 2002 -01; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after review and consideration of the information contained in the City Council staff reports and testimony, has made a decision on this matter. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Ordinance No. Page 2 SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Moorpark does hereby find as follows: a. The Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -01. b. The Development Agreement and assurances that said agreement places upon the project are consistent with the intent and provisions of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Development Agreement is necessary to insure the public health, safety and welfare SECTION 2. The City Council hereby adopts Development Agreement No. 2002 -01 (attached hereto as Exhibit A) between the City of Moorpark, a municipal corporation and Vintage Crest Senior Apartments, L.P., a California Limited Partnership, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause one copy of the signed adopted agreement to be recorded with the records of the County of Ventura within ten (10) days of adoption of said agreement. SECTION 3. That 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 sections, 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 order of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published once in the Moorpark Star, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined in Section 6008 of the Government Code, for the City of Moorpark, and which is hereby designated for that purpose. >4arzR- %� --') a. Ale i W 1 0 Ordinance No. Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September, 2002. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk EXHIBIT A: Development Agreement No. 2001 -01 Ordinance No. Page 4 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 THE CITY OF MOORPARK AND VINTAGE CREST SENIOR APARTMENTS, L.P. THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITHIN TEN DAYS OF EXECUTION BY ALL PARTIES HERETO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE §65868.5 Ordinance No. Page 5 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement ( "the Agreement ") is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF MOORPARK, a municipal corporation, (referred to hereinafter as "City ") and VINTAGE CREST SENIOR APARTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership (referred to hereinafter as "Developer "). City and Developer are referred to hereinafter individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreement's 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 sec. and Moorpark Municipal Code chapter 15.401 City is authorized to enter into a binding contractual agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property within the City in order to establish certainty in the development process. 1.2. Developer is owner in fee simple of certain real property in the City of Moorpark, consisting of approximately nine and forty -eight hundredths (9.48) acres generally located north of the Arroyo Simi and south of Park Lane and more specifically described by the legal description set forth in Exhibit A, which exhibit is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property "). 1.3. City has approved, or is in the process of approving, General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -01 ( "GP "), Zone Change No. 2002 -01 ( "ZC "), and Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2002 -02 ( "RPD "). Implementation of these land use entitlements is subject to a mitigation measures monitoring and reporting program that was approved by City on July 17, 2002 (the "Mitigation Monitoring Program "). (The GP, ZC, RPD and Mitigation Monitoring Program are collectively referred to as the "Project Approvals ".) The Project Approvals authorize a residential development consisting of 190 apartments on the Property (the "Project "). 1.4. By this Agreement, City desires to obtain the binding agreement of Developer to develop the Property in accordance with the Project Approvals and this 3 �, Ordinance No. Page 6 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. 1.5. 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 exactions 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. 1.6. 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 amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2002 -01. 1.7. On August 26, 2002, the Planning Commission of City commenced a duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement and at the conclusion of the hearing recommended approval of the Agreement. 1.8. On September 4, 2002, the City Council of City ( "City Council ") commenced a duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement, and at the conclusion of the hearing approved the Agreement by Ordinance No. 285 ( "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" or "the Project ". 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 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 in which the Developer has a legal interest is, and shall be, conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to be bound by this Agreement, whether or not any reference to the y � 4 1190 1#"- . /w Ordinance No. Page 7 Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired such right, title or interest. 3.2. Release Upon Transfer. Upon the sale or transfer of the Developer's interest in any portion of the Property, that Developer shall be released from its obligations with respect to the portion so sold or transferred subsequent to the effective date of the sale or transfer, provided that the Developer (i) was not in breach of this Agreement at the time of the sale or transfer and (ii) prior to the sale or transfer, delivers to City a written assumption agreement, duly executed by the purchaser or transferee and notarized by a notary public, whereby the purchaser or transferee expressly assumes the obligations of Developer under this Agreement with respect to the sold or transferred portion of the Property. Failure to provide a written assumption agreement hereunder shall not negate, modify or otherwise affect the liability of the purchaser or transferee pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to grant to City discretion to approve or deny any such sale or transfer, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. 4. Development of the Property. The following provisions shall govern the 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 the Uniform Building Code, including the Fire Resistive Design Manual, the National Electrical Code, the Uniform Plumbing Code, the Uniform Mechanical Code, the Uniform Housing Code, the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, the Uniform Code for Building Conservation and the Uniform Administrative Code in effect at the time the plan check or permit is approved and to any federal or state I�J 4J Ordinance No. Page 8 building requirements that are then in effect (collectively "the Building Codes "). 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. Timing of Development. In Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), the California Supreme Court held that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing or rate of development resulted in a later - adopted initiative restricting the rate of development to prevail against the parties' agreement. City and Developer intend to avoid the result in Pardee by acknowledging and providing that 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. In furtherance of the Parties' intent, as set forth in this section, 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 section shall be construed to limit City's right to insure that Developer timely provides all infrastructure required by the Project 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, subdivision Ordinance No. Page 9 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 Approvals and this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Subsequent Approvals do not include a final subdivision map or building permits. The term of any Subsequent Approval, except a tentative map, shall be one year; provided that the term may be extended by the decision maker for two (2) additional one (1) year periods upon application of the Developer holding the Subsequent Approval filed with City's Department of Community Development prior to the expiration of that Approval. Each such Subsequent Approval shall be deemed inaugurated, and no extension shall be necessary, if a building permit was issued and the foundation received final inspection by City's Building Inspector prior to the expiration of that Approval. It is understood by City and Developer that certain Subsequent Approvals may not remain valid for the term of this Agreement. Accordingly, throughout the term of this Agreement, the Developer shall have the right, at its election, to apply for a new permit to replace a permit that has expired or is about to expire. 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 conditional permitted uses of the Property from what is allowed by the Project Approvals; Ordinance No. Page 10 (b) limit or reduce the density or intensity of the Project, or any part thereof, or otherwise require any reduction in the square footage or 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 City -wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects or to all properties with similar land use designations; (e) control residential rents; or (f) modify the land use from what is permitted by the General Plan Land Use Element at the date the Enabling Ordinance is adopted or that prohibits or restricts the establishment or expansion of urban services including but not limited to community sewer systems to the Project. 5.4. Modification of Approvals. Throughout the term of this Agreement, the Developer shall have the right, at its election and without risk to any right that is vested in it pursuant to this section, to apply to City for minor modifications to Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals. The approval or conditional approval of any such minor 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. 5.5. Issuance of Building Permits. No building permit, final inspection or certificate of occupancy will be unreasonably withheld from the Developer if all infrastructure required by Project Approvals to serve the portion of the Property covered by the building permit is in place or is scheduled to be in place prior Ordinance No. Page 11 to completion of construction and all o: relevant provisions of the Project Subsequent Approvals and this Agreement satisfied. In no event shall building allocated on any annual numerical basis arbitrary allocation basis. the other Approvals, have been permits be or on any 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 City -wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects 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 Aareements. 6.1. The Developer shall comply with (i) this Agreement, (ii) the Project Approvals, and (iii) all Subsequent Approvals for which it was the applicant or a successor in interest to the applicant. 6.2. 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. As a condition of issuance of a building permit for each residential dwelling unit, Developer shall pay City a community services fee as described herein (Community Services Fee). The Community Services Fee may be expended by City in its sole and unfettered discretion. The amount of the Community Services Fee shall be Two Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($2,700.00) per residential unit. The Community Services Fee shall be adjusted annually commencing on January 1, 2005, and each January 1 thereafter 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 C � 301 .6 Ordinance No. Page 12 consumers within the Los Angeles /Riverside /Orange Co. metropolitan area during the prior year. The first such calculation shall be made using the month of October 2004 over the month of October 2003 and so forth each January 1 until all Community Services Fees are paid. In the event there is a decrease in the referenced CPI for any annual adjustment, the Community Services Fee shall remain at its then current amount until such time as the next subsequent annual adjustment results in an increase. 6.4. The fee in lieu of park land dedication (Park Fee) pursuant to the requirements of City Ordinance No. 52 shall be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit for each residential unit. The Park Fee may be expended by the City in its sole and unfettered discretion. On the operative date of this Agreement, the amount of the Park Fee shall be Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) per residential unit. Commencing January 1, 2005, and annually thereafter, the Park Fee shall be increased to reflect the change in the State Highway Bid Price Index for the twelve (12) month period that is reported in the latest issue of the Engineering News Record that is available on December 31 of the preceding year ( "annual indexing "). In the event there is a decrease in the referenced Index for any annual indexing, the Park Fee shall remain at its then current amount until such time as the next subsequent annual indexing results in an increase. 6.5. As a condition of the issuance of a building permit for each residential unit, Developer shall pay City a development fee as described herein (the "Development Fee "). The Development Fee may be expended by City in its sole and unfettered discretion. On the operative date of this Agreement, the amount of the Development Fee shall be two thousand seven hundred fifty dollars ($2,750.00) for each residential unit. The fee shall be adjusted annually on January 1, 2005, and each January 1 thereafter by any increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) until all fees have been paid. The CPI increase shall be determined by using the information provided by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for all urban consumers within the Los Angeles /Riverside /Orange Co. metropolitan area during the prior year. The first such calculation shall be made using the month of October 2004 over the month of October 2003 and so forth each January 1 until all Development Fees are �. v : 'j ov Ordinance No. Page 13 paid. In the event there is a decrease in the referenced CPI for any annual adjustment, the Development Fee shall remain at its then current amount until such time as the next subsequent annual adjustment results in an increase. 6.6. As a condition of the issuance of a building permit for each residential unit, Developer shall pay City a traffic mitigation fee as described herein ( "Citywide Traffic Fee "). The Citywide Traffic Fee may be expended by the City in its sole and unfettered discretion. On the operative date of this Agreement, the amount of the Citywide Traffic Fee shall be Eight Hundred Dollars ($800.00) per residential unit for all Citywide Traffic Fees paid on or before December 31, 2004. Developer agrees that the Citywide Traffic Fee for all residential units with a building permit issued after December 31, 2004, shall be Four Thousand Two Hundred Forty Dollars ($4,240.00) per unit plus the annual indexing as hereinafter specified. Commencing January 1, 2006, and annually thereafter, the Citywide Traffic Fee shall be increased to reflect the change in the State Highway Bid Price Index for the twelve (12) month period that is reported in the latest issue of the Engineering News Record that is available on December 31 of the preceding year ( "annual indexing "). In the event there is a decrease in the referenced Index for any annual indexing, the Citywide Traffic Fee shall remain at its then current amount until such time as the next subsequent annual indexing results in an increase. 6.7. On the operative date of this Agreement Developer shall pay all outstanding City processing and environmental processing costs related to the project and preparation of this Agreement. 6.8. Developer hereby waives any right it may have under California Government Code Section 65915 et. Seq., or any successor thereto, or any provision of federal, State, or City laws or regulations for application or use of any density bonus that would increase the number of residential units approved for this project to exceed a total of One Hundred Ninety (190) dwelling units. 6.9. Developer agrees for the life of the Project to cast affirmative ballots for the increase of any assessments for existing assessment districts for the maintenance C 1 4 -4 Ordinance No. Page 14 of parkway and median landscaping, street lighting, and parks conferring special benefits, and for the formation of any new assessment district for the purposes listed above in order to supplement then existing assessments upon properties within the Project. Developer also agrees to add this language to any Regulatory Agreement as part of the sale of any revenue bonds issued by the City for this Project. 6.10 Developer, in consideration for a density bonus obtained through the Project Approvals that is greater than would otherwise be available, agrees to guarantee the affordability of one hundred percent (1000) of all residential units for the life of the Project as follows: 48 units at very low income (500 of median income) and 142 units at low income (60% of median income). A minimum of twelve (12) two- bedroom units shall be occupied by qualified very low income tenants at all times for the life of the Project. The method of selecting eligible tenants, tenant eligibility requirements, the respective roles of the City and the Developer and any other items determined necessary by the City shall be set forth in an Affordable Housing Implementation and Rental Restriction Plan (the "Plan "). The Plan shall restrict the rents of all one hundred ninety (190) units as referenced above and shall be consistent with this Agreement and approved by the City Council in its sole and unfettered discretion prior to the final inspection and occupancy approval for the first residential unit in the Project. The Developer and City shall, prior to the occupancy of the first residential unit for the Project, execute an Affordable Housing Agreement that incorporates the Plan in total and is consistent with this Agreement. Developer agrees to the extent permitted by applicable state and federal law to grant priority to eligible Moorpark residents for the life of the Project. Developer shall pay the City's direct costs for preparation and review of the Plan and the Affordable Housing Agreement, up to a maximum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) . By mutual agreement of Developer and City in lieu of the aforementioned Affordable Housing Agreement, these provisions may be incorporated into the Regulatory Agreement if revenue bonds are issued by the City for this Project. In addition, the Developer agrees not to convert the Project to for -sale condominiums, community apartments, Ordinance No. Page 15 planned development, stock cooperative, or other common interest development, or as congregate care or assisted living facility for the life of the Project. 6.11. 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. 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 said fee is imposed on similarly situated properties. Developer further agrees to not protest these fees as may be authorized by Section 66000, et. Seq. of the California Government Code and statutes amendatory or supplementary thereto or any other applicable state or federal law. 6.12 Developer shall construct Park Lane per modified Ventura County Standard Plate B -3 -C, 68 feet right -of- way; containing 52 feet of roadway (curb face to curb face), 8 feet wide parkways containing 5 feet wide sidewalks located 6 inches from the right -of -way. This will include all portions of existing Park Lane that do not conform to this section. Developer shall demonstrate conformance to ADA access requirements at all locations including driveway locations. Prior to approval of the Park Lane improvement plans, an ADA plan shall be reviewed, approved by the City Engineer and held on file to show conformance to those requirements. Improvement plans will detail all locations where utilities or other improvements conflict with normal walk locations and that the plans conform to the City's requirements. Developer shall reconstruct any broken sidewalk, curb and gutter, and street pavement from the Project to Los Angeles Avenue and repave any portions of Park Lane to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Street sections shall be designed for a 50 -year life. 6.13 Developer agrees that in the event the cable television services or their equivalent are provided to the Project under collective arrangement or any collective means other than by a City Cable Franchisee (including, but not limited to, programming provided over a wireless or satellite system contained within the Project), the apartment management entity shall pay C . aA Ordinance No. Page 16 monthly to City an access fee of five percent (50) of gross revenue generated by the provision of those services, or the highest franchise fee required from any City Cable Franchisee, whichever is greater. "Gross revenue" is as defined in Chapter 5.06 of the Moorpark Municipal Code and any successor amendment or supplementary provision thereto. Developer further agrees that in the event cable television services or their equivalent are provided to the Project by any means other than by a City Cable Franchisee, that the City's government channel shall be available to all units as part of any such service on the same basis as if the Project was served by a City Cable Franchisee. Developer also agrees to add this language to any Regulatory Agreement as part of the sale of any revenue bonds issued by the City for this Project. 6.14 Developer agrees that any fees and payments pursuant to this Agreement 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, or any other applicable state or federal law. 6.15 Developer agrees that as a condition of issuance of a building permit for each residential unit on or after January 1, 2005, it shall pay the then applicable Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution (AOC) Fee less One Thousand Fifty -two Dollars ($1,052.00) for each residential unit so long as the payment of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00), as specified in Subsection 7.2 of this Agreement, has been paid on or before December 31, 2004. Developer agrees this is in addition to the AOC amount specified in Subsection 7.2 of this Agreement. If the AOC payment specified in Subsection 7.2 of this Agreement has not been paid on or before December 31, 2004, Developer agrees to pay the then applicable AOC fee for all residential units prior to issuance of building permits. 6.16 Developer agrees prior to issuance of any grading or building permit for the Project, to enter into an agreement with City to pay City each year Project is otherwise exempt from the payment of any portion or all of the real secured and unsecured property taxes on the Property the amount the City would have received if the Project was not exempt from said payment of property Ordinance No. Page 17 taxes. The agreement shall include but not be limited to: A. If Project is sold or transferred to another entity, the fee amount shall increase based on the new value of the property as if it was reassessed consistent with applicable laws. B. The first year amount shall be Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) . In the event payment of the first year amount occurs after December 31, 2004, the first year amount shall increase by one percent (1 %) for each six -month period or any portion thereof until paid. C. The payment amount shall increase two percent (2 %) each year above the prior year amount except as noted in A., above. In no event shall there be a decrease in the amount paid in any year compared to the prior year. D. Payments shall be made twice each year on dates as mutually agreed upon with provisions for penalties and interest in the event of late or non - payment. 6.17 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 Mitigation Monitoring Program. 7. Citv Aareements. 7.1. City shall process in an expedited manner to the extent possible all plan checking, excavation, grading, building, encroachment and street improvement permits, certificates of occupancy, utility connection authorizations, and other ministerial permits or approvals necessary, convenient or appropriate for the grading, excavation, construction, development, improvement, use and occupancy of the Project. 7.2. City agrees that the Developer's payment of the Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution (AOC) Fee for the project shall be in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) payable prior to issuance of the first building permit for the project so long as the building permits for all residential units in the ti n —117,1 Ordinance No. Page 18 Project are issued on or before December 31, 2004. Developer shall pay the AOC Fee for each residential unit as specified in Subsection 6.15 of this Agreement for building permits issued after January 1, 2005. 7.3 City agrees that the Developer's payment of the Traffic Systems Management (TSM) Fee shall be in the amount of Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) for each residential dwelling unit payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for each unit. 7.4 City agrees to allow certain modifications to the City Zoning Code and development standards as follows: A. Allow the project to be built with a 1:1 parking ratio with a total of 190 parking spaces required on site. B. Allow the project to be built at a density of twenty (20) units per acre. C. Allow reduction in Park Fees and Citywide Traffic Fees and payment of the Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fees at the commercial fee rate so long as the Project has all building permits issued for residential units issued prior to December 31, 2004. 7.5 City agrees that the Citywide Traffic Fee shall be in the amount of Eight Hundred Dollars ($800.00) for each residential unit payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for each residential unit for any building permit issued on or before December 31, 2004. The Citywide Traffic Fee for all units with a building permit issued after December 31, 2004, shall be Four Thousand Two Hundred Forty Dollars ($4,240.00) plus the annual indexing as specified in Subsection 6.6 of this Agreement. 7.6 City agrees that in lieu of preparing a traffic study for the Project and submitting same for review by the City Engineer, the Developer shall pay Four Thousand Dollars ($4,000.00) for impacted intersections. 7.7 Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, in the event Developer repairs or rebuilds the Project consistent with the Project Approvals as a result of fire, earthquake, or other casualty, the following fees would not need to be paid: Community Ordinance No. Page 19 Services Fee, Park Fee, Development Fee, Citywide Traffic Fee, and Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fee. 8. Supersession of Agreement by Change of Law. In the event that any state or federal law or regulation enacted after the date the Enabling Ordinance was adopted by the City Council prevents or precludes compliance with any provision of the Agreement, such provision shall be deemed modified or suspended to comply with such state or federal law or regulation, as reasonably determined necessary by City. 9. Demonstration of Good Faith Compliance. In order to ascertain compliance by the 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 the Developer hereunder or render this Agreement invalid or void. 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 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; (e) damage to work in progress by reason of fire, flood, earthquake or other casualty; (f) failure, delay or inability of City 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; (g) delay caused by a restriction imposed or mandated by a governmental entity other than City; or (h) 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 Property. 11. Default Provisions. 11.1. Default by Developer. The Developer shall be deemed to have breached this Agreement if it: k ,- _1 « Ordinance No. Page 20 (a) practices, or attempts to practice, any fraud or deceit upon City; or (b) willfully violates any order, ruling or decision of any regulatory or judicial body having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project, provided that Developer may contest any such order, ruling or decision by appropriate proceedings conducted in good faith, in which event no breach of this Agreement shall be deemed to have occurred unless and until there is a final adjudication adverse to Developer; or (c) fails to make any payments required under this Agreement; or (d) materially breaches any of the other provisions of the Agreement and the same is not cured within the time set forth in a written notice of violation from City to Developer, which period of time shall not be less than ten (10) days from the date that the notice is deemed received, provided if Developer cannot reasonably cure the breach within the time set forth in the notice, Developer fails to commence to cure the breach within such time limit and diligently effect such cure thereafter. 11.2. Default by City. City shall be deemed in breach of this Agreement if it materially breaches any of the provisions of the Agreement and the same is not cured within the time set forth in a written notice of violation from Developer to City, which period shall not be less than ten (10) days from the date the notice is deemed received, provided if City cannot reasonably cure the breach within the time set forth in the notice, City fails to commence to cure the breach within such time limit and diligently effect such cure thereafter. 11.3. Content of Notice of Violation. Every notice of violation shall state with specificity that it is given pursuant to this section of the Agreement, the nature of the alleged breach, and the manner in which the breach may be satisfactorily cured. The notice shall be deemed given on the date that it is personally delivered or on the third day following the day after it is deposited in the United States mail, in accordance with Section 20 hereof. 11.4. Remedies for Breach. The Parties acknowledge that remedies at law, including without limitation money Ordinance No. Page 21 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 or 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 the Agreement shall be limited to the remedies expressly set forth in this subsection. The remedies for breach of the Agreement by City shall be injunctive relief and /or specific performance. The remedies for breach of the Agreement by the Developer shall be injunctive relief and /or specific performance. In addition, and notwithstanding any other language of this Agreement, if the breach is of Subsections 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.9, 6.10, 6.11, or 6.15, 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 the Developer if it violates any City ordinance or state statute. 12. Mortgage Protection. At the same time that City gives notice to the Developer of a breach, City shall send a copy of the notice to each holder of record of any deed of trust on the portion of the Property in which Developer has a legal interest ( "Financier "), provided that the Financier has given prior written notice of its name and mailing address to City and the notice makes specific reference to this section. The copies shall be sent by United States mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and shall be deemed received upon the third (3rd) day after deposit. Each Financier that has given prior notice to City pursuant to this section shall have the right, at its option and insofar as the rights of City are concerned, to cure any such breach within fifteen (15) days after the receipt of the notice from City. If such breach cannot be cured within such time period, the Financier shall have such additional period as may be reasonably required to cure the same, provided that the Financier gives notice to City of its intention to cure and ,C� 4 ; -�- Ordinance No. Page 22 commences the cure within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice from City and thereafter diligently prosecutes the same to completion. City shall not commence legal action against Developer by reason of Developer's breach without allowing the Financier to cure the same as specified herein. Notwithstanding any cure by Financier, this Agreement shall be binding and effective against the Financier if it takes title to the Property, and every owner of the Property, or part thereof, whose title thereto is acquired by foreclosure, trustee sale or otherwise. 13. Estoppel Certificate. At any time and from time to time, any Developer may deliver written notice to City and City may deliver written notice to the 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 thirty (30) 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 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 ten (10) days after the Developer receives notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall render its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after the appeal was filed. The Developer shall not seek judicial review of any staff decision without first having exhausted its remedies pursuant to this section. 15. Amendment or Termination by Mutual Consent. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code 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 Developer. Ordinance No. Page 23 16. Indemnification. The 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, the Developer's performance pursuant to this Agreement. Developer shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City and its officers, employees and agents from any against any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this Agreement or any provision thereof, or the Project Approvals, or any Subsequent Approvals. 17. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18. Operative Date. This Agreement shall become operative on 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 five (5) years commencing on its operative date or until one (1) year after occupancy of the One Hundred Ninetieth (190th) apartment unit, whichever occurs later, unless said term is amended or the Agreement is sooner terminated as otherwise provided herein. Expiration of the term or earlier termination of this Agreement shall not automatically affect any Project Approval or Subsequent Approval that has been granted or any right or obligation arising independently from such Project Approval or Subsequent Approval. 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. 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. Ordinance No. Page 24 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 contains 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 the other Party in any respect. Nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as creating the relationship of partners, joint ventures or any other association of any kind or nature between City and Developer, jointly or severally. 25. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole benefit of the Parties and their successors in interest. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 26. Recordation of Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement and any amendment thereof shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of Ventura by the City Clerk of City within the period required by Chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code or any successor thereof then in effect. 27. Cooperation Between City and Developers. 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. Ordinance No. Page 25 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 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. Attorneys' fees under this section shall include attorneys' fees on any appeal and any post - judgment proceedings to enforce the judgment. This provision is separate and several and shall survive the merger of this Agreement into any judgment on this Agreement. 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. 1 . Ordinance No. Page 26 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, have executed this and City of Moorpark Development Agreement on CITY OF MOORPARK By: Patrick Hunter Mayor ATTEST Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk VINTAGE CREST SENIOR APARTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership Developer By: USA Properties Fund, Inc., a California corporation Its: Administrative General Partner By: Geoffrey C. Brown, President By: Riverside Charitable Corporation a California non - profit corporation Its: Managing General Partner By: Kenneth S. Robertson, Chairman of the Board I �.`o ,�.� ki p° Ordinance No. Page 27 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1: A portion of Lot "L" of Tract "L" of the Rancho Simi, as per Map recorded in Book 5, Page 5 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, described as follows: Beginning at a point in the West line of the land conveyed to W.O. Redden and wife, recorded July 3, 1952, in Book 1075, Page 191 of Official Records, distant thereon South 0° 03' East, 615.24 feet from the center line of Los Angeles Avenue 60.00 feet wide; thence, continuing along said West line 1St: South 0° 03' East, 810.02 feet to the Southwest corner of said land of Redden in the Southerly line of the land conveyed to John A. King and wife, by deed recorded in Book 754, Page 451 of Official Records; thence, along the Southwest line of said land of King 2nd: North 66° 00' 25" West, 273.75 feet to the Southwest corner thereof; thence, along the West line of said land of King 3rd: North 0° 03' West, 698.71 feet to a line bearing West from the point of beginning; thence 4th: East, 250.00 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: Parcel B of Parcel Map No. 5316, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California as shown on that Parcel Map recorded in Book Page of Parcel Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. y s�: e"� 'r;, ') T Ordinance No. 285 Page 28 EXHIBIT B To City: City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Attn. City Manager To Developer: Steven T. Gall, Executive Vice President USA Properties Fund 2440 Professional Drive, Suite 100 Roseville, CA 95661 -7773 ¢ 41 sbr, � ,