Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2003 0416 CC REGResolution No. 2003 -2076 Ordinance No. 294 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 2003 6:30 P.M. Moorpark Community Center 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. ROLL CALL: 4. PROCLAMATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS: 799 Moorpark Avenue A. Proclamation for National Volunteer Week B. City Manager's Monthly Report. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT: (AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, THE COUNCIL WILL CONVENE THE REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING, UNLESS CANCELED.) 6. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: (Pursuant to Council Rules of Procedure Section 2.8, Items to be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar shall be identified at this time.) 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. Regular City Council Meeting Agenda April 16, 2003 Page 2 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 9. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider City Letter of Support on the Draft Summary Report of the County of Ventura Open Space District Advisory Committee ( OSDAC). Staff Recommendation: Direct staff to prepare a letter to the OSDAC for the City Manager's signature and final language approval including: The City Council's support of the Draft OSDAC Summary Report and requesting the revisions discussed in the agenda report. (Staff: Deborah Traffenstedt) 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Consider Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission of May 8, 2002. Consider Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission of February 26, 2003. Consider Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of March 19, 2003. Consider Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of April 2, 2003. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. B. Consider Approval of Warrant Register for Fiscal Year 2002 -2003 - April 16, 2003. Manual Warrants 112252 & $ 32,240.97 112391 - 112392 $ 1,803.00 Voided Warrant 112269 $ (200.00) Payroll Liability 112468 - 112474 $ 7,958.22 Warrants Regular City Council Meeting Agenda April 16, 2003 Page 3 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued) Regular Warrants 112393 - 112467 & $ 51,329.19 112475 - 112479 & $ 140,812.08 112480 - 112507 $ 286,284.80 Staff Recommendation: Approve the warrant register. C. Consider the 2003 Legislative Program. Staff Recommendation: Adopt the 2003 Legislative Program. (Staff: Hugh Riley) D. Consider Bond Reduction for JIN Industrial Investment, LLC, Located on the Easterly Side of Condor Drive. Staff Recommendation: 1) Authorize the City Clerk to reduce sureties #128830 and #128831 to 100; and 2) Authorize the City Clerk to fully exonerate surety for IPD 99 -04 one year after this approval of the reduction of surety bond and upon written confirmation from the City Engineer that no warranty work is required. (Staff: Walter Brown) E. Consider Bond Reduction for Special Devices, Incorporated, Tract 5004, Located East of the Intersection of the 23 Freeway and New Los Angeles Avenue. Staff Recommendation: 1) Authorize the City Clerk to reduce sureties #0835103531861BCM and #B2881823 to 100; and 2) Authorize the City Clerk to fully exonerate sureties one year after this approval of the reduction of surety bond and upon written confirmation from the City Engineer that no warranty work is required. (Staff: Walter Brown) F. Consider Recordation of Quitclaim Deed of Easements for Disposal of Storm Water to Archstone Communities Project (RPD- 97 -1). Staff Recommendation: Approve the acceptance of the Quitclaim Deed of Easement and authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to record the Quitclaim Deed of Easement in the office of the Ventura County Recorder. (Staff: Walter Brown) G. Consider the Reduction of the Parkland Dedication Fees for the Affordable Unit in Tract Map No. 5181 (TR Partners). Staff Recommendation: Set the parkland dedication fee for the Tract No. 5181 affordable unit at sixty percent (600) of the market rate units. (Staff: Mary Lindley) Regular City Council Meeting Agenda April 16, 2003 Page 4 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued) H. Consider Report of Annual Development Agreement Review, Established in Connection with West Pointe Homes, Located on the West Side of Walnut Canyon Road, Approximately 3,500 feet North of Casey Road, on the Application of William Lyon Homes, Inc. Staff Recommendation: 1) Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation, and find, on the basis of substantial evidence, that William Lyon Homes, Inc. has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement; and 2) Deem the annual review process complete. (Staff: Barry Hogan) I. Consider Report of Annual Development Agreement Review, Established in Connection with Industrial Planned Development (TR No. 5004 /IPD No. 95 -02) Special Devices, Incorporated (SDI). Staff Recommendation: 1) Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation, and find, on the basis of substantial evidence, that SDI has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement; and 2) Deem the annual review process complete. (Staff: Barry Hogan) J. Consider Report of Annual Development Agreement Review, Established in Connection with 43.32 Acres of Land Located West of Gabbert Road, North of the Westerly Extension of Poindexter Avenue (A -B Properties and Southern California Edison Company). Staff Recommendation: 1) Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation, and find, on the basis of substantial evidence, that A -B Properties and Southern California Edison Company have complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement; and 2) Deem the annual review process complete for A -B Properties' Development Agreement and for Southern California Edison Company's Development Agreement. (Staff: Barry Hogan) Regular City Council Meeting Agenda April 16, 2003 Page 5 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued) K. Consider Adoption of Resolution, Amending the Fiscal Year 2002/2003 Budget by Appropriating Additional Older Americans Act (OAA) Grant Funds for Senior Center Health Recommendation: the FY 2002/2003 grant funds for Programs. ROLL Hartnett) 11. ORDINANCES: None. 12. CLOSED SESSION: and Wellness Programs. Staff Adopt Resolution 2003- amending Budget by appropriating $4,200 in OAA Senior Center Health and Wellness CALL VOTE REQUIRED (Staff: John 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) 13. 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 ho.irs 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). STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss CITY OF MOORPARK ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I, Maureen Benson, declare as follows: That I am the Deputy City Clerk of the City of Moorpark and that an agenda of the Regular Meeting of the Moorpark City Council to be held on Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, was posted on April 11, 2003, at a conspicuous place at the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 11, 2003. Maureen Benson, Deputy City Clerk ITEM 9-A- of d re .fl �n bn Gtdc ' I rznv (si c 4v SpA�-G. __�( -Lm r►'►l�ry MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager/ City Clerk -Z) ✓-T— DATE: April 10, 2003 (CC Meeting of 4/16/03) SUBJECT: Consider City Letter of Support on the Draft Summary Report of the County of Ventura Open Space District Advisory Committee ( OSDAC) BACKGROUND Attachment I is the staff report for the December 18, 2002 meeting, which provides background information on the OSDAC. Attachment II is a copy of a March 27, 2003, e -mail request from County Planning Division staff requesting Agency or Organization review, comments, and position on the Draft Summary Report of the OSDAC (included as an attachment to the e- mail). Comments on the Draft Summary Report are requested to be provided no later than April 25, 2003. DISCUSSION The Draft Summary Report represents the consensus of the 41- member Advisory Committee, following detailed discussion at eleven meetings over a one -year time period. For Council discussion purposes, following is a summary and explanation of some of the key OSDAC recommendations contained in the Summary Report and recommendations for revisions. OSDAC Summary Report Recommendations Funding: The OSDAC's preference is for a 1/8 -cent sales tax measure with a ten -year sunset provision. The primary reason cited in support of this option was that the benefit assessment district would not generate enough money to allow the Open Space District (OSD) to accomplish its mission. It was further noted that if a sales tax measure fails, a benefit assessment district could be proposed at a later date. The OSDAC member representing the Ventura County Taxpayers Association also expressed his opinion that the sales tax was preferable to the assessment district in regard to a 000001 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 more equitable shared tax burden. Dan Goodwin, County Assessor, also gave a presentation to the OSDAC and recommended the sales tax versus the assessment district. The OSDAC has recently been provided information that efforts to recruit a legislative sponsor for a 1/8 -cent sales tax authorization measure in 2003 were unsuccessful, due to the State's continuing budget problems. The OSDAC is scheduled to further discuss the recommendations of the Working Subcommittee (Attachment III) pertaining to funding and timeline recommendations, including the scheduling of the OSD formation and sales tax ballot measures for November 2004. There has been no specific discussion at this time regarding how the election for approval of the OSD and sales tax measures would be funded. Funding Distribution: The OSDAC has recommended distribution of OSD funds among three defined geographic areas: North, East and West. The OSDAC also recommends that the distribution of OSD revenues among these areas be population- based, and that a minimum of 85 percent of the entire revenue stream be used for acquisition purposes. The other geographic distribution method that received serious consideration was use of 15 Areas of Interest, including the ten cities and Los Posas, Oak Park, Bell Canyon, Piru, and Lake Sherwood /Hidden Valley areas. The disadvantage of this approach was that there may be desirable properties in some of the areas which would have limited funding because of low sales tax collection. The conclusion was that creating the three defined geographic areas with an equitable population spread provided more opportunities to fund a larger variety of projects. The OSDAC supported maintaining flexibility by not requiring the geographic distribution of the Lunds to be balanced every year, but instead allowing balancing over the ten -year life of the revenue measure and also allowing up to 10 percent of the entire revenue stream to be available to fund projects of special merit that do not meet the geographic distribution requirement. There are many details regarding funding that still need to be worked out. Governance: The OSDAC consensus was a strong preference for the Appointed Five - Member Board of Directors option, involving nomination by the City Selection Committee and the Board of Supervisors and then formal appointment by the Board. The State enabling legislation for the Ventura County OSD states that the OSD 000002 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 3 may be governed by: 1) an elected five - member board of directors, or 2) an appointed (by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors) five - member board of directors, or 3) the members of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors, acting ex- officio. The November 2001 public opinion survey, initiated by the County of Ventura, showed a higher level of support for the appointed board of directors in comparison to the directly elected board and the Board of Supervisors. Although the City Selection Committee is suggested to be used to recommend three of the appointments for an appointed OSD, the OSDAC was informed verbally at its last meeting that County Counsel had given an opinion that city councilmembers could not be appointed to the OSD board. Special enabling State legislation would be required to permit this. For example, the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) and the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) have specific enabling provisions in State law to permit councilmember appointment to those Commissions. Advisory Committees: The OSDAC is recommending, that regardless of the governance option selected, Advisory Committees should continue to be utilized (one fiscal and one diverse and geographically balanced). This approach is considered necessary, because there is no predetermined list of projects to be funded by the OSD. Examples were discussed of two Bay Area open space agencies which each have appointed 17- member advisory committees. Open space agencies which have rejected the advisory committee concept include those which were approved by a ballot measure that had line item detail regarding future projects and funding. "Pass Through" Agency: The OSDAC is recommending that the OSD primarily function as a "pass through" agency in that the OSD would collect the tax revenue, approve the projects for funding, and then distribute the funding to appropriate agencies or organizations. Details have yet to be worked out regarding how the OSD will ensure that land or easements that are transferred to another agency or organization will be protected. This is one of the concerns that the Council expressed at its December 18, 2002 meeting, including that land funded for open space protection would not be subsequently converted to another land use. Staff suggested that this comment be repeated in the comment letter on the Draft Summary report. Eligibility Standards and Selection Criteria: The OSDAC has recommended Acquisition Eligibility Standards and Selection Criteria. Although the City Council's previous recommendation in 000003 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 4 December 2002 was that a recreation acquisition should receive a lower priority in funding, the overall consensus of the OSDAC was to maintain flexibility and allow the OSD to fund projects that meet the eligibility standards and the greatest number of the selection criteria. Given the "Parkland" definition, which includes a "primarily passive recreation" description, and the number of criteria that focus on natural habitat preservation, a truly urban park proposal could probably only qualify under two of the Parkland Selection Criteria (c. The acquisition has access from one or more public roadways; and h. The acquisition improves or significantly enhances parkland in an urban or park -poor community or it is deemed necessary to meet an urgent recreational need.). Recommendations for OSDAC Summary Report Revisions Staff is recommending several minor revisions to the Property Acquisition Eligibility Standards and Selection Criteria section of the Summary Report of the OSDAC. Legislative format has been used to show the recommended language revisions: Page 2, A. General Category, 1. Eligibility Standards. The OSDAC recommends that properties or conservation easements _..ndod by the Open Space District (OSD) meet all of the following standards: (Reason for change is the intent that the OSD function as a "pass through" agency and fund but not acquire land or easements.) Page 2, A. General Category, 1. Eligibility Standards. c. The use of the property does not create a significant 'and Use cotr:patbitit.y conflict among adjacent agricultural, open space or parkland uses. (Reason for change is the standard is too vague as written.) Page 3, C. Open Space Category, 2. Selection Criteria. One or more of the Open Space Category Selection Criteria should be revised to be consistent with Open Space Category Eligibility Standard b., which includes the following language: "...or the potential for restoration of the natural habitat." (Reason for change is staff is concerned that the lack of any reference to restoration of habitat in the Selection Criteria could later be interpreted so as to preclude acquisition of open space land which does not contain high quality habitat or high number and biodiversity of native species, but does present an opportunity for successful restoration and protection.) 000004 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 5 Page 8, D. Structure of Open Space District. Language should be included in this section or a new section of the Summary Report pertaining to requiring any agency /organization receiving Open Space District (OSD) funding to sign an agreement that restricts sale of land or easements and change in land use for projects funded by the OSD. (Reason: While staff supports the recommendation for a "pass through" agency, there is a need to require the agency or organization that receives the OSD funds to maintain the use for which the funding was received. The City Council had previously expressed a concern that a project that received funding priority for preservation of open space should not later be converted to a recreation use.) With the exception of the revisions discussed above and on the preceding page, staff supports the recommendations contained in the Draft OSDAC Summary Report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to prepare a letter to the OSDAC for the City Manager's signature and final language approval including: The City Council's support of the Draft OSDAC Summary Report and requesting the revisions discussed in the agenda report. Attachments: I. Agenda Report dated 12/18/02 II. E -mail from County Planning Staff dated 3/27/03 and Draft Final Summary Report of OSDAC III. OSDAC Working Subcommittee Preliminary Funding and Timeline Recommendations 000005 ATTACHMENT s• ITEM 9- A. C. of ACiF)N _ MOORPARK CITY COUNCI AGENDA REPORT BY: TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager/ City Clerk -�ID 5T DATE: December 11, 2002 (CC Meeting of 12/18/02) SUBJECT: Consider Status Report on County of Ventura Open Space District Advisory Committee ( OSDAC) and Recommendation on Open Space District Project Category Definitions and Priority for Land Acquisition BACKGROUND In November 1998, Ventura County voters endorsed the Open Space District program concept by approving Advisory Measure A. The County Board of Supervisors subsequently established an ad hoc Open Space District Advisory Committee ( OSDAC) on January 8, 2002, and approved a scope of work, which is included as Attachment 1 (as amended in March 2002). The OSDAC includes 41 representatives from various agencies and organizations, as summarized in Attachment 2. The City of Moorpark's current representative on the OSDAC is Deborah Traffenstedt. As an ad hoc committee, the OSDAC will have a limited duration and will be dissolved after it has provided recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on criteria for projects to be funded, a preferred funding option, and on the pros and cons of governance options. To date, the OSDAC has convened six meetings, with the first meeting held in April 2002. There is a ten - member Working Subcommittee of the OSDAC, which has convened five meetings since July 2002. Another important milestone in the progress towards creation of an open space district was the approval of Assembly Bill No. 1145, which was signed into law on April 17, 2002. This legislation allows the Board of Supervisors to call an election for creation of an Open Space District, and describes the governing authority to be five directors either elected, appointed by the Board, or members of the Board. d 00 0(1 6 Honorable City Council December 18, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 2 At the November 20, 2002 meeting of the OSDAC, the City representatives were asked to bring back a recommendation on the definition for "parklands ", in conjunction with defining and analyzing open space district project categories and project criteria. On November 5, 2002, the Board of Supervisors responded to a question from the OSDAC by voting that their preference was to limit the definition of Parkland /Recreation to only passive uses, such as hiking and bicycle trails, nature programs, etc. The Board noted that the voter - approved Measure A did not reference active recreation uses such as softball, football and soccer fields. Included as Attachment 3 is a copy of the draft open space project category definitions that were provided to the Board of Supervisors. The OSDAC discussed the Board's direction at the November 20, 2002 meeting; however, the representatives from the cities of Thousand Oaks, Santa Paula, and Port Hueneme stated their city's preference was to not prohibit future open space district funding of land acquisition for active recreation purposes. On November 25, 2002, the SanBuenaventura City Council voted to communicate to the OSDAC their preference for the parklands definition to be limited to passive recreation uses. The Port Hueneme City Council in a letter dated December 5, 2002, communicated to the OSDAC their preference that active recreational uses be included as an eligible project type under the parklands category for the purposes of open space district funding. Staff is unaware at this time whether any other cities in Ventura County have scheduled this issue for a City Council recommendation. The Open Space District enabling legislation, AB -1145, states that the formation of a regional open -space district in Ventura County is critically needed to help address the unresolved needs and development pressures in the Ventura County area with respect to the preservation of open- space, natural, and agricultural areas, and local and regional parks and recreation facilities. The legislation does not limit the parks and recreation facilities to passive versus active uses. DISCUSSION The question asked by the OSDAC is whether the definition of "parkland" should be limited to only passive uses, as shown on Attachment 3. Staff's intent would be to prepare a letter to the OSDAC that responds to this question as well as related issues as described below. 000007 Honorable City Council December 18, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 3 Staff's opinion is that the definition of "parkland" should not preclude the type of recreation use; however, lands to be acquired for strictly recreation purposes should not have as high a priority for acquisition funding as preservation of greenbelts and buffer lands between cities, and preservation of agricultural land and natural resources. This position would be similar to that followed by the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District, which has an Acquisition Plan that includes four acquisition categories: agriculture, greenbelts, natural resources and recreation. To summarize, the Sonoma County District Acquisition Plan generally states that the District's primary role for recreation is to acquire land and that the responsibility for developing, operating and maintaining recreational sites and facilities lies with appropriate local, regional or State park agencies. Recreation is identified as a secondary focus under the voter approved Expenditure Plan for the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District. Staff's opinion is that the letter to the OSDAC should include language to clarify that the City would not support the funding of an active recreation project in unincorporated areas of the County that serve as greenbelts or buffer areas between cities. This is intended to ensure that the City of Moorpark is not misinterpreted as promoting an active recreation use such as a golf course in the Tierra Rejada Greenbelt area. The letter to the OSDAC should also clearly state the City Council's support for a higher priority for acquisition of open space lands and /or conservation easements to preserve greenbelts and buffer lands between cities, agricultural land, and natural resources, in comparison to acquisition of land for recreation purposes. As previously stated, one of the stated purposes of the OSDAC is to advise the Board of Supervisors on criteria for projects to be funded. STAFF RECObMNDATION Direct staff to prepare a letter to the OSDAC, including a recommendation on Open Space District project category definitions and priority for land acquisition, as discussed in the agenda report. Attachments: 1. OSDAC Scope of Work 2. Summary of OSDAC Representation 3. Open Space District Advisory Committee Vision Statement and Project Categories 000008 ATTACHMENT I BOARD - APPROVED SCOPE -OF -WORK FOR THE OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (OSDAC) Revised by Board on 3119102 The following OSDAC Scope -of -Work expands on the principles approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 8, 2002 and is also based on Board directives and comments provided on February 26 and March 12, 2002. The purpose of the 'Scope' is to describe the goals and purpose of the open space district (OSD) and to clarify the OSDAC's purpose, role, duties and responsibilities so as to minimize any ambiguity as to the Committee's primary objectives. The Committee's responsibilities have also been separated into Board mandated and Board recommended procedures. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FINDING Based on the voter's approval (68 %) of Advisory Measure A in 1998 and the public's considerable support (up to 75 %) for the formation of an OSD (2001 Public Opinion Survey findings), the Board of Supervisors unanimously supports the creation of a Regional OSD in Ventura County. In recognition of this finding, the Board directs that a regional district formation ballot measure be prepared and submitted to Ventura County voters. GOALS AND PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 1. The primary goal and purpose of the OSD is to identify and preserve agricultural and open space lands that are under the greatest threat of conversion to other uses and fits an overall scheme of preserving wildlife corridors and natural habitat and contributing to watershed health. • Develop a capability to accept contributions of lands if no other agency is more appropriate. 2. The secondary goal and purpose of the OSD is to acquire land for parks that is under the greatest threat of conversion to other uses and fits an overall scheme of preserving wildlife corridors and natural habitat and contributing to watershed health. PURPOSE OF OSDAC The OSDAC is to advise the Board on how an OSD could be set up and not if it should be established. The OSDAC is an ad -hoc organization that has been appointed by and will serve as advisor to the Board of Supervisors. As with other ad -hoc organizations, the Committee shall have a limited duration and it will be dissolved after it has provided recommendations to the Board regarding the language of future funding and project ballot measure(s) and completed an assessment of governance options. BOARD - MANDATED OSDAC DECISION - MAKING SEQUENCE • Utilize the Board - adopted goals and purpose of the OSD as the basis for developing project and funding recommendations and assessing governance options. • Prepare draft open space and farmland conservation and park acquisition project lists. OOOOV9 Prepare OSD funding recommendations. • Assess the advantages and disadvantages of OSD governance options including governance costs, autonomy, accountability, etc. BOARD- MANDATED OSDAC RESPONSIBILITIES • Provide periodic progress reports to the Board regarding the OSDAC's activities, deliberations and progress. The written progress reports will be presented to the Board at least quarterly, or on a more frequent basis, if circumstances warrant. • Review and comment on staff and consultant work products including meeting summaries, research papers, analysis and other technical studies. Technical work that has been endorsed by the Committee will become part of a permanent record and should be included in an appendix to the quarterly status reports to the Board. The 'Committee of the Whole' (includes all representatives) shall collectively discuss policy - related issues and shall be involved in making the Committee's final recommendations to the Board. However, the OSDAC may wish to create a small number of 'functional sub - committees' that would identify, analyze and develop funding and project recommendations and assess governance options for later consideration by the 'Committee of the Whole'. • Develop funding recommendations that consider the findings of the November 2001 Public Opinion Survey and the input of the OSDAC members. Funding options that should be analyzed and discussed include a real property special assessment and a special tax (sales tax) increase. Develop a recommended list of projects that are representative of the project categories including, 1) the protection of coastal water, rivers and streams, 2) farmland conservation, 3) open space conservation, and 4) the acquisition and improvement of parks and recreation facilities. The project list shall consider the findings of the November 2001 Public Opinion Survey, the language in the OSD enabling legislation (AB 1145), and the input of the OSDAC members. Assess the advantages and disadvantages of the OSD governance options (i.e., appointed board of directors, directly elected board of directors, or the Board of Supervisors serving in an ex- officio role). The assessment should consider governance costs, autonomy, accountability, etc. and should also take into account the findings of the November 2001 Public Opinion Survey, the language in AB 1145, and the input of the OSDAC members. Although the OSDAC will disband after ballot measure(s) recommended language has been prepared, some or all of the Committee members could serve on their own as the nucleus of a ballot measure advocacy organization, if they so choose. In accordance with State law, the County of Ventura would not provide funding for a future ballot measure advocacy campaign. • The OSD Coordinator shall prepare and the OSDAC shall approve summary minutes of its meetings — the minutes should become part of the permanent record and should be included in the Committee's quarterly progress reports to the Board. 000010 2 One person shall represent each Board - designated agency and organization. If the primary representative is not able to attend a meeting due to illness, a schedule conflict, etc., a designated alternate member may represent the agency or group. However, in order to facilitate the business of the OSDAC and to ensure program continuity, the Board encourages that each agency or group should avoid rotating their membership among different representatives. BOARD - RECOMMENDED OSDAC RESPONSIBILITIES • The OSDAC's recommendations could be decided through a consensus - building process or the Committee could vote on individual policy issues. Another option is to utilize both consensus and voting procedures. Minority opinions on important issues and decisions should also be recorded and made part of the permanent record. • The OSDAC could consider using the services of a professional facilitator. The facilitator could be funded by non - governmental organizations (NGOs) and /or governmental agencies that serve on the Committee. • The OSDAC should appoint a Chair and a Vice - Chair. The 'officers' should work with the OSD Coordinator, the facilitator (if appointed), and the chairs of functional subcommittees (if established), and prepare the Committee's agendas. The Chair should also sign Committee correspondence. • The OSDAC should meet at approximate one -month intervals. The Committee should establish a regular meeting location(s) and a time slot that to the extent feasible, accommodates the schedules of the individual representatives. 000011. ATTACHMENT affimamiaw Open Space District Advisory Committee Representatives • Cities and County Appointees (16) • Agricultural Community (4) • Business Community (4) • Environmental Organizations (3) • Recreation &Park Districts (3) • Local Land Conservancies (3) • Farmland, Open Space and Habitat Conservancies (4) • Public Service Organizations (2) • Wetlands/Water Quality Organizations (2) 006012 ATTACHM-ENT -" MM Open Space District Advisory Committee Vision Statement and Project Categories (Revised: 11/15/02) Open Space District Vision Statement (Revised by Subcommittee 11115102) • The primacy purpose of the Regional Open Space District is to help preserve the natural and unique qualities of Ventura County (e.g., ridgelines, scenic viewsheds, wildlife corridors, natural habitat, agricultural lands, greenbelts between the cities, hillsides, wetlands, rivers and streams, and natural parksites) for the enjoyment of present and future residents of the County. caeGhaRi&M Open Space District Project Category (Definitions) (Approved by Committee 10/17102) • OPEN SPACE — This designation is applied to an area of undeveloped land, wetlands, rivers or streams which has substantially retained its characteristics as provided by nature or has been substantially restored, or which can be feasibly restored to a near natural condition, and which has natural habitat, wildlife, and scenic resources. • AGRICULTURE — This designation is applied to irrigated lands (e.g., prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland) and non - irrigated lands (local importance, grazing lands) that are suitable for the production of agricultural commodities and/or the raising of livestock. (Discussed by Committee on 10/17102 and Subcommittee on 10130102 and 11/15102 — Board direction on 1115102 generally confirmed this definition with the provision that active park and recreation uses should be excluded) • PARKLAND — This designation is applied to lands with scenic, natural and /or open space values, set aW aside to conserve natural, scenic, cultural, or ecological resources for present and future generations, and to be used by the public as a place for rest, education, exercise, inspiration, and passive recreation (e.g., hiking, bicycling, horseback riding, rock climbing, nature studies, afW picnicking and camping). iA Open Space District General Proiect Eligibility Standards (Revised by Subcommittee 11115102) • OPEN SPACE — Properties or conservation easements acquired by the OSD must meet one or more of the following standards: • Wildlife corridor quality • Natural habitat qualify • Watershed health contribution • Scenic qualities values 00001.3 Visibility (e.g., greenbelts, transportation corridors, scenic highways) • AGRICULTURE — Properties or conservation easements acquired by the OSD must meet one or more of the following standards: • Quality 9 Irrigated farmland (e.g., soil quality, water cost and availability) • Non - Irrigated farmland • Quality 1 Livestock grazing land • Watershed health contribution • Visibility (e.g., greenbelts, transportation corridors, scenic highways) • PARKLAND — Properties or conservation easements acquired by the OSD must meet one or more of the following standards: • Wildlife corridor gaaliy • Natural habitat gualit� • Watershed health contribution • Public access • Cultural /historical sigGaase values • Visibility (e.g., greenbelts, transportation corridors, scenic highways) • Scenic qualities values 000014 Q Documents and Settings\kje11bg\My Documents\ OSDACVisionStateDefinitionStand .doc Pagel of 2 ATTACHMENT = Debbie Traffenstedt From: Gene Kjellberg [ Gene. Kjellberg @mail.co.ventura.ca.us] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 5:50 PM To: Dmagney @aol.com; EMCLOANS4U @aol.com; Suel 1723 @aol.com; vcfb1 @aol.com; rguthrie @bialaventura.org; Carl @BioRC.com; larry@brokawnursery.com; mkahn @calattys.com; BOSWORTHE @Calbt.com; paulm @ccc.ca.gov; David Bobardt; Debbie Traffenstedt; Brian. Pendleton @ci.oxnard.ca.us; GBrown @ci.port- hueneme.ca.us; pstrautman@ci.port- hueneme.ca.us; tbartlett @ci.santa- paula.ca.us; LMAGELNI @ci.simi - valley.ca.us; dmackay @ci.ventura.ca.us; pcalderwood @ci.ventura.ca.us; jerryb @CommunityPoll.com; R4villa @cs.com; anngistiev @earthlink.net; garcia.jeffrey @earthlink.net; jwigert@earthlink.net; rockensteinp @earthlink.net; tandemstoker @earthlink.net; jmccaull @FARMLAND.ORG; edhayduk @hotmail.com; hardingco @hotmail.com; vcta @jetlink.net; Earl McPhail; Julie Bulla; Marty ROBINSON; Monica Nolan; joeggibson @msn.com; juliaosbomgourley @msn.com; cdmtowne @mx.ci. thousand - oaks.ca.us; mcharney @nchc.com; bentzsd @netzero.net; ovlc @ojai.net; slee @ouhsd.kl2.ca.us; rob- vcaa @pacbell.net; JCWilliamson @pvrpd.org; Kay @realestatemagic.com; karen.schmidt @sbcglobal.net; brand @scc.ca.gov; edelman @smmc.ca.gov; skei @smmc.ca.gov; eremson @TNC.ORG; wmillet @TNC.ORG; Adam. Eichberg @tpl.org; Rachel.Dinno @tpl.org; Ikyee @ucdavis.edu; srklittich @ucdavis.edu; bburatto @viceda.org; armbrustr @vcss.kl2.ca.us; bottorffm @vcss.kl2.ca.us; broesamlej @vcss.kl2.ca.us; edcjohn @west.net; Ileavens @west.net; Iynnekada @yahoo.com; virginialr @yahoo.com Cc: michael @aginnovations.net Subject: Agency and Organization Review /Comments ( OSDAC Summary Recommendations) Open Space District Advisory Committee Members, On March 20, 2003, the OSDAC made several additions, deletions and changes to OSD governance, territory and funding related issues. These changes have been incorporated in the attached Draft Summary Recommendations Report. Please review the Draft Summary Report and Geographic. Distribution_. and forwardyouur comments to Planning Division staff no later than Friday,_A rp it 25,_003. Your input will be reviewed by the OSDAC at its May 15, 2003 meeting. Please divide your comments into the following categories: o Report Editing Suggestions - The Advisory Committee has reviewed and reached consensus on major substantive issues - please limit this phase of your review to minor editing changes. o Agency or Organization Position on Summary Recommendations - If you represent an agency or organization, please also distribute copies of the draft recommendations to your respective city councils, boards of directors or governing boards for their review and comment. Please request your governing boards or city councils to forward their positions on the Advisory Committee's draft recommendations. o Does your agency (city or rec /park district) or organization support or oppose the proposed OSD, as recommended by the OSDAC? o As part of your response, please include your agency or organizations's position(s) on the issues of OSD formation, territory, funding, governance, and project definitions and criteria, as recommended by the OSDAC. o The format of your response could be a City Council or Rec /Park District resolution or minute order or it could be a "position letter" signed by the Chair of your governing board or board of directors, or the city manager, general manager or director. Please contact Jim Engel (805.646.7930), Joe Gibson (805.279.0601) or staff if you have questions about this review and comment request and the attached Summary Recommendations Report. Thank you for your input. 0001015 4/7/2003 Page 2 of 2 Gene Kjellberg, Senior Planner Ventura County Planning Division 800 S. Victoria Avenue, #1740 Ventura, CA 93009 Ph. 805.654.2455 Fax. 805.654.2509 Email. gene. kjellberg@mail.co.ventura.ca.us Nancy Settle, Manager Regional Programs Ventura County Planning Division 800 S. Victoria Avenue, #1740 Ventura, CA 93009 Ph. 805.654.2465 Fax. 805.654.2509 Email. nancy .settle @mail.co.ventura,ca.us 000016 4/7/2003 Summary of Open Space District Advisory Committee (OSDAC) Assessment and Recommendations on Open Space District Issues (Revised: 3/27/03) I. Purpose Statement The purpose of the Regional Open Space District (OSD) is to preserve the natural qualities of Ventura County (e.g., ridgelines, scenic viewsheds, wildlife corridors, natural habitat, agricultural lands, greenbelts between the cities, hillsides, wetlands, rivers and streams, and natural parksites) for the enjoyment and benefit of present and future residents of the County. II. Property Category Definitions These definitions identify the types of acquisitions the Open Space District would pursue: A. Agricultural Land — This designation is applied to irrigated lands (e.g., prime farmland, farmland of statewide significance, unique farmland) and non - irrigated lands (local importance and grazing lands) that are suitable for the production of agricultural commodities and /or the raising of livestock. B. Open Space — This designation is applied to an area of undeveloped lands, wetlands, rivers or streams which has substantially retained its characteristics as provided by nature or has been substantially restored, or which can be feasibly restored to a near natural condition, and which has natural habitat, wildlife or scenic resources. C. Parkland — This designation is applied to lands with scenic, natural, and /or open space values, set aside to conserve natural, scenic, cultural, or ecological resources for present and future generations and to be used by the public as a place for rest, education, inspiration, and primarily passive recreation. III. Property Acquisition Eligibility Standards and Selection Criteria Introduction This section includes the Property Acquisition Eligibility Standards and Selection Criteria that the Open Space District (OSD) would use to select future properties for funding. The standards and criteria are divided into four categories: General, Agriculture, Open Space and Parkland. The standards and criteria in the General category apply to all projects. The standards and criteria in the Agriculture, Open Space and Parkland categories apply only to acquisitions in each of those categories. • Eligibility Standards — The OSDAC recommends that acquisitions meet all of the Standards in the General category. However, it is only necessary to meet at least one of the Standards in the Agriculture, Open Space or Parkland categories. • Selection Criteria — These criteria are to be used by the Open Space District Board of Directors to identify worthy projects for funding. The greater the number of criteria that a 000017 proposed acquisition meets, the greater the likelihood that it would be funded. As noted above, all projects are judged using the General Selection Criteria. Thus, a proposed agricultural acquisition is evaluated using the General and Agricultural Selection Criteria; a proposed open space acquisition is evaluated using the General and Open Space Selection Criteria; and a proposed parkland acquisition is evaluated using the General and Parkland Selection Criteria. A. General Category 1. Eligibility St s. The OSDAC recommends that properties or conservation easement acquire y the Open Space District (OSD) meet all of the following standards: a. The property is available for acquisition from a willing seller. b. A capable governmental entity and /or non - governmental organization monitors, administers, operates, maintains and /or accepts liability for the property. c. The use of the property does not create a significant conflict among adjacent agricultural, open space or parkland uses. 2. Selection Criteria. The OSDAC recommends that all proposed acquisitions be evaluated using the following criteria. The criteria are not ranked in order of importance. a. Property that has the greatest likelihood of being converted to urban or other non- agricultural, non -open space or non - parkland uses. b. The acquisition is proximate or contiguous to existing OSD protected parcels or similarly designated lands. c. The acquisition has significant strategic value in meeting broad OSD goals such as protecting coastal water quality or preserving scenic vistas. d. The acquisition has a high degree of economic value (e.g., is eligible for matching funds from government agencies and /or non - governmental organizations). e. The acquisition has a unique time - limited opportunity value at the time of purchase. f. The acquisition is consistent with city and /or county general plan land use designations and is used consistently with that land use designation. g. The acquisition provides multiple benefits (e.g. valuable core habitat and wildlife corridor). h. The acquisition is part of a greenbelt or buffer between cities or unincorporated communities. i. The acquisition provides important watershed benefits or protection (e.g. protect riparian areas, improve aquifer recharge and erosion control, and /or minimize runoff). B. Agriculture Category 1. Eligibility Standards. The OSDAC recommends that properties or conservation easements acquired by the OSD include one or more of the following: a. Irrigated farmland (e.g., soil quality, water cost and availability) b. Non - irrigated farmland c. Livestock grazing land 2. Selection Criteria. The OSDAC recommends that proposed agricultural acquisitions be evaluated using the following criteria. The criteria are not ranked in order of importance. a. The acquisition has adequate soil quality to support long -term agricultural production. b. The acquisition has an affordable, uninterruptible water supply of adequate quality. 2 000015 c. The parcel size is adequate to support efficient agricultural production. d. The acquisition supports crop use versatility (e.g., site is frost -free and has minimal flood hazard). e. The parcel sizes of surrounding properties support long -term agricultural production. f. The acquisition contributes to the conservation of a significant regional or contiguous land base. g. The acquisition minimizes farm /urban conflicts by maximizing large contiguous agricultural areas and minimizing the farm /urban interface. C. Open Space Category 1. Eligibility Standards. The OSDAC recommends that properties or conservation easements acquired by the OSD include one or more of the following: a. Wildlife resources. b. Natural habitat or the potential for restoration of the natural habitat. c. Scenic values. d. Visibility (e.g., properties or lands are located adjacent to or in close proximity to greenbelts, transportation corridors and /or scenic highways). 2. Selection Criteria. The OSDAC recommends that all proposed open space acquisitions be evaluated using the following criteria. The criteria are not ranked in order of importance. a. The acquisition has a high quality of habitat type (e.g. high quality riparian, coastal sage scrub, coastal /intertidal zones, oak woodlands, etc.) b. The acquisition has a high number and biodiversity of native species. c. The acquisition has federally- or state - listed endangered or threatened species, candidate species, species of concern, and /or locally rare species. d. The acquisition has habitat connectivity (i.e., functions or could function as a wildlife corridor). e. The acquisition has proximity to the Pacific Ocean coastline or to at least one blue -line stream, intermittent stream, wetland, creek, and /or other watercourse. D. Parkland Category 1. Eligibility Standards. The OSDAC recommends that properties or conservation easements acquired by the OSD include one or more of the following: a. Wildlife resources. b. Natural habitat or the potential for restoration of the natural habitat. c. Cultural, historical or recreational values. d. Visibility (e.g., properties or lands are located adjacent to or in close proximity to greenbelts, transportation corridors and /or scenic highways). e. Scenic values. 2. Selection Criteria. The OSDAC recommends that all proposed parkland acquisitions be evaluated using the following criteria. The criteria are not ranked in order of importance. a. The acquisition has above average habitat value, to include a variety of plants and wildlife. 3 00001.9 WITIM b. The acquisition has unusually varied terrain, to include natural areas offering educational and recreational opportunities. c. The acquisition has access from one or more public roadways. d. The acquisition includes or potentially includes an important trailhead, a regional or local trail, and /or a vista point or overlook over a significant viewshed. e. The acquisition contributes to the protection of scenic views. f. The acquisition includes a federal, state, or locally designated, or eligible, historic or archeologically significant site, such as one listed on the National Register of Historic Places. g. The acquisition has proximity to the Pacific Ocean coastline or to at least one blue -line stream, intermittent stream, wetland, creek, and /or other watercourse. h. The acquisition improves or significantly enhances parkland in an urban or park -poor community or it is deemed necessary to meet an urgent recreational need. IV. Funding Introduction: This section includes the OSDAC's recommendations regarding funding sources for the Open Space District (OSD) as well as policies for the distribution of the funds. A. Funding Source The OSDAC's first choice is a 1/8 -cent sales tax measure with a ten -year sunset provision. If for any reason a sales tax is not feasible, the OSDAC recommends a benefit assessment district as a second choice. B. Funding Distribution The OSDAC divided the acquisition funds into two categories: 1) funds allocated according to Geographic Distribution, and 2) the Flexibility Fund. The OSDAC decided not to recommend that the funds be distributed in fixed percentages among the categories of Agriculture, Open Space, and Parkland. However, it is recommended that a minimum of 85% of the dedicated funding be used for acquisition purposes. Any remaining funds may be used for OSD administration, operations and maintenance. 1. Geographic Distribution. The OSDAC recommends that funds be distributed among three defined geographic areas: North, East and West (see attached map). The OSDAC also recommends that the distribution of OSD revenues among these areas be population - based and the boundaries of the geographic areas remain fixed for the term of the revenue measure. However, the population information is updated annually to reflect annual Department of Finance (DOF) estimates. The OSDAC recommends that the geographic distribution of funds be balanced over the ten -year life of the revenue measure. Thus, in any given single year, a specific geographic area could receive more or less than its population share but after ten years each of the geographic areas receive an equitable distribution of funds based on population. 4 000020 2. Flexibility. The OSDAC recommends that a minimum of 85% of the entire revenue stream be used for acquisition purposes and distributed by population among the geographic areas. The OSDAC also recommends that up to 10% of these funds be available to fund projects of special merit that do not meet the geographic distribution requirement. V. Territory Introduction The OSD enabling legislation states that the boundaries of the OSD could be: A) countywide (the same as Ventura County's boundaries), or B) include a part of Ventura County's territory. Recommendation The OSDAC recommends that the OSD be a countywide regional district — i.e., its boundaries are the same as Ventura County's boundaries and include all incorporated cities and all unincorporated county territory. VI. Governance Introduction The OSD enabling legislation states the OSD may be governed by: 1) an elected five - member board of directors, or 2) an appointed (by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors) five - member board of directors, or 3) the members of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors, acting ex- officio. On March 19, 2002, the Board of Supervisors directed the OSDAC to assess the features, advantages and disadvantages of the governance options to include costs, autonomy, accountability, etc. The OSDAC submits the following governance option assessment and recommendations. Governance Assessment A. Governing Authority Options — The OSDAC separated the three options into "independent governance" or "dependent governance" categories: 1. Independent Governance a. Elected Board of Directors — A directly elected board is considered "independent" because it has one main purpose — oversee a land conservation agency's transactions and administrative, operational and maintenance functions. Elected boards of directors are primarily accountable to the voters who elected them and therefore are independent of other elected officials. There are three current examples of (open space agency) elected boards of directors in California. However, none of the present examples includes a single- county agency with boundaries that are contiguous with the county boundary. b. Appointed Board of Directors — There are no current examples of an appointed (open space agency) board of directors in California. if an appointed board is selected as the governance option in Ventura County, the Board of Supervisors would appoint the five directors to four -year fixed terms — consequently it would be considered an "independent" board. 000021L 2. Dependent Governance �nm INd a. Board of Supervisors — In some cases, the board of supervisors serves as the open space agency's board of directors. This governance option is sometimes referred to as a "dependent" agency because the board of supervisors serves in a part-time (ex- officio) role. Several existing open space agencies utilize this form of governance. B. Appointed Board of Directors and Liability Issues — County Counsel determined there would be no unique liability issues for an appointed board of directors. An appointed board would be subject to tort liability under the Tort Claims Act in the same manner as any public entity governed by an elected board or the Board of Supervisors. C. Costs — The OSDAC determined there were two categories of costs associated with an open space agency: 1. Start-Up Costs A new open space agency with an elected board of directors would require significant start- up costs. Costs would include election costs (see below), hiring new staff, and locating an office and office equipment. If the board of supervisors governed an OSD, start-up costs may be reduced because existing county facilities and /or staff could theoretically be utilized — however, the county would likely charge the new agency for some or all of these costs. Start-up costs for an appointed board of directors is difficult to estimate because there are no current examples of appointed boards. However, costs would probably be less than for a directly elected board but would likely be more than a board -of- supervisors- governed regional district. • Off Year and General Election Costs (Elected Board Option). Estimated election costs could range from $40,000 for a general election to $400,000 or more for a special (off -year) election. 2. Recurring Costs Ongoing costs for administration, operations and maintenance should generally be similar for the three governance options. The three categories of costs would likely be more affected by the structure of the open space agency — i.e., "pass through" vs. "stand alone" agency (see additional findings below). D. Autonomy of Revenue Accounts — An independent board of directors may be viewed as more likely to use agency revenues exclusively for land conservation purposes. There may also be a perception that a dependent board of supervisors- governed district may be tempted to co- mingle dedicated revenues with other revenue sources, in a fiscal crisis. In reality, all dedicated revenues include language that requires the funds be used exclusively for the purposes specified in a voter (or property owner) approved ballot measure. The co- mingling of revenues (dedicated funds [e.g., intended for an open space agency] with a county's general fund) is prohibited. In addition, all regional districts are required to be audited on a regular basis. E. Governance Autonomy and Countvwide Land Use Perspective — Land acquisition decisions made by an OSD governing body could affect future urban settlement patterns. There may be a perception that an independent governing body's decisions could potentially be more problematic because the agency is separate from other government jurisdictions. If an 6 000022 independent agency pursues an ambitious land protection program, in some cases this may conflict with a local jurisdiction's general plan objectives such as providing affordable housing. However, most existing open space agencies have adopted acquisition plans that are based on and consistent with local county or city general plans. If government or non - profit grants are used to match local revenues, most grant administrators require that prospective land acquisitions are consistent with local general plans. Another consideration is the governing authority's knowledge and experience in leveraging local revenue sources with government and non - profit grants and other dedicated funding. F. Public Opinion Survey — The November 2001 public opinion survey initiated by the County of Ventura indicated that 60% of respondents favored an appointed board of directors, 54% favored a directly elected board, and 40% favored the Board of Supervisors. G. Governance Options and Revenue Eligibility — The managers of existing OSD felt the choice of governing authority did not have an effect on establishing a permanent (stable) source of revenue. Also, the selection of a governing authority did not appear to be a significant factor in obtaining intermittent sources of revenue such as grants. As an example, California's Proposition 40 includes revenue that is dedicated to specific open space agencies — in other cases, the revenue may be restricted to only local government agencies (cities and counties) using block grants or competitive grants. Some managers cautioned that grant funding eligibility may not be an accurate measure when evaluating the positives /negatives of different governance options. For example, individual land conservation grants have unique stipulations regarding eligibility requirements and it's difficult to make an accurate assessment that covers all future grant contingencies. H. Appointed Boards of Directors Do Not Govern other California OSD. Why? — With the exception of Ventura County, other California OSD enabling legislation limits their governing boards to either an elected board of directors or a board of supervisors. General managers of some existing OSD regarded an appointed board as an extension of county government and therefore subject to the politics of the board of supervisors. The two multi - county districts in the Bay Area concluded that an appointed board would be unworkable because of geographic and political considerations. Los Angeles County's OSD functions solely as a pass- through agency so the choice of the governing authority was not critical. Governance Recommendations A. Governance /Appointments — The OSDAC has a strong preference for the Appointed Five - Member Board of Directors option. if this governance option is selected, the OSDAC recommends the nomination and appointment process involve the Board of Supervisors and the City Selection Committee as follows: • City Selection Committee nominates three of the five directors and submits its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. Each of the three nominees represents one of the three geographic distribution areas (see attached map). • Board of Supervisors nominates two directors — the nominees represent a countywide perspective. • Board of Supervisors formally appoints the board of directors to 4 -year fixed terms. B. Ward (Sub- District) Boundaries — If a directly elected board of directors is the selected governance option, the OSDAC recommends that the boundaries of the five geographic wards be the same as the existing supervisorial districts. 7 000023 &@N Tud C. Advisory Committees — Regardless of the governance option selected, the OSDAC recommends that the OSD board of directors establish a diverse and geographically balanced Advisory Committee that includes representatives from the agricultural community, open space and habitat conservation agencies or organizations, cities, recreation and park districts, and the environmental and business communities. It is also recommended that a separate 3- member Fiscal Oversight Committee be established with a membership consisting of one representative (each) from the three geographic distribution areas. D. Structure of Open Space District — Regardless of the governance option selected, the OSDAC recommends that the OSD function primarily as a "pass through" agency — i.e., the agency usually does not own or manage land or other assets but rather selects land acquisitions and collects revenue and distributes the funding to appropriate agencies or organizations. It is also recommended that the OSD only accept land or assets if no other agencies or organizations are willing to accept responsibility for administration, operations and maintenance costs. CADocuments and Settings \kjellbglMy Documents\ OSDACWrkn gCmteRecommendations4.doc 8 00024 Open Space District Geographic Distribution Areas Geographic Distribution Areas ® National Forest Boundaries North Q Supervisorial Districts East Cities West jI —^� Dscianrer This map was created by ife Ventura Canty Resource Management Age cy. Planning avision . which is designed and operated solely for Die cuerronce of the Carty and related public agencies. The Canty does not warrant the accuracy of Ns map and no deacon involving a n* ofeconornic loss or physical injury should be made in reliance therein. Vadnra Canty Resource Managmeit Agency Plarmng Division Mardi 2003 000025 ATTACHMENT a OSDAC Working Subcommittee Preliminary Funding and Timeline Recommendations Wdf t Revised: 417103 On April 2, 2003, Working Subcommittee members discussed and analyzed two recent events that could affect the OSDAC's recommendations on a stable (long term) OSD funding source. LEGISLATIVE SPONSOR (1/8 -CENT SALES TAX ENABLING LEGISLATION) Earlier efforts to recruit a legislative sponsor for a 1/8 -cent sales tax authorization measure were unsuccessful. Because of the state's continuing budget problems, most of the state's politicians do not want to be involved in a revenue bill in 2003 including a local sales tax authorization measure. • The lack of a sponsor means the Legislature will not consider enabling legislation in 2003. Without the legislative authorization, a 1/8 -cent sales tax option could not be placed on the March 2004 ballot. COURT DECISION RELATED TO PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS AND OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION • Litigation initiated by property owners in Los Angeles and Santa Clara Counties had challenged the legality of funding open space conservation with benefit assessment districts. Allegations included: Flawed assessment engineer's reports Questionable legal nexus involving costs (property assessments) and benefits (can open space conservation special benefits be measured for individual properties) Flawed mailed "ballots" Court Decision: • A Los Angeles trial court recently dismissed allegations previously filed against the (Santa Monica) Mountains Recreation Authority. The litigation challenged the legality of recently approved assessment measures affecting properties in the Santa Monica Mountains. WORKING SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS The Subcommittee developed the following recommendations related to funding and the scheduling of a future OSD formation and revenue ballot measure(s) — the recommendations are prioritized. 1. Schedule Ballot Measures for November 2004 General Election 2. Concurrent Formation and Funding Ballot Measures 3. Sales Tax Increase - Preferred Funding Option 00002E • 1/8 -cent Sales Tax Increase (first choice) • 1/4 -cent Sales Tax Increase (second choice) 4. Benefit Assessment Measure (third choice funding option) 5. Sunset Provision — voters (or property owners) must reauthorize 1/8-cent sales tax (or benefit assessment measure) at the end of 10 years; 1/4 -cent sales tax must be reauthorized at the end of 5 or 7 years. Expanded Descriptions 1. Schedule Ballot Measures for November 2004 General Election • Pros: Historically higher voter turnout than for primary or off -year elections — increased likelihood of voter approval; if legislature approves 1/8 -cent sales tax urgency (enabling) legislation, would be first opportunity to bring the issue to County voters; more likely to retain OSDAC's momentum than postponing funding election until 2005 or 2006. • Cons: Sixteen -month interval between OSDAC recommendations (July 2003) and general election (November 2004) may negatively affect OSDAC's momentum. 2. Concurrent Formation and Funding Ballot Measures OSD formation and revenue measures are submitted to the voters simultaneously — e.g., on concurrent, separate ballots. Pros: Provides voters the opportunity to analyze and vote on formation and funding measures simultaneously; formation and funding issues are closely linked —difficult to consider the measures separately; opposition to tax increase has less opportunity to organize if there is no interval between formation and funding measures. • Cons: The OSD should be formed first — a funding measure should be submitted to voters (or property owners) only if the OSD has been established. 3. Funding Measure (Sales Tax) Recommendation 1st Choice, 1/8 -Cent Sales Tax Increase • Pros: Voters will more likely approve a 1/8 -cent tax measure than a 1/4 -cent measure; estimated $12 million annual revenue is almost double the estimated revenue that a $20 (annual) property assessment would generate; possible support of business community. Cons: Before a 1/8 -cent measure can be placed on the November 2004 ballot, the legislature must first approve urgency (enabling) legislation; if enabling legislation is not approved in 2004, next general election opportunity would be 2006; dedicated sales tax measure requires a supermajority (2/3) approval of electorate — difficult challenge. 2nd Choice, 1/4-Cent Sales Tax Increase. • Pros: Measure would generate about $24 million annually; state legislature does not have to approve special (enabling) legislation prior to the measure being placed on a ballot. 2 00002' • Cons: Dedicated sales tax measure requires a supermajority (2/3) approval of County's electorate — more difficult challenge than 1/8 -cent measure. 4. Funding Measure (Benefit Assessment District) Recommendation 3`d Choice, benefit assessment district measure • Pros: Approval requires a simple (weighted) majority of property owners instead of supermajority voter approval; no need for special legislation; not constrained to primary or general election calendar as is the case with sales tax measure. • Cons: Estimated revenue from $20 annual assessment about one -half of 1/8 -cent sales tax increase; potential opposition of business community. 5. Funding Sunset Provision Voters (or property owners) must reauthorize 1/8 -cent sales tax (or benefit assessment measure) at the end of 10 years; 1/4 -cent sales tax must be reauthorized at the end of 5 or 7 years. • Pros: Provides voters with the assurance that future revenues are contingent on implementing a successful and cost - effective land conservation program. Cons: 5 or 7 year sunset provision is very restrictive — provides little opportunity to build public and private funding partnerships; grant funding agencies and organizations may question the OSD's long -term commitment to land conservation. CADocuments and Settings\kjeIIbg \My Documents \OSDACWrkngCmteFunding3.doc 3 000028 ITEM I o . A. of A4 - -- MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION B- - M ark, California May 8, 2002 A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark was held on May 8, 2002, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the City Council meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. Chair Otto called the Planning Commission to order at 6:37 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Planning Commissioner Kipp Landis led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL: City Council Members Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Wozniak, and Mayor Hunter. Absent: Councilmember Millhouse. Planning Commissioners Present: Commissioners DiCecco, Landis, Parvin, and Chair Otto. Absent: Commissioner Haller. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Ken Gilbert, Public Works Director; Walter Brown, City Engineer; Dave Bobardt, Advanced Planning Manager; Deborah Traffenstedt, Acting Community Development Director and Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk; and Blanca Garza, Deputy City Clerk. Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 2 May 8, 2002 4. PUBLIC COMMENT: Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no public speakers. Mayor Hunter congratulated Commissioner Janice Parvin as the recipient of the Moorpark Chamber of Commerce Citizen of the Month Award. 5. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider Presentation on FEMA Study of Arroyo Simi and Related Matters. Staff Recommendation: Receive presentation by Ventura County Flood Control District (no agenda report). Mr. Kueny stated that a representative from the Flood Control District will give a presentation relative to the FIR (Flood Insurance Rate) Map and the impact of this process on current developments in the City. Sergio Vargas addressed the Council and Commission as the principal engineer of the Planning and Regulatory Division of the Ventura County Flood Control District. Mr. Vargas provided a background for the need to update the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map. He stated that the significant growth in the Calleguas Creek Watershed since 1986 has prompted FEMA to update the FIR Map to allow local communities to administer their own flood insurance programs. He also stated that as a result of this determination, the Flood Control District, acting as a local sponsor, entered into an Agreement with FEMA in 2001, for a flood insurance study within the Calleguas Creek Watershed. Mr. Vargas provided a schedule of information to the Council and the Commission that outlined the hydrology study currently underway. He stated that the Flood Control District has requested that the Calleguas Creek portion of the FIR Study be given high priority by FEMA. Councilmember Mikos asked if the high priority request was specific to the Moorpark portion of the Calleguas Creek watershed or a more generalized area. 000030 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 3 Mav 8, 2002 Mr. Vargas responded that the areas they requested for priority are Moorpark and Camarillo with the entire Arroyo Simi in Moorpark being part of that area. Councilmember Wozniak asked when the City could expect the numbers for the cubic feet per second (cfs) rate of flow. Mr. Vargas responded that the District is performing a quality review and can only release draft cfs numbers. He stated that 22,300 cfs is the number they have currently estimated based on rainfall patterns of the previous 13 years. Councilmember Wozniak asked if the affected cities will have the opportunity to comment on the cfs numbers. Mr. Vargas stated that a hydrology study is a statistical approach and the District tries to formulate a consistent, reliable statistical model. He stated that the numbers can be shared with the cities, but the results will be based on statistics. Councilmember Harper stated that some developers with approved projects in the downtown area have been told that until the flood map is approved they cannot begin construction, because the required mitigation will be to raise the height of the foundation pads. Mr. Vargas stated that the FEMA flood insurance program requires that the flood map be revised before construction can occur in the floodplain. Councilmember Harper asked if the side of the Arroyo Simi could be bermed rather than raising the height of all of the construction pads in the downtown area. Mr. Vargas responded that the District would be willing to work with the developers to accelerate the proposed improvements to the Arroyo Simi channel. 000031. Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 4 May 8, 2002 Councilmember Harper stated that it appears unreasonable to require the developers to now import large amounts of dirt to raise the foundation pads when it is intended, ultimately, that the channel will be widened and the potential flooding problem may no longer exist. Mr. Vargas stated that the determination must be made by the City, since each community administers its own floodplain program. Mr. Kueny requested that the City Engineer be allowed to explain one specific project that has been approved and what the options are for allowing that developer to proceed with construction. Mr. Brown explained that any developer who wants to pull building permits, currently, must utilize the current FEMA FIR maps. He stated that the difficulty for developers who have yet to design or complete the design of their improvements is that in that process the City would look to the issue of water surface elevations in the Arroyo and have them design their system accordingly. He stated that a developer could proceed using the existing FIR maps, but if changes to those maps occur mid - construction, then the developer would be in a very difficult position. Councilmember Harper stated that it does not seem necessary to require the raising of the foundation pads if the rechannelization of the Arroyo Simi will remove the flooding potential once it is completed. Mr. Brown explained that it is not a feasible thing that lenders would ignore the FIR maps, so financing would become difficult for the purchasers. Councilmember Harper said it has been suggested that an overlay zone be created to charge all development a fee for Arroyo Simi improvements and use those contributions to accelerate the funding and occurrence of the rechannelization project. ,00fl0 -32 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paae 5 Mav 8, 2002 Mr. Kueny explained that the problem is that the full funding is not collected until the last house is actually built in the project. He stated that in the interim the City could have an assessment district, but many of the contributors' projects are not yet approved. In response to Mr. Kueny, Mr. Vargas confirmed that the Flood Control District does not currently have the funding available to perform the rechannelization of the Arroyo Simi. Mr. Kueny requested that the City Engineer explain the Shea Homes project, as an example, and what is being done relative to the flood issue. Mr. Brown stated that the City is investigating with the developer's engineer to raise the level of the lots and the pads. He stated that they are dealing with the 26,900 cfs and the 22,300 cfs numbers. Mr. Brown went on to state that the Flood Control District's efforts to establish an accurate cfs number is essential as there are significant cost differences between designing for each rate of flow. Mr. Gilbert stated that once the rechannelization project is constructed, the full cfs would be contained within the channel. He stated it is a very significant project with a lot of right -of -way design and funding issues to resolve. Mr. Gilbert stated that the City and the developers must work with the data that is currently known. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Vargas stated that the estimated cost for the rechannelization project through the City of Moorpark is over five million dollars. Councilmember Harper asked if a partial rechannelization project is possible to protect the land that is in question on the north side of the channel. 000023 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Mooroark, California Paae 6 Mav 8, 2002 Mr. Vargas explained that due to the sequence of the construction it is not feasible to do so. In response to Commissioner DiCecco, Mr. Vargas stated that the consultant is lagging behind schedule in getting the project to FEMA. He stated that a conservative estimate for approval of the FIR map could feasibly be extended by 2 -1/2 to 3 -1/2 months beyond the projected January, 2003 date. In response to Commissioner Parvin, Mr. Vargas explained that the schedule for the capital improvement project is independent of the FEMA study. Chair Otto asked what is dictating the pace of the FEMA study schedule. Mr. Vargas responded that the Ventura County Flood Control District is providing data for the FEMA study, but that they do not have contractual control over the consultant performing the study, because it is being done with FEMA oversight. Chair Otto asked if the higher priority being requested for the Moorpark area really has any advantage, since we have to wait for the final figures prior to any potential developer benefiting from that information. Mr. Vargas stated that it would have an impact when the results are final, and it does give an advantage over other communities who have other components to be submitted, reviewed, and approved. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Vargas confirmed that the FIR map study is based on the environmental impact report that was done several years ago. He further explained that since that study did not include the various projects that are currently being considered in Moorpark, it should not affect the timetable for the 2005 -2006 project, because some of the right -of -way has already been designated by the Board of Supervisors and there is 000034 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paae 7 Mav 8. 2002 plenty of time to acquire the remaining land necessary for the construction. Councilmember Mikos asked how the existing homeowners in the downtown area are going to be impacted relative to the cost of their flood insurance and the status of their property. Mr. Brown responded that the FEMA flood insurance program provides for flood insurance for persons who are found to be within the floodplain. He also stated that if the floodplain were determined to be larger than it was before, those persons that were now included in the larger area would be eligible to buy flood insurance on a subsidized basis. He further stated that if those homeowners elect to refinance or sell the property, they would be eligible to purchase that flood insurance. Mr. Brown stated that, in the case of a homeowner constructing an addition to an existing structure, FEMA typically does not want to increase their exposure to flooding claims and, therefore, discourages increases to property values within the floodplain. Mr. Gilbert stated that the current FIR map has all of the area south of Los Angeles Avenue in the flood plain. He continued by stating that the new FIR map will possibly have a larger floodplain. John Newton, 165 High Street, addressed the Council and the Commission. He stated that it is important for the improvements to be accelerated and that it should be a formal request to FEMA to do so. He also stated that FEMA should be requested to release the surface elevation information as soon as possible so developers can proceed. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kueny provided a summary of affected projects. He listed them as being Colmer, Shea Homes, and two projects for General Plan Amendment, USA and LT. He stated that 400 units have been approved and there are potentially, 400 additional units. Mr. Kueny stated that staff will meet with the Ventura County Flood 0000 -35 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 8 May 8, 2002 Control District to determine the status of the funds for the project. Councilmember Mikos expressed concern that part of this floodplain development includes affordable housing. This item was concluded with no action required. B. Consider Goals and Objectives for Fiscal year 2002/2003. Staff Recommendation: Consider and discuss Goals and Objectives for FY 2002/2003. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Kueny suggested that the Planning Commission be requested to provide comments and ask questions relative to the stated Goals and Objectives. Mayor Hunter opened the item for discussion. Commissioner Parvin requested the status of the item to develop a plan and conceptual design for City entry signs. (Item G.11, page 11 of the staff report.) Mr. Kueny stated the City has not budgeted for the entry signs so there has been no progress. Commissioner Parvin asked if the City has considered working with the service clubs relative to this item. Mr. Kueny stated that there has been a proposal submitted, but he is not certain of the status of that proposal. He explained that service clubs typically participate when it is on private property at the site to introduce what clubs are available in the City versus the kinds of welcome signs located in the right -of -way. Mayor Hunter asked if the City would be open to a service club proposal to build one or more entry or monument signs on City -owned property, theoretically, in the center median, and if the Council approved of such a sign. 000002E Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 9 Mav 8, 2002 Mr. Kueny stated that it would be a Council decision. Chair Otto inquired on the status of the Business Recovery Plan. (Item G.8, page 11 of the staff report) Mr. Kueny clarified that this item is not relative to Economic Development, but is part of the Disaster Recovery Plan for the City. Chair Otto stated that his question is that a concern in previous years has been attracting and retaining retail businesses in the City. He asked if this is still a concern and area of focus for the City. Mr. Kueny stated that the City works on this objective without an adopted plan. He said attraction of businesses is pursued through the landowners and their brokers on an ongoing basis. Relative to the retention of businesses, Mr. Kueny stated that the City works in conjunction with the Economic Development Collaborative of Ventura County (EDCVC) on an informal basis and assists troubled businesses to refine their business plans. He explained that the City is also in contact with businesses periodically, to see how they are doing. Chair Otto suggested the need for a more explicit goal for this item. Mayor Hunter suggested that perhaps this item should be given more of a priority than the City has given to it in the past and include it as one of the top ten goals for the City. Chair Otto concurred with the Mayor's suggestion. Commissioner Landis commented relative to Items 19 and 27 (pages 4 and 5 of the staff report) . He suggested that Item No. 27, "Work with property owner to improve west City entry ", be a companion item to top priority Item No. 4. He stated that Item No. 19, "Utility undergrounding projects" needs to be addressed as it relates to the utility poles on Los Angeles Avenue and 000013 r Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 10 May 8, 2002 the improvement of the west entrance to the City. Commissioner Landis also suggested that another priority should be to relieve the traffic congestion on the 23 freeway. Mr. Kueny stated that the City does have a project for the utility undergrounding, which was delayed because of the energy crisis. He stated that the City is participating with Southern California Edison in a plan for the service lines from Gabbert Road to Millard Avenue to be undergrounded, which will leave only the transmission lines above ground. Mr. Gilbert stated that the entire process of undergrounding the utility service lines along Los Angeles Avenue would take approximately 1 -1/2 to 2 years to complete. Mr. Kueny stated that this is a long standing, multi- million dollar goal to underground the transmission lines along Los Angeles Avenue. He explained that the City will be working on a funding source in the future to underground the transmission lines. He continued by stating that the City is hopeful that Caltrans will establish a policy that will allow a raised Los Angeles Avenue median that can be landscaped to enhance the west entrance to the City. Mr. Kueny stated that the City has had discussions with the property owner of Specific Plan No. 1, relative to where Muranaka Farms is located, to address possible truck parking violations at the west entrance to the City. Mr. Kueny responded to Commissioner Landis' question relative to alleviating traffic congestion on the State Route 23 freeway. He stated that an additional lane on SR -23 is proposed to be constructed and completed within four years. In response to Mr. Kueny, Mr. Gilbert stated that Caltrans is in the design mode for the proposed project, complete with sound walls and the widening of all of the bridges from here to Highway 101. He 000OZ8 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 11 May 8, 2002 stated that Caltrans proposes to be under construction with this project within approximately two years. Mr. Kueny added that it is the City's understanding that any further widening projects for SR -23 would not be beneficial until design changes are made to the connecting Highway 101. Commissioner DiCecco commented relative to Item No. 6, "Conduct an Organization and Management Study (O &M Study) and prepare an implementation plan ", (page 3 of the staff report). He suggested that this item be deferred until the actual construction of the new City Hall, since most of this information will be utilized in the programming and the organization of the new facility. He commented that if the 0 &M Study is done prematurely to the construction of the new City Hall, it will be outdated information relevant to the needs to be designed into the proposed new facility. He also commented that he is an advocate of the senior center and teen center being developed on the same site or possibly on the site of the existing City Hall. Relative to Item No. 18, "Expand Poindexter Park ", Commissioner DiCecco suggested that Poindexter Park be considered as a skatepark location and that there is substantial community support for such a facility. Commissioner DiCecco suggested that the City consider and expedite a municipal code revision to allow second dwelling units for property owners. He stated that property owners in the City are transitioning to need housing for elderly parents to live with them. Mayor Hunter suggested that Chair Otto's recommendation relative to the heightened level of business proactivity and retention within the City be adopted and moved to what will become the list of the top 10 goals of the City. Councilmember Mikos suggested replacing Item No. 10, which has been accomplished with this evening's discussion, with something relative to Affordable 000039 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 12 May 8, 2002 Housing. She stated that it could serve a dual priority with Business Retention and the Arroyo Vista Park development. Mayor Hunter concurred that it can be done in conjunction with issues surrounding Arroyo Vista Community Park. Councilmember Wozniak stated that he is concerned that the Council needs to keep the top 10 priority items manageable for staff. He concurs with Chair Otto about moving the item that requested a concern for attracting and retaining quality retail businesses in the City to become a focus. Mayor Hunter stated that the City must enhance its proactive stance to pursue businesses to the City which meet the needs and the requirements of the City. Councilmember Harper used the Zelman project as an example and stated that the Council needs to be as proactive as possible in this regard, but they must be aware of the private sector economics that drive such retail development. Mr. Kueny stated that these comments will be provided to the Council in a formal session on their Council agenda so they can contemplate and finalize the language of the Goals and Objectives. Councilmember Mikos suggested that she wants to see the East Los Angeles Avenue widening project receive a higher priority. Mayor Hunter queried the Council and Commission for further comments relative to priorities on the agenda. Commissioner Parvin suggested a volunteer section for the City's webpage. Councilmember Mikos commended staff for the accomplishments that have been done relative to the Goals and Objectives. 000040 Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 13 6. ADJOURNMENT: Mav 8. 2002 Chair Otto adjourned the Planning Commission Meeting at 8:05 p.m. Mayor Hunter adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:05 p.m. William Otto, Jr., Chair Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk 000041- MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Moorpark, California February 26, 2003 A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark was held on February 26, 2003, in the Community Center of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the City Council meeting to order at 6:42 p.m. Chair Landis called the Planning Commission to order at 6:42 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Steven Kueny, City Manager, led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin, and Mayor Hunter. Planning Commissioners Present: Commissioners DiCecco, Lauletta, Peskay, Pozza, and Chair Landis. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Ken Gilbert, Public Works Director; Mary Lindley, Community Services Director; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; David Bobardt, Planning Manager; Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk, and Maureen Benson, Deputy City Clerk. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. t 11,1 • Minutes of the City Council Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 2 February 26, 2003 5. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider Joint City Council /Planning Commission Public Workshop to Discuss the North Park Specific Plan Project and Review Process for the Proposed Construction of 1,650 New Houses on 3,544 Acres Generally North of Moorpark College on the Application of North Park Village, LLC (General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Specific Plan No. 2001 -01 and Zone Change No. 2001 -02). Staff Recommendation: Conduct Public Workshop. Mr. Hogan introduced David Bobardt, Planning Manager, who gave a PowerPoint presentation of the Review Process for the North Park Specific Plan including the Environmental Review, Entitlements, Jurisdictional Boundaries, and Other Permits. He introduced Vince Daly and Kim Kilkenney representing North Park Village, L.P. Vince Daly, Project Manager and Principal of Daly Owens Group, 31304 Via Colinas #103, Westlake Village, provided a brief history of those who have helped in the planning of the proposal and introduced the consultants who will be working on the project. Kim John Kilkenney, Vice President of Village Group and North Park Village, L.P., 350 West Ash Street, Suite 730, San Diego, gave a PowerPoint presentation explaining the site location, ownership, goals, and proposed land use and circulation. He emphasized the goals of the project to be the preservation of natural resources including open space, hillsides, oak trees and farm land and the provision of quality planning to benefit the community of Moorpark. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kilkenney stated that the number of affordable rental units was calculated at 20 -units per acre. Mr. Kueny clarified that being negotiated and will Agreement. the calculation is still be part of the Development 000043 Minutes of the City Council Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 3 February 26, 2003 In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kilkenney described the timeline for the project in order to make the November 2003 ballot and stated that meeting the deadline is optimistic. Councilmember Mikos stated that voters could approve the project with or without changing the City Urban Restriction Boundary line; she is concerned that Planning Area A is too close to sensitive habitat; and that the issues previously raised by the City Council concerning Planning Area A have not been addressed. In response to Councilmember Millhouse, Mr. Kilkenney stated that North Park's proposed lake is one -half the size of the lake in Westlake; however the usable portion is comparable. In response to Councilmember Millhouse, Mr. Kilkenney stated that the new freeway interchange is designed to be the primary entrance for students traveling to Moorpark Community College. In response to Chair Landis, Mr. Kilkenney stated that once the project is approved by the voters it could be completed in six years plus any additional time added for the length of any recession. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Kilkenney stated that the property along the freeway interchange would need to be purchased from Unocal. The City Council and Planning Commission expressed interest in Mr. Hogan's suggestion for an onsite tour and asked that it also be open to the public. In response to Councilmembers Harper and Mikos, Mr. Hogan stated that the PowerPoint presentations would be made available on CDRom, as well as on the city's website. This item was concluded with no action required. B. Consider Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2003/2004. Staff Recommendation: Consider and discuss Goals and Objectives for FY 2003/2004. 000044 Minutes of the City Council Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 4 February 26. 2003 Mr. Kueny introduced the process the City Council goes through each year to consider goals and objectives at a time when they can be tied to the budget. Mayor Hunter stated that the Council considered these objectives and goals within the last few days and invited the Planning Commission to discuss them. In response to Commissioner DiCecco, Mr. Kueny stated that in regard to the state budget crisis, Moorpark's philosophy is not to rush into anything; the city has sufficient reserves to maintain current levels of service and treat this as a transition year; if budget cuts become permanent, other options will need to be explored; and that there are limited options of revenue in Moorpark without going to the voters. In response to Commissioner Pozza, Mr. Kueny stated that with the cooperation of Caltrans, within 24- to 30- months, Los Angeles Avenue, west to the freeway will be improved with a raised median to create a more aesthetically pleasing appearance and provide some mitigation to the truck traffic. Mayor Hunter stated that the top 10 objectives were developed by the City Council for their broadest appeal and greatest community benefit. In response to Chair Landis, Mr. Riley stated that the Police Services Center will be completed in October or November of 2004. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Riley stated that the city will go out for bid next month on the realignment of the intersection at Flinn Road. In response to Commissioner Pozza, Councilmember Mikos stated that on last year's list and this year's list of top 10 objectives she has been trying to gain support to add the improvements to Los Angeles Avenue East. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Kueny stated that sufficient funding has been set aside for improving all of Los Angeles Avenue. 00€ 045 Minutes of the City Council Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 5 February 26, 2003 Mr. Gilbert stated that the City Engineer is finalizing the design for retaining walls on the north side of Los Angeles Avenue East; considerable time will be needed to obtain the right -of -way to 40 -50 affected parcels; and the project could possibly go out for bid in two years. Councilmember Millhouse explained how items move forward on the Objectives List and invited the Planning Commissioners to make additions to the list. In response to Councilmember Harpers' concerns about emergency response confusion with two streets having the name of Los Angeles Avenue, Mr. Kueny stated that the Transportation /Streets Committee will be discussing potential renaming both Los Angeles Avenue East and Spring Road at their meeting in April. In response to Commission Peskay, Mr. Kueny stated that the progress in revitalizing downtown Moorpark is proceeding; public facilities will act as anchors with the Police Service Center and the proposed City Hall serving as bookends, and the new Fire Station in the middle, to attract the private sector to locate to High Street; a developer for a business office project has expressed interest with restaurants to follow; and that the renovation of the Theatre on High Street will further enhance interest in businesses locating to High Street. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Kueny stated that lighting for the multi - purpose court used by roller hockey enthusiasts at Arroyo Vista Recreation Center, is not a budgeted item. Councilmember Millhouse stated that at a recent Youth Sports Liaison meeting, the Arroyo Vista Recreation Center Phase II schedule was discussed and build -out has been approved, including a softball diamond, lighting and paved parking. He went on to comment that there are no funds available to provide lighting for the multi - purpose court used for roller hockey and suggested working with local businesses in the community to raise funds. Minutes of the City Council Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 6 February 26, 2003 In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kueny stated that the ground breaking ceremony for the fire station will be on Thursday, May 8, 2003. In response to Councilmember Parvin, that it is has been suggested by the on Affordable Housing and Community the commercial demand study to detE range of commercial acreage for city of the General Plan study, which the be considering March 19, 2003. Mr. Hogan stated Council Committee Development that !rmine appropriate build -out be part City Council will Mayor Hunter complimented the Planning Commission for distinguishing themselves as energetic, individual thinkers and congratulated them for work well done. 6. CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Hunter announced that the City Council would be going into closed session to consider Item 6.A. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Millhouse seconded a motion to adjourn to closed session for a discussion of Item 6.A. on the agenda. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The time was 7:55 p.m. A. 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. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Chair Landis adjourned the Planning Commission Meeting at 7:55 p.m. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, a recess was declared. The time was 7:55 p.m. The Council reconvened into closed session at 8:10 P.M. Present in closed session were Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin, and Mayor Hunter; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Hugh Riley, Assistant City 000047 Minutes of the City Council Planning Commission Moorpark, California Paqe 7 February 2.6, 2003 Manager; Ken Gilbert, Public Works Director; Barry Hogan, Community Services Director; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. The Council reconvened into open session at 8:35 p.m. Mr. Kueny stated that Item 6.A. was discussed and that there was no action to report. Mayor Hunter adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:35 p.m. Kipp Landis, Chair Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California March 19, 2003 A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on Wednesday, March 19, 2003, in the Community Center of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin, and Mayor Hunter. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 4. CLOSED SESSION: Mr. Kueny announced that the City Council would be going into closed session for discussion of 2 cases under Item 4.A. Mr. Montes announced that the facts and circumstances creating significant exposure to litigation for the first case under Item 4.A., which facts and circumstances are known to potential plaintiffs, consist of issues associated with conditions of approval for the Toll Brothers project, Tract No. 4928, RPD 1994 -01, and CUP 1994 -01. Mr. Montes announced that the facts and circumstances creating significant exposure to litigation for the second case under Item 4.A., which facts and circumstances are known to potential plaintiffs, consist of procedural issues associated with the proposed Asadurian Investments project No. IPD 2000 -10. 51T1 �# Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 2 March 19, 2003 MOTION: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to adjourn to closed session for a discussion of two cases under Item 4.A. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The time was 6:03 p.m. 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) Present in closed session were Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin, and Mayor Hunter; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. The Council reconvened into open session at 6:25 p.m. Mr. Kueny stated that two cases under Item 4.A. were discussed and-that there was no action to report. 5. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Hunter adjourned the meeting at 6:25 p.m. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk 00000 MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California April 2, 2003 A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on April 2, 2003, in the Community Center of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos (arrived at 6:06 p.m.), Millhouse (arrived at 6:05 p.m.), Parvin, and Mayor Hunter. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; Walter Brown, City Engineer; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 4. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: CONSENSUS: It was the consensus of the Council to consider Item 4.B. prior to Item 4.A. B. Consider Parcel Map No. 5371. Staff Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and the City Clerk to cause Parcel Map 5371 to be recorded in the office of the Ventura County Recorder. There was no staff report. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speaker cards. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Parvin seconded a motion to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign and the City Clerk to cause Parcel Map 5371 to be recorded in the office of the Ventura County 0 00 051L Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 2 April 2, 2003 Recorder. The motion carried by voice vote 3 -0, Councilmembers Mikos and Millhouse absent. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, Councilmember Millhouse arrived at 6:05 p.m. and Councilmember Mikos arrived at 6:06 p.m. A. Consider Letter of Support for Public Safety Funding. Staff Recommendation: Authorize letter of support to the County Board of Supervisors to be signed by the Mayor. Mayor Hunter provided and discussed a draft letter of support for Council consideration. Councilmember Mikos questioned language which might be interpreted as a Council position that no cuts in funding for public safety should be made. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speaker cards. CONSENSUS: It was the consensus of the Council to revise the letter to clarify that there should not be disproportionate cuts in County public safety funding. MOTION: Mayor Hunter moved seconded a motion to authorize County Board of Supervisors to amended to clarify that disproportionate cuts in public carried by unanimous voice vote. 5. CLOSED SESSION: and Councilmember Harper a letter of support to the be signed by the Mayor, as there should not be safety funding. The motion Mr. Kueny announced that the City Council would be going into closed session for discussion of one case under Item 5.A. Mr. Montes announced that the facts and circumstances creating significant exposure to litigation for one case under Item 5.A., which facts and circumstances are known to potential plaintiffs, consist of procedural issues associated with the proposed Asadurian Investments project No. IPD 2000 -10. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Millhouse seconded a motion to adjourn to closed session for a discussion AO 00 05-2 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 3 April 2, 2003 of one case under Item 5.A. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The time was 6:15 p.m. 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) Present in closed session were Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin, and Mayor Hunter; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. The closed session for the one case under Item 5.A. was recessed at 6:31 p.m. and then reconvened at 6:40 p.m., with the same attendance as listed above. The closed session for the one case under Item 5.A. was recessed at 6:44 p.m. and then reconvened at 6:46 p.m. with all Councilmembers; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk in attendance. The Council reconvened into open session at 6:50 p.m. Mr. Kueny stated that only one case under Item S.A. was discussed and that there was no action to report. 6. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Hunter adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk 0000-�� STEM -10-.-b i CITY OF MOORPARK WARRANT REGISTER FOR THE 2002 -2003 FISCAL YEAR E y : _✓ CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 16, 2003 SEQUENCE AMOUNT From TO MANUAL 112252 & $ 32,240.97 WARRANTS 112391 - 112392 $ 1,803.00 VOIDED 112269 $ (200.00) WARRANT PAYROLL LIABILITY 112468 - 112474 $ 7,958.22 WARRANTS REGULAR 112393 - 112467 & $ 51,329.19 WARRANTS 112475 - 112479 & $ 140,812.08 112480 - 112507 $ 286,284.80 TOTAL $ 520,228.26 000054 CITY OF MOORPARK WARRANT REGISTER FISCAL YEAR 2002 -03 CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 16, 2003 NUMBER DATE I VENDOR ISTATUSI DESCRIPTION TOTAL 112252 3/19/2003 SOUTHERN_ CALIFORNIA_ ED_ISO_N M Electric Bills I 32,240.97 112269 4/2/2003 'BIRDSELL, PHIL A. V Entertain 4%3 Sr Ctr Volunteer Recognition (200.00) 112391 4/212003 (DRIVER ALOANT M 4/03 -4104 Crime Policy Insurance 1_,603.00 112392 _ 402003 ' BIRDSELL, PHIL A. M Entertain 413 Sr Ctr Volunteer Recognition 200.00 112393 4/9/2003 iA.C. BARON MUSIC GROUP - R 5 /1C Apricot Festival Concert Entertainment_ _ 750.00 112394 4/9/2003 ACCOUNTEMPS R Szabo -Week Ending 3/21 _ 7.76.25 112395 4/912003 (ACCURATE ANSWERING SERVICE R 4/03 Answering & FAX Service 64.90 112396 4/9/2003 " ACCURATE INDUSTRIA_ L SUPPLY 1 R 4Poindexter Park Benches 29.11 1123 97 r 4/9/2003 ARCH WIRELESS R 4/03 Pager Bills 166.81 112398 4/9/2003 IBOETHING TRE_ELA_ ND_ FARMS_ , R Temp Parking Lot Landscaping 627.41 1 12399 4/9/2003 ,BURG, NEIL W R 15 /10 Apricot Festival Concert Entertainment 500.00 112400 4412003 CHEMSEARCH R Cement Repair 416.43 112401 4/9/20_03 CITY_OF MODRPA_RK R Misc City Petty Cash Reimbursement 558.41 112402- 4/9/2003 COASTAL PIPCO R Bocce Ball Court Irrigation 800.44 112403 - - 4!9!2003 COMPLETE PROPERTY MAINTEN - R X4/03 TR Fountain Maintenance _ - 200.00 112404 419/2003 CONCERTO, PASTA I R 'Refund Apricot Festival 140.00 112405 42003 ICONEJO VALLEY ADULT S_CH_OOL /9/ R L Stringer Access Training 141.00 112406 _ _ `__ 4/9/2003 CREATIVE SOUNDS _ _ R X5/10 Apricot Festival Concert Entertainment 3_95.00 t 4%9/2003 D F M ASSOCIATES Ca Elections Code Tax 3.03 _112407 112 408 - 4/9/2003 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE _R_ R _2103 _ FEmployment Applicants ingerprint Em 32.00 112409 4/9/2003 -'DIAL SECURITY _ _ R 463 AVRC &Shadyridge Security Monitor 360.00 112410 T 4/9/2003 'DOYLE SHAW ICE r Vector Control Dry Ice _ 16.00 112411 _ 4/9/2003 ,ESKANDER, STEFANIE C _R R Apricot Festival Concert Entertainment 250.00 112412 -� 4/912003 1 FAULDERS, RITA S. __F5/10 R Sr Ctr Antiques Lecture - 25.00 112413 4%90003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP R �Mpk Mktplace -Dahl Taylor Charges t 34.88 112414 49/2003 •FICK, SHAUNA F R Refund Apricot Festival Vendor Fee 112415 4/9/2003 FIFTH AVENUE CLEANERS R 'M Riley Uniform Cleaning _150.00_ 13.95 112416 4/9/2003 .FLAGS OVER AMERICA, INC_ R - - - - iCom Facilities Flags - 5_0.00 112417 4/9/2003 FLORES, ROCIO_ R I Refund Park Rental 25.00 112418 4/9/2003- G.I. RUBBISH R 14703 Mobilehome Park Trash Pickup 197.90 112419 4%9!2003 �GALBRAITH, COLLEEN R Class F_ e Refund Cooking e 76.00 112420 _ _1 4/9/2003 'GUERRERO, MARIA _ R Final Relocation Fees 8_95.00 112421 4/9/2003 iHERNANDEZ, ENRIQUE R Final Relocation Fees _ 112422 4/9/2003 (HOME DEPOT -GECF R Bocce Ball Slats & Parks Trash Cans 912.29 112423 4/9%2003 HONDA OF HOLLYWOOD R 200_3 BMW PD Motorcycle Svc_. _ 325.21 112424 4/9/2003 HOUGH, BRUCE & WANDA R Final Relocation Fe- es 879.00 112425 4/9/2003 HOUSE SANITARY SUPPLY_ R Com Fac & AVRC Cleaning Supplies _ 6_25.98 112426 4/9%2003 HUTHISON, JOYCE R Refund Tennis Class 95.00 112427- 46/2003 JOLLY JUMPS INC _ i R 15/02 Teen Dance Attractions 500.00 112428 - - _ 4/9/2003 I KEISLER, JOHN R. R -i Cam Ctr Park Improvement - - 360.00 112429 4/9/2003 L.A. LAWNMOWER R Chain Saw Repair 97.26 112430 4/9/2003 LAW OFFICES OF_SC_OT_T GREEN R Refund Facility Rental 94.00 112431 - 4/9/2003 1LIGHTHOUSE - - - R - - - Refund Secu-ritybep-osit - 500.00 112432 419/2003 ,MARTIN, VICTORIA R Refund Teen Theatre 1.00.00 112433 4/9/2003 MCMASTER -CARR SUPPLY R Cable Ties 98.75 112434 4/9/2003 �MMASC y _ R 3/03 Luncheon Mtg -Nancy Bums I_ 25.00 _ 112435 _ 4/9/2003 MONSTERTRAIC.COM R Rec Leader /Camp Counselor Ad 175.00 112436 4/9/2003 MOORPARK BUSINESS SERVICE R '4/03 Sr Newsletter Typesetting 160.87 112437 4/9/2003 ,M-OORPARK FEED & SUPPLY T R 'Vector Control Lay Mash 9.35 112438 4/9/2003 MOSEBY, LIN_A R Refund Park Reservation Fee 20.00 112439 4/9%2003 -1 MR ROOTER PLUMBING INC R City Hall Restroom Repairs _ 148.00 11 2440 4%93 iNAVARF20, ALFREDO & CONSUE /200 R ~Final Relocation Fees 847.00 112441 44/2003 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE R Paint & Operating Supplies 16.81 112442 4/9/2003 PACIFIC PLUMBING SPECIALTY R `Poindexter Park Fountain 85.85 112443 '49/ZOO 'PACIFIC RELOCATION CONSUL - R 2103 Amigos Janitorial,3 /03 Fence Rental 3.50.18 112444 4/9/2003 PARKER, CAROL_ R Refund Tennis Class _ _ 38.00 1.12445 4/9/2003 -PE IA NA, MAR R 'Final Rental Assistance 19,6A0.00 112446 4/9/2003 'POSTNET AN_ D COMMUNICATION R !4/03 Sr Newsletter,Flinn Spec_ Co_pie_-s 112447 4/9/2003 R.H.F., INC R Recertify Radar System _946.72 58.15 000055 CITY OF MOORPARK WARRANT REGISTER FISCAL YEAR 2002 -03 CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 16, 2003 NUMBER DATE I VENDOR ISTATUSI DESCRIPTION TOTAL 112448 4/9/2003 RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY R City Council, Com Fac & AVR_C Supplies 113.40 1449 12 4/9/2003 F20DRIGl1EZ, FRANCISCO _ R tball Refund -Youth Basketball -42.60 _ 112450 4/9/2003 i SIMI4SALE ESCROW + _ R Moving Expenses &Rental Assistance -Final 1.2,050.00 112451 4/912003 SMART &FINAL R Sr Ctr Volunteer Recognition Supplies i 73.90 112452 4/9!2003 SOCIETY OF MUNICIPAL ARBO R - 'Walter Membership Dues 60.00 112453 4/9/2003 ;SOLUTIONS + R Canon NP -6050 Toner 193.05 112454 4/9/2003 ;STEVEN GORDON TONER SUPPLY R _ HP4000, Xerox Toners 392.54 112455 4/9 /2003 ,THOUSAND OAKS YAMAHA KAWA R _ 2001 PD Motorcycle Svc. 476.04 112456 r 4/912003 TRI- COUNTY LOCKSMITHS_ R _ fRekey Lock at 284 Charles 169.00 112457 - 4/912003 � _TROPHIES ETC R City 20th Anniv. Pens 380.58 112458 4/9/2003 U.S. POSTMASTER R 5103 Sr Ctr Newsletter 290.00 112459 4/9/2003 UNISOURCE R _ ' #28 Weight Color copy Paper _ 195.19 112460 4/9/20_03 USA INC. R (Vector Control Replace Sp_raye_r 154.57 2461 _UNIVAR _ ' 4/9/2003 UNIVERSAL REPROGRAPHICS, _ R 'Flinn Ave Realignment 205.49 _11 112462 4/9/2003 VENTURA COUNTY MAIL #1100 R 2/03 Repeater Access 450.00 112463 4/9/2003 ;VILLAGE VIEW LIGHTING, IN R 'AVRC Light Bulbs 241.53 112464 4/9/2003 WEST COAST PIZZA R �JBL Piva Party 1 147.88 112465 4/9/2003 'WHITAKER HARDWARE, INC R CFi,AVRC,Parks,PD &Facility Supplies 183.81 _ 112466 4/90003 IWORL_D MUSIC _R 5/09 Battle of the Bands Event _ 300.00 112467 4/9%2003 7ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE CO. R Youth Sports Medical Supplies 368.77 419/2003 AMERICAN HERITAGE_LI FEIN R _ '04/11/03 P/R Employee Cancer Ins 1 114.32 _112468 112469 _ 4/9/2003 '-S S E I U LOCAL 99_6 R _ '04111103 P/R Employee Union Dues 397.71 _ 112470 4/9/2003 - SANDRA KUENY _ R 04/11/03 P(R Case #SD02044_4 1,693.00 112471 4/9/2003 'UNITED WAY OF VENTURA COUNTY R 04/11/03 P/R Employee Contributions 179.00 112472 4/9/2003 VENTURA COUNTY DIST. ATTORNEY R 04/11/03 P/R ID #9600616061 168.46 112473 4/9/2003 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK R '04/11/03 P%R Employee F!T Defer Comp 5,034_.53 112474 _ 4/9/2003 WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK R 04/11/03 P/R Employee P/T Def_er Comp 37120 _112475 4/9/2003 'SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON _R _ _ ;Flinn Ave Underground Elec Svc & Signal _ 27.54 112476 4/9%2003 ;SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDWIN R Flinn Ave Underground Elec Svc & St Lights 3,773.39 112477 4/9/2003 ;SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO_N R Flinn Ave Elec Svc & Rule 20B 50,642.06 112478 4/9/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON _ R _Underground Flinn Ave Underground Elec 8, Transformer 2,255.09 112479 4/9/2003 VENTURA COUNTY AUDITOR -CO R I ERAF Remittance 84,114.00 112480 ~A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES R _3/03 Cell phone Bills 989.51 112481_ _4/9/2003 _ '_ 4/9/2003 'A.C. BARON MUSIC GROUP R Battle of Bands & Apricot Festival Sound 3,105.00 112482 4%9/2003 'AUSTIN -FOUST ASSOC_IAT_ES, R 'North-Park Village Charges _ 8,166.71 112483 _ i 4/9/2003 iBETANCOURT, ESTELLA _ R _ (Reimburse Moving Expenses 1,600.0_0 4/9/2003 J60NTERR_A CONSULTING CO_RP R 'No_rth Park Village Charges 154,516.62 _112484 1165 24 4/912063 CANTWELL, ALICE A R_ , Preschool Instruction -36 Students 1,404.00 112486 4/9/2003 ;COACH USA TOURS R _ ISr Trip to Kimberly Crest Mansion 1,360.00 112487 4(912003 DECISION MANAGEMENT CO., R Questys Annual Software _ 4,196.50 112488 4/9%2003 GALVEZ, MARIA R Final Relocation Fees _ 1,571.22 _ 4/9/2003 HAWKS & ASSOCIAT_ES INC R -'PD Svc Gtr Flood Study 9,692.80 _112489 24 _ 4/972003 _ HEBEL, RAYMOND MICHAEL R 15/10 Apricot Festival Concert Entertainment 1,500.00 _1190 _ _ _'HUNTER,PATRiCK D. R _ IMUSD Academic ic Decathlon Trip 100.00 _112491 112492 _4/9/2003 41912003 MOORPARF<CHAMBER OF COMME R 2003 Agreement Services 6,000.00 112493 4/912003 [MOORPARK UNIFIED SCHOOL_ D R 13 /03 Moorpark PD Utilities 2,679.00 112494 _ _ , 4/9/2003 'PACIFIC BELL/W_ORLDCOM R _ 2/03 Long Distance Bills 1,001.28 112495 _ 4/9/2063 'PACIFIC PLUMBING SPECIALTY_ R Campus Canyon Park Fountain_ r 1,273.51 112496 -4/6/2603 'PEACH PEACH HILL SOILS R Bocce Ball Court Granite 2,292.47 4/9%2003 ' POSTNET AND COMMUNICATION R 3/19 City Council Mtg Packets,Copy Overlay 1,122.48 _112497 112498 4/912003 'PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT R X5110 Apricot Festival Concert Entertainment 1,500.00 112499 419/2003 QUICK CRETE PRODUCTS CORP R iTR & Mtn Mdws Park Monument ent Signs 7,239.38 112560 STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE R 01102 Annual Street Report _ 1,285.38 112501 _4/9/2003 4/9/2003 'SUNRIDGE LANDSCAPE MAINT R Mpk PD Ctr Weed AbatemenATemp Parking 2_,550.00 112502 4%9/2003 TROPHIES ETC R 'Signature Plaques for Winter JBL 938.44 _ 112503 4/9/2003 1U.S. POSTAL SERVICE /ASC_OM R City Hall Meter Machine Postage !3/03 3,000.00 112504 4/912003_ ­VENCO WESTERN, INC ' R Zone 12 Landscape 3,778.50 112505 4/9/2003 'WEST COAST ARBO_RIS_TS_, INC R Citywide and Parks Tree_Trimming 33,069.00 112506 4/9/2003- 'WILLIS, PAM_ EL_,' S_ R Preschool Instruction -36 Students_ 1,653.00 112507 4/9/2003 '/VWCOT R PD Gtr Phase II & III Design 30,300.00 TOTAL REPORT - - - - - - $ 520,228.26 000056 CS I7 Y3 li.` � r�.c! er�� ►mr- ,rYtC- i- [,ergs MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Kim C. Chudoba, Senior Management Analyst/ U DATE: April 7, 2003 (CC Meeting of 4/16/03) SUBJECT: CONSIDER THE 2003 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM To guide the City's response to state and federal legislation, the City Council adopts an annual Legislative Program with platform statements outlining the City's position on key municipal issues. If a measure is consistent with the platform statements, the Mayor is authorized to send a letter indicating the City's position. If a measure is not covered by the platform statements, or a staff recommendation differs from the platform statements, the Budget and Finance Committee will review the measure and recommend a position for City Council consideration. DISCUSSION Last year, the City Council updated the Legislative Program to address emergent issues. This year, the platform statements provide sufficient guidance on key municipal issues, and no changes are recommended. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the 2003 Legislative Program. Attachment 1: 2003 Legislative Program 000051 ATTACHMENT I CITY OF MOORPARK LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM x-0022003 The following Legislative Program was developed to allow the City to respond to state and federal legislation in a proactive manner. The Mayor (or Mayor Pro Tem in the Mayor's absence) is authorized to sign correspondence expressing the City's position on pending legislation consistent with the Legislative Program and /or other positions approved by the City Council. The Budget and Finance Committee will also periodically review legislation for recommendation to the City Council. Staff will monitor the League of California Cities' Priority Focus and other sources to identify pending legislation that may impact the City. Letters expressing the City's position will be drafted for the Mayor's signature, and copies will be distributed to each Councilmember. Pending legislation not addressed by the Legislative Program, or staff recommendations that deviate from the Legislative Program, will be agendized for Budget and Finance Committee review and City Council consideration. PLATFORM STATEMENTS 1. Local Government Finance A. Support legislation that limits cities' contributions to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) and directs the repayment of past contributions. B. Oppose legislation that eliminates or restricts the taxing authority of cities over development; weakens existing Government Code Section 66000 fee authority; and redefines any development tax, condition, or other monetary charge as development fees. C. Support legislation requiring the state and federal governments to provide full cost reimbursement to cities for all mandated programs and for all programs resulting in revenue losses. D. Support legislation that safeguards existing City revenue sources from preemption or seizure by the state or county. E. Oppose any change in revenue allocations that would negatively affect the City of Moorpark, including but not limited to the redistribution of sales tax, property tax, transient occupancy tax, and vehicle in -lieu fee. Page 1 of 7 000058 2. F. Oppose legislation that restricts or limits a city's ability to use tax - exempt debt for the purchase or construction of public purpose improvements. G. Support measures that provide greater fiscal independence to cities and result in greater stability and predictability in local government budgeting. H. Support efforts that provide greater accountability on the part of counties for the distribution of funds back to municipalities, including, but not limited to, fines and forfeitures. I. Oppose any measure that makes local agencies more dependent on the state for financial stability and policy direction. J. Support efforts to reduce the fiscal impact of Proposition 218 on cities. K. Support the establishment of a constitutionally - protected funding structure for local government. L. Support legislation that closes the loophole that allows companies currently doing business in California to create dot -com subsidiaries to avoid collection of sales taxes on Internet commerce. M. Support legislation that authorizes a statewide ballot measure to restore the requirement for a simple majority of voters in a city or county to approve an increase in taxes or issue general obligation bonds. Labor Relations A. Oppose legislation that would restrict a city's ability to use its own employees on public works projects when such projects have previously been advertised for bid. B. Oppose legislation that requires the use of city employees rather than contracting out. C. Oppose any legislation that would grant employee benefits that should be decided at the local bargaining table. D. Oppose legislation that removes or reduces management rights, such as deciding staffing or service levels, either by direct action or increased liability. E. Support legislation that would reform the Workers' Compensation system to reduce employer cost through the reduction of system abuse. Page 2 of 7 000059 F. Support legislation that limits the ability of employees to receive Workers' Compensation benefits for occupational injuries /illnesses that result from stress, disciplinary action, or performance evaluation consultations. G. Oppose legislation that expands or extends any presumptions of occupational injury or illness. H. Oppose any measure that imposes compulsory and binding interest arbitration. I. Oppose efforts that reduce local control over public employee disputes or impose regulations of an outside agency on such disputes. J. Oppose a mandatory Social Security tax for public employers and public employees. 3. Transportation A. Oppose legislation that redirects local transportation funds away from cities. B. Support legislation that would provide additional resources to cities to finance local transportation systems, facilities, and improvements. C. Support legislation that provides greater flexibility for the use of local transportation funds. D. Support legislation that will help reduce non -local commercial vehicle traffic on SR -118 through the City. E. Oppose legislation that limits and /or decreases the existing amount of retention proceeds withheld from any payment by a public entity to the contractor on a public project. 4. Environment A. Support legislation that streamlines the state's environmental review process and maintains public participation. B. Support legislation that would eliminate unfunded mandates such as the water course pollution prevention programs. C. Support legislation that reduces or eliminates local government's owner /operator Superfund liability. Page 3 of 7 000060 D. Support legislation to either consolidate or streamline the federal and state Clean Air Acts without reducing air quality standards. E. Support air quality efforts that emphasize use of advanced technologies and market incentives, including use of alternative fuels and development of an infrastructure for alternative fuel vehicles. F. Support legislation that reimburses cities for revenue losses stemming from environmental decisions made without city participation. G. Support legislation that provides money to local governments for energy conservation programs. 5. Waste Management A. Support legislation that provides cities with financial assistance for programs designed to provide for the safe disposal of solid, hazardous, and special waste. B. Support legislation that strengthens cities' ability to direct municipal solid waste flow to designated solid waste facilities. C. Support legislation that streamlines AB 939 tracking and reporting requirements. D. Support legislation that would make grants available to local agencies for programs that encourage the recycling /reclaiming of resources. E. Support legislation that promotes source reduction measures without creating an unfunded mandate. F. Oppose legislation that would restrict or limit local government's ability to franchise refuse and recycling collection services, to direct municipal solid waste flow (flow control), or to contractually require haulers to guarantee achievement of AB 939 goals. G. Support legislation that promotes recycling and expands the market for recycled materials. H. Support new resource recovery and conversion technologies, such as bio- diesel from organic waste. I. Support legislation that implements the concept of extended manufacturer responsibility for electronic waste and other material types requiring incentives for recycling. Page 4 of 7 U0006:1 6. General Government A. Support legislation that ensures cities receive a proportionate share of property taxes upon withdrawal from a county library services district. B. Support legislation that provides financial assistance for local public libraries without the imposition of new taxes. C. Support legislation that reinstates effective local regulation of the cable television industry and other deregulated utilities, including financial reimbursement for use of pubic right -of -ways. D. Oppose legislation that restricts or weakens a city's ability to regulate smoking areas. E. Support legislation limiting a city's liability associated with hazardous recreational activities, such as skateboarding and in -line skating. F. Oppose legislation that increases local government's exposure to litigation. G. Support maximum local flexibility in contracting for services. H. Oppose efforts to cut funding for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs. I. Support legislation to give non - entitlement cities the same rights as entitlement cities in CDBG program administration. J. Support legislation that makes funds available to refurbish and improve parks. K. Support legislation that promotes low -cost or no -cost spay and neuter programs. L. Support legislation that holds animal owners accountable for injuries or property damage caused by animals under their care or control. 7. Public Safety A. Support legislation that would provide cities with a greater share of fines and forfeitures. B. Support legislation that would provide additional resources for commercial truck safety inspections and the enforcement of commercial truck vehicle codes. Page 5 of 7 0000+62 C. Oppose legislation that weakens enforcement of, and penalties for, commercial truck violations. D. Support legislation that would provide cities with contract law enforcement a proportionate share of Proposition 172 sales tax revenues for public safety. E. Support legislation that increases local law enforcement resources without increasing taxes. F. Support legislation that would provide a greater share of seized assets to cities. G. Support legislation that allows use of state and federal public safety grants for maintenance efforts in addition to service increases. 8. Land Use Planning A. Support legislation that reforms annexation law by strengthening cities' authority over spheres of influence and ensures that fair property tax agreements can be obtained. B. Support legislation that provides for shared land use determinations between counties and cities when the General Plan of the city establishes a planning area consistent with Government Code provisions. C. Support legislation that enhances local control and diminishes litigation surrounding adult entertainment facilities. D. Support legislation that strengthens local control to prepare, adopt, and implement fiscal plans for orderly growth, development, beautification, and conservation of local planning areas, including, but not limited to, regulatory authority over zoning, subdivisions, annexations, and redevelopment areas. E. Support efforts that are consistent with the doctrine of "home rule" and the local exercise of police powers, through planning and zoning processes, over local land use. F. Oppose development agreements for undeveloped areas in the cities' spheres of influence that do not conform to city standards. 9. Housing A. Support legislation that addresses occupancy levels and strengthens cities' ability to reduce overcrowding in residential housing. Page 6 of 7 000 ()G3 B. Support efforts to develop federal, state, and county participation, financial support, and incentives for programs that provide adequate, affordable housing for the elderly, handicapped, and low - income persons throughout the community. C. Oppose legislation that expands the state Department of Housing and Community Development's review role for local Housing Elements. D. Support Housing Element reform legislation that provides greater local control and flexibility, simplifies the process, and improves its effectiveness. E. Support legislation that eliminates the current Regional Housing Needs Allocation process and defines a more equitable process to determine a "fair share" of new housing needed to respond to growth trends in the region. 10. Redevelopment /Economic Development A. Oppose legislation that further weakens a city redevelopment agency's authority to use eminent domain. B. Oppose legislation that would prohibit or limit the establishment of new redevelopment project areas and /or the expansion of existing project areas. C. Oppose legislation that reduces the amount of gross tax increment allocable to redevelopment agencies. D. Support legislation that reforms reporting requirements for redevelopment agencies by simplifying the process and eliminating reporting confusion. E. Oppose legislation that adds restrictions and procedural requirements regarding closed session discussions on land acquisition, use of eminent domain, and disposal of property. F. Oppose measures that would diminish the current authority or financing capabilities of redevelopment agencies. G. Support legislation that gives cities resources to finance economic development efforts, such as business attraction, retention, and growth, as well as marketing and tourism. H. Support legislation that simplifies and streamlines the process for foreign trade. 11IZ�.- Page 7 of 7 TO: FROM: PREPARED BY: DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND IT]E,M 10._-". ocra MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council Walter Brown, City Engineer u1`� Clara Magana, Assistant Engineercm March 20, 2003 (Meeting of April 16, 2003) Consider Bond Reduction for JIN Industrial Investment, LLC, Located on the Easterly side of Condor Drive JIN Industrial Investments, LLC, IPD 99 -04, is an industrial development located on the easterly side of Condor Drive in the City of Moorpark. A vicinity map has been attached for reference. DISCUSSION The developer requests the reduction of the 2 sureties on file with the City of Moorpark, associated with the above - mentioned development (see attached chart). These sureties guaranteed grading, excavation, erosion control, and faithful performance. All work covered under these sureties has been completed. Staff recommends that these bonds be reduced. Provided below is a chart describing recommended actions by staff: 000065 BOND NO. TYPE BOND AMT. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1 128830 Grading $394,000 Reduce to 100 Performance and 2 128831 $20,000 Reduce to 100 Payment 000065 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Authorize the City Clerk to reduce sureties #128830 and #128831 to 100. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to fully exonerate surety for IPD 99 -04 one year after this approval of the reduction of surety bond and upon written confirmation from the City Engineer that no warranty work is required. ATTACHMENT: 1. Exhibit `A' Vicinity Map 00Qe4cc _ r EXHIBI T A' CI TY OF MOORPARK IPD 99 -04 JIN INDUSTRIAL INVES71E NT, L L C 000067 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Walter Brown, City Engineer PREPARED BY: Clara Magana, Assistant Engineer C M DATE: March 20, 2003 (Meeting of April 16, 2003) SUBJECT: Consider Bond Reduction for Special Devices, Incorporated, Tract 5004, Located east of the intersection of the 23 Freeway and New Los Angeles Ave. BACKGROUND The Special Devices Incorporated, LLC, TR 5004, is an industrial development located east of the intersection of the 23 Freeway and New Los Angeles Avenue in the City of Moorpark. The project consists of two commercial lots (8.1 gross acres and 2.38 gross acres) and a 40.7 gross acre industrial lot. A vicinity map has been attached for reference. DISCUSSION The developer requests the release of the sureties on file with the City of Moorpark, associated with the above - mentioned development (see attached chart). Surety 0835103531861BCM guaranteed grading, paving, and drainage for Tract 5004 and surety B2881823 guaranteed work on the SR 23 at New Los Angeles Avenue. All work covered under these sureties has been completed. Staff recommends that this bond be released. Provided below is a chart describing recommended actions by staff: Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 STAFF RECOWENDATION 1. Authorize the City Clerk to reduce sureties #083S103531861BCM and #B2881823 to 100. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to fully exonerate sureties one year after this approval of the reduction of surety bond and upon written confirmation from the City Engineer that no warranty work is required. ATTACHMENT: 1. Exhibit `A' Vicinity Map RECOMMENDED BOND NO. TYPE BOND AMT. ACTION Grading, Paving, 1 0835103531861BCM $684,416.00 Reduce to loo Drainage 2 B2881823 Perfomance $600,000.00 Reduce to 100 STAFF RECOWENDATION 1. Authorize the City Clerk to reduce sureties #083S103531861BCM and #B2881823 to 100. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to fully exonerate sureties one year after this approval of the reduction of surety bond and upon written confirmation from the City Engineer that no warranty work is required. ATTACHMENT: 1. Exhibit `A' Vicinity Map c ITE 0• F- `�rl-_�'C'3 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Walter Brown, City Engineer PREPARED BY: Clara Magana, Assistant Engineer DATE: March 28, 2002 (Meeting of April 16, 2003) SUBJECT: Consider Recordation of Quitclaim Deed of Easements for disposal of Storm Water to Archstone Communities Project (RPD -97 -1) BACKGROUND Archstone Communities is a project of 312 multiple family units on 19.2 acres located north of the Arroyo Simi, west of Moorpark Ave., and south of Parkcrest Lane. A vicinity map has been attached for reference (Exhibit "A "). DISCUSSION On September 12, 1986, two easements were granted to the City for disposal of storm water from Moorpark Ave. onto the property which is now owned by Archstone Communities: 1) disposal of storm water granted by Rahmatollah Abrar, Instrument No. 86- 125077. 2) disposal of storm water granted by Mash Associates, Ltd., Instrument No. 86- 125078. The Deeds are for "Blanket" Easements which have no specific location but cover the entire property. There are now storm drain lines that provide access for the storm water to the Arroyo Simi, therefore, these easements are no longer needed. Both Easement Deeds contain provisions that the rights of Easements will terminate when a subdivision map is recorded on the property, however, the project was developed as an apartment 000071. Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 complex and no subdivision occurred. Action to terminate the easements would be in keeping with the spirit of the termination clause of the easements. Attached is a Quitclaim Deed for each of the easements. STAFF RECOWMMATION Approve the acceptance of the Quitclaim Deeds of Easement and authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to record the Quitclaim Deeds of Easement in the office of the Ventura County Recorder. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map, Exhibit 'A' 2. Quitclaim Deeds of Easement to Archstone Communities Trust 00007-2 1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: City Clerk CITY OF MOORPARK WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk CITY OF MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 MAIL TAX EXEMPT STATEMENTS TO: EXEMPT ATTACHMENT 2- SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s): Assessor's Parcel No.: 506 -05 -27 Documentary transfer tax is $0.00 Project No. & Name: RPD 97 -1 ( ) computed on full value of property conveyed, or Archstone Communities. ( ) computed on full value less value of liens and encumbrances remaining at time of sale. ( ) Unincorporated area: (x) City of Moorpark, and QUITCLAIM DEED OF EASEMENT FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CITY OF MOORPARK, a Municipal Corporation, organized under the laws of the State of California, for a valuable consideration receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release and quitclaim to Archstone Communities Trust, the following described easement in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California: as follows: an easement for the right to dispose of storm water from Moorpark Avenue, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California per deed recorded on September 12, 1986 as Instrument No. 86- 125077 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, onto Parcel B of Parcel No. 3118 recorded in Book 28, Pages 59 and 60 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Executed on 2002, CITY OF MOORPARK, a Municipal Corporation, at Moorpark, California By PATRICK HUNTER, Mayor Attest DEBORAH TRAFFENSTEDT, City Clerk O 00 0*74 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: City Clerk CITY OF MOORPARK WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk CITY OF MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 MAIL TAX EXEMPT STATEMENTS TO: EXEMPT SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s): Assessor's Parcel No.: 506 -05 -27 Documentary transfer tax is $0.00 Project No. & Name: RPD 97 -1 ( ) computed on full value of property conveyed, or Archstone Communities. ( ) computed on full value less value of liens and encumbrances remaining at time of sale. ( ) Unincorporated area: (x) City of Moorpark, and QUITCLAIM DEED OF EASEMENT FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CITY OF MOORPARK, a Municipal Corporation, organized under the laws of the State of California, for a valuable consideration receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release and quitclaim to Archstone Communities Trust, the following described easement in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California: as follows: an easement for the right to dispose of storm water from Moorpark Avenue, in the City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, State of California per deed recorded on September 12, 1986 as Instrument No. 86- 125078 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, onto Parcel B of Parcel No. 3118 recorded in Book 28, Pages 59 and 60 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Executed on , 2002, CITY OF MOORPARK, a Municipal Corporation, at Moorpark, California By PATRICK HUNTER, Mayor Attest DEBORAH TRAFFENSTEDT, City Clerk 000075 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT :i ._ �L.dM - t-f —lcc• PF �c� 3 __ TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Mary K. Lindley, Director of Community Services DATE: April 7, 2003 (CC Meeting of April 16, 2003) SUBJECT: Consider Reduction of the Parkland Dedication Fees for the Affordable Unit in Tract Map No. 5181 (TR Partners) DISCUSSION The Council is being asked to approve the in -lieu parkland development fee for the one affordable unit in Tract Map No. 5181, TR Partners. Tract Map No. 5181 is an infill project consisting of eight single family units, one of which is required to be provided to a family at or below 80° of median income. Similar to the formula applied to Cabrillo Economic Development's project, staff proposes setting the parkland dedication fee for the affordable unit at sixty percent (60%) of the market unit rate. The City's adopted method of calculating parkland dedication fees for market rate units is using fair market appraisal value of the property plus an additional twenty percent for improvements. This calculation works out to be $7,336 per unit for Tract Map No. 5181. As proposed, the affordable unit would be $4,402 (60° of market rate). Total parkland dedication fees for this project would be $55,754. In conformance with the City park improvement fund policy, sixty percent of the collected fee would be utilized in Zone the project is located in (Zone 1 - downtown) and the remaining forty percent would be utilized in the Community - wide Zone which contains Arroyo Vista Community Park. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Set the parkland dedication fee for the Tract Map No. 5181 affordable unit at sixty percent (600) of the market rate units. M: \ML_nd1ey \PARKS \ -ract Map 5181 gsimby fees.doc 000076 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry R. Hogan, Community Development Director o# Prepared By: Laura Stringer, Senior Management Analyst DATE: March 27, 2003 (CC Meeting of 04/16/03) f SUBJECT: Consider Report of Annual Development Agreement Review, Established in Connection with West Pointe Homes, Located on the West Side of Walnut Canyon Road, Approximately 3,500 feet North of Casey Road, on the Application of William Lyon Homes, Inc. BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 65864 and City of Moorpark Municipal Code Section 15.40 provide for Development Agreements between the City and property owners in connection with proposed plans of development for specific properties. Development Agreements are designed to strengthen the planning process, to provide developers some certainty in the development process and to assure development in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. On February 6, 2002, the Moorpark City Council adopted Ordinance No. 277 (effective March 8, 2002), approving a Development Agreement between the City of Moorpark and West Pointe Homes, Inc. The agreement, recorded February 13, 2003, as Document No. 2002- 0035903-00, was approved in connection with the Tract No. 5187 /RPD 1999 -02 a 250 single- family residential development on a portion of a 350 -acre site located on the west side of Walnut Canyon Road, approximately 3,500 feet north of Casey Road. The agreement remains in full force and effect for twenty (20) years from the operative date of the agreement (until March 8, 2022), or until the close of escrow on the initial sale of the last Affordable Housing Unit, whichever occurs last. William Lyon Homes, Inc. has purchased the property subject to the Development Agreement, and as successor in interest they are now responsible for compliance with the terms of the agreement. \ \mor_pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \2001 -01 nest Pointe \cc 030416 agnda rpt doc +� 0000 ►^�/ Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 Provisions of the agreement require an annual review and report to the City Council on the status of completion of all aspects of the agreement. William Lyon Homes, Inc. has submitted the necessary application form, related materials, and fee /deposit. The Community Development Director has reviewed the submitted information and the project status and provides the following report. DISCUSSION: Current Protect Status The developer has completed the following aspects of Tract 5187/RPD 1999 -02: • Acquisition of a site for construction and submittal of entitlement applications and deposits for 17 affordable units. • Retention of professional engineers and consultants to prepare and process the plans and permits required for the project • Initiation of coordination with permitting agencies, including City of Moorpark, Caltrans, Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1 and Ventura County Watershed Protection District Developer Compliance with Terms of Aareement The developer's responsibilities are included in Section 6 of the Development Agreement and include twenty -six (26) specific requirements, as summarized below. Compliance with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement will occur at various stages of the development process. Action by the developer and other clarifying information has been noted. # REQUIREMENT STATUS 1. Developer shall comply with Developer is in compliance the Agreement, subsequent with all requirements at project approvals and this time. Mitigation Monitoring Program. 2. All lands and interests in To be granted at Final Map land shall be dedicated free approval. and clear of liens and encumbrances. Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 3 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 3. Payment of "Development Fees" These fees will be adjusted of seven thousand, eight- annually (until paid) using hundred -fifty dollars the Consumer Price Index ($7,850) per residential unit (CPI) in accordance with and thirty- five - thousand the agreement. Fees must be three - hundred twenty -five paid prior to issuance of dollars ($35,325) per gross Zoning Clearance for acre of institutional land. Building Permit. No Building Permits have been issued. 4. Payment of "Citywide Traffic These fees will be adjusted Fees" of four - thousand four- annually (until paid) using hundred twenty dollars the State Highway Bid Price ($4,420) per residential unit Index in accordance with and nineteen - thousand eighty the agreement. Fees must dollars ($19,080) per acre of be paid prior to issuance institutional land. of Zoning Clearance for Building Permit. No Building Permits have been issued. 5. Payment of "Community Service These fees will be adjusted Fees" of two - thousand thirty annually (until paid) using dollars ($2,030) per the Consumer Price Index residential unit and two (CPI) in accordance with thousand, six - thousand four- the agreement. Fees must be hundred twenty -eight dollars paid prior to issuance of ($6,428) per gross acre of Zoning Clearance for institutional land. Building Permit. No Building Permits have been issued. 6. Payment of all outstanding This is an ongoing processing costs. requirement. At this time the developer is current with all processing costs, including submittal of Annual Review Application and deposit for Development Agreement - Annual Review. 000079 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 4 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 7. Payment of a fee in lieu of These fees will be adjusted park dedication "Park Fee" of annually (until paid) using nine - thousand dollars the Consumer Price Index ($9,000) per residential unit (CPI) in accordance with and fifty cents ($0.50) per the agreement. Fees must be square foot of each building paid prior to issuance of used for institutional Zoning Clearance for purposes. Building Permit. No Building Permits have been issued. 8. Prior to Final Map The necessary reclaimed recordation, confirmation water facilities are to be from Ventura County installed, and in use prior Waterworks District No. 1 to the first occupancy that sufficient recycled approval of each phase. water is available to serve public and community owned landscape areas. Design and construction of facilities required to deliver the reclaimed water to the project, and payment of any connection /meter fees required by the District. 9. Greenbelts, open space areas, To be recorded with the landscape areas and trails Final Map for each phase. (not covered by any other section) shall be dedicated to the City, or one or more property owners associations as determined by the City. 10. Irrevocable offer of To be included with the (a) dedication of Lot 263, for Final Map for first phase. permanent open space preservation purposes on the first Final Map. 10. Annual Payment of ten- This fee will be adjusted (b) thousand dollars ($10,000) annually using the Consumer for permanent management, Price Index (CPI) in maintenance, and mitigation accordance with the monitoring for open space Lot agreement. 263. The HOA shall be responsible for this perpetual obligation. 1 i1�1 Honorable April 16, Page 5 10. (c) 11. City Council 2003 REQUIREMENT Grant conservation easement to retain Lots 254, 255, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 264 and 265 in predominantly open space condition. Dedication of Lot 251 to the City for permanent open space preservation and trail staging area. Prior to occupancy of the 165th residential unit the developer shall improve the trail staffing area, provide payment for perpetual maintenance, and provisions for temporary trail staging area within "A" Street right - of -way. Provide a total of twenty (20) affordable housing units in accordance with the agreement. Payment of an in- lieu fee of seventy- thousand ($70,000) for each unit less than the required twenty (20) shall be paid prior to occupancy of the 50th unit. Prior to occupancy of the first residential unit, the developer will enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City, and pay the direct costs for preparation of the agreement up to seven - thousand five - hundred dollars ($7,500). STATUS To be granted at Final Map approval. Entitlement permits have been submitted for seventeen (17) affordable units to be located southerly of the subject development. It is the developer's intent to pay the in -lieu fee for the remaining three (3) affordable units. This fee will be adjusted annually (until paid) using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in accordance with the agreement. A deposit for preparation of the agreement has been submitted. Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 6 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 12. Pay Air Quality Fee in the These fees will be adjusted amount of one - thousand four- annually (until paid) using hundred forty -four dollars the Consumer Price Index ($1,444) per residential (CPI) in accordance with unit, and for institutional the agreement. Fees must be uses at a rate calculated by paid prior to issuance of the Community Development Zoning Clearance for Department. Building Permit. No Building Permits have been issued. 13. Submittal and approval of an To date, no such plan has Implementation Plan to been submitted. address requirements for phasing and construction responsibilities. 14. Waiver of any density bonus Applicant has not requested rights that would increase density bonus units. the number of dwelling units approved to be constructed on the property. 15. Agreement to cast affirmative Process to form assessment ballots for formation of one districts has not yet or more assessment districts begun. for maintenance of parkway and median landscaping and street lighting, including but not limited to all water and electricity costs. Agreement to form property owners association(s) to provide landscape, street lighting and park (if necessary) open space land, trails drainage facilities maintenance and compliance with NPDES requirements. 16. Payment of all City capital Developer is in compliance improvement and processing with all requirements at fees. this time. Fund review ongoing. 17. Payment of Los Angeles Avenue Fees must be paid prior to Area of Contribution (AOC) issuance of Zoning Fee. Clearance for Building Permit. Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 7 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 18. Construction of regional Basin is shown on Tract flood control basin (Lot 259) Map, with capacity verified per Walnut /Gabbert Deficiency by Ventura County Watershed Study, in lieu of pro rata Protection District. contribution for Drainage, Sediment Transport and Flood Control Planning Mitigation Measure #4. 19. Payment of seventy- thousand Must be paid prior to dollars ($70,000) to satisfy approval of first Final Final EIR Biological and Map. Botanical Resources Mitigation Measures. 20. Construct "A" Street from "E" To be included with project Street to southern boundary improvement plans and prior to occupancy of 165th securities. residential unit, including all plan check and inspection costs, and improvement surety. 21. Payment of three - hundred- Effective March 1, 2005 the thousand dollars ($300,000) $300,000 fee shall increase to satisfy Mitigation by one -half of one percent Monitoring Program Traffic (0.50) per month until and Transportation Mitigation paid. measures. Payment of twenty - thousand ($20,000) to satisfy Public Services and Utilities Mitigation Measures. 22. Acquire at sole cost and Improvement plans for the expense the property needed Walnut Canyon Improvements to improve Walnut Canyon have been drafted, and the Road. required property to be acquired has been identified. 23. Construct public trail system Trail connections are shown across Walnut Canyon Road on the Tract map. frontage of the property to Verification of trail connect to the trail connections and alignments constructed by Tract No. 4928 will take place prior to (County Club Estates). Final Map approval. Maintenance to be the responsibility of the property owners association(s). 000-083 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 8 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 24. Agreement to pay any fees and Developer is in compliance payments pursuant to this with all requirements at Agreement without this time. reservation. 25. Agreement to comply with To date, the applicant has 2. requirements for annual complied with review review of the Agreement requests and Mitigation including evaluation of Monitoring Program Mitigation Monitoring requirements. Program. 26. Agreement to install No such policy has yet been photovoltaic system for each adopted. Staff is residential dwelling unit, so currently reviewing long as City adopts a policy photovoltaic options. and standards prior to January 31, 2004 or approval of the first phase of the Final Map, whichever is later. All requirements of the Development Agreement will be considered in the City's review and approval process for all aspects of the development; including but not limited to, subsequent entitlement requests, public and private improvements, Final Maps, and building permits. City Compliance with Terms of Agreement The City's responsibilities are included in Section 7 of the agreement and include eleven (11) specific provisions, as summarized below. # REQUIREMENT STATUS 1. Agreement to commit reasonable To date, City has complied time and resources on with any such requests. expedited and parallel processing of application for subsequent applications. 2. If requested, at the To date, no such request developers cost, proceed to has been received. acquire easements or fee title to land in order to allow construction of required public improvements. C 1 F: Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 9 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 3. Agreement to authorize the To date, no such request City Manager to sign an early has been received. grading permit. 4. Agreement to process To date, no such request concurrently, whenever has been received. possible, all land use entitlements for the same property (so long as deemed complete). 5. Agreement that Park Fee To date, City has required per section 6.7 meets complied. obligation for park land dedication provisions of state law and local codes. 6. Agreement to cooperate with To date, no such request developer to allow maximum tax has been received. benefits for dedication of Lot 263 for public open space. 7. Agreement to appoint The Senior Management affordable housing staff Analyst in the Assistant person to oversee the City Manager's Office implementation of affordable oversees affordable housing requirements. housing requirements. 8. Agreement to allow for a To date, no such request variation of five feet (51) has been received. maximum in the grades as shown on the Grading Plan exhibit, subject to approval of the Community Development Director /City Council that the overall design and visual quality would not be significantly affected. 9. Agreement to facilitate To date, no such request reimbursement to developer of has been received. any costs incurred that be subject to partial reimbursement from other developers. 000085 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 10 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 10. Agreement to process a lot To date, no such request line adjustment to modify the has been received. common lot line between Tract 5187 and APN 500 - 0230 -195 (Peter's parcel) to increase Peter's parcel to ten (10) gross acres, not to exceed eight- thousand eight hundred (8,800) square feet. The lot line adjustment must be filed prior to approval of the first final map. 11. Agreement that affordable unit These fees will be Development Fee shall be included in Conditions of three - thousand dollars Approval of the affordable ($3,000) per unit; Park Fee housing development. A shall be three - thousand six- request for 17 affordable hundred dollars ($3,600) per units has been submitted unit, and Air Quality Fee and is currently in shall be five - hundred dollars review. ($500) per unit. Evaluation of Good Faith Compliance Based on a review of the Development Agreement Annual Review Application and the status of the project, the Community Development Director has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence that William Lyon Homes has, to date, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation, and find, on the basis of substantial evidence, that William Lyon Homes, Inc. has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement. 2. Deem the annual review process complete. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Letter from William Lyon Homes y1f-�:. J i ' e _ - I' ;;4 �0'1 PR ECT SIT$ i~ � TENTATIVE TRACT :•d NO. 5187 - / - - r VAL - --; i - � ^' Y ac� °• �a.a.w �r.o,.. Y6Ni:In L'n.:p.,..'1_.�� ,. IiS ! -._.- ___�_... �� _. �...�,_.._........E___.�. _,• a P, � '__......... -. ' _.__.... -.. -- _. - ._._..__._. _._... .. I ..' � ., �, � • b yon - r A f J A 7 1 6 N• ! A f o A A L Lk C F Y X36 5 � cry�Il ; _., -,r__ - _ - -_•e �� � 6%-°' T NORTH CC ATTACHMENT 1 Ct71I1Z� _4 i II .. CC ATTACHMENT 2 =�✓2 µms....... I ' ` ... ...... J,, P. VESTING.TENTATIVE TRACT MAP No. 5187 Development Agreement Annual Review Application Response RPD 99 -01, TTM 5187 January 31, 2003 1) Report of those aspects of the agreement completed prior to this review. • Acquisition of an approximate 2 -Acre site for the construction of affordable homes • Submittal of application, fees and required materials to entitle the affordable housing site: o General Plan Amendment o Zone Change o RPD Permit o Tentative Tract Map 2) Report on progress made toward completion of all other aspects of the agreement during period prior to this review. William Lyon Homes, Inc. has enlisted the services of professional engineers and consultants to conduct the development of the project in timeframes compliant with the Development Agreement. A critical path schedule has been prepared identifying the benchmark accomplishments that must be achieved to fulfill the developer's obligations. This work includes but is not limited to the analysis, design and engineering for offsite improvements along Walnut Canyon Road, design and entitlement application submittal of for the affordable housing site and onsite engineering and plan preparation for the development of Tract 5187. We have met with several agencies in conducting this work that includes the City of Moorpark, Cal Trans, Ventura County Watershed Protection Agency (formerly, VCFCD) and Water Works District No. 1. All work is being conducted to comply with requirements of the Development Agreement and the Conditions of Approval for TTM 5187. 3) An explanation with supporting information of aspects of the agreement where good faith compliance has not been achieved with proposals for a corrective action to achieve such compliance. • None 11:\1- SHARED FnLDLR\1 - Active ProjectsWoorpark 250 \Correspondance \Letters 2003\Development Agreement Review - Laura Stringer.doc CC ATTACHMENT 3 000089 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL BY' �- AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director )?P,4� Prepared By: Laura Stringer, Senior Management Analyst DATE: March 26, 2003 (CC Meeting of 04/16/03) SUBJECT: Consider Report of Annual Development Agreement Review, Established in Connection with Industrial Planned Development (TR No. 5004 /IPD No. 95 -02) Special Devices, Incorporated (SDI) BACKGROUND Government Code Section 65864 and Section 15.40.150 of the Municipal Code provide for Development Agreements between the City and property owners in connection with proposed plans for development of specific properties. Development Agreements are designed to strengthen the planning process, to provide developers some certainty in the development process and to assure development in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. The Municipal Code also requires the Developer to file an application with the Community Development Director requesting the annual review of the Agreement. The last review of SDI's Development Agreement was completed September 19, 2001. On August 21, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96- 1222 approving General Plan Amendment No. 95 -01, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5004, and Industrial Planned Development Permit No. 95 -02 and on August 28, 1996, the Development Agreement between the City of Moorpark (the "City ") and Special Devices, Incorporated ( "SDI" or the "Developer ") was executed. 000030 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 DISCUSSION: Protect Status The following is a Status Update of those items that remained in the last annual review: • Transfer of Lots 4 and D: These lots were transferred to the City of Moorpark (unencumbered by the previous lien) on May 29, 2003. This item is now complete. • Correction of Tract Map No. 5004: An Amended Tract Map to correct certain errors on the original map was recorded on May 29, 2002. This item is now complete. • Reforestation of Caltrans "Gateway to Moorpark ": Planting has been completed to the satisfaction of the City's landscape consultant, the Community Development Director and Caltrans. • Permanent Drainage Solution for Lower Portion of White Sage Road: Although the City's landscape consultant has reported that planting and irrigation have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for this area, the City Engineer has not yet provided final inspection comments on this issue. Developer Compliance with Terms of Aareement Special Devices Incorporated's development responsibilities are included in Section 6 of the Development Agreement and include 14 specific requirements (a. through n.) as listed below along with the status of each: # REQUIREMENT STATUS a. The terms and conditions for the Reported payments required by Subdivisions (1) complete in the and (m) Section 6 shall be those 1998 Report. contained in a promissory note. SDI has executed the Promissory Note and Deed of Trust which have been recorded. \ \mor pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnda rpt.doc 000031 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 3 # REQUIREMENT STATUS b. Grant a conservation easement to retain Completed. Lot A of VTTM No. 5004 in a predominantly open space condition consistent with Civil Code Section 815. The conservation easement shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final subdivision map for VTTM No. 5004, execution of the early grading agreement by the City Manager, or recordation of this Agreement, whichever occurs first. C. Payment of all outstanding City A positive fund processing and environmental impact balance report costs related to VTTM No. 5004, currently IPD No. 95 -02, GPA 95 -01, and Zone exists for this Change No. 95 -03 and for preparation of project, this Agreement. however staff will perform final audit prior to release of cash security currently held. The Engineering Division has requested additional funds to cover estimated cost to complete the Engineering portion of the project. d. Process an application for annexation of Reported the approximate 56.84 acres of Lot A of complete in the VTTM No. 5004, which acreage is 1998 Report. currently not in the City, to the City, so that a LAFCO decision is rendered prior to October 1, 1997. \ \mor_pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnca rpt.doc 000032 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 4 # REQUIREMENT STATUS e. Provide irrevocable offer of dedication Reported to City for public street purposes of complete in the that portion of Lot 3 of VTTM No. 5004 2001 Report. containing the private road prior to approval of the Final Map for VTTM No. 5004. f. Annex all of the property within VTTM Reported No. 5004 that is within the City to complete in the Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1 1998 Report via (the "District ") prior to occupancy of the annexation the first building within the Project or of the property approval of the Final Map for VTTM No. 5004, whichever occurs first. g. Agrees to not oppose creation of a To date SDI has redevelopment project area (as defined complied with by applicable State law) encompassing this condition any part of the Property provided that the project area is consistent with the rights of Developer under this Agreement. h. Agrees to dedicate Lot 4 and Lot D, as These lots were described in Condition No. 16 of VTTM transferred to No. 5004, in fee simple interest to City the City of concurrently with the recordation of the Moorpark Final Map for VTTM Map No. 5004. These (unencumbered lots are to be used for public benefit by the previous as determined by City in its sole lien) on May discretion. 29, 2002. This item is now complete. S: \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnda rpt.doc 000093 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 5 # REQUIRE_MENT STATUS i. Agrees not to request any concession, To date the waiver, modification or reduction of any owners have fee, regulation, requirement, policy or complied with standard condition for development of this condition. Lots 1 and 2 of VTTM No. 5004, and SDI no longer further agrees to pay all fees imposed owns Lots 1 and by City for future buildings, so long as 2. The current said fees are also imposed in a similar owners are manner on similar projects. successors to the Development Agreement. Future Development Agreement reviews will address the other ownership. j. Modification to Caltrans rights -of -way Reported adjacent to the Property and complete in the signalization of SR 23 interchange with 2001 Report. New Los Angeles Avenue. k. Maximum building square footage for Lot To date SDI has 1 of VTTM No. 5004 shall not exceed complied with 132,183 and for Lot 2 of VTTM No. 5004 this condition. shall not exceed 37,200, and limitations to conditionally permitted uses of Lots 1 and 2. S: \Community Development \ADMIN \AGVTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030916 agnda rpt.doc 000094 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 6 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 1. Payment to the City in accordance with Payment in the the provisions of the agreement if, for amount of any reason, Developer does not employ $29,970 was the number of full -time employees received by the required by the agreement at the Project City on May 24, facilities described in IPD No. 95 -02. 2002. That Beginning with the initial occupancy payment date of April 1, 1999 the full -time concluded SDI's employment count for the SDI, Inc. obligation described below: under this section of the DATE Actual FTE Min. FTE Development 6/29/99 645 490 Agreement. 6/29/00 687 565 6/29/01 682 640 6/29/02 385 715 M. Build the Project described in IPD No. SDI has 95 -02 and any City approved minor complied with modification thereto and relocate the this condition Los Angeles County operations of Special through Devices, Incorporated to the Project occupying the facilities within three (3) years after property within the effective date of the Agreement or the time frame pay City the sum of Four Hundred Ninety- originally Two Thousand, Three Hundred and Fifty- contemplated. One Dollars ($492,351.00) plus Seventy- Thus, no Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00) per additional fees year for four (4) consecutive years. are payable pursuant to this provision. n. Pay for City costs at the applicable SDI continues rate then in effect for review and plan to make all check monitoring and inspection of work payments as performed by consultants retained by required for Developer and City pursuant to the plan check and agreement. inspection. Citv Compliance with Terms of Aareement The City's responsibilities are included in Section 7 of the agreement and include 16 specific provisions (a. through p.) as summarized below. S: \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnda rpt.doc 000095 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 7 # REQUIREMENT STATUS a. The Property shall be exempt from the Fulfilled provisions of Chapter 17.38 (Hillside Management) of the Moorpark Municipal Code. b. The Property shall be exempt from any growth Fulfilled management ordinance that is adopted by the City Council or by initiative of the electorate. C. Acquire, at the request of the Developer and at Fulfilled Developer's sole cost and expense, easements or fee title to land in which Developer does not have title or interest in order to allow construction of public improvements required of Developer. d. City shall use its best efforts to process plan Fulfilled checking and early grading agreement for the Project in an expedited manner. e. Approve an early grading agreement on behalf of Fulfilled City to allow rough grading of the Project prior to City Council approval of the Final Map for VTTM No. 5004. f. Defer payment by the developer of applicable Fulfilled fees for the Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution (the "AOC fees ") until the time of issuance of a zone clearance for the first building permit for the Project or approval of the Final Map for VTTM No. 5004, whichever occurs first. g. Defer payment by the Developer of the Citywide Fulfilled Traffic Mitigation Fee until the time of issuance of a zone clearance for the first building permit for each lot within the boundaries of the Property. h. Defer payment of fees except as otherwise Fulfilled provided in this Agreement, other than fees for plan checking, permits, processing and other services controlled by City until the time of issuance of a zone clearance for the first building permit for each lot within the boundaries of the Property, unless the fee is otherwise due at a later time. S: \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnda rpt.doc LL O O © ©9 V Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 8 # REQUIREMENT STATUS i. Upon the effective date of the Agreement, the Fulfilled period required for use inauguration of IPD No. 95 -02 shall be extended from one (1) year to three (3) years. j. Accept Lots 4 and D as satisfaction of the Fulfilled requirements imposed by Condition No. 61 of VTTM No. 5004 and Condition No. 88 of IPD 95- 02. k. Exempt the Project from the Art in Public Fulfilled Places fee. 1. Exempt the Property from the landscape fee of Fulfilled five cents ($.05) per square foot for the Property given the large percentage of the site retained in natural open space. M. Agree that the contribution requirements of Fulfilled Condition No. 127 of VTTM No. 5004 shall be satisfied upon completion of installation of the two (2) traffic signals at the SR 23 /New Los Angeles interchange to the satisfaction of the City. n. Agree not to require Developer to remove Fulfilled noxious plants from the Arroyo Simi. o. Agree that, in implementation of Condition No. Fulfilled 26 of VTTM No. 5004, the City Engineer and Community Development Director may jointly approve elevation changes, not to exceed five (5) feet, for the purpose of providing contour grading of the ridgeline. p. Agree that, in implementation of the condition Fulfilled of VTTM No. 5004 and IPD No. 95 -02 relating to an Environmental Quality Assurance Program, Habitat Restoration Plan, Oak Woodland Restoration and Reforestation Plan and other conditions outlined in the section, work required to be performed by the City Engineer, the City Attorney, City's designated geologist, City's designated geotechnical engineer, and public agencies not under the jurisdiction of City shall not be deemed consultants for purposes of this subsection. S: \Com.-nunity Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnda rpt.doc /� "00 09 . Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 9 Evaluation of Good Faith Compliance Based on a review of the Development Agreement Annual Review Application, the current status of the project and efforts by the developer to comply with all outstanding items, the Community Development Director has, on the basis of substantial evidence, determined that SDI has to date complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation, and find, on the basis of substantial evidence, that SDI has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement. 2. Deem the annual review process complete. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map. 2. Amended Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) No. 5004. 3. Narrative from SDI. S: \Community Developicent \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1996 -01 sdi \cc 030416 agnda rpt.doc 000098 :.OtW D REAL. -N ST HWY I ib) IWY. I� City of Moorpark Planning Division Location: 14370 White Sage Roa Location Map A 200 0 200 Feet M%mw CC ATTACHMENT 1 000099 L O MI wf✓N' K wYSJ d, P KrfKTt9 r K tw• MI<m I.N b tpW Ally wMtri to( .eY•w N >q' w! wr MAY KOY/RIfPr raR rYft>p!Q rl•S(rr q fll0 •V q fr rK wl MNrTRI C N <IWat sID rNWrr P t<0 W K cPOIY U Jr1rr 1M' KOr/lpr IDVOVI u[ K ,wr M> b ur/lYKK� .Y✓'aMY1'r�M�K1�.Y! �A ♦f !r /f %I MIO la7lmrr Krr wClAC wUgrfa /!J nw.! \uV utlR Nrwf y rltWX! KI r/Aerl JaVafK�'NMrI aRr � /MKrr1l WAb .WPoIIJ rDC/(q KOn blmllY(r /aDflr /MIK AIV {lir/S ovr/f KfPS CRaY/raS/P r/ {iXIY /rM KaViAIpIIrD �KMCLT)f: KRrK I!/ar H wrr Mb.Iq) /O,P q f C KOnr♦wlrwr K av/ T fTrKr Nr'lr� I fRll/ U <Y+frpt d(p?<l KF K,yr K /rtl Vrlr OTbI qII OnI rA1'r[M 4c11afrPOrr rodRNaai Krr M/r wpgr /Vrra MRr dIP /1Prr Mra K.Ir /Nrro.Yaflr rflK.Yr SRI { A9fiI gYOn d waMar /V .iltC (q K AI /R frTn rwr N K rv, 1rAVO< q InQIYf Rr prlY1♦! Irr d f+r r.wo ®/ K RTPP alO11f4 d Arrf.«urYr DYrNr Rrd/ r RK f/u Q M1 wa KU nD IrOI a r,IIIY we srw rP Rrf d Ar / .a'fl /gKIK/ {IO /I rRf YIIq KYVq/r fOrn ROL yrlp Isla• / K NrI Mr ITtr O!/ q(YGt q IhIM (rrnrl/yy+QtA Yt+N rprrelKKfru•r rHl I.IYN ADN N M rr K wr K>N.Irvramri{ q KOn d w.vc K4clfr rP Rr<rR.n RrwT ppr aftrrrnad //R /b/VOLYIy/p'1>n d/ {aIbYM(NI /qf IyOM %!! yy/T( /Y�Y rMl(f��.K� <�bl�r�f lM /AAIIUY PIO�J Ir �LIIILl1f �lp�++ Q, ylalf�I�JZ.. f` /tDlwrA rYOY<rr.wrs L4brri C ZYtay(N_SltM/J M/Wru/Y tKM' a r P rWVp q✓ d rlr d f+l✓KATr /MYIG' A r K 1nOl'f � -.Nrf a Alfaalq O K VM MIRYrrf'O rDrlsMlATD q K wyr KiltrtuRp KY.{ r M'Y AwfOtRD GUOIY. I.O w, /r KY 1a'N ieI Y N IawCra'r K n/fDa P Kp•r. w.w.l✓dr.nr K my lrvn lazvao K /alralse - / YV P O+♦I! J <arhr t � r to -sac S 1'<..`» `"""- -• 1 K ffartr d.nsw ml/ntunewofla'< qNl s r ryuvr m RapKl R+avlYnrry r Irrr war m; ..b N fmx aoam d Ylul mnn +.t or area raT K Aa.morr dr<Iw KYYRI /V /4 d K llOOf'ar .!< !V NKT /Q lOr w/ n tAMO/ /luri / 9 •1< M J♦D SaMfKf ✓rrrbr0 //K rV1MI M JWeKd NfO {d NryM< >Q dM /VYYr/p Dp1 fermi rfv/r/ rra fer/ rw J/r w1t /r oD»r r:Qrr d rreM MrR laf OA y,n <� N navrR+lp d artwr<Irrf /L /U d KIOIW YV •.Y K. rfrfrQ lW w/n prpr rir rq ♦ K .+(K a✓ W M<T K m /ryKl N K gyliargr r <ursr r w //w r+w r v vets! ww rrlrrar rot �al nla/r rolert rmp/..r r< �r/u/aRrApr.p mur rym dY.ul+ IvITf 1Rtrrr rr /Y rru K.tceeeM b 1D'rP l[1r'a/ /y /ydKJOra rr Kr NFlfrf /a r<r ar, N xprl�: rR r /l! IlL M NO SpIM'J If wl/ rLLtfD N K Olr<rn0/Wr K mrtr d aa..rr c /)aunt .aAa n r, Dlip dOf+Y/ P /�r/t(lyd AY ? wpIrKIW r1JI�rTrRDRTJNIS K llv'!Q rr/ raven Kor d l+n rot w ra'Mp r m rt<rn R.ew• rr V<+rfpf Ai .V 1 dTaa' r'AX6 b YNRRr It<I'/< W 6r rlfq INO KleVnraT D' ITIV♦ K(,V{ / /{I /(/ d Y JepY{1NYM N lfartr drn w< aft o nrRa,r d +<.e+ar deal d v a rO ♦reL 4Z rIPJr /a /nY' K IIR/rf! rn /Ifyi K Oi d 1I /,Y pl: N RY+Ip M nff0 RRII•I drape // /r, rwv wa A♦1 n d.AW NfaO r WW IMrR r/ rir.rrp fA[b K raefn d rrfv raay!<f lU d K lrelraarw.al N rrArd✓..0 lra< /r r. {rrn d .W dAU rrrrf <uY q tae+,., rY .I.rl,r K arYO 1r..Yrf sr P.Rr... r wn rs fK no-. mwr wa/Rry rrr..d Krd .w.rr Mra+dlra!/r < ✓rvlmr Krea rmalprrmw rwY r tar 1rt +.r au roar rnrv+d YYaw. earn w rrr Dr11I um K Rapwd /rRr rarsllY /C/d K /e1rrRlr r✓ K! cat�nrfxs aaJrx��r <Awt.Yw roremd•{r Y/1rrA{orl.rl aY nwnw Mr rV I]KllrgRlyrp/ JJRYYyYWI•IrOr'tpvrbr /Kt w/ K R.rrQ lltf K 4W7 rf IOIY wr M wfYltlq.Kd K IwK'1T r0 norl K IMDf<ra IYfAID A{ w r frlr car 1vD.Lrf war<nr IY ✓al tyUrAP d M +f/: / %MD wYr N> K Ib rf rl An<ill q OUrl IQ IIN >CK1WC rfrrr gr<(p.Yr laY♦pR lfaw ar >UV< /i./rt KOrrV IrK SOOd NOn tRM•fyWq y�, /aY UKr Kr♦VVrr ?rq KOn1M /f+flY :l. �c:�rr(ll��'y, i arrn�ArDVS mv�i�r /.pepr C l/YY wrIw+V /lWD NrIY rd (Ya•m ll+r tlMV w K lrrrprQ ylfrrlWr K fYI U r/ MGO� N K IInK.M .YI .r+.rarrnrKraaQ wardwxr weYSpeb Klrrw✓w Kr d K fu{ rrx/nwr AID dY' /(TAr Da.w.+tar/ // K k d MI"'hr MaavdKQUnfl✓N/K /Ila Otlam lr lr w/r ArYfbp A wr K r♦♦ a IOK..Ir <w♦cc+ rNrW roan • rlv w o lo+i OR <epYy ar�oae�cs aa�a2 tN rr rwty tart m lar a.mxr f Ytl4 a wYyve/ q N On r<tP[e d KOnr YAMr d Ylt/u tarn Ovnlwy •// rrer r /wr d SID O1I♦Ul rl. d N:iO d r d /Yta1� slit RY ♦+aprY Lp O:eR {rIrMIRfYT YID YV K /rY1 r[b /.tlrlr K /Ila< %rP apt rxf/Vtrst Alp MS+(rlrA�l KlaDYr /q Rba-✓4in Yl� . vrm ,rrsr.an0 ✓�rrKY7ovTFI�I/hT27W '� .IID+M O✓Kwlyd A'! aKI+NW .IOrlf+rrlwi /D/ K RtL'SrlR IYaIK K lG/K K rfQ rtrlr♦[tvn .eu Iwa o rvf � 1 P31F trot rrfYi Kr/odrAwxi-lq QeYwb.wr�..tT2<� t� IAQ/Q /rQ+cvR am rR+b wrI r v K Ar +. for} a.fr• %.`urcl h"w M1 wV v.�/fyp'Ma� /dfOUlf <y�l[IACWNIJ/ I o0 .KD a!!Y, fV Jh rprl .ru fA.rl MJ b108a F rApw \�dlVf >OY/NL _ I/NrRr Klr/)O CIrM rnl<d btW OnK M'rpNTYQ - Qr b JlQ On d Ilanl<f r K r,� R'!'p Mir /by�j�, /rnr Y onPlliM' r � Ohd rrr) /!P/Y wrrl y {tY{f K r Wrn rgwV udr K wrIM4T d JtrP'J rm K rru d K c<ebpr �✓ rl rV rla' rtrp K rrwo rr /.r l..a. T .wave✓ Nr♦n ✓L lOr/rP o9f-a81� ?i R/p M dvd_,�f y�0'IabuKtV ralw rYagrrrlas ♦ ♦ ♦lfrrr�1f l lllllQQQQQQjjjjjj������.roa+.sd oweu.R.f ,e tarn /d J♦laR �rrfs0 K AI(MOIff��lt�"i1C aw /bN a7oc -� Ol' ern. 1�'1lB�li3eYlY,w�ieersus(scretz �QrBR`d2i� 1fYJ C KYrtl RWti aAwaplQ+gAKIAD �Ifq<+YdW � Q y/elr ♦r1YlR1 /r K4KKXD rRf/ PI/r /d LO rIK/ R![NrT ayltYn {MIfaYIlrr}e✓d<►O Y RJN PlY1IgD6 O .p4Y mrn ♦IVY O /..vr. >; /)I/ bIl - ��T�L- HeYI( fif/T rfLP rIYC OIr1 Arrr RGIr b YrfJr AWV! ..w/i r«�.�h7r8i77f•.61naoM y�ag. ct>unr�lxn aW�rx cueerraxraa�wie M Q q O•q w IDr/ drr) rgOr q N rRlrr m.+>ROV tTl'1R CnCf <Wlra(N/Q Imltf f rrlr.b /l/1♦I/ K WLMI<I Oral! PlVY/ d yp OTlwr lerr..r a rwAh tOr/la'DNr'ci turd Kwil�bLf1M #rlOrNr uXr'n .aarY N /Rr J /1V r+m � <7�it _ r.uf wJr (KfR. M! QLiKr AYhd Y.r/f/ Jr/ Or/arl h .a.r� cww c.r•wi� aam alive f dv.dwo rN•K.I.q QP'AOr11IJr<T'lzV rQw KgOq! Qir.fq Ra.YK rQOa AV. rralmC d Km�roa drwrer �f T rpr r lRt ✓w lio Ittir.aq ww.t ✓Q IRria I<Y Oft' d MiNYI' On bead rl Nr rparrJQWa(P rlK raaQl R rave J ru+K lncova /brPlal♦AViomrf(rrvlwYOC� /rory arrr tNra r.wAw rw: � Ntr rvlpa fr,dr /IaIICUIr1wlrAtalYwOlaDK mn.uafr d rrawr+rrlrT.earrrw m.Yfly a rwrieb/KIQf r NerY ryfTlrr b(P <QWtbMrlrre{yoOpll/P Yp O♦w1I MI'+Y< K fY.'r/•W' K♦Irf K.VtTaal/rpYalrllrl IPf31erlar M /¢tds li/rMrAlq.p♦ d0lwG6V rm♦ /4hD r fYr /tp lrr w er naltm v /omr a.o.a RIV •Yrr'la</ PMlaf'ROwrK rp.IOruY DarlftN J/p wlptlp a{ rwpw/ Kr(r rbCJ r1frl M UMI.r Imruu avarYr Ar.IVr AMYIYQ I'(IfpiMl L1Qa K r" A° AMENDED MAP OF TRACT MAP N0. 5004 OTY OF 0000ARK COUNTY Of VENrUR& STATE Of CALIFM" CC ATTACHMENT 2 A/Alc A mIlA)1' <r PACI V p Alt "OkV 9[ AS M AW a mm -Ia i'<O Or /Arj44W fi RWVW W. 1VAC 263' SAW AV I 0r14WS 1 r IAr .ID/ Lc<D Aw wl" M W"r rr(r !QN R<O /AV /Y SIW AW pr IAf CbUr .Qr,Mj, d' SAO aXNIY Aua4'C IpSI SaW 44Y rr<tlll TIT S CO IN ATAV mov Ra AAlQE "V7 ITAM G MpN ,jv ,U-J%. 9r?/ J or 6.9a7Js o vxs 2v/rrrw)F .b �4iAY bYrRLWa �lYIL.OQaao It al/ tJMrrt/rr V bIleuu,� -� r.aw�llur,w„DiAY�IGA��ucBAi _ .YrJO.Ta. aar q.r a MAID A.r d M A.DT d LR%[A.i IMYYr O r M R.OG1 DICY' •I.r T Jr.AG- IbD b W' rnDr .H1Yrrrr Aa +D1APT¢VD O.r Nr M /UTW1D N ♦.✓T KY wq.m On.a/Y, to Arr Ir DN tR.T!- i M M+R.err M tDADi M N a'Dn.Iw KJ.a/ d Mlav KA.+mCf.�•TA lTNTD K r6�f fe.11K � — aA.nM.o.IOrfDUlm dr aarsab p.rr -� ACCYMYRY' aA/FT�q - J:fQ.pl p 1C/A .I J -' /m/. /.V4. a .Oa3LKYt3 K[GfJ frVU •rNaJllv4i0 i11W grrr � o.J s(At�es D°ria Rrr:. a ran.. 0 L7rY 1Mmawffys ammxq ,7r r gf//a..s. ewr, a.♦ �n�r.r lwn rf '✓.sn +vu alr.r+/.n )�'rJr ✓.J 91 Wlff / Clat+i, I K -uAl .q K P+Y.rIU.w �+c rc.� /w NA, rRVM rr YCr�. K.1Ia VLwr:.ra, Mar: r � rrf D[Y a/TYT tK arr...s� v. aiNd 'i xQL ohYw ..1 r.um , use °i+a ap W9FCL'AG7-_clr U7Y CYXnyQ(S CtF1RJGlC ,,YWrJODC{OY MM.AO.... I ri a +a JWr l9N'[R n•.r Trl.YW (P.Y.ap w K .]h Q7r1D T ai+�ar ?!Ir d leT .I .YIY +n. r +rJ .bP .fi1.lM1'J Ir KOr' YJ r'w..fr Ai nCCVYF n- i.4- �4MRS.Y M.tl r Tif a K rdv. 1..r,. rr a vv �.x... .aaf c� o israz ca�fr a_DFr onrex(s1 cr• AvartRrr Arrrc�tn •. Prfr a •.SRDn pt[W /r Kf.MAOIG w, rpr)r a1Q.I T K Kit1V.i DCA'r I,ff1 �r Oh $.l.(aY.Y�/L rn �iuy) ryf1D on o ..w11n ax or e,l. J ct aYOAQZA CfMA'VA)F rr tlitr rrf(,a4wC. ApSiO.'1' pt awn r K Iw o W a K IIVVA)v aV KI MO tY rq{r�p M11Rrr M r �� ,J � N' ✓v �i i 6 f �(C?0 /Ki(✓ f ACII{rti D 7111017 •1 /' ti T :a.�i w.`rie.°d K�..rr.�`i.o.�•• nar J b rr sir � r tOMCf) ry ! A r rl ^r ,d .Dl .J Dc.r d D.. Drrr J a r.filt Alai. A .4 r,7( 7110 >KAr ' M tpnawr A[Yq' 4 O n/ y( '.�. "". Ai rulrrw m.Tt Af.lw ul Yu+m .rKMY..'... y(K11@ICr.,pp lrr /II bwA.Tr.T IOnA'°'rT ra7lOC K. 1T+Y In[ V A �p�Y % ralV Yo Rrri ,r.w rr A K � ar. rATA .ae uKwT.raarD,.fr„�.s lcw.ramrdwRnra .� MK Y 4ti/G r K IL Q.rDr K {yy� Iy�rr o w:rors rAO�a r10 mwrr K. aarrr arroq� w rr. 'Rw.r .p rb 'J, t+0 AKaa l� L.mr K J .TaI.IT MMG (tQlfrr 0.017.17 TRa� DIM) +JDIbr K rlrf r rTr Nl, la .) sZ►�{ r1D A .7'W •I•rA+4M(Dr Klr..aWr TA.b.1[wp,YTDT CI Y ovyal�ITtm�.f�iiTw`m�ivo f4ir•�'�a r.au rt.OQ iY nfia'rm P1rAYU K K AYwrf YIIC W ..f K aT,x -, AA' � a °r: .o.an A Don rc Aw r w oMC'RS O' _H9p4°Rrr :iT 4 a [ JW/ ��.uAiYT MK uyl U.. 1L11iurr /4q.D�r K.SY .+C Tr,Cfa'I r.1rC h A%1 ✓. . 1p..w lrul /f1IDTr.Y YnrDT Mtrn fors ..no ___ . _ _..on bwn.•t.. AMENDED MAP Of TRACT MAP NO. 5004 CM Or MOORPARK COUNTY OF VE?4n A, STAR 6 CALFOMNA A'l1C .r R]P/A7v Or WWf 71.0' Ar rA4010 At AS MAP KAR Ir- [TAA7D Yv d' IW 14W5 O'AtN]f19 Sid AUW RIiTNA)V K(D .M r 0, 4AWS LY K SY(Mp AIp M/rR CT1wrY, K.alr' /AV AIp /� BY SJOr 4.0 ArfAL 32NKXX3 r:[cpiyp W /.'.7f J /A171 a K✓S N Ar 07AY 'r A! CpAlY 4Cyt)@YT Or SIO LYYN/r .fiLAl'BlYakifm9lC I CGYJC(A'AG .V!/ .CAr'RAfl rAtat Karr[siArrs' u w7�i 97771 or 6 9Aa?s �! err Or 1(Cr } rlr rr1. m � /Y • w,u w �v D� rti N rf2 CN,1pM,f rp (Dt +)can RLG rR A� 1'VI >r U n: �ltr j E LN Jwo1,tl rula y: ,�, tt.. n•}ar o.n 'IU au F � i S•AR in raP 'J l - ��'ner ruc �. ., r r(G � � ax) / a. ur .. IMn..c ro r •rr :ti. •K ✓' I r r uu / /� -uMt P�lr. AfN rn �F •. '� N I, wD<�u, •c•+�c / / • .oW r:cr _2 ,t• w o Ne t .n tin (DY rt.f . SM+Y rO i�1 � Atr llw r'I. ' M .tip __ - -- •C lrSt - _ -- 14N M' ;r In "N' L 1W ,} R }) 1 _ rI X � � "yam "n) s n:n. rw i� f srr,. a .• ru n fL ' pµ• �\ UrIN V+O tW .11 t" W .1]n+.nNm� RY i. t• Sr ryr Oa' D W r/• 0,3 uC ft W Y' �;Ar \_s:.1 n•rrnrN is _ fni➢ 0( YM. n. ,W tl N K N ;r Y1tD b LC.Y Ail 1 I' 1 DP.KL m C �'A ✓t MO RG Yu. }, :tM +f J Nl L-.r W r. o r«LII �. o M[ f Lr 10' .e 0 �� r w N -eflbr tlr 0 = i J«} r. }.1 Dr D K Nf} H 1N al of V � c wl04i� e. $>. fir•.. N. wr r aP)c I)l �} wt u.DSr k r.° .f r� r rs ,•:,. ♦o- eP• I 51 waer rRt. s'C •fY (i.1 Rlr I I ChnA14 Y 4 'n K wV J + C l'i•AW f' M� mur. oi�•I DOr � { � / � 41nK m T. rir. - « SEE SHEET NO. 4 yS y .g ` ,e. ♦ass' i ..to A,tj Dar'ot,oKr.m*:tu.sl•a Y A JR IIr 1 ry t -h k' F atf fL. 'n "0% . rl i�t 1tD AQ� N MO SI:J Ix M 31 } W 415 1 A, z a iDY � 5' r1 a S DY t . r.+/9•. rG J DI irn wOluli l 1 nro. N»rwr31 C1 TY OF I a.DAOn MOO.. O 0 a N 't9T 0(Y,p r11rM IS SI WVE yy��G _t �e- YAM DATA, R l i YOM1S •rt.I1V 11 IYlrtf T LL ♦ N N' )> .nm is w aM N' h' . q t r1 > )•ar +Or N.' qN' I{r 04 W S(Ja( YONUt1ENT NOTES AND (EM O � o "r+ . rPw: ,oNrNr .s avJro t IA I ARK Y Rx,r . un rr UEYNCORP(YtATM P nr uNON VS s tMriO M J t l �• 11 .� C REMAINDER PARCEL 56.61 ACRES Y5M : r.gr0 ", w ,as ! mr :cr 1 •r Nr w-e,NC i A m Ir eDl wpipra.r[ :�,Ip�rc a1i �i ��. R n•v rrr.•nNa.nl. u�a i, � «R dsw rc�i n�fr DY Y T_5 i0 MIC c,�Y M faA6 CM L'Mirm � '•A �'vy�lp'.:: �+� m • R-.a 3 NmMNnK1N « rr +3AU KC w'it A Ptf V\ I _N r_r. -r ILr r w'f.AC,W -4r W Lc' rr • +• • , )r K • . nr . ..... lip ii-ia +cr .r v r O 0 a N 't9T 0(Y,p r11rM IS SI WVE yy��G _t �e- YAM DATA, R l i YOM1S •rt.I1V 11 IYlrtf T LL ♦ N N' )> .nm is w aM N' h' . q t r1 > )•ar +Or N.' qN' I{r 04 W S(Ja( YONUt1ENT NOTES AND (EM O � o "r+ . rPw: ,oNrNr .s avJro t IA I ARK Y Rx,r . un rr UEYNCORP(YtATM P nr uNON VS s tMriO M J t l �• 11 .� C REMAINDER PARCEL 56.61 ACRES Y5M : r.gr0 ", w ,as •_a_ }T • J •r "' !.-Am rr •• rr r MIC (tr 04x3 � N N' sr sd . .n.� m • R-.a 3 N sr w e• . + x 'I' 10, • « rr +3AU to .ww Inr 01 -y I _N r_r. -r COUNTY Or VENTURA, STATE Of CALfO NIA rr • +• • f•O AA nr . ..... lip ii-ia +cr .r v r uesv . ,YOf A151mM V Lt. •r At.. _ Y A'lr v'• �m.•I' or .nq IMI W Aor v A. AA • « 4 « Ryq.O Sy J M) rrSM r U MOIwG Std . R -q Y SyLR VMS N.V WATER CMANf. MADE 1B67 AND :BBD qr S10V AND po"E [. a*VC•PT S. KCO"W W BOGS J. PAGE 7 Of YAPS, IN .1 OITIOE + ST )r 1Y � +l•Y Y'r t)'Orr uIN :nt .n4 ' N n_n s1_( /Nr nl .Ix N n' u' i•' • - - Irn•f • 1 -q eco SQ1M BAY ♦ CORSULT111O M' ( ,y ylfQ V'. 11x0 ^y- Yn' .r r•( w -wtr -iii . nas �.� I• . EST E I.L05 sRM10 [575-2$• P .0271 3IX N)] ,x M !S f+MU ASf:lArm AS N N' U' fl' U r n'sr lr. ry.lr nr .R_4 AAWT ART. "of SHEET S Of 6 SKETS Sum -- J _ n' lt• • =AF m 01 -4 a' •i X ( JNOO (fr . Fb Ir w Orr fn It Ifr .S-q NOON N'• Go nr.Dq ■ sn Y.r.rhr u nxwfm O r) r r?,I. ./r,41C1. nNr, riW SR Y J. I/W RPt nfS,. IWY n. rrgN At OAS Al A$ ... Af AA . Rr TOG d Nap«•iW t N1l .l . (- �RI,Nj Rf1D IDIN R n•rn rAVba l R) . CaD.+W ruJ IOW R AA , q - CANN.q rme SOW R . of 4 - DKCrOR rU R(tCram aMO, r, rfq At wfr b R -PNIU O - Ga05ARD I— NC • RCOIO TN n+Nf r/+NO4+ OOMMM• Y nNryp11+11Y rPa♦ WINb 00.N} ft/Nr 1NrSApr ni hr wD .�aowVWuYS . rmo NNaA . m,AN1 NR a nn) . ODNtII(.r v NIA�YIrnW r' I a • Spna+ OO•wn rN)O 01Y 0. . Jrp(DeW AQ-U " /J Jle" -A — A As— At IeAUeto wss rev "• ^• Y >,wl V' NArWD N:A,V rtt O(r I AMENDED MAP OF TRACT W R t d 1NOO Dr. J N. MAP NO. 5004 OTT Of MOORPARK COUNTY Or VENTURA, STATE Of CALfO NIA / % :fIJ 4C ar A iIN .t N [1 n w 1 U sw,'0 - v rU wP M-,Inv ttr it 1w 3 Y+, .J r Y -✓ C:t,C A PCfl i'ON L} (RACE •Y• Of THE RANOv) 94• AS PER YM PC- i)lTi1D 1N . ,YOf A151mM V Lt. •r At.. 'J CT M [.ANDS 01 BAkCY SW, DENG SA'JNSON -1l vO 7 CI Los ME IMI W Aor v A. AA • « 4 « Ryq.O Sy J M) rrSM r U MOIwG Y SyLR VMS N.V WATER CMANf. MADE 1B67 AND :BBD qr S10V AND po"E [. a*VC•PT S. KCO"W W BOGS J. PAGE 7 Of YAPS, IN .1 OITIOE w t Vlm Cf Mr C0.'NM1 REUADER Of 7,,11 CPAs, BASS Or BFAISNGS N`GUS'. r/0.• AY010ED YAP PREP/RE'J BY: ee SA"3 d r+A',as ,is A►KV 11 nr c ]:,0 •OO 1w eco SQ1M BAY ♦ CORSULT111O A d ,tr :OS A. +M N.r rNO. s trrCrA JOE 304 V 011 PE .Li l -- w3 • iM «: V N /I''6' 01' f M'r•Cr W ll �.� I• . EST E I.L05 sRM10 [575-2$• P .0271 3IX N)] ,x M !S f+MU ASf:lArm AS N N' U' fl' U (JIO) 375 -2506 ART. "of SHEET S Of 6 SKETS LINE DATA O _0._... p% C cj LEGEND Y rte•+ 7l 7� NOTE- PfA Au4. •Ar Il 1� i•I!T MtaM MD IFI.q O �•l bTl..R .!o L^rf N o-4,y Jf .ter X� MAL Or LOT 6 OOTAE OF LOT 0 A•IN b InTfJJR DETAIL 'A' IOT 10 A;A.E I.Yi Nt ..wrn .tr arc F4 OA NI S'ti '� >H• / _X. spMA cool 1 SCIL(. . 302' 1 A P` 11 A M .1 1 -TV IVIR `t AMENDED MAP OF TRACT MAP N0. 5004 CITY OF NOORPA2TR COUNTY OF VENTURA. STATE OP CA3TORMA WNG A PCRIION OF RACY 'M Of INE RANCHO S". IS PER NAP RT- INT'jy MN IA Td LAIN`+ OF RANCNC 9W', BEFG SUOD ASIN MAP NO 2 OF LANDS CA IMF SW LAND MO WER COMPANY. MAOE 117 ANO 16M by 510, AIU POMEAJ; W"YORS. RECORDED N BCC( 3. PACE 7 OE PS• NA M TNL CETICE or TK COUNTY RECOkuQ Of SAO COUNrr .!UGIST. 1697 N41OE7 BAP PR{PAREO BY. SOUTH BAY ENWERING k CONSULTING 30, TEX. 'LAQ PALOS HEROES ESTATES CA OM74 (310) 376 -2566 A)LY. 2001 SKEET / OF 6 SLEETS nfr�r Na• �nm 'PIOT•i 2f0 M' � •MEO no �I)Ir. / F!Ti.• _M �f lHW 91Yri� 1 /)I' ftOW Nei —_ Mb N)f �' IN al' 1 JROm 1'IN l NMf.' )AI AW 'tBi�_ pal �bW 7TP'- bM � ba}Y )•m- ) ��{b NSY o-4,y Jf .ter X� MAL Or LOT 6 OOTAE OF LOT 0 A•IN b InTfJJR DETAIL 'A' IOT 10 A;A.E I.Yi Nt ..wrn .tr arc F4 OA NI S'ti '� >H• / _X. spMA cool 1 SCIL(. . 302' 1 A P` 11 A M .1 1 -TV IVIR `t AMENDED MAP OF TRACT MAP N0. 5004 CITY OF NOORPA2TR COUNTY OF VENTURA. STATE OP CA3TORMA WNG A PCRIION OF RACY 'M Of INE RANCHO S". IS PER NAP RT- INT'jy MN IA Td LAIN`+ OF RANCNC 9W', BEFG SUOD ASIN MAP NO 2 OF LANDS CA IMF SW LAND MO WER COMPANY. MAOE 117 ANO 16M by 510, AIU POMEAJ; W"YORS. RECORDED N BCC( 3. PACE 7 OE PS• NA M TNL CETICE or TK COUNTY RECOkuQ Of SAO COUNrr .!UGIST. 1697 N41OE7 BAP PR{PAREO BY. SOUTH BAY ENWERING k CONSULTING 30, TEX. 'LAQ PALOS HEROES ESTATES CA OM74 (310) 376 -2566 A)LY. 2001 SKEET / OF 6 SLEETS uN MIT ol iA � P � RL•,/ L � »sPf•>t < P� SCAU t' . •001 . •00 +0 C Cy it 5 4 mt\ mMAft WIr' O l c 9 3" CC l ONNY / 111 (• 51- �i� I Ji'f/ DETAIL OF LOT 3 <; ol M �R aou�- 5` DETAL.OF LOT 8 7t16 ACRES wy.K] 1.K A art .aH1 _ A DETAL.OF LOT C 1� ACRES .a;l�t, '••�A "p+� w`'�'�� L ADETALOF DETAIL OF LOT UNE DATA M0. K4" STM Oa In s nv:i . uad S rn�M • r]I •f w' J1 "WE NIII Nvn tt .1as SM.N'� u11 CURSE DATA w c :q 'w 100 1rSi"�"S[Rf+a.� suit. ipy \a�4 LOT A 4V LOW ACM ��� WMrq MOrH >gr�et rP .�D ry �1'Ow s Hwo w rw> UbgP q.tYW PLrn RIYO >1tr p 1 r0 Yf. NGM ti• .v1ul f[HH> 111,1x] AO Mf110r w M an � MY1IY Iv N.c cNm Arm EASEMENT DETAILS AMENDED MAP OF TRACT MAP NO. 5004 07Y Or MOORPARK CGUNTY a SENIURA. STATE Of CALWOMA BE HG A llaR lA TRACT 1' Of TOE P-M SEW. AS PER YAP RE- EN71TLED NAP OF THE LA%CS Cf RAVCHO SW'. OL'NC SL'"A7Uk NAP Wh 7 a WAS O IM SU LAND A40 .11TR CCWpMY. NAOL 1197 AHD 1666 BY SID. AHD P_ _RS. S,%tYC'R5. RECORGEO w ROM S• PACE 7 OF YAPS. n T.Z OMCE Of TIE COLP,ti RC:UQOLN n SAA :Rw7Y k1.116I 171, AYEA10(Ll Y.1P PN[PNILD BT, SOUTH BAY D#CWIPJNG ! CONSULTING 604 TEOON PLACE PALM WMS ESTATES• CA 10711 (310) 3MI-rm A4 Y. 7007 SHEET S Of 6 SHEETS Pied a BEOSa1NG f R2 2P+EPyPE U, Tipp T fr 4611PANt m fM11ATCt: RS'PoCT TOR 4.YR atRPDYS EST. PE f IT, r4Pi :Hf MA11NRlY GPoI.dGATw :PPA nE..g PE-SA, 20 itt 1. Kfal4 RQ 9tY Vd m'nZ SCti�fAp AfPlf RNJww � R(W s P A A _, e e DETAIL OF a 1 LOT 4 � 0 --0' STATE 0' c.i2rnwA mass: of ti a.- „` ; PPPdG,9 r� ua.! DPudAr 41 EID Akf.. N ht. JN4. P4 25L DA. DETAIL 'D'^ 2G' G 211 -40 60' aG' DETAIL OF LOT A G9[W,? S DP::kWaS' PiMO'K R.Tt �� y�.Y'• pa'a2J ifR futRR C .(tN' MD 2CPf ��... —L_ �j5 R'NPOS'n ep1 f MEL 4nR li. NJ .�"' � UC owsr. No. cJSarr � 1 „aroa-a _ -*�.•' ,.� Attyt bw -e -AS SYacl —” SD.LC' S2KyK) p Y °i x��i PTY OF N 61]VIS'R .YSfem Iri11mIWmAYM DETAIL 'B' O O i �ry NkGWN flA:f RL -R'd 10 NP 1I „_ P A R f--' DETAIL. OF - s is'd$ �.,••_,. 'li7an' 6ETAA R LOT C ETA s 1a�aw' C n.cT_ _ �G i�ae +roe' ^'a�D LEGEND A Q Dtwwu, +rLlL 4 ua ,•, Jy,''• .w .hLas�ati cs.G. ftiA mtNA NSOrI Y A a,wTS rDA staE P,:Pwus. vAK �c vEx DIED nEfO%NA IP K N92 ° / � \ aD.7a'4� �•"Z d- Ixlo.aa � 83 L•a,tr � � LL�5ti l � � d WRI'D• v it19 a� R Bp4 1 20' 0�2ff—a0�eV- • —y�J' ' nJR ",wl:[ UD WL ^.xFEtD. Gi.YitC R KRxio Ct5 IIC TAUS me rowT m TrcaPPw oES:,PIPEC w sND u[o. DETAIL 'A' 30WtS'76i 3x91.00' DETAIL OF LOT D W G imm DETAIL. OF x+sP— a IT. cl—T I, POOPV.PA cn L LOT 4 5 T daP 11 'PE:1P[ PudWS;ES DEYt B J211 2SY K 4d, C.. IM.G NCN;wAit 6ETAA R LOT C s 1a�aw' C n.cT_ _ �G i�ae +roe' a" At! LEGEND A Q Dtwwu, DETAIL 'A' 30WtS'76i 3x91.00' DETAIL OF LOT D W G imm SCALE, t' . 100' 6ETAA R LOT C s 1a�aw' C n.cT_ _ �G i�ae +roe' a" At! LEGEND A Q Dtwwu, � 5uo a'ataRru '� f - %4r \ lP''T' ..-• .." � � � nwaQS. A°�rc °, RuYac+e M'amx , 756. '� +ti• • •%� ♦ P "" � A K%AA T4P tRtR Anwat uR 2P+ a PIT RNM mw 'a^n,'�w"a a aa�'irrr a'iineio�ECs 1� �a'r�.� -" P• 1W Ga0a0+i AJ M CY d POpPeIY M.G UaUn TNAa.A RNA %R AMENDED MAP OF TRACT MAP NO. 5004 .,• �-• T ,�, u V " PTY OF MODRPAW( l ss ~`�n4tvY.Y DETAL OF !•PT3 � COUNTY OF VENTURA, STATE OF CAUFORHIA 9ERiD PIX27WN "u' -xdOP' ta.ar A OF TRACT OF W RANCHO SIN!, AS PER MAP RE- ENi1RED MAP 9F RTE LANDS OF RAWIO SIMI•, BONG SUBD'NSICH MAP N0, 2 OF LANDS S� OF RTE Sm LAND ANO WATER COMPANY, MADE 1887 ANO 1686 BY STOW AND U' PO'AERS, SURtftORS RECORDED Ri BOOK S, PAGE 7 Or MAPS, IN TOE OFFICE OF NE COUNTY RECORf�R OF SAID COLIN Y. F-�� p DE1 AJL F� '4' AUGUST. 1497 AMENDED MAP PREPARED BY; SOUTH BAY FHOwEERU k CONSUETwo 1D' 0 10' ?0' TO' W4 TEJON PLACE W' PALOS *AM ESTATES, CA $0274 (310) GUM -use SCACL 1' - 2W JAY, 2001 SHEET 6 OF 6 SHEETS SPECIAL DEVICES, INCORPORATED September 25, 2002 Ms. Laura Stringer Senior Management Analyst City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Re: Development Agreement dated August 28, 1996 (the "Development Agreement ") by and between Special Devices, Incorporated ( "SDI" or the "Developer") and the City of Moorpark (the "City ") Dear Ms. Stringer: Pursuant to Moorpark Municipal Code Section 15.40150 and the terms of the Development Agreement, we are pleased to submit this application for annual review of compliance with the Development Agreement. ANNUAL REVIEW APPLICATION As required, we enclose: 1. Annual Review Application Form (copy attached as Exhibit A); 2. Our check no. 146787 in payment of the filing fee (deposit) of $1,760 (copy attached as Exhibit B); 3. Two (2) full size and two (2) 8 '/2 by 11 inch copies of Plans and Drawings, as follows: Amended Tract Map No. 5004 (see, Exhibit C); 4. Two (2) additional copies of this letter and exhibits, which contains our narrative addressing the following items: a. Report of those aspects of the agreement completed during the twelve (12) months prior to this review; b. Report on progress made toward completion of all other aspects of the agreement during the twelve (12) months prior to this review; and c. An explanation, with supporting information, of aspects of the agreement, if any, where good faith compliance has not been achieved with proposals for a corrective action to achieve such compliance. NARRATIVE At the conclusion of last year's annual review of the Development Agreement, City Council accepted the staff report and recommendation, concluding on the basis of substantial evidence that SDI was in good faith compliance with the Development Agreement. See, 14370 WHITE SAGE ROAD • MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021 • PHONE (805) 553 -1200 • FAX (805) 553 -1201 CC ATTACHMENT 3 000106 OTI- A, M Ms. Laura Stringer September 25, 2002 Page 2 Annotated City Council Regular Meeting Agenda for Wednesday, September 19, 2001 (copy attached as Exhibit D), at p. 8 (Item 11.J); and Moorpark City Council Agenda Report dated September 6, 2001 (for meeting of 9/19/2001, Item 11.J) (copy attached as Exhibit E) (hereinafter, the "2001 Staff Report") The 2001 Staff Report (at pp. 2, 3 and 5) identified five items that remained to be completed as of September 2001, as follows: 1. Transfer of Lots 4 and D: This item now is complete. See, the attached recorded copies of the Grant Deed (Exhibit F) and the Amended Declaration of Conditions Covenants & Restrictions (Exhibit G). These documents were recorded on May 29, 2002 as document nos. 2002 -12512 and 2002 - 125811, respectively. Although the 2001 Staff Report stated (at p. 2) that Bankers Trust Company had a lien on Lots 4 and D, the lien had been released on June 27, 2001 in connection with the refinancing of SDI's credit facility. Thus, the lots were unencumbered at the time of recordation of the Grant Deed. 2. Correction of Tract Map 5004. This item now is complete. See, the recorded copies of the Amended Tract Map attached as Exhibit C. The Amended Tract Map was recorded on May 29, 2002 in Book 146, Pages 1 through 6, as document no. 2002 - 125810. 3. Reforestation of Caltrans Right of Way. This item now is complete. See, attached copies of letters dated June 24 and June 26, 2002 from City Landscape Architect Jeremy Laurentowski and Caltrans Landscape Associate Jeffrey Yuen (Exhibit H). 4. Final inspection of Permanent Drainage Solution for Lower White Sage Road. This item now is complete. See, attached letter dated October 23, 2001 from City Landscape Architect Jeremy Laurentowski (Exhibit 1) 5. Final Payment Due Pursuant to Section 60) of the Development Agreement. Final payment has been made. See, attached letters dated April 29, May 2, and May 24, 2002 (Exhibit J). In addition to completion of the foregoing items, the following developments occurred during the past twelve months: 1. Final certificates of occupancy for the SDI facilities were issued December 21, 2001 (see, Exhibit K). Concurrently, SDI posted a cash escrow to secure successful completion of remaining landscape work (see, Exhibit Q. 2. Following completion of the Caltrans reforestation project, on June 27, 2002, SDI applied for release of the cash escrow and two outstanding construction bonds (see Exhibit M). 00010'7 Ms. Laura Stringer September 25, 2002 Page 3 3. By letter dated August 13, 2002, the City requested that additional work be performed prior to release of the bonds and escrow (see, Exhibit O). SDI and City representatives met on August 28, 2002, and on several subsequent dates, to assemble information relevant to the City's request. A follow -up meeting with the Director of Community Development and his staff is scheduled for Wednesday, September 25, 2002 in an effort to reach agreement on the scope of any outstanding work and the timing of the escrow and bond release. It is expected that the agreement of the parties will be reduced to writing and submitted in connection with this annual review application. ACTION REQUESTED Based upon the foregoing, we hereby respectfully request the following actions: 1. A determination that the Developer has complied in good faith with the Development Agreement and that the annual review process for the Development Agreement is deemed complete; and 2. Confirmation that, except as set forth above, all conditions of the Development Agreement have been satisfied. If you have any questions or require any further information, please call me or Steve Paloian at (805) 553 -1283 or Barbara Linney at (202) 944 -3562. Best regards, � w�Li ,< 4_ -, Thomas W. Cresante President and Chief Executive Officer Enclosures cc: Barbara D. Linney, Esquire Steve Paloian 111 t: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director t y�i�6171/I Prepared by Laura Stringer, Senior Management Analyst S DATE: March 27, 2003 (CC Meeting of 04/16/03) SUBJECT: Consider Report of Annual Development Agreement Review, Established in connection with 43.32 Acres of Land Located West of Gabbert Road, North of the Westerly Extension of Poindexter Avenue (A -B Properties and Southern California Edison Company) BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 65864 and City of Moorpark Municipal Code Section 15.40 provide for Development Agreements between the City and property owners in connection with proposed plans of development for specific properties. Development Agreements are designed to strengthen the planning process, to provide developers some certainty in the development process and to assure development in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. On December 16, 1998 the Moorpark City Council adopted Ordinance No. 250 (effective January 15, 1999), approving a Development Agreement between the City of Moorpark and A -B properties and a Development Agreement between the City of Moorpark and Southern California Edison Company. The agreements were approved in connection with General Plan Amendment (GPA) NO. 97 -2 and Zone Change (ZC) No. 97 -6, including a proposed thirty -four and one -half (34.5) acre industrial development (A -B Properties) and approximately nine (9) acres owned by Southern California Edison. These properties are located approximately 1,300 feet west of Gabbert Road, north of the westerly extension of Poindexter Avenue. Both Development Agreements remain in full force and effect for twenty (20) years from the operative date of the agreements (until January 15, 2019). S: \Community Development \ADMIN \AGMTS \D A \1998 -04 ab \Agenda Reports \cc 030416 agrpt ab- sce.doc 00009 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 Provisions of the agreements require annual review and report to the City Council on the status of completion of all aspects of the agreements. The developers have submitted the necessary application forms, related materials, and fees /deposits. The Community Development Director has reviewed the submitted information, including the project status and provides the following report. DISCUSSION: Protect Status • Tentative Tract No. 5147, a seventeen (17) lot subdivision proposed by A -B Properties, was conditionally approved by the City Council on March 15, 2000, per Resolution No. 2000 -1714. The approved tentative tract map includes offsite improvements for the north -south connector to the future Highway 118 by -pass (North Hills Parkway), and for the southerly half and easterly extension of "C" Street to Gabbert Road. The easterly extension of "C" Street will serve as interim access to the project until a railroad underpass and linkage to Los Angeles are constructed. Following completion of this linkage to Los Angeles Avenue, the "C" Street connection to Gabbert Road will be for emergency access only. Portions of these offsite improvements are within the Southern California Edison property. All other activities are on hold pending resolution of funding mechanisms for infrastructure requirements. • Southern California Edison Company has not initiated any specific development proposals. Developer Compliance with Terms of Agreement A -B Properties' and Southern California Edison Company's development responsibilities are included in Section 6 of each respective Development Agreement. Both Development Agreements are similar with exceptions for names; revisions to Section 6.10 regarding the future 118 by -pass, (subsequently recognized by the City Council as a future arterial) as it relates to each property. The differences also include deletion of Section 6.17 on the Southern California Edison agreement, which relate to A -B Properties requirement to dedicate a conservation easement. Compliance with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement will occur at various stages of the development process. 000110 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 3 Action by the developer, and other clarifying information has been noted. Where no comment appears, no specific activity has occurred. # REQUIREMENT STATUS 1. Compliance with Development Although A -B Properties Agreement, Project Approvals and has gained approval of Subsequent approvals. (A -B and Tentative Tract No. SCE) 5147, no additional entitlements or permits have been requested. No development may take place until an IPD application is filed for individual lot development or for all of the lots in the subdivision. Southern California Edison Company has not submitted specific development proposals beyond the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. 2. Dedicated lands to be free and The developers will clear of liens and encumbrances, provide clear title to including off -site property any property required required for street extensions or for dedications. improvements. (A -B and SCE) 3. Payment of Park Improvement Fee of These fees will be twenty -five cents ($.25) per adjusted annually square foot of gross floor area. (until paid) using the (A -B and SCE) Consumer Price Index (CPI) in accordance with the agreement. Fees must be paid prior to issuance of zoning clearance for building permits. 000111 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 4 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 4. Payment of "Development Fees" of These fees will be twenty -one thousand dollars adjusted annually ($21,000) per acre of each lot on (until paid) using the which the building is located. (A- Consumer Price Index B and SCE) (CPI) in accordance with the agreement. Fees must be paid prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for building permits. 5. Payment of "Citywide Traffic Fees" These fees will be of eighteen thousand dollars adjusted annually ($18,000) per acre of each lot on (until paid) using the which the building is located. (A- State Highway Bid Price B and SCE) Index in accordance with the agreement. Fees must be paid prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for building permits. 6. Payment of all outstanding city The Annual Review processing and environmental Applications and $1,760 processing costs. (A -B and SCE) deposits for each Development Agreement - Annual Reviews were paid. 7. Agreement to payment of "Air Compliance with this Quality Fee" to be calculated by requirement must be met the City as a condition on each prior to building subsequent approval. (A -B and SCE) permit issuance. 8. Agreement to cast affirmative vote To date, A -B Properties for the formation of an assessment and SCE are in district with the power to levy compliance with this assessments for the maintenance of requirement. parkway landscaping, street lighting (upon Council request - parks conferring special benefits). (A -B and SCE) 9. Agreement to pay all City capital Compliance with this improvement, development and requirement must be met processing fees. (A -B and SCE) prior to building permit issuance. 000112 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 5 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 10. Provide irrevocable offer of These requirements must dedication to the City for the be complied with prior rights -of -way for the future 118 to City Council action bypass along the entire length of on subsequent approvals the north side of the property and or grading, whichever along the east side of the Gabbert occurs first. The Channel, including a connector required rights -of -way with a radius to be determined by have been reflected on the City. The developer also approved Tentative agrees to dedication of access Tract Map No. 5147. rights to the City for the future east /west arterial (formerly 118 bypass), except for not more than one (1) approved intersection. (A- B) Provide irrevocable offer of dedication to the City for the rights -of -way for the future east /west arterial (formerly 118 bypass) along the entire length of the west side of the property outside of the easements for the Gabbert Channel. (SCE) 11. Agreement to provide grading of This requirement will right -of -way for the future be included as a part east /west arterial (formerly 118 of any grading approved bypass). (A -B and SCE) for the property. 12. Agreement to comply with all This requirement will provisions of the Hillside be included as a part Management Ordinance. (A -B and of any grading approved SCE) for the property. 13. Payment of pro -rata share of This requirement must funding and construction of be met as part of the improvements identified in Gabbert issuance of a grading and Walnut Canyon Channels permit. Deficiency Study, and acknowledgement that interim improvements may also be necessary. (A -B and SCE) 000113 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 6 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 14. Agreement to acquire and construct This requirement must dedicated public access to the be complied with prior properties with secondary access to subdivision or any in compliance with public safety new use of the requirements. (A -B and SCE) property. 15. Agreement to not oppose creation To date, A -B Properties of a Redevelopment Project Area, and SCE are in encompassing any part of the compliance with this property. (A -B and SCE) requirement. 16. Agreement not to request any To date, A -B Properties concession, waiver, modification and SCE are in or reduction of any fee, compliance with this regulation, requirement, policy or requirement. standard condition for any subsequent approval, and agreement to pay all fees imposed by the City for future buildings. (A -B and SCE) 17. Grant a conservation easement to The conservation retain property west of Gabbert easement is to be Canyon drain in a predominantly recorded with the first open space condition, with Final Map for the exceptions as described in the property. Development Agreement. (A -B Properties only) 18. (Ref. Sec. 6.17. in SCE DA) The covenant was Execute and record a covenant executed and recorded concerning restriction of uses to as a part of the be permitted in the rezoned recorded Development property, consistent with Exhibit Agreement. B of the Development Agreement. 19. ((Ref. Sec. 6.18. in SCE DA) This improvement is to Agreement to submit improvement be constructed prior to plans for Gabbert Road from the issuance of a building Union Pacific / Gabbert Road rail Permit for any portion crossing to a point approximately of the property in one hundred twenty -five (125) feet excess of forty percent north of the rail crossing, (400) of the total including surety to guarantee acreage for all lots improvement. created by the first Final Map. To date not plans have been submitted. 000114 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 7 # REQUIREMENT STATUS 20. ((Ref. Sec. 6.19. in SCE DA) Construction of the Provide traffic study to determine traffic signal, if signalization requirements for the required, shall be at Gabbert Road /Poindexter Avenue the same time as the intersection. The traffic study Gabbert Road is required prior to the first improvements. subsequent approval for the project. Developer may be conditioned to construct or pay a fair share for the traffic signal. 21. ((Ref. Sec. 6.20. in SCE DA) To date no plans have Construct thirty -two (32) foot been submitted. wide paved access road to serve as primary access until such time as improvements per Section 6.22 (6.21 SCE) are constructed. The paved access road to become emergency access only upon opening of said improvements to the public. 22. ((Ref. Sec. 6.21. in SCE DA) To date no plans have Construct street improvements been submitted. extending north from Los Angeles Avenue (SR 118) to a point approximately six hundred (600) feet north of the railroad tracks, including an underground crossing of the Union Pacific railroad tracks prior to issuance of a building permit for any portion of the property in excess of seventy per cent (70 %) of the total acreage for all lots created by the first Final Map. Final improvement plans and an improvement financing plan must be approved prior to issuance of a building permit for any portion of the property in excess of forty per cent (40 %) of the total acreage for all lots created by the first Final Map. 000115 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 8 City Compliance with Terms of Agreement The City's responsibilities are included in Section 7 of both agreements and include four (4) specific provisions, as summarized below. # REQUIREMENT STATUS 1. Expedite (to the extent To date no plans have been possible) the processing of submitted. plan checking and related processing. 2. Exempt this project from No further action payment of the Gabbert necessary. Road /Casey Road Area of Contribution (AOC) fees. 3. Commence proceedings to form a To date no petition or fee Mello -Roos Community payment have been Facilities District, upon submitted. receipt of landowners petition and payment of fee. 4. Proceed to acquire, if To date no such request has requested, and at developer's been submitted. sole cost and expense, easements or fee title to land not held by the developer, but necessary for construction of required improvements. Evaluation of Good Faith Compliance Based on a review of the Development Agreement Annual Review Application and the status of the project, the Community Development Director has determined on the basis of substantial evidence that A -B Properties and Southern California Edison Company have, to date, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation, and find, on the basis of substantial evidence, that A -B Properties and Southern California Edison Company have complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement. 00®x.16 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 9 2. Deem the annual review process complete for Southern California Edison Company's Development Agreement and for A -B Properties' Development Agreement. Attachments: 1) Location Map 2) Tentative Tract Map 000217 LOCATION MAP 3 EltnM sr 'b -siTE NORTH IS! °v ktONt DR LOS ANGELES ......... � {clErr natxrrincalc sr& Cr a d is * A. Borietto B. Son Tropez PE. ppppyOlEtt C1 °a C. Revello Pt. tNtt?FlONR CT COURTWY D, milono PI. Co Af! 1N E- Napoli PI. CoRA1BERFT Cr po z P. Brindisi PI. m W U m mtrycreek Ct. G. Torino Si, wk101N00D Cr pork Ct. H, Sortino Ct. SEEK •- FwvESTER St ! ETTA okcrest Ct. 1, Trapani Ci, gtlTU eview Ct. J. Catania Ct. Oenrood Pork verview Ct. K. Bergamo Ct- z �* CC ATTACHMENT 1 000118 O O T r.w rL710M H C. RTZLtT a.. • rrA I ... .. ,.. w•• • ••� "A" & "P' T�L RCIi 3 > s \ CT TW-, AL STMT SEION c N. _ ' ► 1 ... LOC�7f01t u�[�r �nAO sera+ - - i I ` % 1 wax W! .�'I` _ - � �� - - � r I � '%+r%r � �'� 1� 1 �^ f� /•l+ �� ..ter, � . f •• 1 � -- w . / Y , �., � �1 1:. ._fr a - IV, � l� Y <, T �• S� one (:? �� ,R tr Y �� �� f, - "` a ww�.�.rr.a�wrr. nw.r •.�i �w .L.:.... h `r u ✓" f j', s • ImLQYY�11PJtlIF1 •-'ri , :i: i r � ��yi 1 � , 9 �"L � ...' ` ,�, • � au.r. � rw.w�wra � � r.a+w..w f .f%a �-•�. I _ Aw, uwomrowrwnrnro..uenoows �'�+s: .0 e..srmm -- / GL[♦ZiA4AlILl7ii: rrr,na,u.•a,r..,. r+ «wara. r w: r ww '� /(.. ,- � � 'r 'J� /• _,'. - i � �� .. OWIIIIIRMM1010rM��IMYrIMrOM.rw ^ = YMA.a1. �R; ii // 1 - i - � tl r. �MY.r�LC./i0pY1r�: ra.a. rr� MWa w.W r•.oP.i• ��. i1`.L: r )) _ '`i �• �'r'• 1wtX NOY. •. i �r .rs•. iii .s w.u. ie&AiR° et��ir..wrwmwrw.rnri we r�mwa«rr. 0i0' illt r`i �. Yid, 'ir".,wmi.w— "As" ""'"' gws RY'Z. .'IRr RNA OF MCXWAMC - -- A♦It101S>7m RNT A TRACT NO. 5147 �0 7AT°' °� - _- ...-... R?lM70NAA..00..,c. _ ,Y G!•� r.n �..^ FOR WI LAWMID POKWIL AL FLO"SES CC ATTACHMENT 2 '' LL /}T'p'v um I r-0-1L 1 -P 1, 15th 7 -, 003.21�� MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT �;•Y . Lj}�„� �a a y_ TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: John Hartnett, Recreation Manager 4 " Q� Peggy Rothschild, Senior Center Coordinator` F DATE: April 4, 2003 (CC Meeting of April 16, 2003) SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of Resolution, Amending the FY 02/03 Budget by Appropriating Additional OAA Grant Funds for Senior Center Health and Wellness Programs SUMMARY In January 2003, the City was awarded $5,000 in Older Americans Act (OAA) grant funds from the Ventura County Area Agency on Aging ( VCAAA) to fund health and wellness programs at the Senior Center during fiscal 2002 -2003. On March 18, the City received notification from the VCAAA that the grant award has been increased by an additional $4,200, bringing the total grant amount to $9,200. The City Council is being asked to adopt the attached Resolution, amending the FY 02/03 budget to formally appropriate an additional $4,200 in funds. DISCUSSION As you will recall, at the December 4, 2002 City Council Meeting, the Council authorized the City to apply for OAA grant funds in the amount of $5,000 from VCAAA to provide Preventive Health and /or Wellness Programs at the Moorpark Senior Center. The City Council amended the FY 02/03 budget, allocating $5,000 in funds to the designated expenditure account. With the increase in funding from the VCAAA, we are now asking the City Council to amend the FY 02/03 budget, allocating an additional $4,200 to the designated expenditure account. The grant money will be used to provide testing and education in four areas: stroke prevention, osteoporosis, diabetes and cholesterol. Free "Fitness Fairs" will be held at the Senior 000120 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 2 Center to provide glucose testing, cholesterol testing, carotid artery screening, peripheral artery blockage screening, abdominal aortic aneurysm screening, and bone density testing to seniors age 60 and older. Screening asymptomatic people who may be at -risk of developing disabling or deadly conditions can change seniors' lives. In today's healthcare market, many seniors may not receive testing until they are exhibiting symptoms, preventing a proactive approach to maintaining health. The Senior Center will work with three subcontractors to provide the screenings, and present educational programming related to the screenings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Roll Call Vote) Adopt the Resolution amending the FY 02/03 Budget by appropriating $4,200 in OAA grant funds for Senior Center Health and Wellness Programs. 000121 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- ATTACHMENT A A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FY 2002/03 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $4,200 OLDER AMERICAN ACT GRANT FUNDS TO THE SENIOR CENTER DIVISION BUDGET (1000.7610) FOR PREVENTIVE HEALTH AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS WHEREAS, on June 5, 2002, the City Council adopted the budget for Fiscal Year 2002/03; and WHEREAS, a staff report has been presented to said Council requesting a budget amendment appropriating $4,200 in Older Americans Act (OAA) grant funds for Senior Center Preventive Health and Wellness programs; and WHEREAS, Exhibit "A" hereof describes said budget amendment and its resultant impacts to the budget line item(s). NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. A budget amendment appropriating expenditures and revenue in the amount of $4,200 in OAA grant funds as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto is hereby approved. 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 16th day of April, 2003. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk 000:.22 Honorable City Council April 16, 2003 Page 4 Resolution No. 2003- EXHIBIT A Budget Revision A. Fund Allocation: Fund No. Fund Name Amount 1000.5500 General Fund - OAA Grant $4,200 $4,200 $15,200 1000.3600 B. Budget Appropriation: BUDGET NUMBER BUDGETED REVISION NEW BUDGET 1000.7610.7619.9103 $11,000 $4,200 $15,200 1000.3600 $5,000 $4,200 $9,200 Approved to Form: ��V, 000123