Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 0819 CC REG ITEM 11B ITEM ,I I • o MOORPARK raid) 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805)'6X. CAIIFORNIA 0 City Council Mooling X — 9 199 of ACTION: _ ,.f. __ .. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .:-,/!� :C 2 C Byi.7�f TO: The Honorable City Council 11 FROM: William Phelps, Director of Community Development W 9A DATE: August 14, 1992 (CC meeting of 8/19/92) SUBJECT: REVISED PAD ELEVATIONS AND BUILDING ENVELOPES ON VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4620 - JBH DEVELOPMENT Backaround On June 3, 1992 this item was removed from the Consent Calendar portion of the Agenda for further discussion by the Council. The Tentative Map No. 4620 was approved by the Council on January 9, 1991. At that time the elevations of the "building envelopes" were discussed and approved to minimize grading on slopes of 20% or greater. During the final design the applicant's engineer determined that certain adjustments to the grading plan were desired to improve the "building envelopes. " These changes require Council approval because some of the elevations will change by more than 2 feet. After this matter was discussed by the City Council it was referred for further study to the Community Development Committee. Subsequently the Community Development Committee reported back to the City Council on July 15, 1992 , the results of the meeting with representatives of JBH. In summary the Committee reported: 1. Each of the 66 lots were evaluated. 2 . Five lots will not require any grading. 3 . 33 lots are not involved in any changes. 4. The building envelopes on nine lots (2, 3 , 13, 22, 45, 50, 61, 62, and 63) were enlarged to accommodate larger estate type homes, and accessory uses. The building envelopes were enlarged by changing their original location, and not the grading. PAUL W.LAWRASON JR. JOHN E.WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M.PEREZ ROY E. TALLEY JR. Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Printed On Recycled Paper The Honorable City Council August 14, 1992 Page Two 5. Changes to lots 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, and 42 are a result of lowering the road to improve access, drainage, and building sites. 6. The remaining lots are lots on which grading changes are proposed. Of these lots, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 25, 27, 32, 33 , 34, 36, 37, 38, 41, 42, and 66 are the lots on which the proposed grading plan lowers the building sites. 7. On lots 17, 44, 46, 48, and 59 the pads were raised. (See attached statement from applicant "Exhibit 1" . ) After hearing the Committee report, the Council heard from the applicant, members of the public, and discussed the matter. A major question arose about whether the request was a minor or major modification. The City Attorney reviewed and described the code, and subsequently wrote a formal description of a major and minor modification of the Subdivision Ordinance and the consequences as applied to this request. (See "Exhibit 2" . ) Staff advised the City Attorney that the request before the City Council was not a minor modification application but a request processed in accordance with the General Grading Policy adopted by the City Council on September 15, 1986. (See "Exhibit 3". ) In response to this new information, the City Attorney still concluded that if the subject revisions are a modification to the tentative Tract Map No. 4620 and not to another entitlement then it must be processed as a Minor Modification. In the event of objections, it must be processed as a Major Modification. This is the same position stated at the previous meeting, and in the letter labeled as "Exhibit 2". Discussion The Committee has reviewed the applicant's request and reported favorably to the Council. The Council has heard from the applicant and interested citizens. After hearing from the City Attorney, the Council decided to continue this item to the next City Council agenda to provide time for the City Attorney to prepare a written statement about the appropriateness of the review process as applied to this case. The City Attorney (at the meeting of July 15, 1992) reviewed the Subdivision Ordinance and informed the City Council that the Ordinance required the filing of either a minor or major modification to respond correctly to the applicant's request. The Honorable City Council August 14, 1992 Page Three Later this opinion was restated in a letter to the City Manager (see "Exhibit 2") . Subsequent information from the staff about the Council Grading Policy (see "Exhibit 3") , and a letter from the applicant's attorney has not altered the original opinion. Therefore, the request before the City Council has not been processed correctly. It should have been filed as a Minor Modification and not as a request following the Grading Policy. Recommendation That the request be denied without prejudice. C:TR4620.JBH EXHIBIT. 1 Tract 4620 Comparison of Grading between the Feasibility Plan and Final Design of those lots with greater than 2' vertical change General The natural terrain of Tract 4620 is such that a change in the configuration of a graded area will necessitate moving it horizontally to minimize the amount of impact the change will have on the adjacent and manufactured slopes, required setbacks from proposed lot lines, views, etc. In order to further minimize the grading and slope heights, these horizontal moves often result in a vertical move as well due to the sloping terrain. . It should be noted that the graded pad areas are required to have a slope of 2% for drainage purposes (2 feet vertically for each 100 feet horizontally). Many of the pads on this project are some 200 feet, or more, in length, resulting in a vertically change of some 4 feet across it. The following is a listing of those lots that exceed 2 feet in vertical difference from that depicted on the grading feasibility study submitted with the tentative map of this project, and the main reasons the pad area is changed. Lot No. Reason for change and some comments 2 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Original slope map in error-mostly less • than 20%. Horizontal moves raised pad 12 feet to minimize grading. 3 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Expanded area on slopes that are less than 20%. Pad lowered 4 feet. 13 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Pad lowered 13 feet. 14 Relocated driveway which originally crossed Lot 18, creating a high slope on that lot, to be contained wholly within Lit 14. Lot 14 is now self-contained. Pad adjusted horizontally to fit the relocated driveway resulting in it being lowered 5 feet. 15 Deleted pad area, deleted grading in the area of greater than 20%natural slope. Simply filling in to daylight from the street for a more natural look. Pad lowered 5 feet. 16 Adjusted lot line & pad to place knoll on only one lot & to enhance its view to the north. Its an area that Lot 15 can't use. The expanded area is all contained within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad raised 3 feet. 18 Pad moved northwesterly to minimize the effect of its slopes on Lot 17. This was made possible by the relocation of the driveway to Lot 14. This horizontal move resulted in raising the pad 31 feet in order to not have excessive slopes. 19 Pad cut to daylight to improve view and to minimize slopes. Pad lowered 14 feet. 22 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Essentially within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad raised 3 feet. • Lot No. Reason for change and some comments 25 Pad reconfigured to minimize slopes & to fit slope within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad lowered 5 feet. 27 Pad adjusted to balance the cut & fill slopes and to remove impact on adjacent lots. The size of the pad is essentially the same as shown on the tentative map. Pad lowered 18 feet to effect this change. 32 Little change. Adjustments were made to improve drainage and provide adequate setback at the top of slope. Pad lowered 4 feet. 33,35-36, Pads adjusted and street lowered to provide better utilization and drainage to 38-42 street at suggestion of the City Planning Director. Pad areas lowered an average of 8 feet. 44 Pad moved westerly to smooth contours of small valley, resulting in the pad area being raised 5 feet. 45 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area. It was moved northerly • for a better fit with the driveway. Due to the gently sloping terrain, this move required a vertical move of some 15 feet. 46 Little change. The pad area adjusted because of a better design of the driveway, which is shared with Lot 48. Pad enlarged somewhat within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad elevation raised 7 feet due to this horizontal adjustment. 48 Pad rotated to minimize slope on greater than 20% natural slope area, to place slope on less than 20% and to fit the revised driveway shared with Lot 46. These adjustments resulted in a pad elevation about 3 feet higher. 50 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area and pad area raised to minimize slope heights. In order to enlarge it and not go into the 20% slope area resulted in it moving horizontally and being raised some 10 feet. 59 Pad rotated out of greater than 20%, but entire site filled per previous discussions with the Planning Director. Net change in pad area about 6 feet higher. 61 Pad enlarged within the less than 26% natural slope area. Enlargement was northerly into the flatter portions of the lot, necessitating it being lowered 7 feet. 62 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area and raised 5 feet to better serve it with underground sewer system. 66 Pad reoriented & enlarged somewhat within the less than 20% natural slope area and the cut in the 20% area to its northeast side was eliminated. In order to re- orient it without creating higher slopes, the pad was moved to an area of lower elevation, resulting in a 5 foot change. I ry LAW OFFICES BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN 611 WEST SIFTN STREET, SUITE 2500 maRTiN JRKE• ROBERT V.WADOEN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 VENTURA COUNTY Orr,CE. JAMES i ARDSHAW.JGOODKINO 2310 PONDEROSA DRIVE mARn G. P ALLEN.J cOSnER 12131 236-0600 SUITE I V NSON CAMARILLO. CALIFORNIA 93010 MARTIN WSON 21]1 18051 981-3468 J. ROBERT FLAOry DPIC n• TERPVNP. TELECOPIER 1 236-2100 NORMAN E.GAART STEPHEN R. ONSTOT EDWARD M FOX' JAIME AREVALO HARRY C WILLIAM'S ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE DENNIS P BURKE• E. DANIELS CRAWFORD. S 1191219611 3200 BRISTOL STREET LELAND C. DOLLE-r JOHN E. CAVANAUGH SUITE 640 NEIL F.YEAGER• MARK O HENSLEY ROYAL M SORENSEN COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA 92626 BRIAN A PIERIK• R O. TREMBU11 Y 914-19831 1714.154.5-55.513 CHARLES M. CALDERON• GLBE PT A TRUJiLLO PETER M. THORSON• GREGORY P PRIAMOS IT CRSON MCURTH• BURKE, WILLIAMS. SORENSEN 6 GAAR JERRY M, HAROLD A.P BRIDGES• JOSEPH P. BUCHMAN LIG HTON PLAZA CHERYL J KANE• GREGORY T. DION 7300 COLLEGE BOULEVARD SUITE 220 RAYMOND J. FVENTES• ANTHONY P CONDOTTI July 2 0F 1992 OVERLAND PARK. KANSAS 66210 BARRY S GLASER AUDREY HO VIRGINIA R. PESOLA KAREN J.SCHULDT 19131339-6200 S.PAUL BRUGUERA JANET 5:GARMS! B. DEREK STRMTSMA PAUL C ANDERSON DON G. KIRCHER BRENDA L DIEOERICHS o/C H [L MICHELE VAOON-RIVERA TIMOTHY V. P.GALLAGHER EXHIBIT 2 DWIGHT A NEWELL SCOTT F. FIELD JOHN J WELSH MARY REPOS GAYLE• R JO SHELTON-DUTCHER RUFUS C.YOUNG,JR. JEFFREY KIOHTLINGER WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL STEVEN KARLTON KOP EDVIN E. M NASSIAN • (213) 236-2721 JUDITH A ENRIGNT JUDITH K.ANDERSON -' KATHRYN P PETERS° TIMOTHY 0 CREMIN 01359-001 THOMAS C. WOOD GREGORY G. DIA2 OUR FILE NO. LISA E KRANITZ KENNETH D. ROZELL KIm E. MCN ALLY LAURIE E SHERWOOD . - N. LOIS BOBAK 'PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION UPRoFESS,ONALASSOOATIoR ADMITTED IN KANSAS 4 MISSOURI 'ADMITTED IN KANSAS IADMITTCD IR CALIFORNIA KANSAS i MISSOURI The Honorable Mayor and Members • of the City Council City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Re: Modification To Tentative Tract Map No. 4620 Dear Mayor Lawrason & Councilmember: JBH has requested modification of the approved pad elevations and building envelopes for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 4620. That request has been processed as a minor modification by the Director of Community Development. A question has arisen as to the appropriateness of this process. Discussion of the Law Modification to approved tentative tract maps, including vesting maps, are governed by subsections (e) and (f) of Section 8250-1 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Those subsections are summarized as follows: 1) A major modification is handled as an application for a new tentative tract map, requiring a public hearing before the Planning Commission and the City Council. 2) The request for a minor modification is handled informally by the Director of Community Development. 23737.E - i — RECEIVED — JUL221992 • City of Moorpark Moorpark Mayor & Councilmembers July 20, 1992 Page 2 3) The terms "major modification" and "minor modification" are not defined. However, pursuant to subsection (e) , minor modifications specifically exclude requests that (i) "affect the quantity or quality of required dedications" , or (ii) "increase the total number or significantly alter the configuration of proposed lots" . 4) Classification of a request as major or minor is left to the discretion of the Director. However, any interested person has ten (10) days within which to object to the Director's classification of a request as minor or to the Director's action on a minor modification. 5) Once a timely objection is made, the request is handled like a major modification, that is, as an application for a new tentative tract map. When a request is classified as major or an objection is made, it is within the discretion of the subdivider to process the application for a new tentative map. If the subdivider elects not to do so, he can proceed to finalize the original tentative map. Pursuant to Government Code section 66474 . 1, your City Council must approve the final map submitted by the subdivider, as long as it is consistent with an approved tentative map. Application to JBH If the minor modification is not approved or if, by operation of Section 8250-1 of the Subdivision Ordinance, the modification must be processed as an application for a new tentative tract map, JBH will have two options. The first option will be to process a new tentative tract map. The second option will be to finalize the existing tentative tract map. If JBH elects the second option, it will not be foreclosed from subsequently seeking changes to the lot envelope areas. In part, Condition No. 96 of Tentative Tract Map No. 4620 provides that: "The approved lot envelope areas shall be graphically illustrated and described by a notation on the final map and recorded. The CC&R's shall include language clarifying that modifications to lot envelope areas shall 23737.1 Moorpark Mayor & Councilmembers July 20, 1992 Page 3 require City of Moorpark Community Development Director approval. " Since CC&R's are of no effect until the final map has been recorded, thus, permitting the individual lots to be sold, Condition No. 96 allows for consideration of changes to the envelope areas even after the final map has been recorded. By the terms of Condition 96, no new tentative tract map would have to be submitted, since approval power is expressly vested in the Director of Community Development. I hope that this information will assist you in your deliberations. :::jtNt CIT •RNEY, MOORPARK and BTJRKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN CJK:jf cc: Steven Kueny, City Manager 23737.1 • ARTICLE 8 HEARINGS, REPORTS AND APPEALS (Enacted by Ord. 3105 - 12/30/75) Sec. 8250 - REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Any staff report or recommendation on a tentative map to the Advisory Agency or Board of Supervisors shall be in writing and a copy thereof shall be served on the subdivider at least three days prior to any hearing or action on such map by the Advisory Agency or Board of Supervisors. Sec. 8250-1 - HEARINGS AND APPEAL - a. For subdivisions which require preparation of a tentative map and a final map pursuant to this Chapter and the Subdivision Map Act, the Planning Commission shall constitute the Advisory Agency. Within 50 days .after the filing of the tentative map, or within such longer period of time as may be agreed to by the subdivider, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the map, recommend the ' content of the findings required by this Chapter and the Subdivision Map Act, recommend approval, conditional approval or disapproval of the tentative map and report its actions in writing to the Board of Supervisors. At the next regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors following the filing of the Planning Commission's report with it, the Board shall fix the meeting date at which the tentative map will be considered by it at a public hearing, which date shall be within 30 days thereafter, and the Board shall approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the tentative map within such 30-day period; provided, however, that if legally sufficient notice thereof has been given, the Board may hold the required public bearing at its next regular meeting following filing of the Planning Commission's report, in which case it shall approve, . conditionally approve or disapprove the tentative map within 30 days thereafter. b. For subdivisions which require preparation of a tentative map and a parcel map or a parcel map alone pursuant to this Chapter and the Subdivision Map Act, the Planning Division of the Resource Management Agency shall constitute the Advisory Agency. Within 50 days after the filing of the tentative map, or within such longer period of the time as may be agreed to by the subdivider, the Planning Division shall make all findings required by this Chapter and the Subdivision Map Act, shall approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the tentative map and shall report its action to the subdivider. In accordance with the provisions and time limitations set forth in section 66452.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, any interested person may appeal any decision of the Planning Division (Advisory Agency) to the Planning Commission (Appeal Board) which shall hold a public hearing thereon, and may appeal any decision of the Planning Commission (Appeal Board) to the Board of Supervisors which shall hold a public hearing thereon. With the written consent of all parties thereto, appeals from Planning Division (Advisory -Agency) decisions which relate solely to waivers or modifications of policies of the Board of Supervisors may be appealed directly to the Board of Supervisors. (EN. 3105-12/30/75; AM. 3490-7/1/80) 8-2 17 0C-1 H193 Li • Tenozdde JO:;oaJTQ :luatudoTanoQ AZTunurwoO NaudzooN Jo Ai-TD e1Tnbal TTegs scale adoTanuo 10T of suotluDigTpow buTAjTzeTa ebunbueT epnTouT I T cgs s , W3JJ eqj, - pepaooa.z pun' dui TPuT3 eq 1 uo uo;J.Pou P Aq pagT.osap pue pa=)PlsnTTT ATIeoTt{de.xb eq TTPus seele ado{anua ZoT peiozdde eqj - sea.xe adoTanua DoT palPUbTSap O� ( sInoo sTuuaq put' ' suds ' sTood 5UTwIItMS buTpnTou: ) satnona s TeTuaPTsa.z Io3 buTpe.xb s,3Tx,sal i4ZTM s ,�=3J3 eq-1 UT papnTouT aq TTuus a6Pnbu?T ' TPno.xddP deur TPUT3 IoTxd • sadoTs .za,eazb put' auao.xad OZ 3o buTpesb azTUITUTUI Oz. SP os paeooTaa eq TTeus ZS pup ' TE ' OF ' 6Z ' 8Z ' S uo seeau adoTanua loT agI - TPno.ddP 1Tugxed buTpesb toT2d IoYoe.xTQ auawdoTeAeQ AiTununuoj puP aeaUT5U2 A,TJ au-1 Aq pano.zddu pue uPTd DUTpPJb TPUT3 aql uo UMogs eq Tugs ( se8.72 adoTanua loT ) zUawdOTanap TeT-luapTsaa aoJ pa-aPubTsap loT uoPa uo Peat, au, - 96 -PexTnbea eq TTegs uPVTnsuoo TPoTugoaloe5 s ,AyTO eq: Aq l.xodaz TpoTugoagoab PUP sTTos agq 3o MaTnaa 'TPnoadde 1nriied buTpeab 0T aoTad ' S6 ▪ sloT TPnpTATpuT TTP SP TT am sP aznlonagsuaguT TTe .zog gaodaa TeoTugoagoab puP sTTos panoxddP egq. go suoTTepueuluzooaz eqq. e uaod.zoouT TTPgs uPTd 5uTpPab au -Aages oTUlsTas Puy ' sTTos eATsuedxe 'AgTTTge s edoTs ' sepTTspuPT 'uo-mP;anbTT o4 pa:P5ex ggTM uOT3PbTlsanuT TPOTuuoagoab P apnTouT TTPgs .1.ode.i gees, -PTuso;TYPO go elugS egq. uVTM paIeSTbe1 xaauTbue TP3TuuOegoa5 P pup taauTbua TTnTo P gloq Aq pe.zpdaad laoda.z TPoTuuoagoab puP sTTos paTTPI.ap P 'TPnoaddP pue MaTna.z ao3 A;TO alp o� rTuigns TTPgs 4uPoTTddP aq4 'TPAoaddP 4Tuxad buTpe,zb 04 .toTad * V6 •aaeuTbua AgTO pup cuewdoTaAea A4TunululoO go ao4oaaTQ eql go uoTlougsTges awl. 04 pepTnoad eq TTeus sadoTs TTP go buTpPab anoquop - (TeoT4aan :TeluozTaog) T : z ueq{4 aedaals ou eq 'Tugs sadoTs ITT; zo 4n3 •uoTgaTdutoo buTaa4uPaPnb Alaans aUeToT;Jns asod TTPus puP :4Twaed buTpuab P uzu4go Hugs :ieeuTbue TTATO pane s-bat P Aq paaudead uPTd buTpesb P T2Aoxdde pue MaTnaa JO; 4-4TO age oc v p qns TTPus 'ueoTTdde et{q. 'Tt.no.xddP dual TPuTg 04 aoT.zd . E6 :uoTlebT3t buTpQeaD/TPoTuqoagoa0 -ATdde 'Tugs uoT�Tpuoo .zal.ZTals eul ' Tenoadde go uoT4Tpuoo aetpouP uaTM saoTT3uOo uoTVTpuoo uOTge5TgTUI P aaagM sasPo tri - Z6 ( - saanseaul uoT�PbTTw peITnbez TTP A;TIPTo o1 ataq papnTouT ase anq pe STT ATsnoTnaad sUOTVTOUoo .7aeUTbu3 ATD jo soleoTTdnp a_Te suoT,Tpuoo uo7aP577JTu:I buTMoT IOJ au, go autos) SNOIZIQNOJ NOI,LVOI LIW 'IVWNa NOUTANa 1661 ' 6 AxenuP_ :,arra Aueduloj -aUawdoTanaG Hg1' :INVDIiddY OZ96 -ON 01Y; IDV L aAI LV,LI'Z3L JNIISaA r •x . . _ C-,,l1tieS. r � c. Whenever a public hearing is to be held, notice of the time and place . thereof, including a general description of the location of the subdivision, shall be given at least 10 days before the hearing. Such notice shall be given by publication once in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the County. Any interested person may appear at such a hearing and shall be heard. Hearings respecting notices of merger and notices of violation as provided in subsections (i) and (j) of this section 8250-1 are not "public hearings" within the meaning of this subsection (c) . (EN. 3105-12/30/75; AM. 3490-7/1/80) d. Except as otherwise specified herein, decisions of any County agency, officer or employee exercising powers pursuant to this Chapter may be appealed by any aggrieved party within 15 calendar days after any such decision has been made. An appeal may be commenced only by filing with the Planning Division an appeal application addressed to the Board of Supervisors. No appeal application shall be accepted for filing or processing unless it contains all information, data and papers prescribed by the forms supplied by the Planning Division. A fee as specified by resolution of the Board of Supervisors shall be paid to the Planning Division with the filing of each appeal; provided, however, no filing fee shall be charged or collected for any appeal filed on behalf of the County of Ventura. The Board of Supervisors shall hear and decide any such appeal within 30 days after filing, or within such longer period of time as may be consented to by the appellant. (EN. 3105-12/30/75; AM. ORD. 3301-5/3/77; AM. 3490-7/1/80) e. Following the approval of a tentative map for a subdivision requiring • preparation of a final map, the Planning Division of the Resource Management Agency may, upon payment of the fee specified therefor by Board of Supervisors resolution, grant requests for minor modifications of the tentative map which do not affect the quantity or quality of required dedications and which do not increase the total number or significantly alter the configuration of proposed lots in the subdivision. Before granting any minor modification requests, the Planning Division shall make a written finding, with a statement of reasons in support thereof, that the proposed modification could not reasonably be expected to change any of the findings previously adopted by the Board of Supervisors at the time of its approval of the tentative map. Minor modification decisions which are objected to in writing by any interested person within 10 days after rendition shall be deemed to be recommendations only and the modifications request shall thereafter be processed in the manner provided in this Chapter, and for the fee required, for the initial processing of tentative maps for subdivisions requiring preparation of final maps. f. Requests for major modifications of approved tentative maps of subdivisions requiring preparation of final maps shall be processed in the manner provided in this Chapter, and for the fee required, for the initial processing of tentative maps for such subdivisions. 8-2 18 OC-1 H193 OZ • adoTanue -1oj panoxdde 04 pa40Ti1sas aq TTeus buTdeospueT pue ( s43noo sTuual pue sTood buTuzuiTMs buTpnTouT ) sasn4ona4s TeTquapTsax xo3 aoueq.zn4sTp/TPnouzat uoT4Pla6an :papnTouT ale SUOT4oTalsaa 6uTM0TT03 auk leqw axnsua 01 peMetna.z aq Hulls s .2i'4JJ aq4 ' Tenoxdde deux TPUTT oq 10T-Id • S0T :uoT4ebT4Tr TeoTboTOTQ •wIo4s xpeA-OT P buTsnp ssaoop oTgTspe; pup uzxoIs .zeal-OOT e wos3 not:oaio.zd a4pnbape spu ppd buTpTTnq goes leg4 xaauTbu3 AgTD e144 3o uoT4oPTsT3es au4 o4 a4Pa4suouzap TTPgs lueoTTddp ag4. 'Tenoxdde dpmc TeuTT o; aoTad • VOT •xaax3 4nUTPM go 'fuPq sot eq4 wox; 4ee; 00T go uznUITuTW P xoPq qes axe saxn4on.Js TpTluapTsaa 4e4-4 axnsua O . Axessaoau SP pasTnax eq TTPgs uPTd edoleAue 4oT auk. 'TeAoxddp 4Tzzxxad buTpPab o4 xoTad ' COT :uoT4PbT4fl pxpzPH poor, • s�TurTT 43eCoxd au4 uTg4TM suxep pue 'sluauzasea ebemoTT TTP 'suTPxp uuo4s agTs-uO to aoueue4uTeuz xoJ SuoTsTnoxd apnTouT TTTM s,J/DD auk •4p1.14 aouepTne 'TPnoxdde puP MaTnax JO; xaauTbug A4TD auk 4Tuzgns TTP MS 4UPOTTddP au4 'Te.oadde dpnx TpuT; o4 xoTxd • ZOT •Tenoxdde dpiu TPUT3 3o au1T4 ago 4P ale.' a5PUTPrQ Teoo*I uoAu'J lnuTPM luaxxno uagq age eq TTPgs gTsodep TPn4op at •PaxV abeuTP.Q TPoo'I uoAuPD lnuTPM eqa xo3 uO flq a4uoo P AlTD auq -1 TM 4TSodap TiPgs queoTTdde au4 'TPnaadde deux TPUTg 04 aOTxa 'TOT • squeweaTnbax 43TxgsTa Toaluoa pooT3 A4unoj eznquaj xad papTnoxd .eq pTnogs UoT4Ualep OVTs-uo 3T auTuuIe ep TTPgs suOT.PTnoTPP ZTTn2LPA4 pue oTboTaxplu et{j, • C • saT4Tquenb sT.gep pup sMO ; pnui egewT1se TTPgs suoT4PTn3TPD DTTnPapA4 puP .oTboToxpnu auy •T •esTnoo xaZPA P of queoPCpP exagm saxnseaui Jewao xo dex-dTx Aq pagoaloxd eq TTpus ped butpTTnq tiou3 •g -lueoTTdde au4 Aq pepTAoxd aq TTPgs sMoT, .a1PM uzorols esaul alebT4TW o4 Axessaoau saxnseeui abPuTpap TTV • ;uauzdoTanep stuff Aq paqPxlueouoo .10 pesea.zou T eq Tau TTPgs sTa3xed alts-T3o '4uaoeCpe of abpuTpaa •b 166T '6 fix Pnupi :21o Aueduzop queuidoTanea I;IIr :S.[v'VDI*IddY 0 Z 9 t 'ON d`IW s�'a'23s 311Y�.1l�i,i4.L :?I�FI,I.s31i '.' ;3x.':",''-"iii .. ,L ffFF7 1 r • ..-..d/1�.1.iCaa't '�T . i.4i/6w.1.�.�1:••}� _ _� -.1. .., l - t'_ VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4620 APPLICANT: JBH Development Company DATE: January 9 , L991 9 . No Zoning Clearance shall be issued for any building construction unt_l the Final Map has been recorded . Prior to the issuance of any building permit , a zoning clearance shall be obtained from the Department of Community Development . A Buildina Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Building and Safety after the granting of a zoning clearance. 10 . The Vesting Tentative Map shall expire three years from the date of its approval . Failure to record a Final Map with the Ventura County 'Recorder prior to expiration of the Tentative Map shall terminate all proceedings, and any subdivision of the land shall require the filing and processing of a new Vesting Tentative Map. PRIOR TO GRADING PERMIT APPROVAL, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: 11 . The developer shall submit grading plans to the Director of Community Development for approval to ensure compliance with the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The grading plans shall include the areas designated forresidential development on each lot, consistent with the "lot envelope" plan approved by the City Council. 12 . In order to reduce the visual impact of manufactured slopes , the top and toe of these slopes shall be rounded off. Also, the grading plan shall indicate the manner in which the graded slopes shall be blended with the natural slope of the site. 13 . A complete landscape plan (2 sets) , together with specifications and a maintenance program shall be prepared by a State Licensed Landscape Architect, generally in accordance with the Ventura County Guide to Landscape Plans and in compliance with the City of Moorpark Ordinance No. 74 , and shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development . The purpose of the landscaping will be to control erosion, replace mature trees lost as a result of construction and/or grading, and to mitigate the visual impacts of all manufactured slopes three feet or more in height. Landscaping shall consist of drought tolerant and/or native groundcovers , shrubs , and trees which do not require permanent irrigation . The applicant shall bear the cost of the landscape plan review, installation of the landscaping and irrigation system, and of final landscape inspection . All landscaping shall be in place and receive final inspection prior to approval of the Final 2 AoTTod butpsao Tsaauao :4uaatgos44j sdTagd TITg Ono paTaaso sem AoTTod aqg 3o 4ua4uT 0144 aanaMog -asPo a144 4ou sum goes isW{V •4aodaa 33s4s aq4 g;tM AoTTod ago 3o Adoo s papnTouT ansa o4 pus '11104r uorssnosTp-uoT4oe us ss ttta4T 0114 paosTd ansa{ o4 .za44aq uaaq ansa 4gbTuu 4T 40Ts puTq LP-TM -aspueTso 4uasuoo auo uo paosTd sem moll aqg uoT4sutaT33s sTg4 anTaoaa oy •TTounop A4TD ago Aq uot4sutaT33s o4 4oaCgns sabuego eq4 panoadde pus 'paMarna.x ao4oaaTQ 4ueutdoTanac A4Tunmmoo pus aaauTbug A4To ago aseo sT144 uI -TTounoZ A4To et14 go Tsnoadds aoTad eqo 4nog4TM panssT aq 4ou TTsus 4Tutaad buTpsab s 'uETd Tsngdaouoo eti4 44TH tuao3uoo 4ou op 4sg4 sueTd butpsab asouq and •suot4spuaututooaa 144TH TTounop A4To 0144 o4 4aodai s 4Tutgns TT Pus aaeutbug A4T3 aq4 4003 Z usg4 aaout sa4sTnep usTd buTpe.zb 91.14 ;Liana eq4 uT 4Pg4 sepTnoad AoTTod sT114 uT suta4t ago 3o auo •986T/ST/6 uo TTounoo A4To ago Aq pe dopy AoTTod butpsao Tsaeuao auo 114TM aouspi000P uT passaooad 4somTs aaai Aag4 psa4suT -uoT4soT3Tpoat aouTM s se pesseoo.zd ATTstgtuT qou aaaM suoTSTna1 buTpsab aqy -esTataad buoaM 9144 g4TM 33o sgasgs goolgns stg4 burpaebaa antu Aeut TTounoo A4TO atm suoTgdo ago 4nogs aa44aT uoTurdo anoA OZ9f -0N dew gosay anTgs4ueJ, oq uoT4soTjTpoN ei. 4nogy ATuo uoT4eutaoJui :4oeCgns ausx -r TA.zauo :uoT4ue44y LT006 -so 'saTabuy soZ 00cZ e4Tns 4eaa4S 144xTS gsaM TT9 uosuaaos / uosutsTTTTM ' axing Z66T ' 8Z Ainr L abed E l!gngx3 Exhibit 3 Page 2 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California 6 September 15, 1986 Motion by Councilmember Yancy-Sutton to direct staff to develop criteria for allocating the amount of dwelling units permitted each year based on the samples submitted or as modified by Council , seconded by Councilmember Hartley, carried unanimously. 10.G. General Policy Regarding Conceptual Grading Plans on Tentative Maps - • Assistant City Engineer Knipe presented the staff report and policy re- commendations concerning conceptual grading plans on tentative tract maps, parcel maps, land divisions, and development permits. Motion by Councilmember Hartley, to adopt the proposed general policy regarding conceptual grading plans on tentative maps, seconded by Councilmember Yancy-Sutton, carried unanimously. 10.H. Agreement for Use of Facilities, Supplies and Services with Moorpark Unified School District Administrative Assistant Genovese presented the staff report concerning leasing of facilities to allow the Recreation Department to expand its available facilities for adult and youth classes and operate the Star Club afterschool care program; reported the Moorpark Unified School District has agreed to allow the City assume a monthly lease from Action Mobile Office Rentals for a classroom trailer; tentative cost to the city is $2,000/month including staff, the program has twenty students currently enrolled and is self supporting. Motion by Councilmember Yancy-Sutton to approve agreement for use of facilities , supplies and services of Moorpark Unified School District, subject to review and approval by the City Attorney and City Manager, seconded by Councilmember Prieto, carried unanimously. Council recessed at 10:00 p.m. and reconvened at 10: 15 p.m. 11. STAFF REPORTS - INFORMATION ITEMS 11.A. Tract No. 4037/Planned Development Permit No. PD-1044 (Calprop) Environmental Review The staff report was presented by Senior Planner Mike Rubin; reported the EIR for Tract 2964 essentially addressed the same project on the same site as Tract 4037 and areas east of the present site and was utilized for environmental review of Tract 4037; public notice, review and hearing dates were addressed in the report. It was the consensus of the Council to receive and file the report . 11.B. Senior Citizens Expenditures Councilmember Yancy-Sutton recommended senior programs be provided in recreation programing prior to construction of the Senior Center. It was the consensus of the Council to receive and file this report. Exhibit 3 Page 3 ��`` • I'TEM 1 0 . G MOORPARK 'AMES D. WEAK STEVEN KUENY Mayor Clty Manager ''iOMAS C. FERGUSON . `� CHERYL J. KANE Mayor Pro Tern 40w/ City Attorney ALBERT PRIETO 004,1002 RICHARD MORTON Council,nember t 1 .. DirectorDANNY A, WOOLARD Community Councllmmber Development LETA YANCYSUTTON "s R. DENNIS DEt.ZEII CounclImember City Engineer DORIS D. BANKUS MD&ORANDJIM JOHN V. GILLESP;E City Clerk Chief of Police THO•AAS P. GENOVESE CIty Treasurer TO: The Honorable City Council • FROM: R. Dennis Delzeit, City Engineer /2,(54A,I.A.,:olDea DATE: August 21 , 1986 SUBJECT: General Policy Regarding Conceptual Grading Plans on Tentative Maps AACI;Q.ROUND UFORnATION At the June 2 , 1986 Council meeting, the City Council requested the preparation of a general policy regarding the submittal of conceptual grading plans on tentative maps . The following is presented for the City Council ' s consideration : pslj.cy -- Conceptual G1_ading Plans 1 . On all tentative tract maps, parcel maps, LDM' s and DP ' s, where grading quantities will be equal to or greater than 50 cubic yards, a conceptual grading plan shall be a part of the tentative tract map submittal . This conceptual plan shall show pad elevations, tops and toes of slopes and the general drainage pattern. Where siltation basins , retention basins, or where debris basins are envisioned, the grading plan shall show the location of same. If it is anticipated that the cut and fill volumes will not balance, the borrow site or Lill site shall be shown. If these sites are within the City limits it shall be so indicated. 2 . The Community Development Director.,shall provide recommendations concerning conceptual grading plans at the tentative tract map, parcel maps, LDM or DP stage of the project . His focus shall be aesthetics, viewshed and conformance to the City General Plan. The City Engineer shall provide appropriate recommendations f relative to the slope of stability, drainage, erosion .... FrCEWED ... protection and related items . 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark. California 93021 dw . Exhibit 3 Page 4 / Page -2- 3 . The final grading plan shall be in substantial compliance with the conceptual grading plan submitted at the tentative map stage. This determination shall be made by the City Engineer . Minor changes may be approved by the City Engineer, administratively, where the elevations do not deviate by more than two feet from the approved tentative map elevations, provided no adverse situations are created relative to slope stability, drainage, erosion, aesthetics or viewshed. If it is deemed that the grading plan is not in substantial compliance with the conceptual grading plan approved at the tentative stage, the City Engineer shall submit a report with recommendations to the City Council . For those grading plans that do not conform with the conceptual plan, a grading permit shall not be issued without the prior approval of the City Council . 4 . During Grading operations, changes may be authorized by the City Engineer, where such changes result in an "equal to" or " improved" grading plan, provided the Director of Community Development concurs that the change does not result in adverse impact over the aesthetics or viewshed. RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the foregoing policy. MOORPARK. CALIFORNIA City/1 Council Meeting of fill 2- ',nil?. ..014.44„ ?C ACTIONS terytiel b_ slgL. RDDssm2 by John Knipe, Assistant City Engineer John Wanger, Project Engineer Mark Wessel, Project Engineer Chris Lynch, Project Engineer y , /` 11111*. California stkop- - Fair Political Practices Commission MEMORANDUM January, 1992 TO: City Attorneys and County Counsels RE: Legislation Requiring Local Agencies to Amend Their Conflict of Interest Codes In 1990 Government Code Section 87306. 5 was added to the Political Reform Act (Ch. 1075) . Section 87306. 5 requires every local agency's code reviewing body to, no later than July 1 of every even-numbered year, direct every local government agency who has adopted a conflict of interest code within their authority, to review its conflict of interest code and to either amend the code if necessary or report to their respective code reviewing body that no amendment is necessary. This report must be submitted to the agency's code reviewing body no later than October 1 of each even-numbered year. Local agencies must file their first report no later than October 1, 1992 . What this means is that the city council must, no later than July 1, 1992 , take the initiative to notify every local government agency within its jurisdiction to review its code and either amend the code if necessary, or submit a report no later than October 1, 1992 , that no amendment is necessary. Similarly, the County Board of Supervisors must, no later than July 1, 1992 , take the initiative to notify every local government agency within its jurisdiction to conduct a similar review and report. Should an agency determine that its code is out of date, it has 90 days to submit the proposed amendment to its respective code reviewing body. The types of changes which could occur within an agency which would warrant an amendment would include: (1) The creation of positions which involve the making or participation in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on any financial interest; (2) The reclassification, renaming or deletion of previously designated positions; . 428 J Street, Suite 800 • P.O. Box 807 • Sacramento CA 95804-0807 0 (916)322-5660 t Y r (3) The addition, deletion or modification of definitionial or operational provisions of a code; or (4) The addition, deletion or modification of the specific types of investments, business positions, interests in real property, and sources of income which are reportable. In addition to the general changes mentioned previously, a code would need to be amended if: (1) The code contains an outdated paragraph which requires that "An interest in a business entity or a source of income of a type listed in the appendix is not disclosable if the reported assets and the reported gross annual income of the business entity or source of income each exceeded $250 million in the year preceding the filing of a disclosure statement under the provisions of this Code. " This statement should be deleted. (2) The disclosure category portion does not require the disclosure of business positions. Section 87302 was amended in 1987 to require codes to specifically require the disclosure of business positions. If the disclosure category portion of a code requires the disclosure of investments in certain interests, the category should be amended to now require the disclosure of investments and business positions in those certain interests as follows (language which should be added is underlined in the sample below) : Persons in this category must report investments and business positions in business entities and income from sources which manufacture, sell or provide, supplies, materials, books, machinery, services or equipment of the type utilized by the agency. (3) The appendix of designated positions does not designate consultants. The definition of "designated employee" in the Act includes consultants. (Section 82019. ) A consultant is any natural person who provides under contract, information, advice, recommendation or counsel to any agency. (Regulation 18700. ) The Commission realizes that not all consultants participate in the making of decisions on behalf of public agencies and rather than amend their code each time an agency retains a consultant that is in a decision-making capacity, the agency may use a specialized disclosure category which provides that the disclosure required of consultants shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by the executive officer of the agency. The agency's executive officer shall make a determination as to what disclosure, if any, is required by any particular consultant. The Fair Political Practices Commission is the code reviewing body for all multi-county local government agencies. We will notify those agencies to conduct a similar review and report. To assist our agencies with their biennial report, we have created a simple form which can be completed and returned. The use of this form is strictly voluntary, however it has been designed to make the biennial report transition much smoother and time effective. Attached, for your perusal, is a sample of this form which you may wish to use for your agencies. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the information contained above, or if you wish to obtain a copy of the specialized consultant disclosure category, please feel free to contact either Jeanette Turvill or Cheryl Hoff of the Legal Division at (916) 322-5901. LOCAL AGENCY BIENNIAL REPORT Government Code Section 87306. 5 requires local agencies to submit to their code reviewing body a biennial report identifying changes in its code, or a statement that their code is not in need of amendment. Such reports shall be submitted no later than October 1 of each even-numbered year. The first report is due no later than October 1, 1992 and is to be returned to your agencies respective code reviewing body (Section 82011. ) . You may use this form or you may prepare your own report. When completed, all reports must be mailed to: (PLACE RETURN ADDRESS OF CITY OR COUNTY HERE TO ASSIST AGENCIES WITH LOCATION IN WHICH TO RETURN THEIR COMPLETED BIENNIAL REPORTS OR STATEMENTS . ) # # # This agency has reviewed its conflict of interest code and has determined that: 1) Our agency's code accurately designates all positions which make or participate in the making of governmental decisions; that the disclosure assigned those positions accurately requires the disclosure of all investments, business positions, interests in real property and sources of income which may foreseeably be affected materially by the decisions made by those designated positions; and further that the code includes all other provisions required by Government Code Section 87302 ; or, 2) Our agency' s code is in need of amendment. We have determined that the following amendments are necessary (check applicable items) : Include new positions which must be designated Make changes to the reportable sources of income, investments, business positions, or real property Make changes to the positions assigned Change or add the provisions required by Government Code Sections 87302 Contact Person Name of Agency Mailing Address (Signature of Chief Executive Officer) Note: Government Code Section 87306 requires that when an agency has determined that amendments are necessitated by changed circumstances, the amendments or revisions shall be submitted to the code reviewing body within 90 days.