HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2016 0420 CCSA REG ITEM 08A ITEM 8.A.
CITY OF MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of y/ d 1/40 (o
ACTION:422p4n,40 oladA
cwt . �IZo . pet-3 493
BY: 1/4-7harr--
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Dave A. Bobardt, Community Development Director90
Prepared by Freddy A. Carrillo, Associate Planner I
DATE: April 14, 2016 (CC Meeting of 4/20/2016)
SUBJECT: Consider a Resolution Approving Modification No. 6 to Development
Plan (DP) Permit No. 290, to Allow the Development of New Parking
Spaces and New Landscaping and Lighting at 6101 Condor Drive;
Making a Determination of Exemption Under CEQA in Connection
Therewith, on the Application of Dave Osborn for Calabasas BCD
BACKGROUND
On January 28, 2016, an application was filed by Dave Osborn (for Calabasas BCD) for
Modification No. 6 to Development Plan (DP) Permit No. 290. The applicant is
requesting approval for an expansion of the parking lot for a net increase of 178 parking
spaces and for new landscaping and lighting at 6101 Condor Drive. The property
currently has 692 parking spaces and 6 motorcycle spaces; however, 60 spaces would
be removed to accommodate 238 new parking spaces. This would bring a total of 876
parking spaces to the site. Landscape improvements and new lighting poles are also
proposed as part of this permit.
The office building on the site is currently occupied by PennyMac Loan Services, LLC.
The tenant is requesting additional parking spaces for its employees. Many employees
are currently parking improperly on driveways, across the street in the former Kavlico
parking lot, and on Condor Drive.
1
Honorable City Council
April 20, 2016
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Project Setting
Existing Site Conditions:
The property is approximately 16.08 acres and is located on the south east corner of
Princeton Avenue and Condor Drive. The developed area sits on top of a slope that
slopes down at the southern edge of the property. An approximately 140,544 square-
foot two-story office building is located on east side of the site. Access to the property is
located on the north side of the property and on the east side of the property. The
applicant is proposing 238 new parking spaces divided in three different locations: 195
spaces will be developed on south side of the existing parking lot, 6 spaces will be
located east of the shower facility, and 31 spaces will be located south of the office
building. The applicant will also be removing and replacing 6 parking spaces that meet
Americans Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible parking requirements.
Previous Applications:
On June 27, 1983, the Planning Director for Ventura County approved Development
Plan No. 290, for the construction of a 134,400 square-foot industrial/office building with
708 parking spaces and an outdoor jogging track, volleyball court, and patio area.
On December 11, 1985, the Community Development Director of Moorpark approved
Minor Modification No. 2 to Development Permit No. 290, to allow a revision of a
recreational area to include softball field, basketball court, and a 1,352 square-foot
shower facility. However, only the softball field, basketball court and shower facility were
built.
On June 26, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-770, which approved
Industrial Planned Development No. 90-15, for the construction and operation of a
176,000 square-foot building for administration and research and development
purposes. The building was never built and the permit has now expired.
On May 15, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2013-3188, which approved
revised parking restrictions on Condor Drive allowing on street parking for
approximately 80-90 vehicles on the westerly and southerly sides of Condor Drive as it
curves around the eastern boundary of this site, during the hours of 5:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m. to accommodate the parking needs of PennyMac.
On September 4, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution 2013-3220, which
approved parking restrictions on Condor Drive be revised further to provide a "No
Stopping Anytime" zone immediately west of PennyMac's easterly driveway to allow
sufficient space for vehicles to enter and exit Pennymac's easterly driveway as well as
the driveway immediately opposite on the north side of Condor Drive. Prior to this,
parking was not permitted on Condor Drive. If this request is approved, and the parking
lot is constructed, it would be appropriate to restore the "No Stopping at Any Time"
2
Honorable City Council
April 20, 2016
Page 3
restriction to all of Condor Drive. Staff will place this matter on a future City Council
agenda after the parking lot is constructed.
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING
Direction General Plan Zoning Land Use
Site Light Industrial Industrial Park Office building
North Light Industrial Industrial Park Retail / warehousing
South Light Industrial Industrial Park Vacant lot
East Light Industrial Industrial Park Light industrial building
West Light Industrial Industrial Park Light industrial building
General Plan and Zoning Consistency:
The development of parking within the proposed area to accommodate the existing
office use on the subject property is consistent with the Light Industrial General Plan
land use designation of the property. The development of this parking to provide
parking for the office use as conditioned is consistent with the property's Industrial Park,
M-1, zoning designation.
ANALYSIS
Issues
Staff analysis of the proposed project has identified the following areas for City Council
consideration.
Landscaping:
All proposed parking areas are currently covered by grass. The applicant is proposing to
remove 64,650 square-feet of grass from the south side of the existing parking lot and
install 4 planters with attached 'finger" planters on each corner. The parking lot currently
has 19 similar planters. New planters will enhance the parking lot with landscape. The
applicant is also proposing to remove 9,290 square-feet of grass from the east side of
the existing parking lot, which may possibly be used for electrical vehicle parking only.
In addition, 1 ,125 square-feet of grass adjacent to the basketball court and shower
facility will also be removed to accommodate more parking spaces. Both the basketball
court and shower facility will remain as is. However, the softball field will be replaced
with new parking. The recreational facility was originally approved by the County as part
of the site plan but not as a condition of approval. The City has not required recreational
facilities be part of new industrial developments, and has not approved new industrial
developments with recreational facilities.
3
Honorable City Council
April 20, 2016
Page 4
New landscaping on the outer sides of the property and within the slopes is also
proposed as part of this permit. The applicant wants to remove all dead shrubs and
trees and replace vegetation with drought-tolerant landscaping. The existing landscape
has been poorly maintained and has declined with reduced irrigation. New landscaping
will also provide adequate drainage, slope support and erosion control. To ensure
landscaping is installed properly and consistent with the City's Landscape Guidelines, a
special condition has been added to submit a landscape and irrigation plan to be
reviewed and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and the Community
Development Director prior to issuance of a zoning clearance.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination Standards Requirements (NPDES) and
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4):
The City Engineer/Public Works Director has conditioned the project to provide for all
necessary on-site and off-site storm drain improvements including the imposition of
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) requirements. "Passive" Best Management Practices
Drainage Facilities are required to be provided so that surface flows are intercepted and
treated on the surface over biofilters (grassy swales), infiltration areas and other similar
solutions. To ensure grading is done properly, a special condition has been added to
submit a grading plan, to be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer/ Public
Works Director prior to issuance of building permits.
Lighting:
Parking lot lighting is important for both the safety and convenience of users of any
parking area. Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code addresses lighting
systems constructed on properties within the various zones in the city. The code states
that "...lighting has both a practical and aesthetic value and is an integral portion of any
development..." and that "improperly installed lighting, illegal lighting, or improperly
maintained lighting, creates impacts upon astronomical resources within the community
and creates conflicts and nuisance impacts upon abutting properties and is wasteful of
energy resources by causing energy to be expended without producing additional useful
light." To ensure proper lighting is installed, a special condition has been added
requiring a lighting plan subject to review by the Community Development Director and
Police Chief as part of the condition compliance process.
FINDINGS
Modification Findings per Section 17.44.100 of the Moorpark Municipal Code:
A. The site design, as modified by Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290, would
not be considered a substantial or fundamental change in the approved
entitlement or use relative to the permit in that development of parking spaces
would not change the use as authorized by the original permit.
4
Honorable City Council
April 20, 2016
Page 5
B. The site design, as modified by Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290, would
not have a substantial adverse impact on surrounding properties in that the use
does not require modification to the exterior of the approved office building, and
the additional parking spaces will help to resolve current parking shortage that is
impacting offsite properties.
C. The site design, as modified by Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290, would
not change any findings contained in the environmental documentation prepared
for the permit in that this parking lot expansion is within an existing developed
property with appropriate access, parking and circulation for this proposal. No
further environmental documentation is required.
PROCESSING TIME LIMITS
Time limits have been established for the processing of development projects under the
Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.5), the
Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 2), and the California
Environmental Quality Act Statutes and Guidelines (Public Resources Code Division 13,
and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3). Under the applicable
provisions of these regulations, the following timelines have been established for action
on this project:
Date Application Determined Complete: February 26, 2016
Planning Commission Action Deadline: NA
City Council Action Deadline: May 25, 2016*
* This date reflects a 90-day extension to the deadline agreed to by the applicant.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In accordance with the City's environmental review procedures adopted by resolution,
the Community Development Director determines the level of review necessary for a
project to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Some projects
may be exempt from review based upon a specific category listed in CEQA. Other
projects may be exempt under a general rule that environmental review is not
necessary where it can be determined that there would be no possibility of significant
effect upon the environment. A project which does not qualify for an exemption requires
the preparation of an Initial Study to assess the level of potential environmental impacts.
Based upon the results of an Initial Study, the Director may determine that a project will
not have a significant effect upon the environment. In such a case, a Notice of Intent to
Adopt a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration is prepared. For
many projects, a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration will prove to be
sufficient environmental documentation. If the Director determines that a project has
the potential for significant adverse impacts and adequate mitigation cannot be readily
identified, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is prepared.
5
Honorable City Council
April 20, 2016
Page 6
The Community Development Director has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the Class 32 exemption under
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) because
Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290 allows the development of 178 parking spaces
in an existing undeveloped area and the use is consistent with the applicable general
plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning
designation and regulations. In addition, there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment.
The project is consistent with the Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects) exemption as
follows:
A. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all
applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and
regulations, in that the development of new parking spaces will not create negative
impacts on or impair the utility of the neighboring properties, structures or uses in the
surrounding area as the proposed parking lot expansion is compatible in design with
surrounding buildings and land uses and; the circulation system provides for logical
connections between the existing parking lot located on the same property.
B. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than
five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses, in that the development area
consists of 1.72 acre project site within an already developed 16.08 acre site and will
be located adjacent to an existing parking lot in a developed business park.
C. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species,
in that it had been previously graded and prepared for urban development.
D. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic,
noise, air quality, or water quality, in that the development of 178 parking spaces is
intended to supplement the parking needs of the office building on the same
property.
E. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services, in that
utilities and public services exist providing service to adjacent buildings. The new
parking area will be required to comply with all codes in effect at the time of
construction.
NOTICING
Public Notice for this meeting was given consistent with Chapter 17.44.070 of the
Zoning Ordinance as follows:
6
Honorable City Council
April 20, 2016
Page 7
1. Publication. The notice of the public hearing was published in the Ventura County
Star on April 8, 2016.
2. Mailing. The notice of the public hearing was mailed on April 8, 2016, to owners
of real property, as identified on the latest adjusted Ventura County Tax Assessor
Roles, within one-thousand (1,000) feet of the exterior boundaries of the
assessor's parcel(s) subject to the hearing.
3. Sign. One 32 square foot sign was placed on the street frontage on April 4,
2016.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2016- approving Modification No. 6 to Development
Plan Permit No. 290.
3. Direct staff upon completion of the parking lot construction per this Modification
No. 6 to Development Planned Permit No. 290 to present a resolution to
eliminate the parking on Condor Drive.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photograph
3. Project Exhibit `Site Plan' (Under Separate Cover)
4. Draft Resolution with Conditions of Approval
7
8 1 1N3WH3V11V 00
ro =
o ' -
0
3 p II
n W
ro
^"
0) %
., w.
< §- R
a U
aN
3 .
-, v K -8 z
v Q CoO 3
ro '{ �D Q.
o
tol CD O 0
E •
C
a (00)
ro
(DF
O ? e: Cf.: Ab.. Ave -- - -
_..
— -
7 CO 3 n
co N _ _
a)
— N =
N - I o
D O =
ED
E o)
.o su
< -0
aI
a
O
ro
o 0
I
_ O
a
o Q.
co 0
C Com 00
0; °_,. �
// <
CD
O_
N :\
A
C
co
rt)
n
PI
O R= 1,
"Z6.. ; 0 kt e,
t
c
ro
O z
J
it-
FIT
=
ro , N -
d \ V :
n
n ato
v \ -z.
T
6 Z 1N3INH3V11V 33
� � • �.$� I . • , �' .. .
d o, p
n co - _ •
• .., ;_ 0 ., -,.. '..: 41
0 2 ,
a ,.. , . \
i,, "7' .....l. ; . •
ifT
tn c 15' - f'
co co
.-,., . : ),,,.,
1.. . ''.•:.
o —, 0 Z \., ., , .
•
v c O Ob
p /j1r
p O a 9F •- `�Ilf - . b-•
5 g �' y- .any woiaawud D
lit .P.:' - '* ... 4 t: ' 1, -t •••• o • 0 1.c.
a w!"7 ,...: .. •
44' CD
14
• 7 1. ..,..- -.I =
cs
,.... ' ..."<)---. \-....-.4 .., —1
CO
,- . 'It,I\\., :
p -'� .. F
.
co
1 11 i J 1 ' n
•
n , . .' 4 'Ili \ .
'".." To\VI 1 :: 0 iii.7‘ ,
1
•
\ '
CP
. y • 1 j\
i
i•. % I' 1
t
I.n ''' - a .` - • .. ' 411:1: Olti 4 ,1
co
n
Ei3 L- '',',,, •. \ I li
n
2 q:i,:i .; ,, ,.4,..
2`11.0,
„Tn.7,1Ji N'--• ' Mild LIS .-.
a
VIN?10d11V0'Altid8001/1'3AICI I8OGNO0 1,0 l9
ONIAlVd 1VNOLLICICIV CIDSOdOld
111!
14 .41
Phi ,
Z
<
.--I
CL
,;...,3
^
i
g
g-
4‘1111,16
•_,. _
•_,...-*Itqw,v,„,
/ i'FiritiktaiiiNt.• N 0.3 a z 6„ i g ., ,,,, !6 2
/ je,•4 41:70211,1 14°A u) i 1 1 1 a .J. iq. 1 i - = cm DNIkelg
.0.4,tteptev4r--
AL7.10/0#1.'
."140 AA Pee o 0 A V'PrO
J,. w - ..s.
• /,1,
400, mt. r. ' +NPArb0004
fg, 1 - . 4 riii lit*•)14 1/4 0.,
ff. . e•
4)
itlig, .tikvitki 1 . 4p.-4.. a*
I / rtAltitalitifir,i '..:C..
4, '+ 14214 (a -""5 •,,mr,...ow.1,
erwr .4* + egiteei . 1 , z'
r .i...›. ,
1114`°t* :11UF.111.40:41-:.*.
g
0'00 ILL.....elk Ill V 1 k co
*,
ii h
,L, •
I Or I LAP" . • G '141i;
le
/ Ilt"
O.
III@..,N i • ''' „ + . •IIP + ‘••••, • „ 9 0 *
84111100,
11rT.# • . • • • ..1,' It*
111--. 4..` tr.... e• 7Pr' '-'til...... ..vareir
;11i4 —1F -
[2,," . ioir,t•
,•=9...A. Ar„,,r.F. tr. i,... .gew. cow. AK. ipacxo 4r-7o .11031 .,,.
i Pit i If
! ,
2 i V . 0...
I
N ir/ i . ia. ie,',,
, • Milk
6
i I .
i i'l 9 :tr. -u u•u _ • .7.---x.
. _. •.,...
-
® • , •
• • >
4:
9 9 Itk
•
. ,. ., .r /t) 01) ' 1' ,
. , _.,.. ..........., e
a 4.1 L
1 a 9"...2 .
,a,w,.. pant* cmigo, "Ex., ,E.; clue.) f.B•ro (OZ.01 41' 1(i:um*
'1116 III 11-,
''I c
101 T I 1 1' ,3 - iik* 9
§
I
I
1
..‘
!I i
to 0 N
17ft P
S 14 S2 I
1
1
....
irc I
i lir; jar It Mit W.I' I, L. CII,
li:Vitihn • l
li.• A.. '-'' L.) iett, i
‘',,,.. l .. .....,......111.11....1 ------ - Aarlil% .""F
IMI 1 --- ----- -...V.,_.„....T., .-..ilitci...
a ' 0.
l'"'elli101111MI-joh„, ME
lit " • 111111.
• - ____---R__C4) 11110""Ig rip Egg
, k‘
illiii. , ,, -•______ _ ,.., .t.t...elkr. ele. .
-- r
'''T ••(
- x
" 1*--.1 I •/AA.
: i, 3-, 1-1-'-': .•- `1- ''f.- 4:.2-10: -
—. 111- – 'i _ • .t( : ,.. ,
0
- x , .3,- tw - 1- -• . r -' ,,,i, , V
ii., ' 1
I '* ' ••411 "
CC ATTACHMENT 3 lo
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MODIFICATION NO.
6 TO DEVELOPMENT PLANNED (DP) PERMIT NO. 290, TO
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PARKING SPACES
AND NEW LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING AT 6101 CONDOR
DRIVE, AND MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION
UNDER CEQA IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, ON THE
APPLICATION OF DAVID OSBORN ON BEHALF OF
CALABASAS BCD
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2016, an application was filed by David Osborn (for
Calabasas BCD) for Modification No. 6 to Development Plan (DP) Permit No. 209, for
the development of new parking spaces and new landscape and lighting within an
existing undeveloped area at 6101 Condor Drive; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held on April 20, 2016, the City
Council considered the agenda report for Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290, and
any supplements thereto and written public comments; opened the public hearing and
took and considered public testimony both for and against the proposal, closed the
public hearing and reached a decision on this matter.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director's determined that this project
is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15332 (Class
32 - In-Fill Development Projects) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA
Guidelines) in that the project is consistent with the applicable general and specific plan
designation and all applicable general and specific plan policies as well as with the
applicable zoning designation and regulations; the proposed development occurs within
city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban
uses; the project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened
species; approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to
traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately served by all
required utilities and public services. No further environmental documentation is
required.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The City Council concurs
with the Community Development Director's determination that this project is
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32
- In-Fill Development Projects) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines)
in that the project is consistent with the applicable general and specific plan designation
and all applicable general and specific plan policies as well as with applicable zoning
designation and regulations; the proposed development occurs within city limits on a
project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; the
project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species;
CC ATTACHMENT 4 i i
Resolution No. 2016-
Page 2
approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise,
air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities
and public services. No further environmental documentation is required.
SECTION 2. MODIFICATION FINDINGS: Based upon the information set forth
in the staff report(s), accompanying studies, and oral and written public testimony, the
City Council makes the following findings in accordance with City of Moorpark,
Municipal Code Section 17.44.100:
A. The site design, as modified by Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290,
would not be considered a substantial or fundamental change in the
approved entitlement or use relative to the permit in that development of
parking spaces would not change the use as authorized by the original
permit.
B. The site design, as modified by Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290,
would not have a substantial adverse impact on surrounding properties in
that the use does not require modification to the exterior of the approved
office building, and the additional parking spaces will help to resolve
current parking shortage that is impacting offsite properties.
C. The site design, as modified by Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No. 290,
would not change any findings contained in the environmental
documentation prepared for the permit in that this parking lot expansion is
within an existing developed property with appropriate access, parking
and circulation for this proposal. No further environmental documentation
is required.
SECTION 3. APPROVAL OF PERMITS: Modification No. 6 to DP Permit No.
209 is hereby approved, subject to conditions of approval in Exhibit A, attached hereto
and incorporated herein.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and
shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 2016.
Janice S. Parvin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Maureen Benson, City Clerk
Exhibit A — Special Conditions of Approval
12
Resolution No. 2016-
Page 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MODIFICATION NO. 6 TO
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (DO) PERMIT NO. 290
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The applicant shall comply with Standard Conditions of Approval for Subdivisions and
Planned Development Permits as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2009-2799
(Exhibit A), except as modified by the following Special Conditions of Approval. In the
event of conflict between a Standard and Special Condition of Approval, the Special
Condition shall apply.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This Modification No. 6 to Development Plan (DP) Permit No. 290 will expire one
year from the date of its approval unless the use has been inaugurated by
issuance of a building permit for construction. The Community Development
Director may, at his/her discretion, grant up to two (2) additional one-year
extensions for use inauguration of the Modification to the Development Plan, if
there have been no changes in the adjacent areas and if the applicant can
document that he/she has diligently worked towards use inauguration during the
initial period of time. The request for extension shall be made in writing, at least
thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date of this Modification and shall be
accompanied by applicable entitlement processing deposits.
2. The applicants acceptance of this approval of the Modification No. 6 to
Development Plan (DP) Permit No. 209 and/or commencement of construction
and/or operations under this Modification is deemed to be acceptance of all
conditions of this permit, as amended by Modification No. 6. If any of the
conditions or limitations of this approval are held to be invalid, that holding will
not invalidate any of the remaining conditions or limitations set forth.
3. Conditions of this entitlement may not be interpreted as permitting or requiring
any violation of law or any unlawful rules or regulations or orders of an authorized
governmental agency.
4. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the plans presented in
conjunction with the application for Modification No. 6 to Development Plan (DP)
Permit No. 290, except any modifications as may be required to meet specific
Code standards or other conditions stipulated herein.
5. All other conditions of approval for Development Plan (DP) No. 290 shall
continue to apply, except as revised herein. Should there be any conflict between
the conditions of this Modification No. 6 and the conditions for Development Plan
(DP) No. 290, the conditions of this Modification No. 6 shall prevail.
13
Resolution No. 2016-
Page 4
6. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents,
officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or
its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval
by the City or any of its agencies, departments, commissions, agents, officers, or
employees concerning the permit, which claim, action or proceeding is brought
within the time period provided by the California Code of Civil Procedure Section
1094.6 and Government Code Section 65009. The City will promptly notify the
applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and if the City should fail to do
so or should fail to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not
thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City or its
agents, officers and employees pursuant to this condition.
a. The City may, within its unlimited discretion, participate in the defense of
any such claim, action or proceeding, if both of the following occur:
The City bears its own attorney fees and costs;
ii. The City defends the claim, action or proceeding in good faith.
b. The applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement of
such claim, action or proceeding unless the settlement is approved by the
applicant. The applicant's obligations under this condition shall apply
regardless of whether a building permit is ultimately obtained, or final
occupancy is ultimately granted with respect to the permit.
7. All necessary permits must be obtained from the Building and Safety Department
and all construction shall be in compliance with the Moorpark Building Code and
all other applicable regulations. Approval of a Zoning Clearance is required prior
to the issuance of building permits. All other permit and fee requirements must
be met.
8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a grading plan shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Engineer/ Public Works Director.
9. Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance, a landscape and irrigation plan with
drought-tolerant landscaping consistent with the City's Water Efficient
Landscaping Ordinance and Landscaping Design Guidelines shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Parks and Recreation Director and Community
Development Director. The landscaping plan must include restoration of all
slopes on the site.
10. None of the prohibited plants indicated in the Provisionally Acceptable Plant List
and the Invasive and Prohibited Plant List contained in the City's Landscape
Standards and Guidelines shall be used on any property within the development
site, or slope area.
14
Resolution No. 2016-
Page 5
11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a lighting plan shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Community Development Director, and Police Chief
to ensure compliance with Chapter 17.30 of the Moorpark Municipal Code.
- END -
15