Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
AGENDA REPORT 1986 0303 CC REG ITEM 07B
114 , 6-6 MOORPARK ITEM 7.E5 JAMES D. WEAK STEVEN KUENY Mayor .•� q� City Manager �i CHERYL J. KANE THOMAS C. FERGUSON c Mayor Pro Tern F�/ City Attorney ALBERT PRIETO MINI AS RICHARD MORTON Councilmember e V Director of DANNY A. WOOLARD o9-,/ Community Councilmember o,/��� Development LETA YANCY-SUTTON �� R. DENNIS DELZEIT Councilmember City Engineer DORIS D. BANKUS JOHN V. GILLESPIE City Clerk Chief of Police THOMAS P. GENOVESE City Treasurer To: The Honorable City Council From: Steven Kueny, City Manager (Prepared by Steve Rodriguez, McClelland Engineers) Date: March 3, 1986 Subject: General Plan Amendment GPA 85-4; Zone Change ZC-2804; Tract TR-4147; Residential Planned Development Permit RPD-1049 (Villa Campesina) At its regular meeting of February 12, 1986, the Planning Commission reviewed the above entitlement requests. Following the staff presentation, the Commission received testimony from Ms. Karen Flock, Project Manager for the applicant, the Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation. Ms. Jeanette Duncan, of the Peoples Self-Help Corporation of San Luis Obispo, made a slide presentation of past "self-help" projects constructed in the San Luis Obispo area. Teresa Cortes, President of the Villa Campesina Corporation, and Raul Valdivia spoke in favor of the project. There was no testimony provided in opposition to the proposed project. The Commission asked questions of staff and the applicant about proposed resale controls and residency requirements for the proposed project. The applicant indicated that it was their belief that resale controls were not necessary because their past experience indicated that little turnover occurs in unit ownership after the initial sale of the unit. Also, due to the "interest recapture" program required by the Farmers Home Administration 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805)529-6874 (FmHA) , there is little incentive for the initial buyer of a home to sell the house during the first ten or fifteen years of ownership. The applicant then provided clarification of their request that if resale controls are imple- mented, that only twenty percent of the units be restricted, and that those units be made available to households with very-low, low and moderate incomes. The applicant stated that the ability to sell to a moderate income household was needed to allow the seller of a unit a better opportunity to sell the home to a qualifying household and obtain the equity that they had accrued in the home. In regard to a residency requirement, the applicant stated that for a potential buyer to be qualified by the FmHA for one of the project homes, an extensive check of the household's income, work history, budget, etc. , is made. Another qualifying requirement is the ability of the household to travel to the construction site. This requirement would give an advantage to people who presently live or work in the Moorpark area over a household that would be forced to commute to the job site. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Development Standard and Waivers The Planning Commission Staff Report contains a list of seven requests made by the applicant for waivers of development standards (see page 19, item 3) . The Planning Commission discussed each of these items and made the following recommendations to the City Council: 3a. Waiver of improvements to the proposed east-west collector street. Commissioner Holland made a motion to add an additional condition of approval to require a deed covenant that would require homeowners to waive their right to protest the formation of an assessment district to install future improvements for this proposed road. This action would not require the City or the homeowners to install the road until it was deemed necessary, and leaves other potential options for funding available. 59047A/M-2 Commissioner Hartley disagreed with this motion. He preferred an alter- native that would waive the applicant's responsibility to provide the east- west improvements entirely, and instead require the applicant to provide full improvements to Liberty Bell Road. This option would provide the roads needed to serve the project, and would not encumber the project with the prospect of a future assessment district. Future improvements of the east- west collector street could be the responsibility of the commercial prop- erties to the north. Commissioner Holland's motion was passed 3-1 (see revised Condition of Approval No. 37 of Tract 4147) . Staff recommends that if the City Council adopts this Planning Commission action, that a similar condition be imposed on RPD-1049 (see attached condition "A") . The Planning Commission's action defers the proposed road improvements and sets the initial groundwork for establishing a future installation assessment district. It does not, however, guarantee that the proposed road will be installed. To ensure installation of the road, an improvement bond or similar surety would be required. As an alternative to bonding for the road installation, the applicant could submit the required half-street improvement plans, including curb, gutter and sidewalk. Installation of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk, or surety to ensure their installation, could be required at this time. The installation of the road improvements could then be the responsibility of the commercial uses to the north of the project. Staff Recommendation: Consider requiring curb, gutter and sidewalk installation or appropriate bonding, and waive the requirement for future road paving. Should the City Council adopt the Planning Commission's action requiring the waiver of the right to protest the formation of an assessment district, then adopt the staff recommended condition placing the waiver of the right to protest condition on RPD-1049 (see attached condition "A") . 3b. That resale control on 20% of the proposed units be specified for very-low, low and moderate income households. 59047A/M-3 Commissioner Holland made a motion to restrict the resale of all units in the subdivision with the provisions outlined on Condition Nos. 22 and 23 of RPD-1049. This resale control program would utilize the potential to "rollover" the Community Development Block Grant deferred loan monies from the City to provide an incentive to resell homes to very-low and low income households. Using only only this strategy, it would not be necessary to "target" specific homes (i.e. , 20%) in the project to be effected by resale control. Additionally, Commissioner Holland felt that due to the low turn- over rate tendencies of similar projects, that more restrictive measures were not required. Discussion then ensued that the above motion would not guaran- tee the reservation of any of the units for lower income families. The motion was defeated, 2-2. Commissioner Hartley made a motion to institute resale control utilizing the staff recommended plan of a deed restriction on 20% of the units (Tract Condition No. 20) in conjunction with the CDBG deferred loan "rollover" con- trol on all units (RPD Condition Nos. 22 and 23) . The motion also specified that the provision of Condition No. 20 to allow the resale of controlled homes to households of moderate income be deleted. Both Commissioners Hartley and LaPerch indicated that the deletion of the moderate income provision was needed to prevent the very-low and low income households from being "squeezed out" of the project. The motion passed 4-0. See attached for revised Condition No. 20 of Tract 4147. An alternative to "targeting" specific homes in the project with deed restrictions requiring them to be owned by lower income households, would be to require that at least 20% (12) of the homes in the project be owned by lower income households during the required ten year period. This provision could be monitored through the income reporting requirements of the CDBG "rollover" conditions proposed for all units in the project. If at any time during the required ten year period, lower income household occupancy was to drop below 20%, the City could disapprove further sales to moderate income households under the provision of the rollover condition and the requirements of the S.B. 156 legislation (see discussion below) . 59047A/M-4 Since the Planning Commission's February 12 hearing, the City Attorney has conducted additional review of the requirements of S.B. 156 (Mello) . It is the City Attorney's opinion that due to the wording contained in the legislation, it is not the responsibility of the City to provide a mechanism for reserving any of the units for lower income households. The legislation states that the units for lower income households "shall be reserved" for a period of ten years or longer. Therefore, it is inherent in the law that such a reservation must occur, if it does not, the law has been violated. This differs from the wording found in the "Roos" legislation which states that the City "shall assure" that the reservation for lower income households occurs. In this instance, the burden is placed on the City to provide a reservation mechanism. Staff Recommendation: If the City takes a passive role in informing potential buyers that at least twenty percent of the homes have been reserved for lower income households, inadvertent violations of the Mello legislation would probably occur. To reduce this potential, staff recommends that your Council consider the following three alternatives: a) Raise the allowable project density so that a density bonus is not required, hence, the S.B. 156 reservation requirements would no longer pertain to the project. To change the allowable project density, it would be necessary to change the request for a Land Use Element amendment from "High" to "Very High". The High designation allows for an average project density of seven units per acre. While a density range of five to ten units per acre is specified, the Land Use Element states that in order to provide a project density above the specified average, the project must be filed as a "Planned Community". Therefore, the proposed project would not qualify for a density above seven units per acre average, and the next higher Land Use Element density designation (Very High, fifteen units per acre average) would be necessary. The "Very High" designation would allow a maximum of approxi- mately 123 units to be located on the project site, about twice the requested number of units in the proposed project. 59047A/M-5 This option would have one potential drawback. If the proposed project is approved, but for some reason it is never constructed, the site would remain with a "Very High" density General Plan designation. The environ- mental review conducted for this project's requested General Plan Amendment has been based upon a project density of 62 units, not a conceivable maximum buildout of 123 units, which could occur if another project is constructed on this site. A 123 unit project could have significantly greater traffic, air quality, sewer and water impacts than the proposed 62 unit development. An increase in the requested project zoning would also be required to eliminate the need for a density bonus. The minimum zoning density required to accommodate 62 units on 8.2 net acres is "R-P-D-7.6u". Since the Miti- gated Negative Declaration prepared for this project addresses potential impacts resulting from the construction of 62 units, the document would be adequate to consider an increase in the requested zoning density. A question remains, however, as to whether the "R-P-D-7.6u" zoning could be considered consistent with the Land use Element designation of "Very High" (10 to 20 units per acre, 15 units average) , as the zoning would allow fewer units than the minimum permitted by the General Plan. b) Grant the requested density bonus and development standard waivers as required by S.B. 156, and accept the City Attorney's interpretation of the reservation requirements of the legislation. To ensure that the City's contribution to this project through the Community Development Block Grant deferred loan program continues to provide low income housing opportunities (as required by the grant) , implement the proposed CDBG "rollover" provision on all units as specified by Condition Nos. 22 and 23 of RPD 1049. This option would be consistent with the requirements of S.B. 156, it could inform future home buyers that there are State law requirements for unit reservation, and it would serve to protect the City's investment in this project. The previous argument against using the CDBG rollover provision as the only method of resale control is no longer valid. The concern was that the CDBG method did not guarantee that the units would be maintained as low income units, as it would only provide a good incentive to sell to lower 59047A/M-6 income households. However, with the City Attorney's interpretation of S.B. 156, it is not the City's responsibility to ensure that the homes remain lower income units. The drawback to this option is that some staff time, with no apparent means of compensation, will be needed over a period of at least ten years for the continued monitoring and approval of sales as required by Condition Numbers 22 and 23. c) Do not increase the requested General Plan and Zone Change requests, and grant a density bonus under "Roos" requirements. Resale control measures as recommended by the Planning Commission would then be required for a thirty year period. This option would result in increased enforcement costs to the City, and has been previously considered and rejected by the applicant, due to the thirty year resale provision. 3c. Place a limit on required park site improvements or accept the payment of in lieu fees. Considerable discussion occurred regarding the benefits versus liabil- ities of providing the proposed on-site park, and potential funding mecha- nisms to pay for park maintenance. Commissioner Holland stated that he felt that in consideration of the community park to be located across the Arroyo, the proposed on-site park was inappropriate and that the in lieu fees should be accepted. Commissioner Hartley argued that due to the small lot sizes, a convenient outdoor recreation area should be provided. It was discussed and generally agreed upon that the most expensive aspect of the park construction would be the site preparation and installa- tion of turf. Eliminating some of the other Park and Recreation Commission improvement requirements (i.e. , picnic tables, basketball court, etc.) would not result in a significant cost savings. Additionally, by placing a ceiling on the maximum dollar amount to be expended, there would be no incentive to use the "self-help" ethic or labor provided by the residents to construct the park. 59047A/M-7 Therefore, Commissioner Claffey moved to require park improvements similar to those required by the Parks and Recreation Commission (see RPD Condition No. 24) and that no maximum dollar amount for required improvements be specified. The motion passed 3-1. Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Planning Commission's recommended action. Regarding the establishment of a funding mechanism for park maintenance, Commissioner Hartley stated that he disagreed with the Parks and Recreation Commission's contention that the park would be used only by project residents and, therefore, they should be responsible for all the costs of the park maintenance. Commissioner Hartley felt that the park would receive some general public use (users of the proposed bike path and equestrian trail for instance) . Therefore, the City should retain some responsibility for the park maintenance. Commissioner Hartley made a motion that RPD Condition No. 27 be amended to require that 90% of the park site maintenance costs be borne by the proj- ect residents as an additional payment to City Assessment District 85-1. The remaining 10% of the maintenance costs would be provided by the City from Assessment District 85-1 funds. This 90%/10% split in maintenance responsi- bility should be reviewed on an annual basis. The motion passed 4-0 (see revised RPD Condition No. 27) . Staff Recommendation: Adopt the recommendation of the Parks and Recre- ation Commission to require 100% maintenance of the park by project resi- dents. The acceptance of the proposed park site and improvements by the Parks and Recreation Commission was a compromise of their normal standards for Quimby and RPD dedications and improvements. The park dedication and improvements requirements for this project are considerably less than those required for similar sized projects. 3d. Permit the proposed two-car garages in this project to have an interior measurement of 16 ft by 20 ft. The Moorpark Zoning Ordinance requires an interior measurement of 18 ft by 20 ft. 59047A/M-8 ti Commissioner Claffey made a motion to recommend approval of this devel- opment standard modification. The motion passed 4-0. Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Planning Commission recommended action. 3e. Require only necessary improvements to Liberty Bell Road and/or estab- lish a payback agreement for road improvements between the applicant and surrounding properties. The City Engineer reported that it would not be feasible to require a payback agreement for the road improvements at this time. According to the City Attorney, an enabling ordinance is required before such an agreement may be imposed. Considerable discussion then ensued regarding the extent of the road improvements that should be required. Commissioner Holland made a motion that would require half street plus twelve feet of improvements along all of Liberty Bell for a 40 foot wide street in 60 feet of right of way (ROW) . Furthermore, that if prior to recordation of the tract map, a payback ordi- nance was adopted, the applicant would be required to install one-half plus twelve feet of a 40 foot wide road in a 60 foot ROW along the southern portion of Liberty Bell Road, and half street improvements for a 60 foot wide road in an 80 foot ROW along the northern portion. This motion was tabled, however, when it was realized that presently only 40 feet of existing ROW exists for Liberty Bell Road. This condition would result in additional land acquisition costs to the applicant or result in condemnation proceedings by the City. A second motion was then made by Commissioner Hartley that would require the installation of half street improvements plus 12 feet, of a 40 foot wide road in a 60 foot ROW along the southern portion of Liberty Bell Road within the tract boundary. The northern portion would require half street improve- ments of a 60 foot road in an 80 foot ROW, plus curbs, gutters and sidewalks if no supplemental acquisition of land was required. If additional public right of way would be required for these northerly offsite improvements, the same road improvements would be required, minus the provision of curb, gutter 59047A/M-9 and sidewalk. The City Engineer expressed concern regarding this alter- native, as adequate pedestrian access may not be provided if there are no sidewalks. The motion passed 4-0 (see revised Condition No. 37 of Tract 4147) . Staff Recommendation: That along the northern portion of Liberty Bell Road, thirty (30) feet of paving and curbs, gutters, and sidewalks be pro- vided. 3f. Waiver of Los Angeles Area of Contribution Fee. The Planning Commission agreed with the staff recommendation that the fee should not be waived because of environmental impact mitigation conse- quences. Commissioner Hartley made a motion that expanded the staff recom- mendation to allow the payment of the fees at the time each building permit is issued, to give the applicant a choice of when to pay the fee, as long as the then current fee was paid. Therefore, if the lump-sum fee was paid prior to recordation of the tract map, it is possible that the current contribution would be required. If the payment at building permit option was selected, the individual fees would be subject to possible increases in the Area of Contribution Fee. Commissioner Hartley stressed that the above motion would not set a general precedent due to the low-income nature of the project. The motion passed 4-0 (see revised Condition No. 41 of Tract 4147 and Condition No. 44 of RPD-1049) . Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Planning Commission's recommended action. 3g. That wooden fencing be permitted as part of the project design. The Commission and the applicant discussed the installation price of different types of fences. Commissioner Claffey made a motion to allow all fences in the project (including perimeter fencing) to consist of a concrete base with a wooden upper portion. There would be no contact between soil and wood. This motion was passed 4-0 (see revised RPD-1049 Condition No. 15) . 59047A/M-10 It should be noted that no provisions have been made to require land- scaping adjacent to the perimeter wall along the east-west collector street. Due to the proposed installation of a five-foot-wide sidewalk, the instal- lation of street trees will not be feasible. A streetscape treatment could be required along the northern side of the street when the commercial prop- erties develop. Staff Recommendation: Allow the combination concrete/wood fencing or permit the use of wooden fencing with galvanized steel posts along all interior property lines. A solid block wall should be required to be installed along the north and east project perimeters, as well as along the western property line of lot one. Circulation Element The Commission considered the applicant's request to amend the Circu- lation Element to delete the requirement to install the bike path and eques- trian trail. After expressing concerns for importance of maintaining the integrity of the path and trail system in the area, a motion was made to recommend to the City Council that the applicant be required to grant an easement to the City for the future installation of the path and trail improvements. The applicant would not be responsible for the installation of the improvements at this time. However, a covenant to the deeds of all of the parcels contained in the subdivision would be required waiving the right to protest the formation of an assessment district to provide the instal- lation of the bike path and equestrian trail. The motion passed 4-0. Condition No. 37 of tract 4147 has been revised to delete the requirement for the applicant to install the path and trail improvements at this time. Condition No. 18 of the tract has been amended to include the requirement of a covenant waiving the right to protest the formation of a future assessment district. Staff has proposed a similar condition of approval (see attached condition "B") to be imposed on RPD 1049. 59047A/M-11 Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Planning Commission's recommended action, and impose a similar condition regarding waiving the right to protest the formation of an assessment district on RPD 1049 (see attached staff proposed condition "B") . Lot Depth/Width Ratio The Commission considered the applicant's request to waive the zoning ordinance requirement for the ratio of lot depth to width, not exceed 3:1 for proposed lot numbers 56, 57, 58, and 59. A motion was made to waive the requirement, and was passed 4-0. This represents a final action on this request; no further action is required by the City Council. Additional Conditions The Commission considered and passed a motion to require the applicant to prepare Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) establishing maintenance requirements for the project properties. Said CC&Rs would be enforceable by the City, and must be submitted for review by the City Manager prior to recordation of the Tract Map (see Condition of Approval No. 58 of Tract 4147) . The establishment of project CC&Rs to be enforced by the City (or by project residents) would be a precedent-setting action. Other project CC&Rs are enforced by homeowners' associations. The adoption and subsequent enforcement responsibility of detailed CC&Rs could create potential enforce- ment problems for the City. As an alternative to requiring project CC&Rs, the City could incorporate the provisions contained in Section 8160-2.10 (see attached staff proposed condition "C") of the Moorpark Zoning Ordinance regarding accessory open storage in residential zones into the conditions of the RPD permit. These provisions must be specifically incorporated into the permit as this ordinance section does not pertain to the R-P-D zone. Addi- tionally, conditions regarding landscaping and site maintenance (see attached conditions "D" and "E") could also be imposed. 59047A/M-12 Staff Recommendation: Adopt staff proposed conditions of approval "C", "D", and "E" (see attached) regarding site maintenance. Project Environmental Document and Entitlements In their final action, the Commission unanimously passed a motion to recommend to the City Council that the Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and that it approve the requested amendment to the Land Use Element (GPA 85-4) , TR-4147, ZC-2804, and RPD-1049; subject to the revised Conditions of Approval. Attachments: Staff Proposed Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Resolution and Revised Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments 59047A/M-13 STAFF PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. That prior to the issuance of a zone clearance for each unit, the applicant shall secure from the prospective purchaser of the home, a written statement waiving the right of the purchaser to protest the formation of an assessment district to fund the improvements of the east-west collector street. B. That prior to the issuance of a zone clearance for each unit, the applicant shall secure from the prospective purchaser of the home, a written statement waiving the right of the purchaser to protest the formation of an assessment district to fund the installation of the equestrian trail and bike path. C. Sec. 8160-2.10 - In the A-E, R-A, O-S, R-B, R-B-H, R-E, R-0, R-1, R-2, and R-3 zones, the open storage of materials is an accessory use to a permitted use and shall be allowed subject to the following conditions: (EN. ORD. #3572-11/3/81) Sec. 8160-1.10.1 - The open storage of materials shall not intrude into any required setbacks; (EN. ORD. #3572-11/3/81) Sec. 8160-2.10.2 - The open storage of materials shall not exceed an aggregate area of two hundred (200) square feet and shall not exceed a height of six (6) feet; (EN. ORD. #3572-11/3/81) Sec. 8160-2.10.3 - Materials stored may include, but are not limited to, inoperative vehicles, equipment, building materials, scrap metal, or personal or household items; (EN. ORD. #3572-11/3/81) 59047A/N-1 Sec. 8160-2.10.4 - Exempt from the open storage conditions of Sections 8160-2.10.2 and 8160-2.10.3 are materials or equipment kept on any premises for use in construction of any building on said premises for which a zone clearance and necessary building permits are obtained and in force and materials or equipment customarily used on a farm or ranch and so situated. (EN. ORD. #3572-11/3/81) Sec. 8160-2.10.5 - Violation of any previsions of Sections 8160-2.10.1 to 8160-2.10.4 is a misdemeanor/infraction as specified in Section 13-1 of the Ventura County Ordinance Code. (EN. ORD. #3562-11/3/81) D. That continued landscape maintenance shall be subject to periodic inspection by the City. Project occupants shall be required to remedy any defects in ground maintenance, as indicated by the City Inspector, within two weeks after notification. E. That all required yards, fences, parking areas, and common open spaces shall be improved as required by these regulations and shall at all times be maintained in a neat and orderly manner appropriate for the "RPD" zone. Additional Requirement The, proposed project shall be subject to all provisions of the Moorpark Zoning Ordinance relating to open storage regulations as they apply to the "R-1" zone, or as they may be subsequently amended. 59047A/N-2 CITY OF MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION REVISED AND ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GPA 85-4; TR-4147 ZC-2804; and RPD-1049 (VILLA CAMPESINA) At their February 12, 1986 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed the above referenced entitlement requests. As a result of their review, the following proposed conditions of approval for Tract 4147 and RPD-1049 were either amended or added. TENTATIVE TRACT TR-4147 18. That in conjunction with recordation, the applicant shall offer to dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, an easement for the possible future installation of the bike path and equestrian trail as shown on the Circulation Element. There shall be no requirement to install the path and trail improvements at this time. However, the applicant shall record with the deeds of the properties of the subdivision a covenant waiving the right of future home buyers to protest the formation of an assessment district to finance the instal- lation of the equestrian trail and bike path. 20. That prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall designate twenty percent of the project (12 units) which will be reserved for households with very-low and low, er-madeTtite incomes, as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for a period of ten years. These specified units shall be reserved through the application of a deed restriction. Said deed restriction shall not bind the mortgage holder of the property in the event the mortgage holder reacquires the property. 59047A/L-1 37. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark, for review and approval, street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The improvements shall include concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, striping and signing, and paving in accordance with the Ventura county Road Standards. The applicable Road Standard Plates are as follows: - Liberty Bell Road, between the Arroyo Simi Flood Control Channel and the northerly tract boundary, shall be per Plate B-4A with full improvements constructed east of the centerline and 12 ft of paving west of the centerline. Between the northerly tract boundary and Los Angeles Avenue, Liberty Bell Road shall be improved per Plate B-3B modified to 60 ft of paving on 80 ft of right of way with full improvements constructed east of the centerline, if no additional public right of way is required. If additional right of way north of the tract boundary is required for street improvements, Liberty Bell Road shall be constructed with thirty (30) feet of pavement (without curbs, gutters and sidewalks) with any transitions required at Los Angeles Avenue or at the tract boundary as required by the City Engineer. - "A," "B" and "C" Streets shall be constructed per Plate B-5B. - A road shall be constructed, just south of the northerly tract boundary, to be per Plate B-3C. Said road shall consist of full street improvements south of the centerline, (the centerline shall be located on the northerly tract boundary) . Improvement plans for said street shall be submitted along with tract improvement plans, but construction of the street may be deferred until such time that the adjacent property to the north or east develops, or until the 59047A/L-2 City Engineer deems it necessary. If this road is to be utilized as a second emergency access, deferment of improvements must be approved by the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention. - That the deeds for all parcels contained within this subdivision shall contain a covenant requiring that the property owner waive their right to protest the formation of a future assessment district to fund the improvements of the east-west collector street described above. - Appl4eaat-shall-prey de-hke-path-aad-equestf aa-trail- mprevemeats as-shewn-em-the-e rettIat ea-Element-ef-the-General-Plan. 41. That either prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, or the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improve- ment Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time the Final Map records or the building permit is issued. Additional Community Development Department Conditions: 58. That prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall submit to the City Manager for review and approval, Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the proposed subdivision. Said CC&Rs shall set maintenance standards for all properties contained within the subdivision, and shall be enforced by the City. Subsequent to approval by the City Manager, said CC&Rs shall be recorded. RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RPD-1049 15. That prior to issuance of the first zone clearance, the developer shall submit a plan showing fencing along the side and rear yards of each 59047A/L-3 residential lot. Said fencing plan shall identify the location and materials to be used (wrought iron, plasters, wood, slumpstone, etc. but ne- od) Said fencing shall consist of a concrete base and a wooden upper portion. There shall be no direct soil to wood contact. The design of the fence and shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Said fencing shall be completed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the affected lot. 27. That maintenance of the recreation area and facilities shall be provided by the City Assessment District 85-1. Petal Ninety percent (90%) of the cost of the maintenance shall be borne by the homeowners of Tract 4147. This maintenance assessment shall be paid in addition to the required City wide park maintenance assessment. Homeowner participation in the maintenance of the recreation area is encouraged to reduce the amount of the assessment required. The remaining ten percent (10%) of the mainte- nance costs shall be borne by the City of Moorpark and financed with funds from Assessment District 85-1. Prior to the acceptance of the recreation area facilities by the City for maintenance purposes, the applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of the park to City standards for a period of one year. The ratio of the 10%/90% split in maintenance responsibility shall be reviewed by the City Council on an annual basis. Additional City Engineer Conditions: 44. That either prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, or the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improve- ment Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time the Final Map records or the building permit is issued. 59047A/L-4 . , 46-(:17" RESOLUTION NO. PC-86-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING AP- PROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GPA-85-4, TENTATIVE TRACT NO. TR-4147, ZONE CHANGE NO. ZC-2804, AND RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. REP-1049 ON THE APPLICATION OF CABRILLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO 506-05-10. WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on February 12, 1986, the Moorpark Planning Commission considered the application filed by Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation requesting approval of the following: o Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from "M-L" (Residential: Medium Low Density, 2. 6 units per acre average) and "C-2" (General Commercial) to "H" (Residential) : High density, 7 units per acre average; o Amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to delete the requirement to provide an equestrian trail and bike path on the project site adjacent to the Arroyo Simi; o Change the existing zoning from "R-1-13" (Single Family Residential, 13, 000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) and "C-P-D" (Commercial Planned Development) to "R-P-D-7u" (Residential Planned Development, 7 units per acre) ; o A tentative tract map to subdivide the project site into 62 single family lots; o A Residential Planned Development for 62 family homes for very-low and low-income families; o A project density bonus of nine percent and a waiver of several development standards to accommodate the proposed low-income housing project; said proposed project being located south of Los Angeles Avenue, east of Liberty Bell Road, north of and adjacent to the Arroyo Simi, gross acreage of the project site is 10. 7 acres; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed said application, has considered the information contained in the Environmental Imapact Report prepared for the project, and has reached its decision in the matter; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of February 12, 1986, the Planning Commission took the following actions : 1. By the following roll call vote, requested staff to prepare a resolution recommending to the City Council that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that this body has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration as having been completed in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines issued thereunder: AYES: Commissioners Holland, Claffey, LaPerch, and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. 2. By the following roll call vote said resolution also to recommend approval of amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan from "M-L" (Residential: Medium Low Density, 2 . 6 units per acre average) and "C-2" (General Commercial) to "H" (Residential) : High Density, 7 units per acre average) : AYES: Commissioners Holland, Claffey, LaPerch, and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. 3. By the following roll call vote said resolution also to recommend in lieu of amending the Circulation Element of the General Plan pertaining to the deletion of an equestrian trail and bike path on the project site adjacent to the Arroyo Simi, that in conjunction with recordation, the applicant shall offer to dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, and easement for the possible future installation of the bike path and equestrian trail as shown on the Circulation Element. There shall be no requirement to install the path and trial improvements at this time; however, the applicant shall record with the deeds of the properties of the subdivision a covenant waiving the right of future home buyers to protest the formation of an assessment district to finance the installation of the equestrian trail and bike path: AYES: Commissioners Holland, Claffey, LaPerch, and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. 1 4. By the following roll call vote said resolution also to recommend approval of Zone Change No. ZC-2804 as requested by the applicant; AYES: Commissioners Holland, Claffey, LaPerch, and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. 5. By the following roll call vote said resolution also to recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the project site into 62 single family lots subject to the attached modified and proposed conditions; AYES: Commissioners Holland, Claffey, LaPerch, and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan, 6. By the following roll call vote said resolution also to recommend approval of Residential Planned Development for 62 family homes for very-low and low-income families subject to the attached modified and proposed conditions; AYES: Commissioners Holland, Claffey, LaPerch, and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. 7. By the following roll call vote said resolution also to recommend to the City Council a density bonus of nine percent and a waiver of the following development standards: a) That the reduction in required garage size be accepted. AYES: Commissioners Claffey, Hartley, LaPerch and Holland; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. b) Approve the waiver of the required lot depth/width ratio due to project design constraints . AYES: Commissioners Claffey, Holland, LaPerch and Hartley; NOES: None; ABSENT: Commissioner Keenan. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the findings contained in the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission Meeting of February 12 , 1986, which report is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein, with recommended conditions as modified by said Commission, are hereby approved. SECTION 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the following, subject to conditions attached to this resolution and made a part hereof: 1. Certify that the environmental effects are adequately addressed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project, and the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that this body has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration as having been completed in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines; 2. General Plan Amendment No. GPA-85-4, to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from "M-L" (Residential: Medium Low Density, 2 . 6 units per acre average) and "C-2" (General Commercial) to "H" (Residential) : High density, 7 units per acre average) ; 3. In lieu of amending the Circulation Element of the General Plan pertaining to the deletion of an equestrian trail and bike path on the project site adjacent to the Arroyo Simi, that in conjunction with recordation, he applicant shall offer to dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, an easement for the possible future installation of the bike path and equestrian trail as shown on the Circulation Element. There shall be no requirement to install the path and trail improvements at this time; however, the applicant shall record with the deeds of the properties of the subdivision a covenant waiving the right of future home buyers to protest the formation of an assessment district to finance the installation of the equestrian trail and bike path: 4. Zone Change No. ZC-2804; 5. Tentative Tract Map No. TR-4147; 6. Residential Planned Development Permit No. RPD-1049; 7. A project density bonus of nine percent and a waiver of certain development standards to accommodate the proposed low-income housing project, as follows: a) That the redustion in required garage size be accepted. b) Approve the waiver of the required lot depth/width ratio due to project design constraints. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26 February, 1986 Chairman ATTEST: Acting Secretary CITY OF MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION REVISED AND ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GPA 85-4; TR-4147 ZC-2804; and RPD-1049 (VILLA CAMPESINA) At their February 12, 1986 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed the above referenced entitlement requests. As a result of their review, the following proposed conditions of approval for Tract 4147 and RPD-1049 were either amended or added. TENTATIVE TRACT TR-4147 18. That in conjunction with recordation, the applicant shall offer to dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, an easement for the possible future installation of the bike path and equestrian trail as shown on the Circulation Element. There shall be no requirement to install the path and trail improvements at this time. However, the applicant shall record with the deeds of the properties of the subdivision a covenant waiving the right of future home buyers to protest the formation of an assessment district to finance the instal- lation of the equestrian trail and bike path. 20. That prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall designate twenty percent of the project (12 units) which will be reserved for households with very-low and low, er-mtedeTet.e incomes, as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for a period of ten years. These specified units shall be reserved through the application of a deed restriction. Said deed restriction shall not bind the mortgage holder of the property in the event the mortgage holder reacquires the property. 51027A/L-1 37. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark, for review and approval, street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The improvements shall include concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, striping and signing, and paving in accordance with the Ventura county Road Standards. The applicable Road Standard Plates are as follows: Liberty Bell Road, between the Arroyo Simi Flood Control Channel and the northerly tract boundary, shall be per Plate B-4A with full improvements constructed east of the centerline and 12 ft of paving west of the centerline. Between the northerly tract boundary and Los Angeles Avenue, Liberty Bell Road shall be improved per Plate B-3B modified to 60 ft of paving on 80 ft of right of way with full improvements constructed east of the centerline, if no additional public right of way is required. If additional right of way north of the tract boundary is required for street improvements, Liberty Bell Road shall be constructed with thirty (30) feet of pavement (without curbs, gutters and sidewalks) with any transitions required at Los Angeles Avenue or at the tract boundary as required by the City Engineer. - "A," "B" and "C" Streets shall be constructed per Plate B-5B. - A road shall be constructed, just south of the northerly tract boundary, to be per Plate B-3C. Said road shall consist of full street improvements south of the centerline, (the centerline shall be located on the northerly tract boundary) . Improvement plans for said street shall be submitted along with tract improvement plans, but construction of the street may be deferred until such time that the adjacent property to the north or east develops, or until the 51027A/L-1.1 City Engineer deems it necessary. If this road is to be utilized as a second emergency access, deferment of improvements must be approved by the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention. - That the deeds for all parcels contained within this subdivision shall contain a covenant requiring that the property owner waive their right to protest the formation of a future assessment district to fund the improvements of the east-west collector street described above. - AppIieent-shall-prey+de-bike-path-and-equeetriam-tra41-imprevements as-shewm-en-the-eireeiatiem-E+ement-of-the-General-E4an. 41. That either prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, or the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improve- ment Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time the Final Map " records or the building permit is issued. Additional Community Development Department Conditions: 58. That prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall submit to the City Manager for review and approval, Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the proposed subdivision. Said CC&Rs shall set maintenance standards for all properties contained within the subdivision, and shall be enforced by the City. Subsequent to approval by the City Manager, said CC&Rs shall be recorded. RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RPD-1049 15. That prior to issuance of the first zone clearance, the developer shall submit a plan showing fencing along the side and rear yards of each 51027A/L-2 • residential lot. Said fencing plan shall identify the location and materials to be used (wrought iron, plasters, wood, slumpstone, etc. but rte--wee Said fencing shall consist of a concrete base and a wooden upper portion. There shall be no direct soil to wood contact. The design of the fence and shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Said fencing shall be completed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the affected lot. 27. That maintenance of the recreation area and facilities shall be provided by the City Assessment District 85-1. Petel Ninety percent (90%) of the cost of the maintenance shall be borne by the homeowners of Tract 4147. This maintenance assessment shall be paid in addition to the required City wide park maintenance assessment. Homeowner participation in the maintenance of the recreation area is encouraged to reduce the amount of the assessment required. The remaining ten percent (10%) of the mainte- nance costs shall be borne by the City of Moorpark and financed with funds from Assessment District 85-1. Prior to the acceptance of the recreation area facilities by the City for maintenance purposes, the applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of the park to City standards for a period of one year. The ratio of the 10%/90% split in maintenance responsibility shall be reviewed by the City Council on an annual basis. Additional City Engineer Conditions: 44. That either prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, or the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improve- ment Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time the Final Map records or the building permit is issued. 51027A/L-3 - ---- 1 LIAPt '18 City of Moorpark Planning Commission Staff Report and Recommendation Date: February 12, 1986 Subject: GPA 85-4, ZC-2804, TR-4147, and RPD-1049 Applicant: Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation, 11011 Azahar Street, Saticoy, CA 93004 Request: Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from "M-L" (Res- idential: Medium Low Density, 2.6 units per acre average) and "C-2" (General Commercial) to "H" (Residential: High density, 7 units per acre average) . Amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to delete the requirement to provide an equestrian trail and bike path on the project site adjacent to the Arroyo Simi. • Change the existing zoning from "R-1-13" (Single Family Residen- tial, 13,000 sq ft minimum lot size) and "C-P-D" (Commercial Planned Development) to "R-P-D-7u" (Residental Planned Develop- ment, 7 units per acre) . A tentative tract map to subdivide the project site into 62 single family lots. A Residential Planned Development for 62 single family homes for very-low and low-income families. The applicant is also requesting a project density bonus of nine percent and a waiver of several development standards to accommo- date the proposed low-income housing project. A. BACKGROUND 1. Project Location, Size and Parcel Number The proposed project is located south of Los Angeles Avenue, east of Liberty Bell Road, north of and adjacent to the Arroyo Simi. Gross acreage of the project site is 10.7 acres. Net parcel size has been calculated by deducting the area that is proposed to be offered for dedication for flood control purposes. This results in a net parcel size of 8.2 acres. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 506-05-10 (see Exhibits 2 and 3) . 2. History This General Plan Amendment request was heard by the City Council on February 4, 1985 as part of a General Plan Amendment screening hearing. At 59047A/1-1 1 that time, the applicant was requesting approval to amend the General Plan to an "M" designation (Residential: Medium density, 4 units per acre average) . The applicant indicated at that time that a "density bonus" would be required to facilitate the requested project density. The General Plan screening request was approved for further processing. After additional consideration by Planning Staff, it was calculated that at four units per acre, a density bonus of approximately 47% would be required to accommodate the buildout of the project. Staff recommended to the applicant to modify their General Plan Amendment request to the "H" designation, to be more consistent with the project density requirements.' The applicant subsequently amended their application. 3. State Legislation Pertaining to Low Income Housing Projects The project applicant has requested that in conjunction with the approval of this project, the City grant a density bonus and a reduction/ ' waiver of several development standards, as required by Senate Bill 156 (Mello) . This legislation went into effect January 1, 1986, and requires that "if a developer agrees to construct a housing development with 20 percent or more of the units reserved for occupancy by lower income house- holds" the City shall provide one or more of the following regulatory concessions or incentives: o A reduction in site development standards, modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements; o Density bonuses; o Approval of mixed use zoning if the addition of commercial, office, industrial or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing project and theotherland uses would be compatible; o Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the devel- oper or City which result in identifiable cost reductions. SB 156 also requires that the units reserved for lower income households must be reserved for a period of ten years, or longer. This requirement for a ten year reservation is not as restrictive as the "Roos" legislation, which requires a reservation for thirty years when the City writes down housing costs. Therefore, the applicant has chosen to request assistance utilizing the "Mello" legislation. Legislation has recently been proposed that would amend SB 156 to exempt federally funded housing programs of this type from the reservation requirement. If the City determines that regulatory concessions or incentives are unnecessary or inappropriate for this project, written findings must be made stating that: 1Text of SB 156. 59047A/I-2 2 ^ � (a) The housing development does not need local assistance because the reserved units would be affordable to very low-income households without the additional assistance; or, (b) Granting regulatory concessions or incentives would have a substan- tial adverse impact upon public health or safety. The applicant's request for a density bonus and the waiver of several development standards are discussed throughout this staff report, and are summarized in Section G.3. 4. Project Description The goal of this project is to provide households with very-low and low-incomes an opportunity to purchase their own home. Very-low and low- income is defined as: below 50% of the county-wide median income for "very low^,' and between 50 and 80 percent of the County median income for "low." The County median income is adjusted to accommodate for family size. The median income for a family of four is presently $33,400-' The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property into 62 single family lots (see Exhibit No. 4) . Lot sizes will range from 3560 to 6500 square feet. Average lot size is 3987 square feet. All residences will be single story and will come in two, three, four, and five bedroom models. The homes will have stucco exteriors with wood trim and asphalt sbinglea, Unit size ranges from 900 to 1350 square feet. Setbacks from property lines vary, however, most units have a twenty foot front yard (15 units have eighteen foot front yards) , ten to twenty foot rear yards, and five foot side yards (see Exhibits 5, 6, and 7) . Due to the relatively small size of most of the rear yards, proposed Condition of Approval Nos. 4 and 19 of aeD-1049 impose specific requirements regarding the placement of patios, patio covers, and accessory structures. Proposed Condition of Approval No. 29 of neD-1049 requires that prior to the issuance of a zone clearance for Lot No. 1, that house shall be reorientated such that access to the unit is obtained from "B" Street. This project will utilize a "mutual self-help" approach to construct the homes' This entails the organization of ten or eleven separate households to provide the majority of the labor required to construct ten or eleven bomes' Each family unit contributes at least 40 hours of labor per week. After con- struction is complete, each family is credited $10,000 of "sweat equity" in each unit. Construction supervision and tasks requiring skilled labor will be conducted by nub000tractorn' It is estimated that a group of ten homes can be constructed in approximately ten mmotbs' The next group of ten or eleven would start construction of their homes about one month after the start of the previous group. Buildout of the tract will occur in about a year and a half. The majority of the funding for this project is provided by the Farmers Home Administration (FmB&) ' The maximum mortgage amount that will be funded by the FmRx is $60,000' To help keep the mortgages below V60,000, additional funds (approximately $8,000 per unit) have been made available through a City 59047A/I-3 3 4 sponsored Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) deferred loan program. Mortgage payments by a purchasing household are structured so that twenty percent of the adjusted family income is paid toward the mortgage. Mortgage loans may be supplemented by the FmHA with an "Interest Credit", that can lower the effective rate of interest on the mortgage to as low as one per- cent, depending upon the borrower's income and the amount of the loan. Upon the sale or transfer of a home, a portion of the Interest Credit must be repaid. The actual amount of repayment depends upon the increased value of the home, the amount of subsidy received, and the length of time the borrower held the loan. To satisfy the reservation requirements of SB 156, at least twenty per- cent of the proposed project's residences must be reserved for lower income households. The most common method of implementing such a requirement is through the use of deed restrictions. Such a restriction would require that the sale or resale of a specified unit must be to a household with a qualify- ing income level. Conversations by staff with the State Director of the FmHA have indicated that as the primary lender for the project the FmHA would not accept a deed restriction that would possibly inhibit their ability to sell the home in the event they had to foreclose on a unit. The State Director has indicated that a resale restriction that was not binding to the lender would probably be acceptable. The City attorney will draft some preliminary deed restriction language that would bind only the property purchasers to sell the home to a household with a qualifying income. This preliminary language will be sent to the FmHA for their review and comment. The appli- cant has requested that if deed restrictions are to be implemented, that they be applied only to the minimum required twenty percent of the proposed homes, and that these homes be made available to households with very- low, low and moderate incomes (see Exhibit 8) . Condition of Approval No. 20 of Tract 4147 requires that through the use of deed restriction, twenty percent of the project units be reserved for very-low, low and moderate income households for a period of ten years. It also specifies that this requirement will not bind the mortgage holder in the event the mortgage holder reacquires the property. An additional method to encourage the resale of units to qualifying households has been proposed in Condition No. 22 of RPD-1049. This condition requires that prior to the resale of any unit, either the prospective buyer and/or seller must furnish the City with the following information: o Selling price of the home. This verification may be obtained from the escrow papers for the sale of the home. o A verified statement of the household income for the prospective buyer. This may be obtained from the loan papers filled out by the prospective buyer, or done by the County Housing Authority for a nominal fee. o An independent appraisal of the general market value of the unit offered for sale. 59047A/I-4 4 After receipt of the above information, the City would determine if the prospective buyer has a household income of "very-low" or "low," as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and if the house is sell- ing at, above, or below its appraised market value. If the prospective buyer's income is within the very-low or low level, and the unit is being sold at or below its market value, the City would approve the sale or trans- fer of the unit. Subsequent to this approval, the City would "roll-over" the Community Development Block Grant deferred loan to the new buyer. If the prospective buyer income is above "low" income and/or the selling price of the unit was above its appraised market value, the City would not approve the sale or transfer of the unit. The seller could then either find a new pros- pective buyer, or be required to repay the CDBG deferred loan and any accrued interest to the City (see RPD Condition No. 23) . This program would accomplish several goals. The CDBG money, when "rolled-over", would continue to be used to provide low-income housing, as required by the CDBG grant. The seller of the bome ,woold be discouraged from attempting to make a °wiudfall,' profit on the sale .of the home, and the City can easily monitor the sale of the units. It has also been considered to require that this project provide a specified number of housing units for current Moorpark residents. Conver- sations with the City Attorney, however, have indicated that such a restric- tion may not be legally feasible. To effectively implement a program requir- ing that some of the units be sold only to Moorpark residents, a specific length of time that a person has resided in Moorpark would have to be set to determine "residency." Without such a requirement, someone could move to Moorpark, and in one day, be considered a resident. In several states (California has not ruled on a similar case) courts have invalidated resi- dency requirements that specified a length of time that is needed to become a reoideot' Therefore, without being able to control the length of time needed to become a resident, such a program would not have much meaning' Addition- ally, the applicant has indicated that because of this project's use of Federal money for home construction, residency requirements might be con- sidered discriminatory. If a determination were made that a residency requirement was in violation of a Federal Law, the residency requirement would become iuvalid' Despite the problems stated above, staff would con- sider it appropriate to implement some type of program would ensure that a specified percentage of the project residences be reserved for existing Moorpark residents. The applicant has submitted a waiting list of persons interested in par- ticipating in this program (see Exhibit 9) ' As shown by this list, almost half of the interested people are currently Moorpark residents and many of the non-Moorpark residents work in the Moorpark area. 5. Park Requirements To satisfy the requirements of the City's Parkland Dedication (Quimby) Ordinance, the applicant has offered to the City an area approximately 1.3 acres in area adjacent to the Arroyo Simi. Based on projected population to be generated by this project, the required area to be dedicated and/or in lieu fees paid, is equal to 1.0 acre. 59047A/I-5 5 The proposed recreation area is located in an area identified by the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) in 1974 as being required for ultimate improve- ments to the Arroyo Simi channel. In 1982 the Ventura County Flood Control District (VCFCD) drafted a master plan that identified ultimate channel improvements in an area approximately 78.5 feet in width less than the COE study. It is within this 78.5 foot wide area that the applicant proposes to provide the recreation area (see Exhibit 10) . A flood protection feasibility study prepared for the project site has identified this 78.5 foot area as being an acceptable area for the development of a recreation area. Proposed Condition No. 55 of Tract 4147 requires the applicant to offer this 78.5 foot area to VCFCD as a flood control easement. It is not known whether or not the VCFCD will accept the offer at this time. Regardless, the VCFCD has indicated that they would consider recreation uses and limited value struc- tures in this area as an appropriate land use. The applicant would be required to obtain an encroachment permit from the VCFCD prior to making any improvements. In their review of this project, the City Parks and Recreation Commis- sion expressed concern regarding the acceptance of parkland for a subdivision of such small relative size, and the somewhat undesirable location of the land offered for dedication. After some discussion, however, the Commission recommended that the 1.3 acre area be accepted as fulfillment of this tract's Quimby requirement. Proposed Condition of Approval No. 15 for Tract 4147 requires dedication of this area to the City to satisfy City Municipal Code Section 8279-4 et. seq. (Quimby) requirements. If the City accepts the park- land dedication, any flood control easements that may be required by the VCFCD would remain in effect. In addition to Quimby requirements, City policy requires RPD projects to provide additional recreation facilities than would typically be provided in a traditional subdivision. To satisfy this policy, the Parks and Recreation Commission has recommended that the applicant provide park improvements in the recreation area. These improvements would consist of, but would not be limited to, turf, trees, shrubs, permanent irrigation, half court basketball facility, tot lot, barbeque and picnic tables, and potable water (see Condi- tion No. 24 of RPD-1049) . Improvement plans must be approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission and improvements must be installed prior to the issuance of the 50th (80 percent) occupancy permit (RPD Condition Nos. 25 and 26) . The Parks and Recreation Commission determined that the above recreation facility would not serve to meet recreation needs of the Moorpark community • at large. Rather, it would provide recreation opportunities for residents of the project. Therefore, all maintenance should be provided by the tract. This presents a problem, however, as the FmHA will not allow the creation of a Homeowner Association in projects that it sponsors. This will limit the ability of this project to provide ongoing park maintenance. As a solution, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that maintenance of the park be provided by City Assessment District 85-1, although all costs of mainte- nance shall be borne by the residents of Tract 4147. Therefore, in addition 59047A/I-6 6 to the city-wide park maintenance assessment, residents would pay a supple- mental assessment to cover the costs of on-site park maintenance. The Parks and Recreation Commission encouraged the possibility of project residents participating in the park maintenance to lower costs incurred by the City, hence lowering assessment costs. Preliminary estimates of the supplemental assessment cost per household is $241.00 per year (see RPD Condition No. 27 and tract Condition No. 19) . The applicant has requested that a limit on the dollar amount of improvements be placed on the RPD requirement for park improvements. The proposed limit is $500 per unit or $31,000 for the Tract. The applicant has requested that if park improvements in excess of $31,000 are required, that the concept of providing an on-site park (Quimby) and improvements (RPD requirement) be dropped and that in-lieu fees be paid. For the payment of in-lieu Quimby fees, the parkland dedication ordi- nance requires that the fees be basedupon the valUe of the land at the time of map recordation. Based on the purchase price Of $355,000 for 10.7 acres of residential and commercial land, the base in-lieu fee to fulfill this project's 1.0 acre park requirement would be $33,177. The value of the one acre after map recordation would change due to the requested down zoning of the project site. The parkland dedication ordinance also requires that if in-lieu fees are paid, an additional 20% for street, drainage, and lighting improvements be paid. This would result in a requirement to pay approxi- mately $39,812 in Quimby in-lieu fees. Staff recommends that the concept or providing an on-site recreation area be retained due to the small lot sizes provided in this project. The recreation area and required maintenance would prevent this otherwise unus- able area from becoming overgrown with weeds and an area susceptible to illegal dumping. This alternative would provide recreation opportunities for the project residents, while fulfilling the project's Quimby and RPD recre- ation requirements. Staff would recommend that the types of improvements as specified by the Parks and Recration Commission be required. To reduce the costs of the required improvements, a "self-help" approach (project resi- dents) should be encouraged to participate in the construction of the recre- ation area. B. EVIDENCE REGARDING REQUIRED SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND CITY ZONING ORDINANCE FINDINGS Certain findings must be made to determine that the proposed project is consistent with the State Subdivision Map Act and the City Ordinance Code. These findings, and project information and evidence to support them, are presented below. 1. Consistency of Tentative Map Design and Improvements with Applicable General Plan and Zoning a. General Plan Designation. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates approximately three acres (2.0 acres net) of the project site as 59047A/I-7 7 "M-L" (Residential, medium-low density, 2.6 units per acre average) and 7.7 acres (6.2 acres net) as "C-2" (General Commercial) (see Exhibit No. 11) . The applicant has requested to change these designations to "H" (Residential: high density, 7 units per acre average) . Based upon a net project area of 8.2 acres, a "density bonus" is required to accommodate the requested number of units, as shown by the following calculations. 8.2 net acres x 7 units/acre average = 57.4 units 62 requested units - 57 units permitted by General Plan = 5 units 5 units = an 9.0 percent density bonus 57 requested units Goals and Policies contained in the Residential section of the Land Use Element encourage the City to provide economically and socially diversified residential neighborhoods, and to provide a "range' of residential densities which will ensure a variety of housing types to the residents of Moorpark." The Moorpark General Plan (Land Use Element) indicates that approximately 137 acres of the City have a General Plan designation of "high" or "very high." This represents approximately 2.72 percent of the land within the City. Redesignation of the project site would not significantly increase the per- centage of high and very high density land in the City, however, it would be consistent with the intent of these goals and policies to provide a variety of housing densities. The residential section also contains goals and policies which discour- age "scattered urban growth." The proposed project location is somewhat iso- lated from other existing development within the City, and could be perceived as creating a high density development "island. " This Fill most likely be a short term situation, however, as existing surrounding General Plan and Zon- ing designations would permit a variety of new land uses, including: general commercial, low, medium, high and very high density residential uses. There- fore, the proposed project should be considered consistent with the intent of these goals and policies. Goals and policies contained in the Housing section of the Land Use Ele- ment encourage the City to "provide housing opportunities for all segments of the population and for a variety of economic levels in proximity to jobs, schools and shopping facilities." The section also encourages "a diversity of housing unit types and lot sizes . . . to meet various housing needs," and "to provide for adequate, sound, and well designed low-income housing in accordance with demand." To assess the local demand for low-income housing, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) produces a "Regional Allocation Model" (RAM) for cities within its jurisdiction. This model allocates "fair-share" housing stock requirements for individual com- munities. This housing stock is separated into income categories ranging from very low to upper income. The November, 1984 RAM for Moorpark indicated that by 1988, Moorpark should provide an additional 3057 housing units. These units were separated into the following categories: 59047A/I-8 8 ` Housing Units Income Level Required by 1988 Very low (50% or less of County Median Income) 495 Low (50-80% of County Median Income) 575 Moderate (80-120w of County Median Income) 787 Upper (120% and up of County Median Income) 1200 3057 The proposed project would be consistent with the intent of the goals and policies contained in the Housing section of the Land Use Element. Addi- tionally, the SCAG "RAM" forecast demonstrates a demand for low income hous- ing opportunities in Moorpark. Draft Housing Element The City of Moorpark has prepared a Draft Housing Element. Although this Element has not been adopted, a discussion of the applicable policies and programs of this draft Element is presented below. In Section IV, Housing Programs, the Draft Element describes the pro- posed project and the City's involvement in regard to the CDBG monies. The Draft Element states that the proposed project "will represent the first of its kind in Ventura County, although similar efforts have been undertaken in other rural parts of the state, under the leadership of the People's Self- Help Housing Corporation headquartered in San Luis Obispo." One of the proposed policies contained in the "Housing Production" section of the draft Element states; "Promote the development of well-designed, lower-income housing units with plans and programs developed and supported by the City Council and Planning Commission." Program 1' 5 of this section encourages the "use (of) State and Federal assistance to develop affordable housing for lower-income families' " The objective of this program is to provide 200 units by I989' Program 1.7 encourages the offering of density bonuses for purchase housing for low income hnusebolda' The objective of this program is to provide 300 housing onits' Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the above poli- cies and programs, and would help the City achieve its proposed goals of providing additional low income housing. Circulation Element The Circulation Element depicts a bicycle path and equestrian trail along the Arroyo Simi, on the southern portion of the project site. During their review of this project, the City Parks and Recreation Commission stated 59047A/I-9 9 that they were not interested in obtaining these improvements. The reluc- tance to require these improvements stems from the apparent inability to extend the bike path and equestrian trail along New Los Angeles Avenue, east of Moorpark Road, due to a lack of access across the Arroyo and the Avenue. Without these crossings, the paths would be somewhat limited in their useful- ness. Therefore, the tentative map and RPD do not contain provisions for the installation of these facilities. If the City does not wish to pursue the installation of these facil- ities, the Circulation Element must be amended to reflect this, so the pro- posed project can be considered to be consistent with the requirements of the General Plan. It should be noted, however, that removal of these facilities from this site only, will result in a "missing link" if the facilities are required to be installed elsewhere along the Arroyo. City Engineer Condition of Approval No. 37 of the tract map requires that the path and trail be installed. As an alternative to amending the CirculatiOn Element and omitting a segment of the bike path and equestrian trail or requiring the installation of the facilities at this time, the City could require that the Final Tract Map show an easement for the facilities, but not require the applicant to install the path and trail. This would allow the City the opportunity to evaluate the desirability and reasonableness, of the facilities, without limiting future options for installation. If a future decision is made to install the paths, funding for the bike path could be obtained from Los Angeles Avenue AOC. Money for the equestrian trail would have to come from another source. b. Zoning. The existing zoning of the project site is "R-1-13" (Single family residential, 13,000 sq ft minimum lot size) and "C-P-D" (Commercial Planned Development) . These zoning designations are consistent with the existing General Plan designations described above. The applicant has requested to change the existing zoning to "R-P-D-7u" (Residential Planned Development, 7 units per acre) . This designation would be compatible with the requested General Plan Amendment. Similar to the General Plan Amendment, an 8% density bonus is required to accommodate the request for 62 units. Section 8161-3.1 of the Moorpark Municipal Code requires that every off-street parking space must measure an unobstructed nine by twenty feet. Therefore, the required enclosed two-car garage must have an interior area of at least eighteen by twenty feet. The proposed project provides eighteen foot wide driveways, however, the interior garage width is only sixteen feet with a fourteen foot garage entrance. This reduction of garage space is a result of requirements of the FmHA, which will not allow the construction of a larger garage. The sixteen foot garage width is a substantial design improvement over the previous project design that incorporated a one-car garage and an uncovered parking pad. Section 8213 of the City Subdivision Ordinance requires that the depth of any lot within a subdivision not exceed three times its width. The ordi- nance provides for a waiver of this provision, if the Planning Commission ! I determines that the topographic features of the site justify a greater depth. 59047A/I-10 10 Lots 56, 57, 58 and 59 do not meet the required depth/width ratio due to their location adjacent to the Arroyo Simi and the irregular shape of the property caused by the Arroyo channel. To maintain the basic circulation pattern of the subdivision, the rear yards of these lots require that they exceed the 3:1 ratio. As a result, it is recommended that your Commission waive the required lot depth/width ratio for these lots. c. Adjacent Zoning and General Plan Designations. Zoning General Plan North "R-1-13" (Single Family "C-2" (General Residential, 13,000 Commercial) square foot minimum lot size) "C-P-D" (Commercial Planned Development) South "R-1-8" (8000 square "ML" (Residential, foot minimum lot size) medium-low density) East "C-P-D" "C-2" West "R-1-13" "C-2" Zoning and General Plan designations to the north, east and west of the project site are predominantly commercial with some residential designations. Several inconsistencies between the existing zoning and General Plan desig- nations exists to the north and west. In these areas the zoning designation is "R-1-13" (Single Family Residential) , while the General Plan shows "C-2" (General Commercial) designations. In these instances, the General Plan designation would take precedence. Applicants wishing to develop the prop- erties where these inconsistencies exist would be required to file a zone change application along with their development request. Therefore, future potential development as shown by the General Plan would place commercial uses to the north, east and west of the proposed project. The expansion of the project site's existing residential General Plan designation would not technically result in the creation of a residential island or "spot designation," as the property to the south, across the Arroyo is also designated as residential. The proposed project would be bordered by potential commercial development on three sides and this could result in potential land use conflicts. The design of the proposed subdivision will orientate most of the perimeter residences adjacent to potential commercial development away from any future development. Furthermore, future commercial uses adjacent to the project could be expected to be orientated towards Los Angeles Avenue, away from most of these residences. Traffic generated by future commercial uses would utilize either Los Angeles Avenue and/or the east-west collector street to the north of the proposed project (see Exhibit 12) . Therefore, traffic impacts from future development should not 59047A/I-11 11 impact the proposed project. Proposed Condition of Approval No. 15 of RPD-1049 requires that a block (or similar) wall be constructed along the project's north and east perimeter. Therefore, residences along the north and east perimeter of the project will not be adversely affected by potential adjacent commercial uses. To the west, Lots 43-46 have been orientated as reverse corner lots to provide a twenty foot setback from the perimeter street, as required by the RPD zoning standards. These four residences would be orientated towards future development across Liberty Bell Road. As outlined above, future development to the west can be expected to be orientated toward Los Angeles Avenue, away from the proposed project. Traffic generated by development to the west would not be expected to use that portion of Liberty Bell Road adja- cent to the project for access, and could be required to install a "zone- wall" along its eastern perimeter (along Liberty Bell Road) . Therefore, future development to the west is not expected to create significant land use conflicts with the proposed project. d. Existing Land Use. The project site is vacant and undeveloped. A Ventura County Flood Control service road is adjacent to the Arroyo channel. e. Adjacent Land Uses. North: Several residences, the Caltrans maintenance yard, and the Moorpark Bible Church. South: The Arroyo Simi and undeveloped property beyond. East: Commercial greenhouses and a single family residence. West: The S+K chicken ranch. As indicated by the General Plan and zoning discussion above, the exist- ing land uses to the north, east and west of the project site, in all prob- ability, do not reflect the ultimate land uses for the surrounding property. Property to the south, across the Arroyo, is to be developed as a community park. Therefore, as conditioned, the proposed project will not result in any significant land use conflicts with either existing land uses or potential future land uses. 2. Physical Suitability of the Site for the Proposed Proposed Type and Density of Development a. Existing Natural Features. The project site is flat and gently slopes to the south towards the Arroyo Simi. The Arroyo, along with existing and proposed flood control easements, comprise the southern 187 feet of the project site. The only development proposed in this area is for the on-site park. Several eucalyptus and pepper trees are located on the site. There- fore, as conditioned, the project site is suitable for the proposed develop- ment. 59047A/I-12 12 � ^ b. Flood Control Drainage. Approximately one-half of the project site is located within the 100-year flood plain of the Arroyo Simi. Proposed Tract 4147 Conditions of Approval Nos. 47 through 56 require that the project site be protected from a 100-year flood, that the existing easement for the Arroyo channel be dedicated to the Ventura County Flood Control District (VCFCD) in fee, and that additional flood control and flowage easements be offered for dedication. Flood protection of the site must be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer (Tract Condition No. 52) and the VCFCD (No. 56) . The most likely method of protecting the site from flooding would be to raise the elevation of the building pads above flood level. The VCFCD may require that some bank stabilization measures be implemented. The projected rate of water flow during a 100-year storm at the project site is 18,000 cubic feet per second. The proposed project is not antici- pated tn significantly increase this amount. Site drainage plans must be approved by the City Engineer and the VCFCD. Therefore, as conditioned, the project site will be adequately protected from flooding impacts resulting from a 100-year atorm' c. Traffic/Circulation. Access to the project site is from High- way 118, then south along Liberty Bell Road. A traffic analysis prepared for the project considered potential traffic impacts resulting from this project and other potential development in the vicinity. The study assumed that this high density residential development would be an apartment project, hence used traffic generation factors slightly lower than those for a single family development. Staff revised projected traffic generation for this project is shown below: Average Daily Trips (ADT) 620 AM Peak Hour Trips 50 PM Peak Hour Trips 50 The traffic study indicates that after construction of the proposed project, and potential projects in the vicinity, key intersections in the vicinity (the intersections of Moorpark Road, Millard Street, Moorpark Avenue, and Liberty Bell Road with Los Angeles Avenue) will all continue to operate at Level of Service (LOS) "A" or "e" (see Exhibits 13 and 14) ' The report indicates that the proposed project will contribute to the cumulative traffic impacts on Los Angeles Avenue' As mitigation, proposed Condition of Approval No. 41 for Tract 4147 requires a payment to the Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution. The study recommends a future circulation system for the project area. This system would coordinate and limit access to Los Angeles Avenue and pro- vide access between the various residential and commercial parcels in the area without requiring the use of Los Angeles xvenue' The proposed circula- tion system is depicted as Exhibit No. 12. Implementation of this circula- tion plan would require the proposed project to improve Liberty Bell Road to a 40 foot paved road in a 60 foot right of way south of the northwest corner 59047o/z-13 13 of the site, and a 60 foot wide road in an 80 foot right of way north of the site. Condition of Approval No. 37 of the tract requires the installation of these improvements. A new east-west collector between Liberty Bell Road and Park Lane has been proposed by the traffic study. This road would serve the commercial properties in the vicinity and keep commercial traffic out of the proposed project. This road is proposed to be a 52 foot wide paved area in a 68 foot right of way. Tract Condition No. 37 requires that improvement plans for half of this street be submitted for review. The condition also specifies that construction of the road may be deferred until such time that adjacent properties develop or the City Engineer deems the road necessary. Therefore, as conditioned, the proposed project would not result in significant traffic impacts on Los Angeles Avenue or other key intersections in the vicinity. 3. Likelihood of Proposed Project to Cause Substantial Environmental Damage As discussed in Section 2 above, the impact of the proposed development on on-site resource, drainage and traffic circulation have been adequately mitigated by the project design and proposed conditions of approval. The project will, therefore, not cause substantial environmental damage. 4. Likelihood of the Proposed Project to Cause Serious Public Health Problems a. Water and Sanitation. Water and sewer service to the project site would be provided by the Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1 (VCWD No. 1) . In their January 25, 1985 water and sewer availability letter, the District indicated that adequate service could be provided, however, the extension of a water line and the relocation of a sewer line by the applicant may be required (Exhibit 15) . The letter also indicates that available sewer treatment plant capacity may be consumed prior to the completion of the pro- posed treatment plant expansion, and that this could cause a delay in the issuance of a "will serve" letter for sewage service. Proposed Condition of Approval No. 14 for the tract requires the applicant to obtain an "uncondi- tional will serve" letter prior to recordation of the Tract Map. Buildout of the proposed project will result in a small (9%) increase in wastewater generation as compared to buildout under the existing General Plan designations. Wastewater generated by existing General Plan development would result in approximately 14,463 gallons of wastewater per day. The pro- posed project would generate approximately 15,971 gallons per day. Water consumption for the proposed project would be similar (slightly higher) than the wastewater generation rates. Therefore, the proposed proj- ect would not result in a significantly higher water demand or wastewater generation than buildout under the existing General Plan designations. 59047A/I-14 14 b. Fire Protection. The Bureau of Fire Prevention has responded that the proposed project, as conditioned, would not result in a significant impact to fire protection services. The applicant has worked with the Bureau to provide an adequate second access to the project as required by Condition No. 26 of Tract 4147. The project intends to utilize the new east-west collector right-of-way to the north of the project and "C" Street as the second access. This arrangement has been approved by the Fire Department. Condition No. 37 of the Map requires that if improvements to the east-west road are to be deferred, Fire Department approval must first be obtained. c. Law Enforcement. The Sheriff's Department has responded that while the proposed project will result in increased service calls in the area, as conditioned, it will not result in a significant impact on law enforcement services. d. Education. The Moorpark Unified School District responded that the project applicant would need to enter into a School Facility Agreement to help mitigate the overcrowded conditions in the schOol district. The current School Facility Agreement fee is $2108.21 for each single family residence. The District was also concerned about adequate area to turn school buses around at the end of Liberty Bell Road. Tract 4147 Condition of Approval No. 57 requires that prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the Dis- trict's bus turnaround area requirements be met. Therefore, as conditioned, adequate provisions for sewer, water, fire protection, law enforcement, and school services are available for the pro- posed project. 5. Potential Waste Discharge into Existing Community Sewer System in Violation of Law As discussed in Section B-4 above, the project will be provided sewer service by Waterworks District No. 1. Although the treatment plant is quickly approaching its capacity, sewage system collection improvements are being undertaken to reduce inflow so that additional capacity in the plant can be obtained without expansion. It is anticipated that the treatment plant will undergo expansion in the near future to accommodate future devel- opment. There will be no discharge of waste from the project into an exist- ing community sewer system in violation of water quality control requirements under Water Code Sections 13000 et. seq. 6. Potential Conflict of Proposed Project with Public Easements or Waterways Several sewer, road and access easements are located on the subject property (see Exhibit No. 4) . An easement for Liberty Bell Road and a sewer easement are located along the western property line of the project. The proposed improvements to Liberty Bell Road will not adversely affect these easements. An additional sewer easement is located near the Arroyo Simi Channel. Since no development is proposed in this area, the exiting easement will not be affected. The State of California has a road easement along the northern property line for access to their maintenance yard. Construction of the east-west collector street will not affect this easement. 59047A/I-15 15 . Subdivision Map Act Sections 66478.1 et. seq. require that no tentative map that fronts a public waterway may be approved unless reasonable public access is provided. The Act also requires a public easement along the bank of the waterway, For purposes of the Subdivision Map Act, the Arroyo Simi is not considered a public water way, rather a flood control channel. However, access to the Arroyo Simi will be available at the end of Liberty Bell Road, and a public easement to the Ventura County Flood Control District for flood control purposes will be provided. C. SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND ORDINANCE CODE COMPLIANCE Based upon the evidence and conclusions set forth above, it is deter- mined that the proposed project, with the recommended conditions, meets the requirements of Sections 66473'5, 66474, 66474.6, and 66478.5 et. seq. , and City Ordinance Code Sections 8163-3' The findings that were discussed in the previous section are summarized below. The section of this staff report in which the evidence supporting these findings is presented is shown in paren- theses. 1. Subdivision Map Act Findings a. The proposed map is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans (Section o-l) , provided that requested General Plan Amendment and density bonus are approved. b. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision are consis- tent with the applicable general and specific plans (Section B-I) x that the proposed project complies with the development policies of the City's General Plan (Land Use Element) , as discussed in this report; c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development pro- posed (Section B-2) / d. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of devel- opment (Section B-2) / e. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitats (Sec- tion B-3) / f. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems (Section B-4) / g. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements would not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision (Section B-G) / 59047a/z l6 l� - A h. There would be no discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system in violation of existing water quality control requirements under Water Code Sections 13000 et. seq. (Section B-5) ; and i' The proposed subdivision does not contain or front upon any public waterway, river, stream, coastline, shoreline, lake or reservoir (Section B-6) . 2. City Ordinance Code Findings a. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and future land use within the zone and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located (Section B-l) x b. The proposed use would not be obnoxious or harmful to adjacent properties (Sections B-1, B-2, B-4 and B-5) ; c. The proposed use would not impact the integrity or character of the zone in which it is to be located (Section B-l) / d. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare (Sections B-2, 3, 4, 5 and 6) . D. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACCT (CEQA) COMPLIANCE The initial study prepared for this project has identified the following potential environmental impacts which may result from the proposed land use and construction: alteration of the flow of flood water, exposure of people and property to flooding hazards, alterations in planned land use, cumulative impacts to traffic and sewer service, fire protection, and possible unknown archaeological sites. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared to reduce these potential impacts to an insignificant lavel, Please refer to Exhibit 16 for a discussion of the above impacts and suggested mitigation measures' The public review period of the MND was from December 17, 1985 to January 16, 1986. To date, the only comments regarding the MND have come from the Ventura County Flood Control District stating that they were in agreement with the contents of the mmo' E. DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE A Development Advisory Committee meeting was conducted on January 9, 1986. The applicants' representative requested that your Commission consider the following requests for proposed condition of approval modifications: Tract 4147 Condition No. 37. This condition requires the installation of streets associated with this project and specifies street improve- ments. zbe applicant has requested that they not be responsible for the improvements of the new east-west collector street to the north of the 59047x/I-17 17 ` ~ project. The applicant has stated that the cost of these improvements (estimated to be approximately $75,000) , could jeopardize the economic viability of the project. Any deferment of the improvements of the east-west collector street, must be approved by the Fire Department, as this right-of-way has been specified as the second access for this project. Additionally, the applicant has requested not to be required to make the full improvements to Liberty Bell Road north of the project and/or have the City agree to require other property owners in the area that would receive benefit from the road improvements to be required to enter into a "payback agreement" at the time they develop their property (the City Engineer is investigating methods to implement such a pro- gram) . The proposed condition requires that this section of Liberty Bell Road be improved to half the street width of a road designed for commercial traffic volumes (80 ft right of way with 60 ft of paving) . A staff recommended alternative would be to require the applicant to construct road improvements similar to the southern portion of Liberty Bell Road (60 ft right of way with 40 ft of paving) and require neigh- boring commercial uses to complete the improvethents. Tract 4147 Condition No. 41. The applicant has requested that the City Council waive the Los Angeles Avenue AOC fees as a method of keeping the project's unit cost below $60,000' Waiving these fees, however, would result in an unmitigated environmental impact, and would require that a statement of overriding consideration be adopted by the City Council. Therefore, staff recommends that the Los Angeles Avenue AOC fees not be =aived' As an alternative to waiving the AOC fee, staff recommends that Condition No. 41 be amended to require that the fees be paid at the time of building permit issuance, as opposed to map reoordatioo' This would enable the total fee to be paid in increments, instead of a lump sum. If the condition is amended as suggested, a similar condition should be imposed on Rno-1049' RPD-1049 Condition No. 15. This condition requires the submittal of a ( site fencing plan and specifies that wood fences will not be acoeptable' The applicant has requested that they be allowed to use wooden fencing throughout the tract. An alternative to this request would be to allow wood fencing with galvanized steel posts along interior property lines. Perimeter fencing, however, especially along the north and east property lines, should be concrete block. RPD-1049 Condition No. 24. This condition requires the installation of park improvements as specified by the Parks and Recreation Cowmission' As described in Section A-5 , the applicant has requested that either a limit of $500 per unit be placed on the required park improvements or that the City accept the in-lieu fees. Staff would recommend that the recreation area improvements be consistent with the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission. F. PUBLIC COMMENTS To date, no written public comment have been received. 59047A/z-18 18 G. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Recommend to the City Council that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that this body has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration as having been completed in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines issued thereunder; 2. Recommend to the City Council that the requested SB 156 (Mello) density bonus be approved to accommodate the 62 lots in this subdivision; 3. Consider and recommend to the City Council action regarding the applicants' requested waiver of development standards as SB 156 (Mello) requirements: o That required improvements to the proposed east-west collector street be waived. o That twenty percent (20%) of the proposed units be reserved for very-low, low and moderate income families for a period of ten years. o That a limit be placed on required on-site park improvements, or that in-lieu fees be accepted. o That a reduction in required garage size be accepted; o That Liberty Bell Road only be improved to meet project requirements (i.e. , 60 ft right of way and 40 ft of paving, half street plus twelve feet) and/or a payback agreement with surrounding property owners be required; o That a waiver of Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution payments be granted; o That wooden fencing be permitted as part of the project design; 4. Approve the waiver of the required lot depth/width ratio due to project design constraints; 5. Adopt the proposed findings in Section C of this staff report and recommend approval of the following requests, subject to the proposed conditions of approval. o The General Plan Amendment to change the site's Land Use Element designation from "ML" and "C2" to "H"; 59047A/I-19 19 o Tentative Tract Map TR 4147; o Zone Change Z-2804; o Residential Planned Development RPD-1049. 6. Consider and recommend to the City Council one of the following alternatives regarding the bike paths and equestrian trails as shown on the Circulation Element: o Delete this section of the bike path and equestrian trail from the General Plan. o Require that an easement for the path and trail improvements be dedicated to the City, however, do not require the instal- lation of the facilities at this time. o Require that the path and trail bb dedicated and that the improvements be installed. Prepared by: Reviewed by: Steve Rodriguez Steve Kueny McClelland Engineers/ City Manager Environmental Services Attachments: Exhibit 2. Location Map. 14. LOS for key vicinity 3. Assessor Parcel Map. intersections. 4. Tentative Tract Map No. TR-4147. 15. Ventura County 5. RPD Plot Plan. waterworks District 6. RPD Elevations. No. 1 availability 7. RPD Floor Plans. letter. 8. Letter from applicant. 16. Mitigated Negative 9. Project "waiting list". Declaration. 10. Recreation area Location Map. 17. Proposed conditions 11. Land Use Element Map. of approval, Tentative 12. Traffic study proposed Tract 4147. circulation system. 18. Proposed Conditions of 13. Proposed project site and Approval RPD-1049. potential development in the vicinity traffic volumes. 59047A/I-20 20 • it ;k ;I, x'1 1 ;/ /�rL*; i ,p....._. ; , , . s>t . ��� `� . 1 I• I / !',Z /i. , / /i ' ••••••• l %V ims=v 4a11 .I. *IR ill .1 if , ., II • / 11Erlegr° •% // 'BLit . . l -r_irg u 1� FA WO ri : o IINgitilw 1111111{I61� i*VW* .� r II .. 11511116. _ f�mg Imp Ill%111- ..late.1* ' L I- I .-i =I. _ I •"-� • ', , P 111111--�;a!'lhl]nw11• ' - .1. ,.�: I C� ' 00r.n�n : '+ —T-, , i�sa "ws-tt!<ttt14 I r..n 41' •!t a ci �Li 1 •, •--• - 1 I I X000 5il �: • �t L -7 r Lr III . 7• I ; - • P.:�.0 j I I I _ G - i i it�i==�� uttuttwtt=f- I , . r 'V Si II +L M-EX. R •• ��! ' awe r l 11 sl.r.ss. •h-1111= .•mHla=�.IMO ,. sc�ica� WIC --. �' 1111 111 I I ip+ x-kie ,:•—� .JI � I Ms, ''�•r/. .Lt oe.. . .a .: g-1111.-11111 III _la C Po „ 1 • C r1f11 pati -- '- _ 441.111.1111. = El, .s*.. a 012:11 ing L../''"----'. >t WWI04 EINIMMINIIIM.1111 i11 s a V i Y Y 111111/1411111��, r ±1.1 am' : i I Q OV%1MlwtuUi ”` • �, _ _ '3 W s_I11ntllh1l I w -'at 1 R„ •... _.1��: s 3 llwttlttU •$UU '' '" s. �_ ■.i ro, I >w w,S 11. vs: 1111-111111111114111.11=11. .. . Is "s s: - AVE •■II - I MWY 14 I Alt . r MMI I / t7 IIs To 1 10 Ala . I •.w[ s 1 , 1 b Y •C 4a 4• V-1 • I �/ i C• i"....._1111111.1.1.11111111111= . I I Moan' Ilk ii 111 r. . , InlihNN ______ . • rRoTEGT I , • �. L� SITF- 1 1 -.,.. �'`'�:� �� r Mb 1'o It • rte' T — .• r . Ij.li161411 111 1,01111;1 1 :1 in.111.:11 .. X111111, LOCATION MAP • GPA 85-4 TR-4147 ZC-2804 RPD- 1049 t.),..k-v..s 13 LT 2 f vt4. 'HAG', L RANCHO SIl►11 rat Rote Areo 67053 67014 506-05 -- cOR CON secs ,�67012 . con cora N r con LOT "(NWY.116) G 03 •1Y6E E3 ''r'r•r,f,.' AI/ ue r'3•a', ►} "'9 '�� 00 DEC ] 1311 .� - .,1_ .R_ I 7 o' 1,0.0• rzzsr'- •U 1.1.11 . , • -----� 'Q SIV `0 I 1 1 ` 'C.R_lOr No .o 4Oe ' - rr'.44 _ r so rilt>.1/7t e -lo to -- '-— —-•'t I • --, — i.._...0.14 — r/'S 'f- ' O I I I /! o0 0 - I amr.li ..�e9 n . • I f . � ♦I 1 r r;1/ /6 ors �t O 5 0 88 I d •a ' o iR�?. I I ••' i 22 ....e:o• c,3/J ins•.`••••1:'4. •• 1.9BAc. o 2J0Ac. •• O ,. �D •` ��■i,, °44 4• ;•° of r'• aoo 1. o ' K Fo%7‘ 0•6..'2'.2 I e-3g=y I ° rt�.a+' I K ., O n ' I 32 R592 I ?OPUS "1 4 14-51 • I ^ ° CAA/ Ad ! I°; I 1 •_-L&. a I 011 D. 74• • raa.so'I • ti ! © I h 7I I IIr12-•• ! t/ IS I • 21 I 49 I I Q3 ! 7 64 Ac. a • 1il d 4J i qqI 16 O ^ ' I r r o.. I 2 Q I .5 r .1 I ,ePMzs h n • I a� nr I \ I 50 1 J I I aa(ssr•sso) I Q • I RSIS3 f�-1-/3 • W I I I I I -�h1 ~ 'r 10. 1 A c I I I „1 • _ OR 0.3512 I 1 I 12-23-80 _ ( - a-Q ! I I ,1$ \.I `�� '1 OZ •f L OR'• 18I , •s, re f 12-23-•. h I ° I 0 = I ��I • r.. I 4.33Ac 1 , I I 1 . .z, $ L 1782Ac I 'VI• • n I• I • I `Io 4 Par.■ 11/1/3/0 !� Iel I I •.•11(i • ' I I D I I 19.24Ac. I .�1I4 It 16C I I I 20PM3• I AI • AZ 7605 �;y I I `I l4.. . .. r;�rr I I /6 J� w ( . , - .. _ . _ . _ _ .__. VENTURA COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 01 o9�J I I va 0 °' Ili `°: ''''''''''tZONING MAP 506-05 '\%, sr 7� I I I • I i Dow o wn++o011 Cov11,1/nu101• •94, '�)J ORDINANCE 3400 ADOPTED 10-17-70 1 Teo..... . COUNTY CUR'S r•. RaC.11 L�.11.mm LL..I111..!!�•.�■� ` I V� - • I I • of - w1r I Sri. la —_-, - — •-..•. I9TAc P. I -!SLY Lina On L • 3RM3 REDRAWN K)-0-111 1 '"'„'»• t•'••e” Assessor's Map Bk.506,Pg.05 Por, Lots K 8 L"Poindexter Sub"R.M. Bk.5 Pg. 5 '"„F TR Fremont Troct R M. Bk. 3, Pg.39 NO.'E Assessor', Block Numb.ra snows In frlip,as County of Ventura, Calif. Parcel Numbers Shown in Circles Bk' Roncho Simi R M. Bk.3, Pg. 7 Assessor3 Minerol Numbers Shown in Squares 24 507 EXHI[3IT 3 EXISTING ZONING OF THE PROJECT SITE AND VICINITY ir. - •••••••••0 . . • . • i. • . • . ......_---- . ' . 4.! •f ,, e , / :1111;117 DILL ROA° ... . . . ...__... . ... ..._____ ................„. ... ... . . _ . . it .t tit VICINITY of` kt•• 117 W ‘...•.....,=.4s...... , .,.. . 01."ZIVII,01'1,P" •---•,•"'ski-4,,Troar.4.".....77.,.. ...a.f.....a1,...74' ' MAP' 4 t>,- , i, a,.. .....4.4. .... -.. ....- '.. • •,:•!- •••••-••-...:-..-o:^s_o•-•......7 -.1_1•..„:„,\•......1/.-.,.........-70...... .."7.,......4. ,..... 4,...,,,,.....44.7.,..1...., 4116.. . . a. 1 . ,•;./:.0 .'I ) ' I / t/ 7 z..... i .....,0 .......... P•4.12.b ... \ P•440 • - i 1 ' .? . -"-.--'t•;...\*.- I". /4 ... c •11... P.:1 PROJEC!i1/4 I a .• . r•• k 44 1\ -!0 C) () E3 •.....11.1• /*to' c-,,,,•0 $.5(cl/ON -\'\ '•z .P•Amt•. e . •*.1.1111• €2) vP. , NORTH 5 1 I -1 A a . 1•7/ ... • Li • '• ,,,.',,,,of/ 't'C1;r, , ,,tva*•••3 I €1..) ,„,•. P•••••. €7.) .gt . e••11.1.4,..0 •P C.% , ••• s' • i.' .1 . . .1 ''' - r ,.% P••••••• o ... .......-.-..0.-. ....-,' 8 • • • • 0 , P•413 4 - - -......_ • 41. • t - P.40i11 0 . . so a: 4i-. .--._ , ve... '' '•- L .,...... ..,1 4,_._ ; • ., ,. ...,...... .1 ..s.2.< - , P•41/1t 0 • ./' 1." • • - --- ,,,i •,., ,..,,' ! 1 /...•.•t t (.4 t Is•44%*I (5-. / 1 1 4.4411 ,',),91 I e4 trl , •4,4 s Ori ot.t.• A i ... - ."...:. / • ,. . .5.: •••S 1 • A1 X . A- - t . ' 1..4111.5 0 2 rt. a, „ I\ P•••40 P•414 0 C • SO , ,‘• •• .••.• Q,'.,),,, t CL:1 .. lb • r., . r4oss srenoar • _ '•,.. ' .. tt iv _ ., .1 . :..... ,‘. 1 c. e . ketir..ery (LL R040 ,.,, . 144 P.415• 0 I II ‘• I vs ..., IN o•4114 5 0 4 P•4I•4 5 07 Ply 5.1 • ..• ..1... • 1 oi.. (.•9'.? 'I) :(L/ 1.. ' ' ...) - .*; ... . . P. LEGEND•• 0 ta , i ,J•411•II 0 P•A164 6.9 14 IS I...• III , IA p• -- .... •••WI,•••,•,•••• 4.1•11 ii,et.vv.*.a .: • i s 1Z S.) / • \ A. .,... "• \ . 1• I ® 11' \ Po 444 6 10 I I 0 • P•40.1• (I) Qf P.AVIA• el: " 't. (4 ...0 R.. . .• 7 . , 1 • .-. -. ., .' P•lob b c.01•4 rots Is.„CtATON . . C'°) i (•/, 1 ... ' ''.' (31)k ..`,-".4.1-it (5-)' i• r. ,4 41 I.•41411 a 11 •/ ' ' L: . 0 tOr tattsvillit • ,._ /V. NOIC,5 . r•MIS.* (1.0 I r.0 . / 1 , f••4111.,.. 6.ipi, S..415.6 („I,.?) . /1' 1.• :11 umse."1 Tde Nolo',0140,44 Oisteatbliolir of WO AloSti.... _ ........,:y/ la ... -• ....,a.. ....--...4.- -• ..1 atatataarg......,..i.iso.,... .i.::: ..os it ft al,..voo, . •-- • 'A iti ?i*:' 'roa 41 los '" .s t, b It ...... •vate ' N ...... (4'I 01 5,IC C i cl, • , .•.•••• ...H ..,.• 141111 , ' " . • . . ...-,.. . : ...,_. __ •t. .., • 41. • 1......v..•1,II '.4...•.•A •••t. • 1 . •S4 ft ,, / k.',.1 1 1.-,1 ; (,.1) I, (.!9 Q2) (? 0 Co) @I,,..) b 66.) 6..„1 6:4) ..,, .,:i c, .., o ,. ...vo ,.,• is.•A • ,....,. ...Soil N.. ••••••/ II, . ' I 1 P . C 44. Ar. i :..:. ..,.... '•• ..•I..0.•el •••..0111i5tr.Ala 41 Mat( 4 • a a tv i • 10 4.-. 1) li k:-2.i 4 • r. inri..rit-f FROvire Ka . . /. 1 i ' I 0 ' . I i i ..1 11 • ? A it • • V ; , t:tlIstS4O ta•sala••• tot 4/01/•••". - ' ..•I_ o o. / .s • • I 'i ,:s . .' -V) 4 4, i ..I. a o: . 4 0 -s 0 4.) 40 . : • .II ; -fek.- /.4 - s tAltOOSOI COmptto0. gooboo caossomvi, r•assoo‘ fel 11. seltSstob bfAlserf lo011rotofolf...1 Vsfilbsof.I,prowl' .11 .... anas' --t. , , A.P. 1\.il. .::,ii i,.I j..9 L9.1 u.) to us r t•co..... 1 A.?.61.11+•'.}..01;9 SOU•O-.) )•10 ,,,,,fir.SIMLA It.10.it. 1.P.M hoes/skoZt rincm- MOORPARX . . il A 1.3U%!t.) TI it!Girt • DIULE CIRHICII .' . • • • PlICPARCIS IF011 I TENTATIVE MAP Owe 1 .._ _ .. ..-.. t.,-.3 SANTINA . ......._-• CABRILLO ECONOMIC ....: DEVELOPEMENT CORP. cull ,I):,%((, mo. 81 r 81 7. .. i ..r. . 'I. THOMPSON,,,, 4.P•alipit 0011N11. : • 11011 AZAHAR STREET '"•••""••••••••'••••"""•-•' '"...•"•• '1,'" •III•"'I 38o" 64.3.1".".^...* SATICOY,CALIFORNIA 03004 MOORPARK, VeNTIIRA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA T8500 1 : ••• .' ".. .,., ., . .. .J. ' " • i --_------------- . -..---.---- • • ., •• .. I. ':-. '1..•••......t. -- - - ' 7 --...,_s�: 1" v y• \,',AV oft 91 0 o"o! (YV1(1 11.1•IJ :s'':•..•..,::: NSW4 ' 19y4 410 tl8941 �'�ae _ t747/L9.i/ ♦d�9M 714 LUI71 •,,411,1 ........"--00I-.1i ti, V/ '..44.1 '111'41.1 2 tWfra t2l0?'A'NV 1{� i $•a 014.•4 `� �, 17 1. I."' 6.417 '1e ,w1 3 .•011,4 '1���'f�t.J kFar lei i,wM/.•Y N'1L writ wows, 9911.4 j W '• `1 am: ..k \ �,, 0114 19 •'44wr.,ny Evia UN b '01 1 _-: •."••• y fi J� OOa► ti it '� MILL:,•4I! XI, Orr 1 04 •.•04499, M wl0•N In 49,,•••4,00. 70 •`i - i t (') a1o09 W l0 nu 41 ,901.•.7 ' . k N'•Y !It • • 4J mJ'N 'N�1 v1�M1 x °414 i4 iigw9 9'04144 1 9'" +7 st•nwr+Vw { .... '-f I ++•' .`)may, > ��,. 944 a1 141104.,17 01'04'0 tlws+.4'4•+"4000,/ iIHVIH '/ f•4 M t 1 14 . ♦ \L. n K 0014164 w N..wrcl4f4 a+4•0 •.109 I*La a4,04 'G SII .4, l,a .+•I+4• 1`+s S p.1• .1. CI N K 4.4.44.40 ^svf 0.4 • •I •,'y O1 ''•' .v Io r 1•V r0 is 19 II IS C9r7 r s,.1.0 94.9ftl 974•,,,,0 b I •ir ,w 0111' y !4'I 1... �l• I "' 'd•! ,, f (Y, ir! , S'*!4y „,.•r%,4•.a Iv+ a OQ '0404,744 94 147 . 01►. 0'G 4''1, S'4 `!4'i ' A'C ' •)t'.' { i „,, 1 rb w Lt .alpvyw w1vN W1114 '0•441404/40 y/ 0A419400 III .. - .7 '".1'. . 40.. fl .,. -/ n it u 214011 ►xa'ctearaa4ra •1 494104 w,a4 '4 i'M lira iti "t ?VI 7( 9079 1t VII 17KJ •.1. c' •t ! 4it.:� t int* et L4WW '� • .,+' �'1}',`_, W ^�7�1. r,� 4 t{, I ^ w tt 14•9'4•1 ! 9.111 as 90044'4• i�• tt t•(:. r.] �" V.J. l+ 1"110► it of 104011 1 a"c a4 (09.4i9 7 9v0w0w« 4 14•494 It N 01 101.910 'et n W'1 1 O./, 17•+410- V 111419 t _ i It k _. 9t i 0614 44 ,�' t }D.. _j_j�. . i •' r La 9«11,4.4a al 41 494.1'10.»)4 IW ....t,"•... . # -4 �., ... e it 1 4>9401 9+0944 fl ON 19s 190404 4414.104 t� ` 4 ,10 ' M e4 1(NvwK w 0+9.44 G'w11147r 19 1 1.• . '•ill,�, a tl.. " ,.. aIle s4 M 4;49.9194 19441.044 i• wt4914tYw 99494 49 I:i 1 i i 1 •••••'r..ur. 0074 0* i Nit) wi tAws A 4K 4r,, ' = 9 6t 194.0.,as 1°7>` 0119 c4)41•,1a.4A }�4•Il 1•w I q „44,`4 .� • 1N �,U 5 L I Ml! 14 997'° 104'94 t'oi 444,07.41.104. 'L Ia .4 •--•?� r� i iw 000► q t r r q t I1 ... Si .. a �y..,,i��..... ... .. ....... • ... .�%... .. ..r� '._. 1 o rl►► •I, t►W 1.4 1114,,4 ugos 91191909 t14rJ,10i0t1°1.49••04 NJv 1 i ... ... .i .' `. . .. ••. 94iG 143 1.`I.......•t' L 4.1 './ i1 11 • r 1 M . I,Y, - __ f 11'u i a 2 aw4 n ;l 1 ..,__,'rii.. r.�L,i....n. ..lr e1,.•!•�!`l• " I I_ .I'(� q.. .. est La 53SON s 9a '' 4100 1•!4'1 4'% 1,)4`1 i'G • 44°4 4094 a'z a:': 1+ 'c tail. t9 1 ts' • c� ,_z : 0744 h I.••..•w• ,.,r' r'•'•�t ��,' ,.. -y , II i+ 4e e4 J 1 941 1�•' \ r 11 .7-11/"--,.r 7 i , t_ [` 1 • tl sa ii' \ t •_l 1 \• C i 1/ t4 us.* 470 "10'47 } WMl 010 t1n1YH1u { `\ 1 t�:....•..4.vi'_c = i 1 4 a 1M SuoI1Wa17 40 °nikt 4 14-11w 4s wl# } -..--••••.,3• is i, { 11 it t IY1 IY.41 Ia is i• ,.11,+9 4,4110 /J 14'4.'410 < ( . LI p 41 II "9'10 0011 M ;t�.,_!1 . . ^, _ ^ _ IM --.,. - w'_} --1� ,.., art* 4i 9a 'C'4 ozii 6 1 t °6 };s�z(� a ';t� -ya f �, 1 r tt4Gt cr • •• •awi.4.7! .s°944 s1 Lt "'7'L t>o{. E cn.1,U / •• 1 .1,• a ii • '�4 a! 4.941+90 •� bIJX O9IXMiia It•"•19119M r.. ..'v► fAilli...,1111- di asrk . • b II II Q :10 1 t 4. 11 a 1/UNn aQ J.1W 11.4PyN^wnn44 nAra/ I "•• fl 4 i .- ,4,t4 1 ..two,•';447 1' ...j ,1a_- • av4•l9/ 0 01 a a sus. 4. I1.3 cr7 tt•♦v 4941 1 • Wad •411a0 1 ' 3 - . 4.414 • 1)- f M..';V •'1'441 1' A • ' i�Y Ill J 1I (+r• 14.•••W'lr°•Y° i -.pow _ _ _„__. 440,..0 •.W4.°/' 14.6.4 10•44.04 .1 ••••-) N....•1 44441.MMI _ <v 1...... I. , .. . . .. ...d..ni...I. ..b. H. 1 I ' :}}} TQ 1 ..•ini��rdu r,.. N.4.0.rrw•nim• • 1 ' r4_,.., 1 • .' 1144144,4201 MP" i ti ' i1 I. 4 4+4 4 44.1, , ,“Al 4••14.1 •... I•' .104,4,114 -.."mK.MVO. 4.0,4 _^" 4 ..1.1 ..p 444 4:1 rr_'r:I. 1 ' v I ,1144 ./ 1: 4.J b'u,r.w I ..,,.1.....1‘,1 JJ •J.Ay [II. ._': .'J v 1.0 Iv ,..x" .I.. v , cnu suY3 . 1t/}� ! -1 . •,1.'..•I now •n•1'.4.••.•I'.'V 444 t.w* 3 't'.'1-0,4•41"- ,fnw; _ - - j//-'N " ' •_ �. 4444.± •Uvl..,l � ~�•�„� V. / •1 .y� • i. i. ' , ,4..ri)J ry„•4, r+q4_ .-s. , �\ sr•J1,. ,• --. • '.:.' •.. ..1. 4•44.44v - - _ .44..,00 L..y:, as s,v.•44 -+.rvn.c • � (_ 1414.• . .. ) i ,•i `S'' 70 •1 1 . 1I `�=#G .1� .. .'r'i!�'I r f '' !1 �.. __/ ^tJ^ 441+4 I1 43" a r' IU 1.!1.11.11 ; , /. .«. �►� o } p 2 , ' ..a•4•4••• 44.41 1 I,.4 . ..u;,. .,.�.r::. .. $ .... .. .. .�•,J..q 4."1.0. .. --. __ .._. ., ..� : ivy S'.r»,N/r -4 4444 t Y MRI -'i.4 .1 4w. 4+ 44 `` -t .. .. �:....1 .,.. d---cr1;V. ..4.14; Ip, , �' ) #11144.11 'q1 A•. q..�iJJ; 0.IV..., .44.1......01..14102 14 \4 14.44"4JN AV.Y Y 4410,4 1/44, _'\�. 0 447.1174.0 5027)V .IVij .1r r; 1 �� �19QDIytVM('�1r' 4144.. .Vi• i .,Ii M1 �( ^1 ! t0.1,4 -"t 1,n ► _ 11� ',C,1.4 4. 1 J r! f 1 Fx.►, ,.rtt 17 f .4• • �' 1 9 ; _ f •II•N li �.1•.w r'�r�... �a 1 y ! '' 1 i 1 !! •1 Mi.t I� � 11 iJ� • "IMO' ._ ... I*• • .ii f 4. 441,4.,4 .i• ` A 4441 •.1 i 4l -, • .4 .0.42!1*10g. W1':n- {t', M { - r:1.14 O . n t; ' .. 1.414. O fJ4i Y illi1+. 7 1 l'01014 r 1014.11 -.1.; e*14 i i 1`� y 'y0.t•►i 44 J Jr. '13440. 40 "'.`Y+ro-fifiriti •►�y' +/• 1.11 iIIIIIIIIMIIII, �}arIJ..1;1J 4440 wiolwNJ �� .,, .+14.1 %��.� '•', � ' ...,. ... ,.. i4 �r {if'•l ► � tv .AI.144'..,4 n r .w..,1 1 .�.{ 1 ••11 i . 11 r t •!it`. .r1 4 /3J ^•4^11,..•4..;, ! „ J., !.- •1J MV9•.•.GM.M1.IW•Ili ',I'M / n• •� �; .1�• l 1141••. . MX, (/\ \ .. r r Y It i 1 11., i ; ' . 0 •••0..04 Y•w•w•I Wll tO 4.Ma (1� lett 1 Far MR Old 14141 Mar 4 44, • _�--F O...r.I...1. _1.•. , 1 I 5.•..L.�1■•Ga•41..•-r 1� ' I I Ir-w,.,,rr..r.•.., I ����I I ••'-• .' �a+*1 I :I ' I I I! .1` I I no.r.•r IrCli ,]. Ui t+.l�amar r ..:..I i I, I 1 I 5.1,0/.4 4001.+.14: l r I 4 il•i•♦wrr�• 1 ;� 11,•.. I'I ii , . 1 I I { L I 1 I .�o-r44144,11•••••••,l I>A.on : .i.� I t. I _ ••• ", — 1 �L: r�. ` � r e..r,wr,■Mw. SL .14•::- u.v.w, •< • I.I..L.. ■4 I I I { I.►.n.yrlR.wr►nrlt 1 �-!. 0�1! ' �1 al I.•..••:.•II.1r••••.r. • I jl/9,. •a� r. J i I. oa.... 1e.1 ;f r�1 ••E- ,..11 r ( 11•11....._.! I ••J . a I. ^, hi_ I I, I i 1 •• a.1..w.■..,•.••-•.Y •t-��- •I M- . I 7.".7. ,.110.1. R•r 1� T , 1.1 • [•. IL II_ • • •I 1 1•1 I j' 1 I 1 ti I1r I i is' wvwncs II I i t L �` p I • f.i4.l.,ui. -�, " A 0 p . �1I yf j*j • C :1 { ( I I I !.1'.I ._1 1'•1 r,i .. 'r °I , I= 01.3.1 �..j 11 1 _'1 LL ii 11 I I 1 �:' I �ruw.■w•w•a1 1.l_I. i I • t�1, i I• r II I 1 111 J ` in`w�w7t ,I I I I 1wI[�. M•M! _ �r 1 I r,...e. ■..•r 11 -` I f J: ° 1..14 4 - _� IS. Mw .!M • _I _ r iv.font yr.Pnr,J,tr V, 1.-RR}P .. I e, iarm.% 1r•a■1 of.. S a i 1(y�1 I I ir�K. .Y • •,I•. 4� ..,. • ,ewe. u45 •• I wnK.fuw a.r' ewn2 70 .r Mloer T Y■N , 1 I. IR■I..rr. tw V•.�.•.M.. I•alal•Tf1 MR rag. S : t • •' %■■•/S.'.•I• InP[Atra R A M•i. to • !a M.M 4 •n ;.N I{M. t.1t .rRwR 1. ., 0. *fps P1 „elly(R)^�._.,_�r,lt•.I r,f, pews,/ ( �\ I • >- 1 —a._1` - --..+i 1 Q I. 1 _ 1 r-, ug • 1 E. 1f; 1 ern=— LII )-- ,i• I. .{ ILL.t. I � i . , .. _, • .1 i i . I. 1- C. L4, 4 { 1_!L•1� 11 I I l r ' ' 9 '• g: _ R i .1, �1i ; _ lr h ' I '� I :► 1 111 1' I • S I �� :1 1.a,: .11 . .11 . 7 1-- 1 1-.. I• • '1 I I d 1 I !..• , :f .i 1 1 �. I 1 I n I 1•J ---;-.12-, I __• •— I I TJI v3 0 -11 F I .;p: , , I � i r -i 47. aco .I• -f I I � • _ 1 1 i 1 II i I ;; II I I,. I . i t 11 1 • 1 c1) CD O O a. p N y M JA 4r•tA . ••I• . 4 ,tw •• 1.010 IIt6 M MM1. 7+MMM... , MR 1 I I w A .w_. p•I••,110••••••• t.•. I.301.11 �.• ••+ A %O. aMIDC Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation 11011 Azahar Street,Saticoy, California 93004 (805)659-3791 January 30, 1986 W ARD OP DIRECTORS TERESA CORTES President Ville Camisoles Steve Rodriguez Associate Planner CARMEN RAMIREZ Vice President McClelland Engineers Channel Ceentles Legal Services 1140 Eastman Avenue Aseedellen Ventura, CA 93003 D ELPINO LOPEZ-ROJAS Tressurer Procter&Gamble Re: GPA-85-4, Z-2804, TR-4147, and RPD-1049 VICTOR FONTAINE Secrelery P entair*.Oulnisnitis Dear Steve: an.Amecistes • MARIA LUISA LOPEZ AdralnIstretive AM* This is to change our request for this project to "Mello" Aw▪ kwomo incentives, including any amendments to "Mello" , instead ',Amor GRAINIEHR of "Roos" incentives. The reason for this is so that resale Canon.Alesander &Clayton restrictions for the project will only be required for ADAL I ARANA ten years. In addition, we understand that urgency legislation La CAAVIOne is being considered that would allow for an exemption for JOHN PATTON Farmers Home Administration 502 financed housing under Adensfeils AYR SR Suilernser "Mello" . wean Lacey B ERNARDO PEREZ city et Lee Mertes As you know, all of the homes in our project will initially Deparirnent Waft"&Pewee De sold to low income families and financed with Farmers CRISTOSAL RAMOS Home Administration 502 mortgage financing. Each home carp:ran., will additionally have a deferred CDBG loan of approximately M.wstflgJAIME ZEPEOA $8,000. The Farmers Home loans are 33 year loans with etercne Sims a provision for an interest writedown based on family income; r Workers Imorwrnwanl AJNOC the amount of interest writedown required is reevaluated annually. The experience with this program is that there is very little turnover. Farmers Home provisions for interest ADVISORY&OARO credit recapture act as an anti-speculation mechanism. CHARLES COHEN Using a formula based on the length of the loan at resale Cohen.Almorder L Ct•ItCn and the amount of interest credit, on resale Farmers Home RON HERTEL.Sit. recaptures a percentage of the interest credit from appreciation. ▪ C•nianiciers The CDBG deferred loans are another mechanism for keeping ERNIE MORALES ▪er'reef Mayer al Ihe housing affordable. The loans are due upon sale or transfer city of FIllmara of ownership, and could be assumed by another low income AL ZAPANTA family. AllantkIRWO&W We have several concerns about resale restrictions . First, any resale restriction must be approved by Farmers Home e xecuTIVE oiltiEcToie as the lender. Farmers Home has problems with resale restrictions, RODNEY E.FERNANDEZ particularly if its rights in the event of foreclosure are limited, and with restrictions longer than ten years. I am enclosing a Farmers Home Administration legal opinion on one proposed resale r- ...? . * ction. A United W•y Agency A community economic development corporation serving Ventura County 7-7— G...? January 30, 1986 • Steve Rodriguez Page 2 Secondly, we see a need to protect the equity of the families who participate in this project. With resale restrictions, if a family is forced to sell its home, it may be impossible for it to recover its equity, including the approximately $10,000 of "sweat" equity and any improvements made to the home, let alone any fair appreciation on equity. This is because the FmHA financing would not be available to the family who buys the home on resale; and the selling family could be forced into selling the home for less than the amount of its equity in order for another low income family to be able to purchase at market interest rates. These problems can be partially addressed by making resale restrictions apply only to 20% of the homes (Section 65913.4(a) ) and by allowing resale to families of low or moderate income. Although we would prefer no resale restrictions, this would meet the legal "Mello" requirement. Sincerely, 71iO4./ Ak Karen Flock Project Manager kf cc: People's Self Help Enclosure ...-----'"* r l" Villa Campesina Waiting List 12/2/85 City of Moorpark Name Residence Employment 1. Lorenzo Aguilera Moorpark 2. Raul Aguilera Camarillo Egg City 4 3. Joel y Irma Aguirre Moorpark Egg City 4 . Emilio y Guillermina Almanza Moorpark Muranaka 5. Domingo y Maria Arambula Moorpark Egg City 6. Rodolfo y Maria Alvarado Fillmore Egg City 7. Ramon y Rosa Alvarez Santa Paula • 8. Miguel y Celia Andrade Oxnard Egg City i 9. Rene y Maria Luisa Barrera Moorpark 10. Frank and Sharon Bernal Moorpark 1 11. Lance and Sandra Bocher Oxnard 12. Manuel y Isaura Briceno Santa Paula 13. John Victor and Patti Ann Cau Moorpark 14. Gonzalo y Gracia Calderon Oxnard 15. Jesus Castillo 16. Agustin y Irma Castro Oxnard Egg City 17. Isaias y Celia Castro Oxnard 18. Armando y Carmen Cisneros Moorpark 19. Catarino y Maria Coronado Oxnard 20. Salvador Cisneros Moorpark 21. Samuel y Teresa Cortes Moorpark 22. Antonio y Ramona Esparza Moorpark S&K Ranch 23. Placido y Juana Estrada Oxnard 24. Isidro y Francisca Fernandez Moorpark Muranaka ; 25. Anthony and Jan Gagliardo Oxnard 26. Reynaldo y Enriqueta Garcia Fillmore Egg City 27. Cynthia Gonzales Moorpark 28. Fernando y Trinidad Grajeda Moorpark Pro-Ag 29. Ruben y Evelia Guerrero Oxnard 30. Porfirio y Hortencia Gonzalez Pt. Hueneme 31. Guillermo y Elisa Gonzalez Fillmore 32. Gregorio y Margarita Gurrolo Fillmore 33 . Farahon y Victoria Guzman Moorpark 34. Nicandro y Victoria Guzman Oxnard 35. Herminio y Herlinda Hernandez Oxnard S&K Ranch 36. Gary Hilliard Moorpark 1' 37 . Yvonne Hinojosa Moorpark 38. Jose y Alicia Jiminez Newbury Pk. 39. Raul Juarez Thous . Oaks 40. Jose y Silvia Leos Moorpark Egg City 41. Serafin y Aurora Leon Santa Paula 42. Manuel y Celia Madrigal Moorpark Egg City 43 . Santiago y Soledad Magana Oxnard 44 . Mariana Mareira • Thous . Oaks 45. Juan M. T. y Alma Martinez Fillmore Egg City h 46 . Elias y Silvia Martinez Santa Paula Egg City 47 . Francisco y Maria Martinez Oxnard S&K Ranch (laid off ; 48 . Juan y Delia Martinez Santa Paula 49 . Marcos y Antonia Martinez Santa Paula 50 . Patricio y Maria Mejia Oxnard 9 jl City of Moorpark Name • Residence Employment 51. Jesus y Ema Melgoza Thous. Oaks 52. Jose y Bertha Mendez Camarillo 53. Jose y Maria Luisa Mendez Moorpark i 54 . Javier y Guillermina Meza i Somis i 55. Miguel y Celia Mendez Oxnard 56. Fernando y Rosa Meza Fillmore S&K Ranch 57. Jorge y Socorro Meza Egg City 58. Leopoldo y Maria Meza ! Fillmore Muranaka 59. Reyes y Celia Misquez Thous. Oaks 60. Martine y Rosalilia Morales Fillmore S&K Ranch 61. Pablo y Silvia Murillo Moorpark .62. Kevin Morrow and Renee Massow Simi Valley 63. Rodolfo y Consuelo Morales Moorpark Egg City 64. Ramon y Elva Moreira Moorpark 65. Antonio Murillo Moorpark 66. Gustavo y Linda Muro •` Oxnard 67. Juan y Ana Muro Oxnard • 68. Abelino y Cecilia Navarrete . Oxnard 69. Benito y Rosa Ortiz Thous. Oaks 70. Jorge y Sarah Partida ; Moorpark 71. Mariana Pietris Thous. Oaks 72. Mario y Dolores PorrasNewbury Pk. 73. Sergio Prado s Oxnard 74. Armando y Yolanda Prado Oxnard 75. Ramon y Rosa Prado Oxnard Egg City 6 76. Alfonso Ramirez Moorpark ' 77. Fiorentino y Esther Ramirez Moorpark Egg City 78. Jose y Mara Ramirez Santa Paula 79. Alfonso y Guadalupe Ramos ' Moorpark S&K Ranch 80. Anatolio y Nelly Rangel Moorpark ' 81. Juventino y Maria Rangel Fillmore Egg City 82. Refugio Rivas Fillmore 83. Heraclio Rodriguez Camarillo 84. James and Michelle Robertson '!" . Simi Valley 85. Filiberto y Maria Rosales - Moorpark Eggs West 86. Enrique y Isabell Rubio i • Moorpark Egg City 87. Juan Manuel y Maria Nieve Serna Fillmore Egg City 88. Pedro y Eva Solano Moorpark Egg City 89. Salvador y Elisa Tamayo Moorpark 90. Jose and Lilia Tello La Puente 91. Jose Luis y Elvia Topete Oxnard 92. Emigdio y Maria Valdivia Moorpark Pro-Ag 93. Gustavo y Maria Valdivia Oxnard 94. Raul y Ana Valdivia Moorpark Egg City 95. Santiago y Eliza Valencia Oxnard 96. Jose y Maria Vasquez Oxnard Egg City 97. Miguel y Maria Vazquez Oxnard Egg City 98. Alberto y Maria Vigil Santa Paula 99. Francisco y Alicia Vigil t Santa Paula 100. Jose Luis y Edith Villa Fillmore Pro-Ag 101. Miguel y Victoria Villa Moorpark 102. Salvador y Maria Luisa Villa Moorpark 103. Serafin y Maria Elena Zapien Oxnard 104. Guadalupe y Guadalupe Zaragoza Moorpark Eqq city 105. . Jose y Mafia 7.arar*n7n I •Ih • I t 41 • 3 II It 0 111 ` l i1 a I���.1�y I _t.i,.tiY1• •4AY Ir MM1. ('OM1. (/WI•,/ 4 It • j j '' •• M 4 ii •...�' tn. 11 /0641 ' •« vM. Y V•• j wl ••..6•lt..a, ■ir'.+•� t.n. ♦ •wl/w.i I .1 •/0.4011.1. ,� •�� ti' r • rs•w u. Y 910 •♦,t., 1! i 1140 4 •1101 , 1 . .. I r ... t atrrrr _._ �_ -�..•'•- I 9 1844 ♦,••, It •/ 106 L'•_ r +a/«.. w.• / a' L. 11 LA as • ti ,1 Wy I ii �i/ 1 ff 11* • • •—•17, 111-91,- 1, , 1 `11i l .. • 11 .I t-I [/,1:11 1.l '! ill. . �1• L i, NOt�S u ••',*,' I �� a� • ,. ,.E IA •r '6.;* .. '� I. Aril !e•.•N•,•.w•[�Ar.,,•rrrA us. w 64.4 1..� 1.. 1;I I •�lV L •,1'rl,va•af 1..T K,/,+T •a Ac H !w N ,. ., i M 1 t w p,•.•.•, ti...11r4 s.. t t 1•r•1.6.0.1 1 /1.l• (\ \) .� r41.1::.:., •. ' .•1�'P:U•+�� I:� ,vr+� .w.«•w.,f...rr • I.•...A MM1... .. 1I.IM.+p1,•�, t....•,3««..•v// N f'� _ I�• 6 W r.(..,.• r{.1 H •w1.•144.4.1 U. ti 1 _..._..__ Mi1 ! 11 ..,•/...r A .40441 M • •• • .y4. / 441.4•4,..n.� . q /t ! 1~ j 141 I ......1'i /W••1. M n«Y 1 • 3.40 r" • in 1•., �y 1 •� \ M) 1006 MIN ,• .4.••w•-•K.W4 M 411-..• ..r v..•. !.3 . ....• I *OD i/!• .. ,...440 ,r ••r••1.•• MA•ii•• M•••• •• •�' �''�,• I 1 '� ..1'I 1.1.6,+1. AN PAD• 64 •1 ., ,0-E..._..-4.-• , I.. .. 4 i1� ; , .1...r,.,r.. 1r.. w . w 44 It .e., . r.*. I ;P .MI ♦ ...MI1 "a.1104,4•41,•••••46 /.A1,0 Y.MMY1 MOO w �•y� /�.�/ '•. ,i �n « _� .... .. .,,,,......„•1. 0. /,.r t 4041• .rsw. �' ••.• f// ..M� {..i..�•� t, • . ... ...........I • ••A• 1..4•• ••••••• • 14•• NT OL �1JM� • \~moi 0f or PAIR k-a34.0 1" 1'!1 \ .1 •••• � ` 1 ' " • °�0 '••1•14111r!) 'I(' , ` II i �— `� a '� cam.,, s�Q� �� : , ;p ►�cuL �t,ct e�ze Cele F's as. x_tt,r=•a G `\ \I11CF.0 10 I C h G L '' i EK(,IZ►J F45 Q�fn 14:1" 6:206- �y ttZOt- O i, c:_kf t-i)4z� • • �� " S,• V,,'1ct1Tu Cott�t'� �,.r, W Z� NI Or I 44/4*•• FLA Tv-4". 1 c a f}T O� u�4� K;1.Q u D 1*1 0 F Cl nA til...l L ...... '• IN1100. i $t� 17tc Krt c Qh l'cxawart' �GCx> .,,,._, to }'t C Oj•1hCpG. v.t'S!t¢�;G-"r I/J{I• , �,/ .slYl. PLAN `'� "' i � � AG - 2 .:1.:•:* I.::: \\*\*'''ssomi... ; • • AG— I . I ♦'�•I % _.1V J - - /.. 1. • os - I c1 RL - it • 11 , i I ,::::.4" Ilk I 11 I i ) • • • - - • .„ . • IVIr. X11tliiiiii1111�: :,;: R H ::1f ii•-'+z. �IiII 2:pfi;. .h 1••�.: 1 y:} • /+� } A G — I PARK 'fS:s:..:::::::.::..:_..,...:::;::;:::: :>:::.::.:,>.. hii•;• M VH M L •:',, : : : = i :• ♦ ' : {{ ' • : .a. '- ' • .. • •' •• : -•- ' ••.: -.,.:.:.:••$..-:'Z ....7:..-. -''Wail*-%iliPlea!WIM Fr. • i. 4:41/41 • • 11♦♦•• .4 lif.;•4::....:::.:::;:::::t::,.:•;•....:•',cif:::•::::::::;:*::::,•3:7:*i 4.0 mai, 44, ,4 e f••, ,,,,,,,,,,,. ... ...„:.„,„:.,,,„,„ „....-....,--:.:: M •f►•Y!:}:G::::<K; : :5 :*ii.. 1... •.. .. . •' y• . ... •.• x r • ♦ • ♦ .........41• r x 2 �M J f '*. ::.....*, -,:::,::.:i:i.,..-:::.::::.:::].;:i;.,iii:* lot i:::: *1114104 ::i • 1♦ rhoc ♦ !4 .‘,7 ki.. • '4;Ft01":::. 17;:i::.::Mi ••• •J - • lIcc GT l�T•E • ' --..::.'... ...--.;..-...... .,.. ... .!,.• •••_::...-....•;:;•••::•i-:•-•..-.:..?..-;.i'.I.:'-....„ .7:......-:-.... ..... ----''.•.- -' ;".:.:. ...:: . .. ..:':. .„,. _ . . ; :.---...:s:f.l.:.:::::5:•:;-:-.......:1.L. E\}i1BIT it EXISTING LAN!) USE ELEMENT DESIGNATIONS OF THE PROJECT SITE AND VICINITY W < UJ 0 Z ¢ N ¢ IanIY1i J <a. O (.. Y < JIOi O: 0 I < 0 J co ¢1 a 02 3). /e1 I ` LOS ANGELES AVE C / a 1 < ' • cc 0 o3 h Y ¢ F• CC -J6='III' CC < m en. ' ��s arse �� a.0 .. (1,1: O I-- F 2 ee U1 $ RN U1 m • i MAJESTIC COURT 0 f Willa y cli wise Arter sr tor ■�•��111M1111•�•�1•�■ -• ■•ii•■ 1 EXISTING b MEM"�`.'1� . b• a f 1. \. \\•., LEGEND, COUNTY OF VEMTLAA ROAD STANDARDS -PLATE FI I.54 FOOT FADE ROAD ON H FEET OF MOW -FATE D-I C.LI FOOT WIDE ROAD OM N FEET OF ROM '� /ARROYO SIMI ' FA -RATE IJ`I 4 10 FOOT DE ROAD ON IO FEET OF ROM `�` -RATE N A.40 FOOT WOE ROAD ON II FEET OF ROW • • 'L '1J 4 0 i10 300 SOO RECOMMENDED CIRCULATION SYSTEA KALE MI FEET APPROX. 40 LINSCOTT. LAW 5 OREENSPAN, INC., ENGINEERS ARROYO MM ORO..LATIO w ^ t LU Q w X f. r CC j N N 1 J < 0 IZ 1OI X CC 2 01 ¢ a. ' 0 < J tw p o Il Iro a Q L--110o .`.::2 is ss .-303 .-Irs �r:o / \4-40 LOS ANGELES AVE .)4 V\ UI �rs rs r: 1 2 3 -. 113-.� , 12 0-. /• 10-99.,' f /4 Z111-&'" _ I 10.„ :: :: 11-.4 : 120-o.Qo^ 1 co . 7. 111 ( 1 a (1 C2 C2 C2 C2 • CO EC C2 a. w o m H o )- t? o - c-r s�F 2 7 . CO Cntu VH C2 J Co VH VH VH C2 C2 COk.,..,........I x h y . 1 W ARROYO SIMI C2-GENERAL COMMERCIAL . CO- COMMERCIAL. OFFICE ' H - HIGH DENSITIF RESIDENTIALi VH- VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL • ,Zb. o ,.o goo ,� PROJECT AREA TRAFFIC VQL�Jr1 N PROPOSED LAND USES� PM PEAK HOUR SCALA IN MET APPROX. 4p LINSCOTT, LAW IN GREENSPAN. INC., ENGINEERS AMOro WA ORC L.TION PeoP0s&9 T12cr - -r s'� A44.D �eCri t-Cr=A-L. ''e,etsc,o owl- =I-, *T 14-E. Or-ea"r:1-.1 -T•7' 1 ' . Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Inc., Engineers TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION UTILIZATION • - 1 AND LEVELS OF SERVICE . , I • I` I BEFORE j EXISTING PROJECT AFTER PROJECT • INTERSECTION TCU LOS ICU . LOS Moorpark Rd. & Los Angeles Ave. 0.58 A 0.64 B Millard St. & Los Angeles Ave. 0.42 A 0.54 •A i Moorpark Ave. & Los Angeles Ave. 0.46 A 0.67 " B i Liberty Bell Rd. & Los Angeles Ave. 0.62 B 0.43 A I K rv¢ ozwr £'��*,,e-s -ry -r1A-E.. ?eo'c>SE 0 `L eo J•P_GT et-t-40 $t Do ac r iFL he- "Pacgv-T urc_r F.A.- A-1' AS S4.4o W/L O K Eg_o-v-iT t 1 . _x .zr ' 1f r.•l 'PUBLIC WOR � S AGENCY county Of tura Director Arthur E. Gnv|e, yWwnoee,—Administrative Services Deputy Directors Paul W. Ruffin Ron Brazill Real Property Services Al F. Knuth January 25, 1985 Transportation T. M. Morgan Engineering Services G.J. Nowak Flood Control/Water Resources Resource Management Agency Planning Division 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009 Subject: APN 506-0-05-10 Water and Sanitary Sewer Availability Subject property is within the boundaries of Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1, Division 1 for water and sanitary sewer service. The District has a 6" water main in Los Angeles Avenue that is planned for replacement with a 10" water main. The applicant for subject pro- perty will be conditioned to replace the 6" water line beginning at the end of the 10" water line at the extension of the westerly property line of APN 511-0-08-37 and running in a westerly direction along Lou Angeles Avenue to the connection with the 10" water line at the exten- sion of the easterly property line of APN 511-0-151-05, a distance of approximately 1450 feet. This length may be reduced depending on other arrangements for replacement of the pipeline that may be in effect at the time a "will serve" letter is issued for subject property. The District has a 27" sanitary sewer main trunk line in the Arroyo Simi, southerly of the subject property to provide service. The applicant may be conditioned to relocate the 27" sanitary sewer line from its present location to the southerly portion of the subject property. The District is beginning a sewage treatment plant expansion project. The cumulative increase of the flow into the treatment plant is based on the rate at which new connections are put in service. This rate as compared to the timing for the completion of the plant expansion may cause a delay in issuance of a "will serve" letter to the appli- cant to insure that the plant expansion is complete when the sewer service begins. This is not to be construed as a "will serve" letter . Very truly yours, ) _ ~ ; Gregory�8. V�o=lec_ v, Manager ' Water & Sanitation Services Division Real Property Services Department GSF:jp ' sc4+ 85I21805/ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021 NEGATIVE DECLARATION X MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1. Entitlement; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85-4, ZONE CHANGE Z-2804, TRACT MAP TR-4147, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RPD-1049. 2. Applicant; Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation 3. Proposal; See Attached (Exhibit 1) . 4. Location and Parcel Number(s) ; South of Los Angeles Avenue, east of Liberty Bell Road, north of and adjacent to the Arroyo Simi. APN 506-05-10 (see attached map, Exhibit 2) . 5. Responsible Agencies; California Department of Fish and Game, CALTRANS, Ventura County Flood Control District. II. STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: An initial study was conducted by the Department of Community Development to evaluate the potential effects of this project upon the environment. Based upon the findings contained in the attached initial study (Exhibit 3) it has been determined that this project could have a significant effect upon the environment. These potentially significant impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated through adoption of the following identified measures as conditions of approval. MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS: See attached. (Exhibit 4) . III. PUBLIC REVIEW: 1. Legal Notice Method; Direct mailing to property owners within 300 feet. 2. Document Posting Period; December 12, 1985 through January 11, 1986 Prepared by: Approved by: L - r , 127/85 --(Name) if ' (Name) (Date) (Name) / (Date) 59047A/C-1 EXHIBIT 1 Department of Community Development 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION General Plan Amendment GPA 85-4: The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the project site as "M-L" (Residential, Medium Low Density, 2.6 units/acre average) and C-2 (General Commercial) . For this project to be considered consistent with the General Plan, the existing Land Use designa- tions must be amended to "H" (Residential, High Density, 7 units/acre average) . Zone Change Z-2804: The existing zoning of the project site is "R-1-13" (Single Family Residential, 1300 sq ft minimum lot size) and "C-P-D" (Com- mercial Planned Development) . The requested zoning for the proposed site is "R-P-D-7U" (Residential Planned Development, 7 units/acre) . This zoning designation would be consistent with the requested General Plan Amendment. Tract Map TR 4147: The project site is 10.7 gross acres and 8.2 net acres in size. The proposed tract map will create 62 residential parcels. Average lot size is 3987 square feet (see Exhibit 5) . Residential Planned Development RPD-1049: The applicant proposes to con- struct 62 single-family homes for low income families (see Exhibits 6, 7, and 8) . 1 59047A/D-1 1 1 1 1 •• % I J 1f. • 11 1.,m% 11;, I 1 4 lamp � .6 rvi i.w i 1� % ` 1i /. r 1 1 .,' w 1' 1 1 r .�., a 1. 'i ! 1 1 1 i/ /1 • V' i 0 'ININIMI•• AMINCEIMP - II it // /11 % S S 111:Aill=1W/Agji1.7 - 1 1 i 1,1 o o ' ! r-- r' .- ali Air'1 c1 aillail rwimi•-k1AW 11 WI piker It''�`%' --- — cs 1 -f �' .11 111 : I I L 1�.a .1• -- •••,,, �_ i _.. .- 1 ! • I�, n III "' ' ( l 1 ( ITT /L. 1 .. : ; . . vi —V 1 w i11. - 1 � 014:11•11014:11•111014:11•111:1 4. : : - Illa 111.1.111nEUXIXIXXo , ; I I j�~ ;P. r .,• ss „ s cap">; - ' �uHl.�- aru nswm:I .•.1 c'1OP:. y n iz rO*JEX Jt - • _ _ . cz , 1 I e_ . . .s1lsllrl a /<,,, . •�11 OW ^ ;, 1 I 11�CHOOY timet ��y �! * • i L T , 1 , - .II_' - t � � / 1 111111 .yf' _ Oa of �i]*r.dRctlrRfilc:Iun l/-_i ki PI1 33 f t d �~! � r+ a I AVO +�M i • .� . •�� r r— I s 1 I I I I- J 1 1 e r t� .,- Cr Cte 1 T -a. '-i T- 1 ' e KrT PAR. 1 ]] i "�= S u • I • 1 . I I '7. X �� ■ POI LA su. I / ., _�.1] a■ Wis 1/' 11 I 1 Fr !1+117 !Is es u' ■ AY= 1 Nin III 1 ATE t � .T n n TO 1 '1 U .t R7Tra rill 1/ I ii :o Aos A 3 rxaoa.T . 1 1Ageft t11I•t4] •4 1 1 / . ~ 1 I 1 1 1 t Ipopirri.i / V L+ ; ] ha 111 ti3 , , 1 I /' r �/ C O` I . I EEE Ir.11. * 1 I I ♦.91 y \lik\ 11411111111 1 _ `\ ( i , 1 ,moi.,fRoThcT .ems .�:i II 3,. es r's . /.. laiga. - ..----.--"'"*". 111.1111=31311111.9. , - - ..ilk �. - .. LOCATION MAP GPA 85- 4 TR-4147 ZC-2804 RPD- 1049 zT 3 CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Applicant C. 4r.0-0 Ue(.sovn VT e, 2. Project Description C;0,05re crr-c•#.1 OF (opt 3.1,tiJL 4WYisCj ,-b"1E5 ceK (.060- s t4rF__s. ett} 6S -A, -re- 44 • 3. Date of Checklist submittal U2_I q !$s l 4/6 VIVE4 1 44 f z,6RierP 4. Project Location ' E(,ES efiELC D. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) YES MAYBE NO 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? - c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction. covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, S� either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in situation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic ?� hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? YES MAYBE NO 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration .� of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? LL c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? d. Is there a potential for cumulative adverse impacts on air quality in the project area? 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction >G of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of 4.L ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either X through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Degradation of ground water quality? >c i. Substantial reduction in the amount of water }C otherwise available for public water supplies? j. Exposure of people or property to water related _ hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? YES MAYBE NO 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including trees. shrubs. grass. crops. and aquatic plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique. rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area. or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of >< any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles. fish and shellfish. benthic organisms or insects)? b. Restrict the range of or otherwise affect any rare or endangered animal species? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area. or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ZL 7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable resource? YES MAYBE NO 10. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous ,47- substances csubstances (including, but not limited to. oil. pesticides. chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location. distribution. density or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing. or create a demand for additional housing? 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular )C movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand �C for new parking? COnln 4clirr - c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or X. movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne. rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles. �C bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Viii the proposal have an effect upon. or result in a need for new or altered governmental servies in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? )‹. • b. Police protection? c. Schools? x d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Other governmental services? >'- cm ak ucArrve. GJ E 2 SES J= c£ 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? YES MAYBE NO b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications system? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? g. Street lighting annexation and/or improvements? y' 17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health > hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ,i 16. AESitttiICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal: a. Affect possible unknown archaeological or historic- X al sites? b. Result in destruction or alteration of a known y� archaeological or historical site within the vicinity of the project? c. Result in destruction or alteration of a known _ archaeological or historical site near the vicinity of the project? 1 ' YES MAYBE NO 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species. cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels. threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term. to the disadvantage of long-term. environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individu- ally limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where impact on ea .h resource is relatively small. but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) t d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. either directly or indirectly. III. RECOMMENDATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: In conformance with Section 15060 of the State EIR Guidelines. I find with certainity that the proposal would not have a significant impact on the environment. I find the proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to class I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment . and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION should be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet could be applied to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SHOULD BE PREPARED. 1 find proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. •••=1,DI find proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. and an ADDENDUM to an existing certified Environmental Impact Report is required. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. and this effect is adequately addressed in a certified Environmental Impact Report, and thus SUBSEQUENT USE of the existing EIR is required. DATE: 12-/T �$S- Initial Study r rer Initial Study Contributors: V &Ivo, dw4e, Atid( /1 .frk> 6/4-C PMXIS deft/f-d . w. 14v a(t /,-(4-04 dri9r--e AeengP it , <'( 3c.h ' ‘P,5 _77-75h EXHIBIT 4 DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Item 3C Increased impervious surface as a result of this project will increase the amount, and change the direction of surface runoff. To ensure that a hazardous situation is not created, the following condition has been imposed: 1. That prior to recordation, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark and Ventura County'Flood Control District for review and approval, drainage plans, hydrologic, and hydraulic calculations prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvement and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The drainage plans and calculations shall indicate the following conditions before and after development; Quantities of water, water flow rates, major water courses, drainage areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps and drainage courses. Item 3J Proposed construction on the project site is located within, or adjacent to the 100-year flood limits of the Arroyo Simi. The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential flood- related hazards to an insignificant level: 1 . That in conjunction with recordation, the developer shall delineate on the Final Map areas subject to flooding as a "Flowage Easement" and then offer the easement for dedication to the City of Moorpark. Lot to lot drainage easements, flood hazard areas and secondary drainage easements shall also be delineated on the Map. 59047A/E-1 The subject easements shall be identified based on hydrologic and hydraulic methodology approved by the Ventura County Flood Control District. 2. That prior to any work being conducted within Arroyo Simi Channel, the developer shall obtain a Ventura County Flood Control District Watercourse Encroachment Permit. 3. That prior to recordation, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, evidence that all the buildable sites in the subdivision, will be protected from flooding. 4. That prior to recordation, the developer shall demonstrate feasible access with adequate protection from a 10 year fre- quency storm to the satisfaction of the City of Moorpark. Item 8 General Plan Amendment No. GPA 85-4 will result in the redesig- nation of the project site from "M-L" (Medium-Low Density Residen • - tial, 2.6 units/acre average) and "C-2" (General Commercial) to Residential High (7 units/acre average) . As discussed in this environmental document, potential environmental impacts resulting from the requested General Plan Amendment (as well as the proposed Tract Map, Zone Change and Residential Planned Development) can be mitigated to an insignificant level. Item 13C A traffic/circulation study has been prepared for the development of the project site and surrounding properties. This report con- sidered potential traffic impacts resulting from a very high den- sity residential development on the subject site, along with the development of other properties in the vicinity. The study deter- mined that this project, along with the development of surrounding properties, would have a cumulative traffic impact at the inter- sections of Los Angeles Avenue and Moorpark Road, Millard Street, Moorpark Avenue, and Liberty Bell Road. To mitigate this cumula- tive traffic impact, the following condition shall be imposed: 59047A/E-2 1. That prior to recordation, the developer shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time of recordation. Item 14a As presently designed, the proposed project does not provide a second or emergency access for emergency vehicles. To mitigate this potential safety impact to an insignificant level, the follow- ing condition has been imposed. 1. That prior to the recordation of the tract map, a second, emer- gency access acceptable to the Fire Prevention Bureau shall be provided. Item 14e The Moorpark wastewater treatment plant operated by the VCWD No. 1 fr is quickly approaching its 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD) design capacity. The district is presently identifying and repairing locations in the sewage collection system where a portion of the daily flow is from inflow/infiltration, so that additional capacity in the plant of up to approximately 1.6 MGD can be obtained without expansion. A letter dated August 5, 1985, from the County Public Works Director, states that bids for the plant expansion will be accepted in Spring, 1986. The expansion project is anticipated to be completed by Spring, 1987. Currently, prior to recordation of any subdivision map, the devel- oper must enter into an agreement with the District which requires the developer to obtain an "unconditional" will-serve letter from the District before any units can be constructed. The District must have available treatment plant capacity in order for the letter to be issued. Therefore, to ensure that sewer service will be available for the proposed project, the following condition shall be imposed; 59047A/E-3 Prior to recordation, an Unconditional Availability Letter shall be obtained from County Waterworks District 01 for sewage and water service for each lot created. Said letter shall be filed with the Planning Department. Or if said Unconditional Availability Letter in a form satisfactory to the City cannot be obtained from the County Waterworks District, the developer shall execute a Sub- division Sewer Agreement in a form satisfactory to the City. Said agreement will permit deferral of the unconditional guarantee for sewer and water service until issuance of a building permit for each lot in the subdivision. Item 20a No survey of potential archaeological or historical resources has been conducted for the project site. Therefore, the following condition is imposed to reduce the potential for this project to impact any potential resources to an insignificant level: 1. That if archaeological or historical artifacts are uncovered, the developer shall ensure the preservation of the site; shall obtain the services of a qualified archaeologist to recommend proper disposition of the site; and shall obtain City of Moorpark, Department of Community Development written concur- rence of the recommended disposition before resulting develop- ment. 59047A/E-4 CONDITIONS FOR: Tract 4147 APPLICANT: Cabrillo Economic Development Corp. DATE: February 12, 1986 PAGE: 1 of 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: I. That the conditions of approval of this Tentative Maps supersede all conflicting notations, specifications, dimensions, typical sections and the like which may be shown on said map and all the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, City of Moorpark Subdivision Ordinance and adopted City policies apply. 2. That all applicable requirements of any law or agency of the State, _ . Ventura County, City of Moorpark and any other governmental entity shall be met, and all such requirements and enactments shall, by reference, become conditions of this entitlement. 3. That no condition of this entitlement shall be interpreted as permitting or requiring any violation of law, or any lawful rules or regulations or orders of an authorized governmental pgeocy' In instances where more than one set of rules apply, the stricter ones shall take precedence. 4. That if any of the conditions or limitations of this entitlement are held to be invalid, that holding shall not invalidate any of the remain- ing conditions or limitations set forth. 5. That applicant agrees as a condition of issuance (or renewal) for the use of this permit, to defend, at his sole expense, any action brought against the City because of issuance (or renewal) of this permit, or in the alternative, to relinquish this permit. Applicant will reimburse the City for any court costs and/or attorney's fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of any such aotioo' City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. As of the date of recordation of the final map, the lots depicted thereon shall meet the requirements of the zoning ordinances and General Plan then applicable to the property. Compliance with this condition shall be required even if the zoning and General Plan requirements in effect as of the date of recordation are different from those in effect as of the date the tentative map is conditionally approved. Conditional approval of the tentative map shall neither limit the power of the legislative body to amend the applicable zoning ordinances and/or General Plan nor compel the legislative body to make any such amend- ments. 7. That the applicant's recordation of this map and/or commencement of con- struction and/oz operations as a result of this map shall be deemed to be acceptance by applicant of all conditions of this map. 59047A/c-z 4. Page 2 of 8 8. That the development shall be subject to all applicable regulations of the "R-P-D-7U" (Residential Planned Development, seven units per acre) zone. 9. That all on-site utilities shall be placed underground. 10. That no zoning clearance shall be issued for residential construction until the Final Map has been recorded. Prior to construction, a zoning clearance shall be obtained for each individual unit from the Planning Division and a building permit shall be obtained from the Building and Safety Division. 11 . That prior to recordation, the applicant shall demonstrate by possession of a District Release from the Calleguas Municipal Water District that arrangement for payment of the Capital Construction Charge applicable to the proposed subdivision has been made. 12. That the Tentative Map shall expire three ydars 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 Tentative Map. 13. That at the time water service connection is made, cross-connection control devices shall be installed on the water system in accordance with the requirements of the Ventura County Division of Environmental Health. 14. That prior to recordation, an Unconditional Will Serve Letter shall be obtained from County Waterworks District #1 for sewage and water service for each lot created. Said letter shall be filed with the Planning Department. Or if said Unconditional Will Serve Letter in a form satis- factory to the City cannot be obtained from the County Waterworks Dis- trict, the developer shall execute a Subdivision Sewer Agreement in a form satisfactory to the City. Said agreement will permit deferral of the unconditional guarantee for sewer and water service until issuance of a building permit for each lot in the subdivision. 15. That in conjunction with the recordation of the final map, an approxi- mate 1.3 acre recreation area shall be dedicated to the City to meet the requirements of the Moorpark Municipal Code, Section 8279-4 et. seq. 16. That during grading of on-site roads and building pads, regular watering of unpaved areas shall occur to reduce fugitive dust emissions. 17. That if archaeological or historical artifacts are uncovered, the devel- oper shall ensure the preservation of the site; shall obtain the ser- vices of a qualified archaeologist to recommend proper disposition of the site; and shall obtain City of Moorpark, Department of Community Development written concurrence of the recommended disposition before resulting development. 59047A/G-2 Page 3 of 8 18. That in conjunction with the recordation, the applicant shall offer to dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, an easement for the possible future installation of the bike path and equestrian trail as shown on the Circulation Element. 19. That prior to the recordation of the final map, the recreation area shall be annexed to City Assessment District 85-1 and a supplemental maintenance assessment fee specified by the City Council. 20. That prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall designate twenty percent of the project (12 units) which will be reserved for households with very-low, low, or moderate incomes, as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for a period of ten years. These specified units shall be reserved through the application of a deed restriction. Said deed restriction shall not bind the mortgage holder of the property in the event the mortgage holder reacquires the property. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: 21. That a minimum street width of thirty-six (36) feet, accommodating two- way traffic, and on-street parallel parking on both sides shall be pro- vided. A street width of at least thirty-two (32) feet shall be pro- vided for the cul-de-sac serving 15 or fewer units and less than 800 feet in length. 22. Access roads shall be installed with an all-weather surface, suitable for access by Fire Department apparatus. 23. That the access roads shall be certified by a Registered civil Engineer as having an all-weather surface in conformance with Public Works' Standards. This certification shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention, prior to occupancy. 24. That all drives shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches (13'6") . 25. That when only one access point is provided and the zoning allows parcels of less than one acre in size, the maximum length of such access shall not exceed 800 feet. 26. That prior to recordation of the Final Map a secondary access road shall be provided to the development. The location of said access shall be approved by the Ventura County Fire Prevention Bureau. 27. That approved turn-around areas for fire apparatus shall be provided where the access road is 150 feet or farther from the main thoroughfare. 28. That prior to recordation of street names, names shall be submitted to the Bureau of Fire Prevention for review. 59047A/G-3 Page 4 of 8 29. That prior to the occupancy of the first unit street signs shall be installed. 30. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for the approval of the location of fire hydrants. Show existing hydrants on plan within 500 feet of the development. 31. A minimum fire flow of 1000 gallons per minute shall be provided at this location. 32. Fire hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to combustible construction and shall conform to the minimum standards of the Ventura County Waterworks Manual. a) Each hydrant shall be a 6-inch wet barrel design, and shall have one 4-inch and one 2 1/2-inch outlet. b) The required fire flow shall be achieved at no less than 20 psi residual pressure. c) Fire hydrants shall be spaced 500 feet on center, and so located that no structure will be farther than 250 feet from any one hydrant. d) Fire hydrants shall be 24 inches on center, recessed in from the curb face. 33. All grass or brush exposing any structures shall be cleared for a dis- tance of 100 feet prior to framing, according to the Ventura County Weed Abatement Ordinance. 34. Address numbers, a minimum of 4-inches high, shall be installed prior to occupancy, shall be of contrasting color to the background, and shall be readily visible at night. Where structures are setback more than 150 feet from the street, larger numbers will be required so that they are distinguishable from the street. In the event the structures are not visible from the street, the address numbers shall be posted adjacent to the driveway entrance. CITY ENGINEER CONDITIONS: 35. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark, for review and approval, a grading plan prepared by a Regis- tered Civil Engineer; shall obtain a Grading Permit; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing completion. 36. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, a detailed Soils Report certified by a registered professional Civil Engineer in the State of California. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the approved Soils Report. 59047A/G-4 Page 5 of 8 37. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark, for review and approval, street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The improvements shall include concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, striping and signing, and paving in accordance with the Ventura county Road Standards. The applicable Road Standard Plates are as follows: - Liberty Bell Road, between the Arroyo Simi Flood Control Channel and the northerly tract boundary, shall be per Plate B-4A with full improvements constructed east of the centerline and 12 ft of paving west of the centerline. Between the northerly tract boundary and Los Angeles Avenue, Liberty Bell Road shall be improved per Plate B-3B modified to 60 ft of paving on 80 ft of• right of way with full improvements constructed east of the centerline. - "A", "B" and "C" Streets shall be constructed per Plate B-58. A road shall be constructed, just south of the northerly tract boundary, to be per Plate B-3C. Said road shall consist of full street improvements south of the centerline, (the centerline shall be located on the northerly tract boundary) . Improvement plans for said street shall be submitted along with tract improvement plans, but construction of the street may be deferred until such time that the adjacent property to the north or east develops, or until the City Engineer deems it necessary. If this road is to be utilized as a second emergency access, deferment of improvements must be approved by the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention. i Applicant shall provide bike path and equestrian trail improvements as shown on the Circulation Element of the General Plan. 38. That in conjunction with the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall offer to dedicate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, for public use, all the public streets' right-of-way shown on the Final Map. 39. That in conjunction with recordation, the applicant shall offer to dedi- cate on the Final Map to the City of Moorpark, a Public Service Easement as required. 40. That prior to any work being conducted within the State or City right- of-way, the applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the appropriate agency. 41. That prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improve- ment Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time the Final Map records. 59047A/G-5 A Page 6 of 8 42. That prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall indicate in writing to the City of Moorpark the disposition of any water wells that may exist within the site. If any wells are proposed to be aban- doned, or if they are abandoned nd have not been propertly sealed, they must be destroyed per Ventura county Ordinance No. 2372. 43. That prior to the submittal of the Final Map, the applicant shall trans- mit by certified mail a copy of the conditionally approved Tentative Map, together with a copy of Section 66436 of the State Subdivision Map Act, to each public entity or public utility that is an easement holder of record. Written compliance shall be submitted to the City of Moorpark. 44, That the applicant shall pay all energy costs associated with street lighting for a period of one year from the initial energizing of the street lights. 45. If any of the improvements which the subdivider is required to construct or install is to be constructed or installed upon land in which the sub- divider does not have title or interest sufficient for such purposes, the subdivider shall do all of the following at least 60 days prior to the filing of the final or parcel map for approval pursuant to Govern- ment Code Section 66457' a. Notify the City of Moorpark (hereafter "City") in writing that the subdivider wishes the City to acquire an interest in the land which is sufficient for such purposes as provided in Government Code Section 66462.5; b. Supply the City with (i) a legal description of the interest to be acquired, (ii) a map or diagram of the interest to be acquired sufficient to satisfy the requirements of subdivision (e) of Section 1250'310 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (iii) a current appraisal report prepared by an appraiser approved by the City which expresses an opinion as to the current fair market value of the interest to be acquired, and (iv) a current Litigation Guaran- tee Report; c. Enter into an agreement with the City, guaranteed by such cash deposits or other security as the City may require, pursuant to which the subdivider will pay all of the City' s cost (including, without limitation, attorney' s fees and overhead expenses) of acquiring such an interest in the land. 46. If any grading occurs within the rainy season (October through April) , erosion control plans shall be submitted concurrently with the improve- ment plans. 47. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark, and Ventura County Flood Control District, for review and approval, drainage plans, hydrologic and hydraulic calculations prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements and shall post sufficient 59047a/G-6 Page 7 of 8 surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The drainage plans and calculations shall indicate the following conditions before and after development: Quantities of water, water flow rates, major water courses, drain- age areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps and drainage courses. 48. That in conjunction with recordation, the applicant shall delineate on the Final (Parcel) Map areas subject to flooding as a "Flowage Easement" and then offer the easement for dedication to the City of Moorpark. Lot to lot drainage easements, flood hazard areas and secondary drainage easements shall also be delineated on the Map. The subject easements shall be identified based on hydrologic and hydraulic methodology approved by the Ventura County Flood Control District. • 49. That prior to any work being conducted within Arroyo Simi channel, or existing or proposed right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain a Ventura County Flood Control District Watercourse Encroachment Permit. 50. That in conjunction with recordation, the Developer shall offer to dedi- cate on the Final Map to the Ventura County Flood Control District a storm drainage easement of sufficient width to permit necessary ultimate right-of-way for the Arroyo Simi Channel in accordance with the approval of the Flood Control District. 51. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall demonstrate feasible access with adequate protection for a 10-year frequency storm to the satisfaction of the City of Moorpark. 52. That prior to recordation, the applicant shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, evidence that all the buildable sites in the subdivision will be protected from flooding. 53. That prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall submit evidence that all requirements set forth in City of Moorpark Ordinance 42 (dealing with flood damage protection) have been met. VENTURA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT CONDITIONS: 54. That the land currently within the existing 160 foot easement for the Arroyo Simi shall be dedicated to the Ventura County Flood Control District in fee. 55. That the land exterior of the Ventura County Flood Control District (VCFCD) existing right-of-way but within the proposed right-of-way as indicated on VCFCD Drawing Y-3-2102 be offered for dedication to the VCFCD) as a flood control easement. 59047A/G-7 Page 8 of 8 56. That the development shall be protected from the occurrence of a 100- year flood in the Arroyo Simi in a manner satisfactory to the VCFCD. MOORPARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CONDITION: 57. That prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pro- vide to the satisfaction of the school district, adequate turning area to accommodate a school bus at the end of Liberty Bell Road. • 59047A/G-8 4 CONDITIONS FOR: Residential Planned Develop- APPLICANT: Cabrillo Economic ment Permit No. 1049 Development Corp, DATE: February 12, 1986 PAGE: 1 of 6 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: 1. That the permit is granted for the land as described in the application and any attachments thereto, and as shown on the plot plan submitted, labeled Exhibit 5. 2. That the permit is granted for all of the buildings, fences, signs, roadways, landscaping and other features which shall be located substan- tially as shown on Exhibits 5, 6, and 7, except or unless indicated otherwise herein. 3. That the elevations and floor plans of all buildings shall be substan- tially in conformance with the elevation plans and floor plans labeled Exhibits 6 and 7. 4. That subsequent to occupancy, minor changes or additions to approved structures, fences, etc. , or the construction of patio covers and acces- sory structures may be approved by the Community Development Director through issuance of a zone clearance provided that the minor change clearly does not affect the design, integrity, or quality of the devel- opment; and is consistent with the regulations of the City Zoning 0rdivaone' Minor changes which do not meet these criteria will require a minor modification of the permit to be considered by the Community Development oireotor' Any changes determined to be major by the Com- munity Development Director will require the filing of a modification application to be considered by the Planning Commission. 5. That the final design of all buildings, communal open spaces, recre- ational facilities, walls and fences including materials and colors, is subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 6. That all requirements of any law or agency of the State, Ventura County, and City of Moorpark, and any other governmental entity shall be met. 7. That applicant agrees as a condition of issuance (or renewal) for the use of this permit, to defend, at his sole expense, any action brought against the City because of issuance (or renewal) of this permit, or in the alternative, to relinquish this permit. Applicant will reimburse the City for any court costs and/or attorney' s fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of any such action. City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 8. That prior to construction, a zone clearance shall be obtained for each unit from the Community Development Department and a building permit shall be obtained from the Building and Safety Division. 59047A/*-1 Page 2 of 6 9. That no zone clearance shall be issued for this permit until Tract Map No. 4147 has been recorded. 10. That unless a zone clearance for a unit is issued within thirty-six (36) months after the date the permit is granted, this permit shall automat- ically expire on that date. The Community Development Director may, at his discretion, grant two separate 12 month extensions for issuance of a zone clearance for a unit, provided: a) the application for extension is made prior to the expiration of the initial thirty-six (36) months; b) there has been no change in the approved plans; c) there has been no change of circumstance which will prevent the preservation of the integ- rity, character, utility or value of the property in the zone and the general area in which the use is proposed to be located or will be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare; and d) the per- mittee has diligently worked toward initiation of construction of each phase of the development during the initial thirty-six (36) month period. 11. That signs are subject to the regulations of Article 25 of the Moorpark Ordinance Code. 12. That a transfer of this permit shall not be effective until the name and address of the transferee and date when such transfer shall be effec- tive, together with a letter from the new owner certifying agreement to comply with all conditions of the permit is filed with the Community Development Director. 13. That the project is subject to all applicable regulations of the "R-P-D-7U" (Residential Planned Development, seven dwelling units per acre) zone. 14. That prior to issuance of the first zone clearance, a landscaping, planting and irrigation plan, together with specifications and a mainte- nance program, shall be prepared by a State-licensed landscape archi- tect. The Ventura County Guide to Landscape Plans, dated July 1982, shall be used. The landscaping plan shall show typical planting within the front yards of all residential lots in the subdivision; within the recreation area and street trees along Liberty Bell Road. Landscaping in these areas shall incorporate drought resistant and native plant materials as feasible, and shall be chosen to insure adequate erosion control, and to mitigate the visual impacts of all man-made slopes three feet or more in height. Prior to preparation of the landscaping plan, the landscape architect shall consult with the Director of Community Development regarding species to be planted and the overall landscape concept to be used. Three sets of plans shall be submitted for approval to the Director of Community Development. The applicant shall bear the total cost of such review and of final installation inspection. 59047A/H-2 0 . Page 3 of 6 Landscaping installation shall be installed according to the following schedule: o Front Yards - Within 60 days of the issuance of the certifi- cate of occupancy for the affected lot. o Recreation Area - As specified in Condition No. 28. o Slopes/Street Trees - Prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit. Hydroseeding of brush cleared areas is subject to the standards of the Ventura County Fire Protection District. 15. That prior to issuance of the first zone clearance, the developer shall submit a plan showing fencing along the side and rear yards of each residential lot. Said fencing plan shall identify the location and materials to be used (wrought iron, pilasters,' slumpstone, etc. , but no wood) and shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Said fencing shall be completed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the affected lot. 16. Prior to the issuance of the first zone clearance, a plan showing the location of mail boxes shall be submitted to tbe. Cummunity Development Director for approval upon review by the Moorpark Postmaster. 17. That all residential units shall be constructed employing energy saving devices as may be appropriate to the State of the Art. These are to include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) Low flush toilets (not to exceed 1-1/2 gallons) . 2) Shower controllers. I i / 3) ��oves, oveos aud rpoges' wb�n qan cu�zed' ouaz� no� xane contin- uous burning pilot lights. 4) All thermostats connected to the main space heating source to have night setback features. 5) Kitchen ventilation system to have automatic dampers to insure closure when not in use. 6) Solar panel stubouts. 7) Floor plans to demonstrate reservation of space for solar equipment adjacent to furnace. | ' 18. That gutters and downspouts shall be provided over all garage doors and front entryways, unless covered. 59O47A/n-] , Page 4 of 6 19. That patio covers shall conform to the "Patio Cover Policy" adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1985. The required patio cover setback of 10 feet shall be measured from the rear property line. Accessory struc- tures shall be located a minimum 5 feet from the rear and side property line. Patio covers and accessory structures shall cover no more than 40 percent of the provided rear yard area. 20. That prior to issuance of the first zone clearance, an "Unconditional" Will-Serve Letter for water and sewer service shall be obtained from Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1. 21. That all the residences within this subdivision shall be sold exclu- sively to households of very low or low income as defined by the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development. All units shall be owner occupied. 22. That prior to the resale of any unit within this subdivision, the pro- spective buyer and/or seller shall provide the' following information to the Department of Community Development. o Selling price of the unit offered for sale. o Statement of combined annual income for the household pur- chasing the unit offered for sale. o An independent appraisal of the market value of the unit offered for sale. 23. After receipt of the information required by Condition No. 22, the City shall determine if the prospective buyer has a combined household income level of "very-low" or "low" as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The City shall also determine if the selling price of the unit is for an amount not to exceed the market value specified by the independent appraisal. If the City approves the sale of the unit based on the above information and determinations, any outstanding Community Development Block Grant deferred loan money shall be "rolled- over" to the prospective buyer. If the City does not approve either the prospective buyer or selling price, based on household income or unit selling price, the seller of the house may find a new prospective buyer, or pay back to the City the outstanding balance and accumulated interest on the CDBG deferred loan. 24. That the 78.5 foot wide flood control easement area adjacent to Lots 27, 28, and 56-62 shall be designated as a recreation area. Improvements within the recreation area shall include, but are not limited to, turf area, shrubs and trees, permanent irrigation system, barbeque facili- ties, picnic tables, half-court basketball court, tot lot, and potable water. 25. That prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit, improvement plans for the recreation area shall be approved by the Parks and Recrea- tion Commission. 59047A/8-4 0 Page 5 of 6 26. That prior to the issuance of the 50th (80%) occupancy permit, all park facilities shall be installed and accepted by the City of Moorpark. 27. That maintenance of the recreation area and facilities shall be provided by the City Assessment District 85-1. Total cost of the maintenance shall be borne by the homeowners of Tract 4147. This maintenance assessment shall be paid in addition to the required City wide park maintenance assessment. Homeowner participation in the maintenance of the recreation area is encouraged to reduce the amount of the assessment required. Prior to the acceptance of the recreation area facilities by the City for maintenance purposes, the applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of the park to City standards for a period of one year. 28. That the only approved use of the recreation area is for passive and active recreation related uses. Other uses and structures not specified in the approved plan are not permitted without, first obtaining a minor modification of this permit. 29. That prior to the issuance of a zone clearance •for Lot No. 1, plans shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for the reorientation of the residence. The driveway for the unit shall be moved so that ingress/egress is from "B" Street. VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: 30. That a licensed security guard is recommended during the construction phase, or a 6 foot chainlink fence will be erected around the construc- tion site. 31. That construction equipment, tools, etc. , will be properly secured during non-working hours. 32. That all appliances (microwave ovens, dishwashers, trash compactors, waterheaters, etc. ) will be properly secured prior to installation during non-working hours. All serial numbers will be recorded for identification purposes. 33. That landscaping will not cover any door or window. 34. That landscaping at entrances/exists or at any intersection will not block or screen the view of a seated driver from another moving vehicle or pedestrian. 35. That prior to issuance of the first zone clearance, landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Sheriff's Department for review and approval. 36. That addresses will be clearly visible to approaching emergency vehicles and mounted against a contrasting color. 37. That address numbers will be a minimum of 4" in height and capable of being illuminated during hours of darkness. 59047A/H-5 # 4 Page 6 of 6 38. That front door entrances will be visible from the street. 39. That all exterior doors will be constructed of solid wood core with a minimum thickness of 1-3/4". 40. That doors utilizing a cylinder lock shall have a minimum five (5) pin- tumbler operation with the locking bar or bolt extending into the receiving guide a minimum of one inch. 41. That all exterior sliding glass doors or windows will be equipped with metal guide tracks at the top and bottom and be constructed so that the window cannot be lifted from the track when in the closed or locked position. 42. That prior to occupancy by the owner, each single unit in the tract shall have locks using combinations which are interchanged free from locks used in all other separate dwellings. MOORPARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CONDITION: 43. That prior to the issuance of a building permit for any dwelling unit within Tract 4147, arrangements shall be made with the Moorpark Unified School District for payment of all necessary school facilities fees. 59047A/H-6