Oxnard City Council
January 18, 2022

site as well as residential development on an adjacent 10-acre property to the south of the site; and
Whereas, the MND was not legally challenged and thus is presumed valid in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21167.2 and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title. 14, § 15000 et seq.); and Whereas, the City is the lead agency for purposes of the project pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21067; and
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA, when taking subsequent discretionary actions in furtherance of a project for which an MND has been approved, the Lead Agency is required to prepare an Addendum to a previously approved MND if some changes or additions to the MND are necessary but none of the conditions described in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent MND have occurred; and Whereas, the Planning Division evaluated the project by preparing an Addendum, and based on that Addendum, and all other information in the administrative record, has determined that none of the circumstances identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 have arisen as a result of the project, and that an Addendum to the Final MND 2004-11 for the Dunkirk Drive project is appropriate to analyze the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of the modified project; and
Whereas, Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11 is attached to the staff report in is incorporated by reference; and
Whereas, Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11 has been provided to and has been reviewed by the City Council in connection with the previously approved MND 2004-11, which is available for inspection at City Hall and is posted on the City’s website, and are incorporated herein by reference; and
Whereas, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15164, subdivision (c), the Addendum is not required to be circulated for public review, but can be attached to the adopted MND 2004-11; and
Whereas, in accordance with CEQA, the City Council considered the proposed Addendum to the previously adopted Final MND 2004-11, finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and adopted mitigated negative declaration) that with Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program and imposition of mitigation measures as conditions of approval, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, further finds that the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11 reflects the independent judgment of the City, and adopts the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11; and
Whereas, the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) reviewed the plans on December 18, 2019, February 24, 2021 and May 12, 2021 and provided conditions of approval for the project; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard conducted a duly noticed public hearing and recommended that the City Council adopt the Addendum to the MND 2004-11; and
654
Resolution No. 2021-XX – [Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, the City Council of the City of Oxnard conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider adopting the Addendum to the MND 2004-11; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that the public interest and general welfare require the adoption of the Addendum to the MND 2004-11; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant agrees as a condition of this Resolution that at its own expense, to indemnify and defend the City of Oxnard and its agents, officers and employees from and against any claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this Resolution or any actions or proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made before the approval of this Resolution that were part of the approval process.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD:

SECTION 1. The Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. In adopting Addendum to MND 2004-11, the City Council finds and determines the project is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act because an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND 2004-11) that was prepared for the 2004 Dunkirk Drive Project was considered by the City Council at the public hearing for the Portofino Place project. The Addendum to the Final MND was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq., CEQA Guidelines), and the City’s Environmental Review Guidelines. The City of Oxnard is the Lead Agency. The Addendum is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15164 since only minor changes and additions to the MND are necessary to address the Project changes and no circumstances exist calling for the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15162 and 15163. With implementation of the MND 2004-11 mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect upon the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of adopts an Addendum to MND 2004-11, attached to the staff report and incorporated by reference.
655
Resolution No. 2021-XX – [Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

John Zaragoza, Mayor
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
656

ATTACHMENT R
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PZ 20-620-02 CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROJECT SITE (APNs:
185-0-221-025, 185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015) FROM BUSINESS RESEARCH PARK TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM IN THE 2030 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION MAP. FILED BY THE LAW OFFICE OF K.M.

NEISWENDER, P.O. BOX 1225, BLUE JAY, CA 92317, THE APPLICANT.

WHEREAS, the Law Offices of K.M. Neiswender filed entitlement applications with the City of Oxnard on November 7, 2019, General Plan Amendment (PZ 20-620-02), Zone Change (PZ 20-570-02), Special Use Permit (PZ 19-500-04), and a Tentative Subdivision Map (PZ 20-300-02); and
WHEREAS, if the aforementioned entitlement applications are collectively approved by the City of Oxnard, the project would be permitted to develop a 7.61 acre project site with 90, two-story condominium dwelling units each with attached 2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements at the subject project site (APNs: 185-0-221-025, 185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015) (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment would change the land use designation of the subject project site from Business Research Park to Residential Medium; and
WHEREAS, the Project was initially reviewed by the City Council as a Pre-Application (PZ 18-600-02) on March 19, 2019, where the City Council discussed the ability for the project to incorporate inclusionary housing on the project site instead of requesting to pay the affordable housing in-lieu fee payment; and WHEREAS, the Project applicant mailed notices to all property owners within the Seaview Estates neighborhood and presented the project at the April 20, 2020 Community Workshop; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission considered the proposed Addendum to a previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND 2004-11) before making its recommendation, finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and adopted MND 2004-11) that with the previously adopted Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is included in MND 2004-11 document and incorporated by reference in this and related resolutions and permits and imposition of mitigation measures as conditions of approval, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, further finds that the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11 reflects the independent judgment of the City, and recommends that the City Council adopt the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and approved a Special Use Permit (PZ 19-500-04) to develop a

7.61 acre project site with 90, two-story condominium dwelling units each with attached 657
Resolution No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-620-02 [General Plan Amendment] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements subject to approval of the related actions as specified within the Special Use Permits conditions of approval, respectively; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard conducted a duly noticed public hearing and recommended to the City Council of the City of Oxnard approval of Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-620-02 (General Plan Amendment) to change the land use designation of the subject project site from Business Research Park to Residential Medium; a Zone Change for the project site from Business Research Park to Multiple-Family (R-2) (PZ 20-570-02); and a Tentative Subdivision Map (Tract No. 6064) for condominium purposes and to combine three existing lots into two lots (PZ 20-300-02)
WHEREAS, the Project has been reviewed by the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) and the DAC has prepared conditions of approval that are incorporated within the recommended entitlements; and
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, the City Council of the City of conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-620-02 (General Plan Amendment) in accordance with the City’s 2030 General Plan and Oxnard City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is concurrently considering approving a Zone Change for the project site from Business Research Park to Multiple-Family (R-2) (PZ 20-570-02), and a Tentative Subdivision Map (Tract No. 6064) for condominium purposes and to combine three existing lots into two lots (PZ 20-300-02) WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that the public interest and general welfare require the approval of a General Plan Amendment changing the 2030 General Plan land use map designation of the project site from Business Research Park to Residential Medium; and
WHEREAS, the pursuit of the General Plan Amendment is a reasonable exercise of the City’s police powers to ensure the continued health, safety, and welfare of the public by providing housing opportunities for the residents of the City of Oxnard; and WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the policies and directives in the 2030 General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to allow development to those areas that can be served by existing or planned utilities, transportation, and service systems. The proposed General Plan Amendment does not represent a significant change in the 2030 General Plan and Zoning Ordinance nor does it result in significant new environmental impacts that have not been previously evaluated; and WHEREAS, the Applicant agrees as a condition of this Resolution that at its own expense, to indemnify and defend the City of Oxnard and its agents, officers and employees from and against any claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this resolution or any actions or proceedings, acts or determinations 658
Resolution No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-620-02 [General Plan Amendment] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

taken, done or made before the approval of this resolution that were part of the approval process.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD:

SECTION 1. The Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the General Plan Amendment is internally consistent with all other provisions of the City of Oxnard 2030 General Plan SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the General Plan Amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the project site associated with the General Plan Amendment is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

SECTION 5. The City Council determines that the proposed change in land use designation from Business Research Park to Residential Medium is the best use for the subject project site.

SECTION 6. The City Council determines that the General Plan Amendment is in the best interests and welfare of the City and its residents.

SECTION 7. In adopting this Resolution for the General Plan Amendment, the City Council finds and determines the project is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act because an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final MND 2004-11) that was prepared for the 2004 Dunkirk Drive Project was considered by the City Council at the public hearing for the Portofino Place project. The Addendum to the Final MND was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq., CEQA Guidelines), and the City’s Environmental Review Guidelines. The City of Oxnard is the Lead Agency. The Addendum is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15164 since only minor changes and additions to the MND are necessary to address the Project changes and no circumstances exist calling for the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15162 and 15163. With implementation of the MND 2004-11 mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect upon the environment.

SECTION 8. Except as expressly amended herein, the 2030 General Plan Land Use Map shall remain in full force and effect and shall apply to the property affected by this Resolution.
659
Resolution No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-620-02 [General Plan Amendment] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Oxnard hereby approves a General Plan Amendment (PZ 20-620-02), which amends the City’s 2030 General Plan Land Use Map, in accordance with Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

John Zaragoza, Mayor
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
660
Resolution No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-620-02 [General Plan Amendment] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

EXHIBIT A
661

ATTACHMENT S

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD
APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE PZ 20-570-02 FOR THE
SUBJECT PROJECT SITE (APNS: 185-0-221-025, 185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015) FROM BUSINESS RESEARCH PARK (BRP) TO
RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE-FAMILY (R-2). FILED BY THE LAW OFFICE OF K.M. NEISWENDER, P.O. BOX 1225, BLUE JAY, CA 92317, THE APPLICANT.

WHEREAS, the Law Offices of K.M. Neiswender filed entitlement applications with the City of Oxnard on November 7, 2019, General Plan Amendment (PZ 20-620-02), Zone Change (PZ 20-570-02), Special Use Permit (PZ 19-500-04), and a Tentative Subdivision Map (PZ 20-300-02); and
WHEREAS, if the aforementioned entitlement applications are collectively approved by the City of Oxnard, the project would be permitted to develop a 7.61 acre project site with 90, two-story condominium dwelling units each with attached 2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements at the subject project site (APNs: 185-0-221-025, 185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015) (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the proposed applicant requests that the City’s Zoning Ordinance Map change the zoning of the subject project site from Business Research Park (BRP) to Residential Multiple-Family (R-2); and
WHEREAS, the Project was initially reviewed by the City Council as a Pre-Application (PZ 18-600-02) on March 19, 2019, where the City Council discussed the ability for the project to incorporate inclusionary housing on the project site instead of requesting to pay the affordable housing in-lieu fee payment; and WHEREAS, the Project applicant mailed notices to all property owners within the Seaview Estates neighborhood and presented the project at the April 20, 2020 Community Workshop; and
WHEREAS, the Project has been reviewed by the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) and the DAC has prepared conditions of approval that are incorporated within the recommended entitlements; and
662
Ordinance No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-570-02 [Zone Change]
City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard held a public hearing, reviewed the request, and recommended that the City Council approve the requested Zone Change; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed Planning Commission Resolution No. 2021-42 recommending approval of a Zone Change for the subject project site; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is concurrently considering a General Plan Amendment requests that the General Plan Land Use Map change the land use designation of the subject project site from Business Research Park to Residential Medium (PZ 20-620-02), and a Tentative Subdivision Map (Tract No. 6064) for condominium purposes and to combine three existing lots into two lots (PZ 20-300-02) WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, the City Council has held a public hearing and received and reviewed written and oral comments related to the proposed PZ No. 20-570-02; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that the public interest and general welfare require the adoption of PZ No. 20-570-02 and the Zone Change to Residential Multiple-Family (R-2) as shown on Attachment A hereto; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Zone Change is consistent with the 2030 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the pursuit of the Zone Change is a reasonable exercise of the City’s police powers to ensure the continued health, safety, and welfare of the public by providing housing opportunities for the residents of the City of Oxnard; and WHEREAS, the proposed Zone Change is consistent with the policies and directives in the 2030 General Plan if the associated General Plan Amendment (PZ No. 20-620-02) is approved and the Zoning Ordinance to allow orderly development to those areas that can be served by existing or planned utilities, transportation, and service systems. The proposed Zone Change does not represent a significant change in the 2030 General Plan and Zoning Ordinance nor does it result in significant new environmental impacts that have not been previously evaluated; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission and City Council considered the proposed Addendum to a previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final MND 2004-11) before making its recommendation, finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and adopted MND 2004-11) that with the previously adopted Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is included in MND 2004-11 document and incorporated 663
Ordinance No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-570-02 [Zone Change]
City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

by reference in this and related resolutions and permits and imposition of mitigation measures as conditions of approval, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, further finds that the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11 reflects the independent judgment of the City, and recommends that the City Council adopt the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant agrees, as a condition of adoption of this ordinance at the Applicant’s own expense, to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this resolution or any proceedings, acts, or determination taken, done, or made prior thereto that were part of the approval process.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Oxnard makes the following Findings:

SECTION 1. The Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the Zone Change is internally consistent with all other provisions of the City of Oxnard 2030 General Plan if the corresponding General Plan Amendment (PZ No. 20-620-02) is adopted.

SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the Zone Change will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the project site associated with the Zone Change is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

SECTION 5. The City Council determines that the proposed Zone Change from Business Research Park (BRP) to Residential Multiple-Family (R-2) is the best use for the subject project site.

SECTION 6. The City Council determines that the Zone Change is in the best interests and welfare of the City and its residents.

SECTION 7. The City Council finds and determines the project is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act because an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final MND 2004-11) that was prepared for the 2004 Dunkirk Drive Project was considered by the Planning Commission at the public hearing for the 664
Ordinance No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-570-02 [Zone Change]
City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

Portofino Place project. The Addendum to the Final MND was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq., CEQA Guidelines), and the City’s Environmental Review Guidelines. The City of Oxnard is the Lead Agency. The Addendum is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15164 since only minor changes and additions to the MND are necessary to address the Project changes and no circumstances exist calling for the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15162 and 15163. With implementation of the MND 2004-11 mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect upon the environment.

SECTION 8. Except as expressly amended herein, the City’s Zoning Ordinance Map shall remain in full force and effect and shall apply to the property affected by this Resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Oxnard does ordain as follows:

Part 1. PZ No. 20-570-02 (Zone Change) is approved, as shown on the map attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by reference.

Part 2. Within fifteen days after passage, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published one time in a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City. Ordinance No. was first read on , and finally adopted on , to become effective thirty days thereafter.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:
665
Ordinance No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-570-02 [Zone Change]
City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

____________________________________
John C. Zaragoza, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Rose Chaparro, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
666
Ordinance No. 2021-XX – PZ 20-570-02 [Zone Change]
City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

667

ATTACHMENT T
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD

ADOPTING A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANNING AND ZONING
PERMIT NO. 20-300-02 (TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 6064) TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 7.61 ACRES OF VACANT LAND INTO
TWO RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES (90

CONDOMINIUM UNITS) AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE,

LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF FIFTH STREET AT THE
INTERSECTION OF PORTOFINO PLACE (APNs: 185-0-221-025,
185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015), SUBJECT TO CERTAIN FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS. FILED BY THE LAW OFFICE OF K.M. NEISWENDER, P.O. BOX 1225, BLUE JAY, CA 92317, THE APPLICANT.

WHEREAS, the Law Offices of K.M. Neiswender filed entitlement applications with the City of Oxnard on November 7, 2019, General Plan Amendment (PZ 20-620-02), Zone Change (PZ 20-570-02), Special Use Permit (PZ 19-500-04), and a Tentative Subdivision Map (PZ 20-300-02); and
WHEREAS, if the aforementioned entitlement applications are collectively approved by the City of Oxnard, the project would be permitted to develop a 7.61 acre project site with 90, two-story condominium dwelling units each with attached 2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements at the subject project site (APNs: 185-0-221-025, 185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015) (“Project”); and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard (“Planning Commission”) conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider Applicant’s request to approve Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-300-02 (Tentative Subdivision Map) to subdivide a 7.61 acre property (three parcels) for condominium purposes into two lots (Lot 1 will be improved with 60 units, gated entry, swimming pool and playground area, parking and associated site improvements; Lot 2 will be improved with 30 units, gated entry, recreational building, parking and associated site improvements) located at the south side of Fifth Street at the intersection of Portofino Place (APNs: 185-0-221-025, 185-0-221-265, AND 185-0-223-015) in the Oxnard Seaview Estates neighborhood in accordance with Section 16-531 of the Oxnard City Code; and
WHEREAS, the project was initially reviewed by the City Council as a Pre-Application (PZ 18-600-02) on March 19, 2019, where the City Council discussed the ability for the project to incorporate inclusionary housing on the project site instead of requesting to pay the affordable housing in-lieu fee payment; and WHEREAS, the project applicant mailed notices to all property owners within the Sea View Estates neighborhood and presented the project at the April 20, 2020 Community Workshop; and
668
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

Whereas, on November 9, 2004, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.: “CEQA”) and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq.: “State CEQA Guidelines”), the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for The Dunkirk Drive Project (MND 2004-11); and
Whereas, the MND adequately addressed and mitigated the potential environmental impacts associated with the Dunkirk Drive project, which included a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Subdivision Map and Planned Residential Group/Special Use Permit for commercial development on a 7.6-acre portion of the project site as well as residential development on an adjacent 10-acre property to the south of the site; and
Whereas, the MND was not legally challenged and thus is presumed valid in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21167.2 and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.); and Whereas, the City is the lead agency for purposes of the project pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21067; and
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA, when taking subsequent discretionary actions in furtherance of a project for which an MND has been approved, the Lead Agency is required to prepare an Addendum to a previously approved MND if some changes or additions to the MND are necessary but none of the conditions described in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent MND have occurred; and
Whereas, the Planning Division evaluated the project by preparing an Addendum, and based on that Addendum, and all other information in the administrative record, has determined that none of the circumstances identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 have arisen as a result of the project, and that an Addendum to the Final MND 2004-11 for the Dunkirk Drive project is appropriate to analyze the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of the modified project; and Whereas, Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11 is attached to the staff report and is incorporated by reference; and
Whereas, Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11 has been provided to and has been reviewed by the Planning Commission in connection with the previously approved MND 2004-11, which is available for inspection at City Hall and is posted on the City’s website, and are incorporated herein by reference; and
Whereas, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15164, subdivision (c), the Addendum is not required to be circulated for public review, but can be attached to the adopted MND 2004-11; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA, the Planning Commission and City Council considered the proposed Addendum to a previously adopted Final MND 2004-11 669
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

before making its determination, finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and adopted MND 2004-11) that with the previously adopted Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is included in MND 2004-11 document and incorporated by reference in this and related resolutions and permits and imposition of mitigation measures as conditions of approval, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, further finds that the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11 reflects the independent judgment of the City, and recommends that the City Council adopt the Addendum to the previously adopted MND 2004-11; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and approved a Special Use Permit (PZ 19-500-04) to develop a

7.61 acre project site with 90, two-story condominium dwelling units each with attached 2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements subject to approval of the related actions as specified within the Special Use Permits conditions of approval, respectively; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Oxnard conducted a duly noticed public hearing and recommended to the City Council of the City of Oxnard approval of Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-620-02 (General Plan Amendment) to change the land use designation of the subject project site from Business Research Park to Residential Medium; a Zone Change for the project site from Business Research Park to Multiple-Family (R-2) (PZ 20-570-02); and a Tentative Subdivision Map (Tract No. 6064) for condominium purposes and to combine three existing lots into two lots (PZ 20-300-02)
Whereas, the Project has been reviewed by the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) on December 18, 2019, February 24, 2021 and May 12, 2021, and the DAC provided conditions of approval for the project that are incorporated within the recommended entitlements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing at which it received and considered oral and written testimony on Addendum to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-11 for the proposed project; and WHEREAS, said Project was referred to various public utility companies, City departments and the Development Advisory Committee for recommendations; and WHEREAS, the comments of the City Councilmembers, members of the public, and interested groups and agencies have been adequately responded to; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study and deliberation that it is a reasonable exercise of the City’s police powers to condition the project to ensure the continued health, safety, and welfare of the public by providing housing opportunities 670
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

inclusive of 9 affordable low income housing units for the residents of the City of Oxnard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Tentative Map complies with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the Oxnard City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Tentative Map, the proposed site, and the design and improvement of the development requested are consistent with the 2030 General Plan elements thereof; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed site is suitable for the type and density of development requested and is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, serious public health problems or conflict with any publicly acquired easements or access; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed division of land complies with the requirements established by the Subdivision Map Act and Chapter 15 of the Oxnard City Code, including but not limited to requirements as to area, improvement and design, floodwater drainage control, appropriate improved public roads, sanitary disposal facilities, water supply availability and environmental protection; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Applicant agrees with the necessity of and accepts all elements, requirements, and conditions of this Resolution as being a reasonable manner of preserving, protecting, providing for, and fostering the health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry in general and the persons who work, visit or live in this subdivision in particular; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Applicant agrees as a condition of this Resolution that at its own expense, to indemnify and defend the City of Oxnard and its agents, officers and employees from and against any claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this Resolution or any actions or proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made before the approval of this resolution that were part of the approval process; and
WHEREAS, the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision to adopt Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11 is based are located in the Planning Division of the City of Oxnard, and the custodian of the record is the Planning Manager; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OXNARD:

SECTION 1. The Recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map is 671
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

internally consistent with the provisions of the City of Oxnard 2030 General Plan SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the Project site associated with the Tentative Subdivision Map is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

SECTION 5. The City Council determines that the residential project is the best use for the subject project site.

SECTION 6. The City Council determines that the Tentative Subdivision Map is in the best interests and welfare of the City and its residents.

SECTION 7. In adopting this Resolution for the Tentative Subdivision Map, the City Council finds and determines the project is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act because an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final MND 2004-11) that was prepared for the 2004 Dunkirk Drive Project was considered by the City Council at the public hearing for the Portofino Place project. The Addendum to the Final MND was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq., CEQA Guidelines), and the City’s Environmental Review Guidelines. The City of Oxnard is the Lead Agency. The Addendum is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15164 since only minor changes and additions to the MND are necessary to address the Project changes and no circumstances exist calling for the preparation of a subsequent negative declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15162 and 15163. With implementation of the MND 2004-11 mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect upon the environment.

SECTION 8. Based on the entire record before the City Council and all written and oral evidence presented, including the City Council Staff Report and all attachments thereto, the City Council finds:

Consistent with California Government Code Section 66474, a legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, if it makes any of the following findings:
672
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

(a) That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.

As described in the staff report, the project site currently has a 2030 General Plan land use designation of Business Research Park (BRP) and a zoning of Business Research Park (BRP). As part of this proposal, the project is concurrently requesting a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation BRP to Residential Medium (RM) and a Zone Change from Business Research Park to Multiple-Family (R-2). If the aforementioned General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are approved, the proposed subdivision, inclusive of the 90, two-story condominium dwelling units each with attached 2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements at the subject project site would be consistent with the policies and provisions of the 2030 General Plan because the proposed land use of the project is of a multi-family use, which is an allowed use pursuant to the Residential Medium (RM) land use designation of the 2030 General Plan Plan. The subject project site has an area of 7.61 acres which allows a maximum of 94 residential units; however, the project is requesting to construct 90 residential units. The project density at 90 residential units is equal to 12 units per acre which is consistent with the RM land use designation of 12 to 18 units per acre. The subdivision of the project site as proposed with 90 condominium units and associated site improvements would be consistent with the 2030 General Plan if the associated General Plan Amendment is approved. Additionally, the condominium units have been designed to meet the required development standards identified in the R-2 zone (Multiple-Family) and all of the advisory standards contained within City Council Resolution No. 7658 that are intended to encourage amenities that enhance the livability of condominiums with the exception of the required 10-foot by 10-foot dimensions for private patios; however, the land area of the project’s private patios ranges from 450 to 1,530 square feet which exceeds the minimum land area of 100 square feet provided by private patios. Therefore, the project is in conformance with the 2030 General Plan and the elements thereof and other adopted standards. No specific plan is applicable to the subject site. Therefore, the project does not meet this finding which means the Project can be supported. (b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

As described in the staff report, the design and improvement of the proposed development is consistent with applicable provisions of the City’ 2030 General Plan because the proposed subdivision and development of the multi-family residential use supports the proposed development improvements, with the required infrastructure.

Additionally, the proposed subdivision has been designed to meet the required minimum lot area and density identified in the R-2 zoning (Multiple-Family) as prescribed by the 2030 General Plan land use designation of Residential Medium. No specific plan is 673
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

applicable to the subject site. Additionally, the design and improvements of the project will provide for development that furthers the intent of the Housing Element to realize the potential of neighborhood improvements that increase housing opportunities in the Sea View Estates Neighborhood. As such, the project does not meet this finding which means the Project can be supported.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

As described in the staff report, the site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development because the division of land includes a residential project that is consistent with the Multiple-Family (R-2) development standards and has been designed to be architecturally compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development because the site is relatively level and an environmental assessment of the site did not find any soil or geologic conditions that would make the site physically unsuitable for development. The site is not subject to soil and/or geologic conditions indicating substrate instability. As proposed and conditioned, the project will be consistent with the 2030 General Plan land use designation of Residential Medium which the project is seeking a General Plan Amendment concurrent with the Tentative Subdivision Map, which requires residential uses to be designed pursuant to the R-2 development standards such as: parking, minimum lot area, density, side yard setback and height. The subject site is adequate in terms of size, and is designed to meet the development standards prescribed in the R-2 zone. Additionally, the project has been reviewed by the Development Advisory Committee and was determined that it would have no significant impact on the public health, safety, or welfare and the project plans have been reviewed by all applicable departments and outside agencies, which include the Oxnard Police and Fire Departments. Based on the aforementioned, this project does not meet this finding which means the Project can be supported.
(d) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

As described in the staff report, the project is concurrently requesting a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation BRP to Residential Medium (RM) and a Zone Change from Business Research Park (BRP) to Multiple-Family (R-2). The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development because the project is being designed to be in conformance with the density allowed under the 2030 General Plan land use designation of Residential Medium and the R-2 zoning. The subject project site has an area of 7.61 acres which allows a maximum of 94 residential units; however, the project is requesting to construct 90 residential units. The project density at 90 residential units is equal to 12 units per acre which is consistent with the RM land use designation of 12 to 18 units per acre. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development because it is located within a developed urban area and will be served by existing adequate public utilities as identified in the Addendum to the adopted 674
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

Mitigated Negative Declaration 2004-11. Additionally, there are no identified physical constraints that would prohibit development of the proposed residential project.

Therefore, the project does not meet this finding, which means the Project can be supported.
(e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

As described in the staff report, the design of the proposed land division and parcel improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because it is located within a developed urban area of the City that contains no environmentally sensitive habitat and/or species as identified in Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11. The project site is not considered to be conducive to important biological resources or their habitat.

Additionally, the project site does not have any natural standing bodies of water, riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural communities. Federally protected wetland communities are not thought or known to exist on the site and the project site is not located within a Biological Resources Area which is known or thought to meet habitat needs for plants and animals or promote wildlife migration or movement. Additionally, the project is not designated nor determined to be an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area. As such, the project does not meet this finding which means the Project can be supported. (f) That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

As described in the staff report, the project would involve the construction 90, two-story condominium dwelling units, inclusive of 9 affordable units each with attached 2-car garages, 214 total visitor parking spaces, common swimming pool and playground area, 3,281 square-foot recreation building, entry gates and perimeter walls, private roads, detention basins, landscaping and associated site improvements that are not anticipated to use or store large quantities of hazardous materials. However, potentially hazardous materials such as fuels, lubricants, and solvents would be used during grading and construction of the proposed project, but their use and disposal would be to applicable standards and law so as to not create environmental or health issues. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems because, as indicated by Finding 2.a above, it would utilize existing adequate public utilities, namely water and sewer.

Construction activities, anticipated uses, and development design will be subject to standard construction requirements of the Building, Fire, and Traffic Codes. Additionally, the project has been reviewed by the Development Advisory Committee and was determined that it would have no significant impact on the public health, safety, or 675
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

welfare and the project plans have been reviewed by all applicable departments and outside agencies, which include the Oxnard Police and Fire Departments. Consequently, this project does not meet this finding, which means the Project can be supported. (g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

As described in the staff report, the design of the proposed land division and parcel improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public-at-large, for access through or use of property within the subdivision because, as conditioned, no buildings would be located in the area of the existing public utilities easements, all blanket easements or other easement that are no longer needed by the City shall be abandoned, and there is no need for new or additional easement(s) for the public-at-large. The project site is currently vacant. Additionally, the land division has been configured to continue to allow for Portofino Place, which currently bisects the parcel, to provide access to the residences in the Oxnard Sea View Estates Neighborhood which is accessed off of Fifth Street and Dunkirk Drive. As such, this project does not meet this finding which means the Project can be supported.

SECTION 9 This Resolution shall not become effective unless and until the City Council adopts the Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration 2017-04 and approves the associated General Plan Amendment (PZ No. 20-620-02), and Zone Change (PZ No. 20-570-02). If the City Council fails to approve the General Plan Amendment or Zone Change, then this Resolution shall become null and void and be of no further force and effect.

SECTION 10. Based on the findings set forth herein, the PCity Council hereby approves Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-300-02 (Tentative Subdivision Map), subject to the attached conditions of approval.

SECTION 11. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. 676
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

FOR LAND USE PERMITS
Note: The abbreviations below identify the City department or division responsible for determining compliance with these standard conditions. The first department or division listed has responsibility for compliance at plan check, the second during inspection and the third at final inspection, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or at a later date, as specified in the condition. If more than one department or division is listed, the first will check the plans or inspect the project before the second confirms compliance with the condition. The italicized code at the end of each condition provides internal information on the source of each condition: Some are standard permit conditions (e.g. G-1) while some are taken from environmental documents (e.g. MND-S2).

DEPARTMENTS AND DIVISIONS
CA City Attorney PL Planning Division
DS Dev Services/Eng Dev/Inspectors TR Traffic Division
PD Police Department B Building Plan Checker
SC Source Control FD Fire Department
PK Landscape Design CE Code Compliance

GENERAL PROJECT CONDITIONS

1. This permit is granted for the property described in the application on file with the Planning Division, and may not be transferred from one property to another. (PL, G-1).

2. This permit is granted for the plans dated November 18, 2021 (“the plans”) on file with the Planning Division. The project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions, or unless a minor modification to the plans is approved by the Planning and Environmental Services Manager (“Planning Manager”) or a major modification to the plans is approved by the Planning Commission. A minor modification may be granted for minimal changes or increases in the extent of use or size of structures or of the design, materials or colors of structures or masonry walls. A major modification shall be required for substantial changes or increases in such items. (PL, G-2)

3. This permit shall automatically become null and void 36 months from the effective date of the Zone Change (PZ No. 20-570-02) (30 days after the second reading of the Zone Change Ordinance Amendment is adopted), unless the Developer has diligently developed the proposed project, as shown by map recordation and / or the issuance of a grading, foundation, or building permit and the construction of substantial improvements. (PL, G-3) 677
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

4. All required off-site and on-site improvements for the project, including structures, paving, and landscaping, shall be completed prior to occupancy unless the Development Services Manager allows the Developer to provide security or an executed agreement approved by the City Attorney to ensure completion of such improvements. (DS, G-4)

5. By commencing any activity related to the project or using any structure authorized by this permit, Developer accepts all of the conditions and obligations imposed by this permit and waives any challenge to the validity of the conditions and obligations stated therein. (CA, G-5)

6. Developer agrees, as a condition of adoption of this resolution, at Developer’s own expense, to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees from and against any claim, action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul the approval of the resolution or any condition attached thereto or any proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to the approval of such resolution that were part of the approval process. (CA, G-6)

7. Any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) applicable to the project property shall be consistent with the terms of this permit and the City Code. If there is a conflict between the CC&Rs and the City Code or this permit, the City Code or this permit shall prevail. (CA, G-7)

8. Developer shall complete the “Notice of Land Use Restrictions and Conditions” form, using the form provided by the City, for recording with the Ventura County Recorder.

Before the City issues building permits, Developer shall submit the original completed, signed and notarized document, together with the required fees to the Planning Manager. (PL, G-8)

PLANNING DIVISION STANDARD CONDITIONS

9. Prior to the close of escrow for each dwelling unit, Developer shall provide the buyer with a written guarantee that the exterior finishes of the dwelling unit will remain in good condition for at least five (5) years from the final building permit inspection and sign off.

Developer shall provide a copy of the guarantee to Planning staff prior to final Planning Division inspection and sign off. (PL, PL-29)

10. Developer shall establish a homeowners association and the association shall be responsible for the maintenance of parking, landscape, recreation and other interior areas held in common by the association and for the enforcement of Conditions Covenants & Restrictions related to property maintenance. (PL/DS, PL-33)

11. Developer shall construct each dwelling unit with separate utility systems and meters.

Developer shall paint utility meter panels to match structures upon which it is located. 678
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

Such panels shall be located to take advantage of screening (e.g. landscaping or other building elements) from public right-of-ways, to the maximum extent feasible. (DS/B, PL-34)

12. Developer shall include in all deeds for the project and in the Conditions Covenants & Restrictions a prohibition against parking recreational vehicles over 20 feet long in the project. (CE/PL, PL-35)

13. Developer shall pay Quimby Fees (fees for park acquisition and improvement) before issuance of building permits. The amount of the fee shall be calculated by the Planning Division, and verified by the Parks Division at the time of payment. (PK/B, PL-36)

14. In accordance with City Council Ordinance No. 2980, or the ordinance in effect at the time building permits are issued, Developer shall provide 9 affordable units. (PL, PL-37)

15. Developer shall post in the sales office of the project the latest City planning documents and maps that may affect the project and adjacent properties. At a minimum, this information shall include the 2030 Oxnard General Plan and General Plan Land Use Map showing all adjacent properties, a copy of the ordinances regulating the zone, and any specific plan that may apply to the project. Such documents may be purchased at cost from the Planning Division Manager. Developer shall require that all purchasers sign an affidavit declaring that they have familiarized themselves with the planning documents.

Developer shall make such affidavits and planning information available for review upon reasonable request of the Planning Division Manager. (PL, PL-38)

16. Where feasible, Developer shall locate individual unit plumbing within individual unit walls, as opposed to common or shared walls, and shall paint roof vents to match the roofing material. (PL/B, PL-40)

PLANNING DIVISION SPECIAL CONDITIONS

17. Developer shall provide electric meters, mailboxes and address directories, placed in decorative cabinets and clustered for efficient access for residents and service persons.

Developer shall coordinate placement and design of such items accordingly, with the Planning Division Manager, the appropriate utility service provider and the United States Postal Service, prior to issuance of building permits. (PL, PL-19 modified)

18. This permit is granted subject to the approval of a Zone Change (PZ 20-570-02) for the project property. (PL)

19. This permit is granted subject to the approval of a General Plan Amendment (PZ 20-620-02) for the project property. (PL)
679
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

20. Street parking is prohibited to ensure that the private streets are at least 26 feet wide at all times to comply with Fire Department regulations.

21. Developer shall deposit $2,000 for mitigation monitoring and reporting associated with the development project (PZ Nos. 19-500-04 and 20-300-02). Such funds shall be deposited prior to issuance of a grading permit or map recordation, whichever occurs first.

Additional deposits shall be made to cover staff time required to monitor implementation of project conditions until the final Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the development.

22. These conditions of approval impose specific fees, dedications, reservations and/or other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, the 90-day period in which the Developer or applicant has to protest the imposed fees, dedications, reservations and/or other exations has begun as of the date that the conditions of approval are approved.

Affordable Housing Conditions

23. Inclusionary housing requirements pertaining to the sale or rental of 10% of all units constructed as part of this development are subject to inclusionary housing requirements, as set forth in Ordinance 2980.

24. Based on the unit count proposed, 9 (10% of 90= 9) of the 90 units being developed must be Affordable Units.

25. Affordable Rental Units – Fifty percent (50%) of the affordable units offered for rent must be made available to very low-income households with incomes at or below fifty percent (50%) of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Ventura County, as set forth in the California Health and Safety Code 50105 and fifty percent (50%) of the affordable units must be offered for rent to low-income households with incomes at or below eighty percent (80%)AMI for Ventura County, as set forth in the California Health and Safety Code 50079.5. For purposes of determining tenant eligibility, Owner and Developer or Property Manager shall use the annual income limits for Low Income and Very Low-Income Households, respectively, published by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

26. Affordable Rent (Low Income Units)– For Low Income Households, "Affordable Rent" shall be inclusive of a reasonable utility allowance and not exceed one- twelfth (1/12) times the product of thirty percent (30%) times eighty percent (80%) of Area Median Income (AMI) adjusted for family size appropriate to the Affordable Unit for households earning less than or equal to eighty percent (80%) of the AMI for the Ventura County Metropolitan Statistical Area as set forth in the sections 6918 and 6932 of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations, unless another subsidy program is used, in which case the stricter requirement shall be applied. For purposes of calculating Affordable Rent, Owner and Developer or Property Manager shall use the Area Median Income for Ventura County for Low Income Households, published annually by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
680
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

27. Affordable Rent (Very Low-Income Units) – For Very-Low Income Households, “Affordable Rent” shall be inclusive of a reasonable utility allowance and not exceed one- twelfth (1/12) times the product of thirty percent (30%) times fifty percent (50%) of area median income adjusted for family size appropriate to the Affordable Unit for households earning less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) of the AMI for Ventura County Metropolitan Statistical Area as set forth in the sections 6918 and 6932 of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations, unless another subsidy program is used, in which case the stricter requirement shall be applied. For purposes of calculating Affordable Rent, Owner and Developer or Property Manager shall use the Area Median Income for Ventura County for Very Low-Income Households, published annually by the California Department of Housing Community Development (HCD), as opposed to HCD’s annual published income limits, which are used to determine tenant eligibility.

28. The Affordable Rental units must include: Three (3) three-bedroom units and two (2) two-bedroom units offered for rent or sale to households with annual incomes at or below fifty percent (50%) of AMI for Ventura County. Two (2) two-bedroom units and two (2) three-bedroom units must be offered for rent or sale to households with annual incomes at or below eighty percent (80%) AMI for Ventura County.

29. Prior to offering the Affordable Units for rent, the Developer and Owner must submit to the Housing Director the proposed rental amounts for the affordable rental units for review and approval.

30. Affordable Rental Units (Eligible Tenants) - All prospective tenants must be income-eligible to rent any of the Affordable Units. Developer shall maintain a copy of the selected tenant’s rental application including information on household size, total Annual Income, rent to be charged, and the unit to be rented, including the unit’s bedroom count and size (the “Application”). Upon request, the Developer shall provide the Application to the Housing Director to review the prospective tenant’s eligibility for the unit to be rented. Income eligibility documentation for occupants of the affordable units must be made available by the Developer for review, upon request by the Housing Director. This provision applies throughout the duration of this Agreement and applies to any change in the tenancy of the Affordable Units.

31. Affordable Rental Units (Management Plan) - Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Developer and Owner shall obtain a clearance form from the Housing Department certifying that the required number of affordable units are being provided at Affordable Rents and that a Management Plan, prepared by the Developer and Owner, for the operation and management of the Affordable Rental Units has been submitted to the Housing Department and approved by the Housing Director. Developer and owner shall provide a copy of the clearance form issued by the Housing Department to the project planner prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy.

32. Affordable Rental Units (Annual Report) - Owner shall maintain complete and accurate records pertaining to (1) the occupancy of each Affordable Unit, and (2) the maintenance, 681
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

management, operation, preservation and repair of each Affordable Unit. Owner agrees to permit the Housing Director or designee to inspect and audit the books and records of Owner pertaining to the Affordable Units. In furtherance of this requirement, Owner shall require tenants or property managers to submit to the Housing Director an annual report (the "Annual Report") in the format approved by the Housing Department and providing the specific information and documentation (including documentation from each tenant) reasonably required by the City and Housing Director to ensure that the Affordable Units are being rented to eligible tenants.

33. Affordable Rental Units (Compliance) - Upon City's request, Owner shall demonstrate that the Affordable Rental units are continually in compliance with the terms of Affordability Covenants and Conditions of Approval pertaining to Affordable Rental Units. Upon thirty (30) days’ notice, City may perform an audit to determine compliance with the terms of this Agreement or any affordability restrictions placed on the property. Owner agrees to pay a reasonable fee, which may be adjusted from time to time, for the purpose of paying the actual costs associated with the City's obligation to monitor Owner's compliance with the affordability restrictions contained in this Agreement.

34. Affordable Units Offered for Sale: Ten percent (10%) of all units offered for sale must be made available for purchase to low-income households with incomes at or below eighty percent (80%) AMI for Ventura County, as set forth in the California Health and Safety Code 50079.5. For purposes of determining buyer eligibility, Owner and Developer shall use the annual income limits for Low-Income Households, published by the California Department of Housing Community Development (HCD).

35. Affordable Housing Cost for Affordable Units Offered for Sale: The term Affordable “Housing Cost” includes the costs described in Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations Section 6920, except that when determining affordable housing cost the amount paid for maintenance and utilities shall not be included. For purposes of calculating Affordable Housing Cost, Owner and Developer shall use the Area Median Income for Ventura County for Low Income Households, published annually by the California Department of Housing Community Development (HCD), as opposed to HCD’s annual published income limits, which are used to determine buyer eligibility.

36. Affordable housing cost must include the sum of the following and may not exceed the product of thirty percent (30%) of eighty percent (80%) AMI for Ventura County as set forth in Part 5 (a) of Ordinance Number 2980:
(a) Mortgage loan payments
(b) Mortgage insurance payments
(c) Property taxes and assessments
(d) Homeowner association fees
(e) Insurance premiums
682
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

(f) Space rent

37. Affordable Units Offered for Sale: Must Include at least five (5) three-bedroom units and four (4) two-bedroom units.

38. Owner and Developer must record affordability covenants approved as to form by the Housing Director and City Attorney prior to submitting their first building permit application. Units shall remain affordable for at least 20 years from the date the first unit in the development is offered for rent or sale. Owner and Developer must contact the Housing Department for review and approval of affordability covenants prior to recordation.

39. Prior to offering any of the Affordable Units for sale or converting any of the Affordable Rental Units into Affordable Units offered for sale, within the initial 20 Year term of Affordability discussed in Condition No. 37, Developer and Owner must:
(a) Adhere to any applicable state and local laws, including but not limited to California Assembly Bill 1521, and applicable tenant relocation requirements for existing tenants of the Affordable Rental Units that may become displaced as result of the conversion from Affordable Rental Units to Affordable Units offered for Sale. This also includes, notification to tenants and prospective tenants 3 years prior to the termination of the lease of the Affordable Rental Units, as set forth in Government Code 65863.10 et seq. Adherence to any and all applicable state and local laws means those state and local laws effective at the time of the conversion. (b) Submit to the Housing Director the proposed sale amounts, for review and approval, the proposed date the affordable units will be offered for sale, the location of the affordable units within the project, and any other information requested by the Housing Director. Thereafter, if the Developer and Owner desires to change the sales price or location of any of the affordable units, the Developer and Owner must obtain the approval of the Housing Director prior to offering any Affordable Unit for sale.
(c) Require any purchaser of an Affordable Unit in the development to execute a Resale Restriction Agreement for a minimum term equivalent to years remaining on the initial 20-year term of affordability covenants recorded by the owner and developer as part of Condition No 164. A separate Resale Restriction Agreement, to be executed between each buyer of an Affordable Unit and the City, must be approved as to form by the Housing Director and City Attorney prior to the sale of any Affordable Unit and must be recorded in the County Recorder’s Office.

40. Owner and Developer must offer existing eligible tenants of the Affordable Rental Units the first opportunity to purchase an Affordable Unit offered for sale within the Development.

41. A City fee may be collected as necessary to enforce the provisions of the affordability covenants, and fees (paid by the owner/seller) to cover City costs associated with the sale of affordable units including the City’s obligation of verification of proposed sale price applicable to the Affordable Units that are offered for sale; income eligibility of the 683
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

prospective household or family to occupy Affordable Units that are to be sold, inspection of Affordable units that are offered for sale, and completion of a resale restriction agreement for all buyers of affordable units that are offered for sale. The City shall set these fees and adjust it as needed from time to time.

42. Prior to the purchase of an Affordable Unit, the buyer’s eligibility for purchase of the Affordable Unit must be demonstrated to the Housing Director, the Housing Director must approve the eligibility of all buyers before they may purchase an Affordable Unit.

43. Affordable Rent and Affordable Housing Cost for 2-bedroom units will be based on a three-person household income and affordability calculations for 3-bedroom units will be based on a four-person household, as set forth in Health and Safety Code 52102(a)(1)(B) and 50052.5 (b)(h).

44. The Affordable Units must be designed and constructed to be architecturally consistent with and qualitatively similar to other unrestricted units in the project.

45. Developer is required to notify the Naval Base Ventura County Housing Service Center of the project and the unit’s anticipated sales prices.

46. Developer is required to coordinate with the City of Oxnard’s Housing Department to provide early advertisement to local residents in compliance with fair housing law.

Addendum Mitigated Negative Declaration 2004-11 Mitigation Measures Developer shall comply with the mitigation measures identified in the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 2004-11, as modified by Addendum No. 1 to Final MND 2004-11 associated with the development project (PZ Nos. 19-500-04 and 20-300-02).

Air Quality

47. Developer shall ensure that all construction equipment is maintained and tuned to meet applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) emission requirements. At such times as new emission control devices or operational modifications are found to be effective, the Developer shall immediately implement such devices or operational modifications on all construction equipment. (MND, C-1)

48. During smog season (May through October), developer shall lengthen the construction period so as to minimize the number of vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. (MND, C-2)

49. At all times during construction activities, Developer shall minimize the area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations to prevent excessive amounts of dust. (MND, C-3)
684
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

50. During construction, Developer shall water the area to be graded or excavated prior to commencement of grading or excavation operations. Such application of water shall be at least twice per day and shall penetrate sufficiently to minimize fugitive dust during grading activities. (MND, C-4)

51. During construction, Developer shall control dust by the following activities:
(a) All trucks hauling graded or excavated material offsite shall be required to cover their loads as required by California Vehicle Code §23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2) and (e)(4) as amended, regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets and roads.
(b) All graded and excavated material, exposed soils areas, and active portions of the construction site, including unpaved onsite roadways, shall be treated to prevent fugitive dust. Treatment shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, periodic watering, application of environmentally-safe soil stabilization materials, and/or roll-compaction as appropriate. Watering shall be done as often as necessary and reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. (MND, C-5)

52. During construction, Developer shall post and maintain onsite signs, in highly visible areas, restricting all vehicular traffic to 15 miles per hour or less. (MND, C-6)

53. During periods of high winds (i.e. wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact adjacent properties), Developer shall cease all clearing, grading, earth moving, and excavation operations to prevent fugitive dust from being a nuisance or creating a hazard, either onsite or offsite. (MND, C-7)

54. Throughout construction, Developer shall sweep adjacent streets and roads at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, so that any visible soil material and debris from the construction site is removed from adjacent roadways. (MND, C-8)

55. Prior to grading permit approval, Developer shall include on the grading plans a reproduction of all conditions of this permit pertaining to dust control requirements. (PL) Cultural Resources

56. Developer shall contract with a qualified archaeologist to conduct a Phase I cultural resources survey of the project site prior to issuance of any grading permits. The survey shall include: (1) an archaeological and historical records search through the California Historical Resources Information System at CalState Fullerton; and (2) a field inspection of the project site. Upon completion, the Phase I survey report shall be submitted to the Planning Division for compliance verification. A copy of the contract for these services shall be submitted to the Planning Division Manager for review and approval prior to initiation of the Phase I activities.
685
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

The contract shall include provisions in case any cultural resources are discovered onsite.

In the event that any historic or prehistoric cultural resources are discovered, work in the vicinity of the find shall be halted immediately. The archaeologist shall evaluate the discovery and determine the necessary mitigations for successful compliance with all applicable regulations. Developer or its successor in interest shall be responsible for paying all salaries, fees and the cost of any future mitigation resulting from the survey. (MND, E-1)

57. Developer shall contract with a Native American monitor to be present during all subsurface grading, trenching or construction activities on the project site. The monitor shall provide a monthly report to the Planning Division summarizing the activities during the reporting period. A copy of the contract for these services shall be submitted to the Planning Division Manager for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permits. The monitoring report(s) shall be provided to the Planning Division prior to approval of the final building permit signature. (MND, E-1) Geology and Soils

58. Developer shall submit a site-specific soils investigation, which shall be prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer. At a minimum, such study shall include liquefaction and compressible soil characteristics on the subject site, and shall identify any necessary construction techniques or other mitigation measures to prevent significant liquefaction/compressible soils impacts upon the proposed project. all recommendations of said report shall be incorporated into the project. The Developer shall submit the report to the Building Official for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. (MND, F-1)
Land Use and Planning

59. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Developer shall file a Form 7460, “Notice of Proposed Construction with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and provide a copy to the Planning Division that enables the FAA to review the development for any hazard to airport/aviation operations. (MND, G-2)
Noise

60. The applicant shall provide a notice to potential homebuyers and renters disclosing the presence of the Oxnard Airport and a helicopter flight path along West Fifth Street and the potential expansion of the Oxnard Airport. The applicant shall provide such notice to each homebuyer and renter and obtain signatures acknowledging the presence of the Oxnard Airport and helicopter flight path along West Fifth Street. (MND, K-1) 686
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION STANDARD CONDITIONS

61. Developer shall pay plan check and processing fees in effect at the time of construction plan submittal and shall pay development fees, encroachment permit fees, and other applicable fees in effect at permit issuance. (DS-1)

62. Developer shall enter into an agreement, approved as to form by the City Attorney, to install and construct all public improvements required by this permit and by the City Code.

Developer shall post security satisfactory to the Finance Director, guaranteeing the installation and construction of all required improvements within the time period specified in the agreement or any approved time extension. (DS-14)

63. Developer agrees, as a condition of approval of this resolution, to indemnify, defend and hold harmless, at Developer’s expense, City and its agents, officers and employees from and against any claim, action or proceeding commenced within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37, to attack, review, set aside, void or annul the approval of this resolution or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The City shall promptly notify the Developer of any such claim, action or proceeding of which the City receives notice, and the City will cooperate fully with the Developer in the defense thereof. Developer shall reimburse City for any court costs and attorney's fees that City may be required to pay as a result of any such claim, action or proceeding. The City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve the Developer of the obligations of this condition. Developer’s acceptance of this resolution or commencement of construction or operations under this resolution shall be deemed to be acceptance of all conditions thereof. (DS-18)

64. Developer shall provide all necessary easements for streets, highways, alleys, sidewalks, parkways, landscaping, utilities, drainage facilities, or other improvements as required by City. If such easements cannot be obtained from the property owner by negotiation, the City may acquire them at the expense of the Developer by exercise of the power of eminent domain. Developer shall bear all costs of eminent domain proceedings, including appraisal, acquisition, attorney’s fees, and court costs. Before the City issues a site improvement permit, the Developer shall dedicate all required easements to the City. (DS-19)

65. The conditions of this resolution shall prevail over all omissions, conflicting notations, specifications, dimensions, typical sections, and the like, that may or may not be shown on the improvement plans. (DS-21)

66. Prior to approval of the final map or parcel map, Developer shall provide the City Engineer with written evidence from the Ventura County Clerk's Office that Developer has executed 687
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

and filed with the Clerk all certificates, statements and securities required by Government Code Sections 66492 and 66493. (DS-26)

67. Developer shall dedicate to the City all water rights for the project property by title sheet dedication on the final map or parcel map. (DS-39)

68. Prior to release of the final map or parcel map for recordation, the Developer shall provide the City Engineer with a 100‑scale base map for addressing purposes. The map shall be drawn on 18‑inch by 24‑inch mylar and shall show the standard address map title block, north arrow, street names, tract number, phase boundary and lot numbers. The City will assign all addresses. (DS-56)

69. Prior to release of the final map or parcel map for recordation, Developer shall post security satisfactory to the City Attorney guaranteeing that all survey monuments will be set as required by the Government Code and the City Code. (DS-57)

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION SPECIAL CONDITIONS

70. Developer shall place existing overhead utility lines on and adjacent to the project underground in accordance with City Code in effect at the time City issues a grading/site improvement permit. The current City Code does not require the placement of lines conducting in more than 33kv underground. Prior to recordation of the final map or issuance the grading/site improvement permit, Developer shall post security satisfactory to the Finance Director guaranteeing utility relocation including the cost of any required pole relocation.(DS)

71. Developer shall process the final map associated with this permit concurrent with the site improvement plans for Planning and Zoning Permit 19-500-04. The final map shall be processed for recordation concurrent with the approval of the PZ 19-500-04 site improvement plans. (DS)

72. The final map shall indicate the vacation of existing City easements that are determined by the City Engineer to no longer be necessary, including but not necessarily limited to, the existing 10-foot landscape easement along the project’s southern boundary. The vacation(s) shall be processed under section 66434(g) of the Subdivision Map Act. If easement vacations are required to be processed separately from the final map, the Developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the vacation including, but not limited to, fees associated with the hearing(s), easement vacation document preparation, and review by the City. (DS)

73. Prior to recordation of the final map, Developer shall coordinate with Public Works Department Maintenance District No. 55 and pay all fees associated with the hearing, easement vacation document preparation, and review by the City to vacate the 10-foot 688
Resolution No. 2021-XX- PZ No. 20-300-02[Tentative Subdivision Map #6064] City Council Hearing Date: January 18, 2022

landscape easement. Developer shall assign the landscape maintenance responsibility of the 10-foot landscape easement in perpetuity to the Homeowner’s Association(s) (HOA).

Developer may remove and replace the trees inside the easement in accordance with City policy if permitted by the Community Development Planning Division and Public Works Department Maintenance District No. 55 as the result of vacationing the 10-foot landscape easement. (DS)

74. Developer shall coordinate with the Public Works Maintenance District No. 55 and acquire all maintenance responsibility for on-going landscaping and hardscape (sidewalk) maintenance along the project frontages on Portofino Place that are being maintained by the maintenance district. A Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be prepared to legally bind all landscape and hardscape maintenance previously performed by the Maintenance District No. 55 to the HOA. Prior to final map recordation, Developer shall submit a copy of the CC&Rs to the City for review and approval. Final approved copy shall be recorded with the Ventura County Recorder’s Office concurrent with the final map recordation. (DS)

TRAFFIC DIVISION SPECIAL CONDITIONS

75. Except for the proposed two driveways, the project shall dedicate all vehicle access rights to the City along West Fifth Street on the final map. (TR) PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

John Zaragoza, Mayor
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Attorney
689
Portofino Place
90, Two-Story Condominium Dwelling Units and Associated Site Improvements on a 7.61-Acre site
Planning and Zoning Permit Nos.
19-500-04 (Special Use Permit - Residential)
20-300-02 (Tentative Subdivision Map)
20-570-02 (Zone Change)
20-620-02 (General Plan Amendment)
South Side of Fifth Street at the Intersection of Portofino Place Isidro Figueroa, Principal Planner
Scott Kolwitz, Planning Manager
Vyto Adomaitis, Community Development Director
City Council Meeting
January 18, 2022
690
Portofino Place
2 691
● General Plan Amendment (PZ 20-620-02)
➢ Change the land use designation of the project site from Business Research Park (BRP) to Residential Medium (RM) ● Zone Change (PZ 20-570-02)
➢ Change the zoning of the project site from Business
Research Park to Multiple-Family (R-2)
● Tentative Subdivision Map
➢ Create condominiums on a 7.61-acre vacant site
● Special Use Permit (PZ 19-500-04)
➢ Development of 90, two-story condominiums
3 Project Description
692
Existing & Surrounding Land Uses
4 ● South side of Fifth Street at
intersection of Portofino Place
within the Sea View Estates
Neighborhood
● North: Industrial/ Oxnard
Airport
● South: Residential
Subdivisions
● West: Carwash
● East: Juan Lagunas Soria
Elementary School
693
2030 General Plan & Zoning
5 694
Aerial Map
6 NORTH
695
Aerial Map w/
Project
7 NORTH
696
Background
● Part of a larger 17-acre project
● In 2004, the Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to designate 7.885 acres residential, remainder of the project site was BRP
● A Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the City Council
● March 19, 2019, the City Council reviewed a Pre-Application and found the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change generally acceptable
● Preferred affordable housing units built onsite
● November 18, 2021, the Planning Commission voted 6:1 to approve the SUP recommended the City Council approve the

MND, GPA, ZC & TSM
8 697
Oxnard Airport
9 698
Oxnard Airport
● Project located within Oxnard Airport Sphere of
Influence
● Limits the structural coverage to 25 percent
and total height to 25 feet
● Project is designed to be consistent with the 25
percent allowable site coverage and 25 feet
maximum height limit
● Mitigation Measures require buffers as well as
review by the Federal Aviation Administration.
10 699
General Plan Amendment & Zone Change
● GPA request is to change the general land use
designation from Business Research Park to Residential
Medium (RM) to allow for a residential project
● Project site is located on Fifth Street- a designated scenic corridor
● Project as designed complies with new RM land use
designation and General Plan policies
● Zone Change request to change zoning from BRP to
Residential Multiple-Family (R-2) to be consistent with GPA request (RM)
● Project designed to meet R-2 development standards
11 700

GPA & ZC
12 North
701
Tract Map
13 702
Circulation
● Project accessed by Fifth Street and bisected by Portofino Place ● The project is conditioned to provide for offsite improvements such as:
➢ Pedestrian safety enhancement along Fifth St. by retrofitting existing street lights along the project frontage with 4000k LED lights.
➢ Project shall construct two (2) traffic calming devices on Portofino Place- Fifth Street and Dunkirk Drive
➢ All internal drive aisles shall be designed and maintained as Fire Lanes for parking regulatory and enforcement purposes. ● Addendum MND 2004-11 analyzed vehicle miles travelled (VMT) as required by the California Environmental Quality Act ➢ Commercial project: 5,172,230 VMT/annually
➢ Proposed project: 1,812,497 VMT/annually
14 703
Inclusionary Ordinance
● Inclusionary Ordinance requires 10 percent of the units as affordable
● Project has been conditioned to offer to:
➢ Rent or sale to households with annual incomes at or below fifty percent (50%) of AMI for Ventura County
■ Three (3) three-bedroom units
■ Two (2) two-bedroom units
➢ Rent or sale to households with annual incomes at or below eighty percent (80%) AMI for Ventura County.
■ Two (2) two-bedroom units
■ Two (2) three-bedroom units
● City and Developer have negotiated agreement to ensure units will be offered to appropriate households
15 704
Community Workshop
● April 20, 2020 Community Workshop
● Public Comments focused on:
➢ Traffic along Fifth Street
➢ Traffic generated by nearby school during the
drop-off and pick-up
➢ Traffic signal at the intersection of Fifth Street and Portofino Place
➢ Airport proximity
➢ Additional traffic to Dunkirk Drive
● Petition Received
16 705
Prior Environmental Review
● In 2004, an MND (No. 04-11) evaluated
Commercial development on the project site
● Project site was found to be suitable for
commercial development
● 10-acre adjoining site was found suitable for
residential development.
● There were no Significant and Unavoidable
Impacts identified in the 2004 MND
● Mitigation measures were incorporated into
conditions of approval
17 706
Current Environmental Review
● An Addendum to MND 2004-11 was prepared
● Residential project is a less intensive use than
the commercial project analyzed in the previous
MND
➢ Less traffic volume.
● Addendum concludes that the proposed project
would
➢ not create any new significant impacts or
increase the severity of impacts
➢ No new significant effects identified
● All mitigation measures included as conditions of
approval in the Special Use Permit Resolution.
18 707
Current Environmental Review - Mitigation Measures
● Air Quality
➢ Emissions and dust control
➢ Street sweeping during construction
● Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
➢ Monitoring
● Geology and Soils
➢ Geotechnical - liquefaction & compressible soil
● Land Use and Planning
➢ FAA Notifications
● Noise
➢ Airport Noise Disclosure
19 708
Recommendation
That the City Council:
a) Adopt a Resolution 2021-XX adopting Addendum No. 1 to previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 2004-11; and
b) Adopt a Resolution 2021-XX approving Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-620-02 (General Plan Amendment) to change the land use designation of the project site from Business Research Park (BRP) to Residential Medium (RM), and
c) Adopt Resolution 2021-XX approving Planning and Zoning Permit No. 20-570-02 (Zone Change) to change the zoning of the project site from Business Research Park to Multiple-Family (R-2), and 20 709
Recommendation
That the City Council:
d)Adopt a Resolution 2021-XX approving Planning
and Zoning Permit No. 20-300-02 (Tentative
Subdivision Map for Tract No. 6064), subject to
certain findings and conditions, and
e) Approve an Affordable Housing Agreement.
21 710
End of Presentation
711

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. N.1
DATE: January 18, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: City of Oxnard Tree Program Review. (10/10/10)

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council receive and file the City of Oxnard Tree Program Review conducted by Dudek. (Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0.) (Presentation will be live upon consultant's request.)

BACKGROUND
In 2021, the Public Works Department bid and selected the consultant team, Dudek, to conduct a comprehensive review of the City’s tree program. Dudek was provided with key insights into City practices, datasets for analysis, and contact information to coordinate with internal and external stakeholders. Dudek analyzed the 1988 Landscape Standards and City Code Tree Ordinance to determine specific areas that could be improved. These recommendations are contained in the Tree Program Review. Additionally, Dudek did an analysis of the City tree inventory, operating budget, and staffing levels, then compared this information to other cities of similar size.

It should be noted that in 2020, City staff made several presentations regarding the restoration of tree and landscape maintenance throughout the City. In these presentations, the tree estimate was 56,000. This number was based on an older estimate from a 2013 tree inventory by West Coast Arborists (WCA). This year, staff reviewed the 2013 WCA inventory and compared that information with current GIS data. The result is a current estimate of 48,806 trees, composed of 137 genera and 261 species. These trees are in sites such as parks, streets, medians, parkways, front/side yards within the public rights-of-way, and open space areas.

This Review does not provide recommendations for individual trees that are planted throughout the City, but rather guidelines to use with dominant species, site conditions to prioritize, and summaries of current practices and tree assets.

DISCUSSION
The intent of the Tree Program Review (Review) is to provide the information necessary to make informed decisions about the future management of citywide trees and the creation of a City Urban Forest Management Plan.

The Review has three recommendations:

1. The City Must Provide Funds to Support Urban Forest Maintenance. 712
At its current staffing levels, the City does not have enough staff members to complete maintenance requests in a timely manner, nor establish a routine maintenance cycle for City-owned trees. The City employs 7.23 fewer FTEs than the average municipal tree program when compared to cities with population sizes similar to Oxnard. Investing in the management and maintenance of the City’s tree inventory will contribute to mitigating defects before failures occur, and potentially decrease the costs incurred from liability claims filed against the City.

2. The City Should Complete a Financing Study of the Tree Program.

Further information is needed to fully understand the budget and financing implications of increased tree maintenance and management activities of the Tree Program. A detailed understanding of what the City will need to sustainably manage the tree population will provide decision makers with a clear picture of the per-tree costs to plant and water new trees, maintain an industry standard pruning cycle (e.g. 3-5 years), remove dead trees, and other management actions.

3. The City Should Complete an Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) to Guide Long-Term Budget and Management Decisions.

In conjunction with, or immediately following a financing study, the City should begin the process to develop an UFMP. The UFMP would establish a vision and goals for the Tree Program based on the priorities and values of staff, elected officials, residents, business owners, and other stakeholders. The goals would not only provide the basis for annual totals of trees to plant, prune, and remove, but also strategies to increase community participation, determine City-wide canopy cover, and prioritize where resources would be most effectively used.

The key findings of the Tree Program Review include:

Current funding and staffing levels are below what is needed to manage the City tree inventory.

Current funding levels allow for one tree trimmer and one groundsworker to conduct various tree maintenance services including pruning, establishment care, pest management, and watering of the trees within the City’s tree inventory. As a result, City tree maintenance is largely conducted in reaction to resident requests, with little active maintenance of the City’s 33,654 General Fund trees. Cities with populations comparable to Oxnard (100,000–249,000) have an average of 11.8 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) positions for the management of the City tree population whereas the City currently only has 2 dedicated FTEs. Additionally, other cities with populations comparable in size to Oxnard have annual tree maintenance budgets of $1.3 to $1.9 million.

This variation in maintenance budgets depends largely on the number of trees in each city. The FY 2021-22 Oxnard budget has $920,741 for General Fund tree maintenance. However, $354,641 is for staff and administration and $566,100 is for the one-time-only Measure E grid pruning of 6,660 trees within the arterial streets. The Special Districts Division is responsible for 15,152 trees within the City tree inventory and has spent $134,586, mostly in Riverpark CFD, for contracted tree maintenance services since July 1, 2021.

The City needs to complete an updated tree inventory.

An inventory of City managed trees was last completed in 2013 by West Coast Arborists. This inventory was reviewed by staff in 2021 using the City GIS system and found the current number to be approximately 48,806.

The City tree inventory should be updated every 3-5 years so City leadership can base decisions on current and accurate data. . Maintaining the inventory can be accomplished if the City can actively maintain all trees in its inventory.

The City-managed tree inventory is not prepared for climate change. 713
Climate change is predicted to cause substantial negative impacts to commonly planted street tree species in California. Based on available research and data, up to 34% of Oxnard’s tree inventory contains species that are predicted to be heat- or water-sensitive in the next 30–100 years.

The 1988 Landscape Standards must be updated.

The 1988 Landscape Standards document is used by multiple City departments to make tree management decisions. Updating the Landscape Standards is an opportunity to strengthen tree protection policies, implement a new tree species palette for City Departments and developers, and improve tree planting standard details. In addition, the Landscape Standards document is the basis for establishing the City as the responsible party for maintaining trees in areas that other comparable cities are typically not responsible to maintain, such as front yards, walls and fences, and residential tract entries.

The City would benefit from an Urban Forest Management Plan.

The findings presented in this Review describe the current state of the City’s Tree Program. This Review should be the first step of a comprehensive urban forest management plan (UFMP) process that provides a roadmap for tangible actions the City can take towards sustainable funding and management of its urban forest program. A UFMP will provide the framework for the management practices and policies that will help guide the City toward a resilient urban forest.

Future considerations that will be brought to the City Council include:

Tree Inventory.

Staff and consultants are working together to analyze the tree inventory to validate the estimated count, while also identifying areas where replacement, new planting, and removal are necessary based on the criteria provided in this Tree Program Review. A key question will be, “Should the City continue to be responsible for maintaining trees that are on private property, but within the public right-of-way?”. This accounts for nearly 50% of the total City tree inventory and therefore has long-term budget implications for a sustainable program.

Tree maintenance budget and staff size.

Staff and consultants will analyze the maintenance and services that are required for a 3 - 5 year pruning cycle.

Based on a future policy-level decision to continue maintaining the residential trees within the public right-ofway, the costs, staff size, and contractor options will be presented to the City Council for future budget consideration.

Revise 1988 Landscape Standard and City Code
Both the Public Works and the Community Development Departments will work together to provide recommendations to the City Council for revisions of the Landscape Standards and City Code that meet the needs of the community, increase efficiency, and address issues of climate change and water reduction.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy. The purpose of the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy is to preserve and improve our roads, utilities, parks, trees, water supply and natural resources through effective planning, prioritization, and an equitable and efficient use of available funding.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for the recommended action. The cost for the professional services agreement with Dudek was $40,000. Any future Financing Studies or the development of an Urban Forest Management Plan will require additional funding, which staff will recommend in future operating budgets for the Council’s consideration. 714

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
The Public Works and Transportation Committee approved 3-0 on December 28, 2021 to approve the staff recommendation and to forward the item for Council approval.

Prepared by: Steve Howlett, Assistant Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. Oxnard Tree Program Review Report
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. N.2
DATE: January 18, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael Wolfe, Public Works Director, (805) 385-8055, [email protected] SUBJECT: First Amendment to Agreement A-8294 with Brown and Caldwell for Primary Clarifiers and Activated Sludge Basins Improvement Project PW 21-17. (0/5/5)

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a First Amendment to Agreement A-8294 with Brown and Caldwell in the amount of $330,069 for a new not to exceed contract amount of $1,173,413 for additional design work required for the Primary Clarifiers & Activated Sludge Improvements Project PW 21-17 (Project No. 186607). (This item did not originate in Committee as this is a capital improvement project specifically listed in the City's Capital Improvement Program.)
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video:
https://youtu.be/kD97xthtjI4

BACKGROUND
On March 16, 2021, the City Council approved Agreement A-8294 with Brown and Caldwell, in the amount of $843,344, for design services for the Primary Clarifiers and Activated Sludge Tanks Improvement Project. The initial scope of work included:
 Develop a clear and concise preliminary design report (PDR) outlining seismic requirements, odor control, improved access and site safety, new mechanical equipment, pipework and appurtenances, treatment process efficiency, and effluent water quality.
 Provide a complete set of design drawings, specifications, and bid documents that incorporate the results of the PDR.
 Provide a bid item list with a cost estimate to be used for budgetary purposes by the City.  Provide bid and construction phase services and support.  Develop record drawings representing the final installation.

CIP Reference
Project No. 186607 - Primary Clarifiers and Activated Sludge Tanks Improvement Project - CIP 2021-2026 - Adopted May 18, 2021 – Pages 161.

DISCUSSION
As part of the original scope of work Brown and Caldwell developed a PDR that included a basis for design, treatment and equipment options, life cycle costs, and a preliminary construction cost estimate. Two workshops were held with the 801
Wastewater Division, Public Works Engineering, and Brown and Caldwell. Through the PDR process additional design parameters were identified as follows:
 Tier 2 structural analysis of the primary clarifiers required to determine California Building Code compliance.

The Tier 2 structural analysis is required to comply with the California Building Code. The analysis will determine the amount of structural reinforcement/modification that is required to extend the life of the clarifiers  Replacement of additional mechanical pipework both above and below ground. During the PDR process the primary clarifiers and activated sludge tanks were drained for inspection. During this process and upon closer inspection it was determined additional pipework and equipment has reached the end of its useful life and would need to be replaced.
 Bio-win wastewater treatment process simulator to model the effects of removing the bio-towers from service.

The PDR identified additional treatment methods required within the activated sludge tanks to make up for biotower nutrient removal. By running a bio-win model different treatment scenarios can be simulated to identify aeration and mixing zones required for the final design.  Changing the activated sludge process from two serpentine tanks to six parallel tanks with anaerobic and swing zones. The original scope of work called for replacement of existing equipment, however through the PDR it was determined that changing the configuration of the tanks would provide operational flexibility.  Additional odor control analysis. In addition to traditional odor control measures Brown and Caldwell recommended taking a holistic approach by analyzing process changes, existing polymer dosing, and other chemical treatment to reduce odor.

Brown and Caldwell provided a proposal for the additional work required to deliver a fully integrated design that will allow for:
 Full rehabilitation and structural reinforcement for the primary clarifiers, including replacement of underground pipework
 Increased odor control efforts
 Decommissioning and eventual demolition of the bio-towers  Additional mechanical/structural design and remediation for the activated sludge tanks  Construction phase services associated with treatment process changes The proposal was reviewed by the City Engineer, the Wastewater Division Manager, and the Supervising Civil Engineer.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy. The purpose of the Infrastructure and Natural Resources strategy is to preserve and improve our roads, utilities, parks, trees, water supply and natural resources through effective planning, prioritization, and an equitable and efficient use of available funding.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total amount of this First Amendment to Agreement A-8294 with Brown and Caldwell shall not exceed $330,069 with a new not to exceed contract amount of $1,173,413 for professional design services. The Primary Clarifiers and Activated Sludge Basins Improvement Project No. 186607 has available appropriations of $2,600,000 from the Wastewater Capital Fund (617) for this phase of the Project.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee as this is a capital improvement project specifically listed in the City's Capital Improvement Program.

Prepared by: Tatiana Arnaout, City Engineer

ATTACHMENTS
802

1. Brown and Caldwell First Amendment A-8294

2. A-8294 Fully Executed

3. Presentation
803
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V-01-17-19) Agreement No. A-8294

FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This First Amendment (“First Amendment”) to the Agreement for Professional Services (“Agreement”) is made and entered into in the County of Ventura, State of California, this 18th day of January, 2022, by and between the City of Oxnard, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Brown and Caldwell (“Consultant”). This First Amendment amends the Agreement entered into on March 16, 2021, by City and Consultant.

City and Consultant agree as follows:

1. The amount in Section 7 of the Cover Page of the Agreement is hereby amended to “$1,173,413”.

2. The reference to the Scope of Services Exhibit everywhere it is listed both on the Cover Page and in the Agreement is hereby amended to add also the Scope of Services as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit. The Scope of Services as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

3. The reference to the Rates and Costs Exhibit everywhere it is listed both on the Cover Page and in the Agreement is hereby amended to add also the Rates and Costs as of January 18, 2022 Exhibit. The Rates and Costs as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

4. The following Section 38 Iran Contracting Act Certification shall be added to the Agreement.
“In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 2200 et seq., the City requires that any person that submits a bid or proposal or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with the City with respect to goods or services of one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more, must certify at the time an Agreement is signed or renewed, that the person is not identified on a list created pursuant to subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code Section 2203 as a person engaging in investment activities in Iran described in subdivision (a) of Public Contract Code Section 2202.5, or as a person described in subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code Section 2202.5, as applicable. The form of such Iran Contracting Certificate is included with this Agreement and must be signed and dated under penalty of perjury.”

5. As so amended, the Agreement remains in full force and effect. [Signatures on next page]
804
Agreement No. A-8294
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V-01-17-19) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Amendment on the date first written above.

CITY OF OXNARD BROWN AND CALDWELL

John C. Zaragoza, Mayor1 Date Michael V. Puccio, Vice President2 Date Alexander Nguyen, City Manager
Daniel Willhite, Purchasing Manager
___________, Buyer
ATTEST:

Rose Chaparro, City Clerk Date
(only if Mayor signs)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Stephen M. Fischer, City Date
Attorney (always required)

1 The City Council must authorize and the Mayor must sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total over $200,000 annually. The City Manager may authorize and sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total over $100,000 but up to $200,000 annually. The Purchasing Manager may authorize and sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total up to $100,000 annually. A Buyer may authorize and sign the amendment if the original contract and all amendments collectively total up to $25,000 annually.
2 The City requires the following for any contract:
• For a corporation, the signatures of the Board President, CEO or Vice President and of the Board Secretary, Assistant Secretary, CFO or Assistant Treasurer;
• For an LLC, the signatures of at least two managers of the LLC (company directors, not lower-level managers); or • For a partnership, the signature of a partner. If the partnership is a limited partnership, the signer must be a general partner.

If the company has a different structure, or if the above-listed persons are not the appropriate signers, please submit to the City Attorney legally-binding documentation stating who can sign and bind your company. 805
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
3 SCOPE OF SERVICES AS OF JANUARY 18, 2022 EXHIBIT
Task 1: Program Management
Most Project Management activities are covered as part of the original contract. Brown and Caldwell will perform additional project management associated with the work as part of the First Amendment, including:
• Management of efforts of the Project Team including representatives from the City of Oxnard (City).
• Four additional progress meetings including preparation of meeting agendas and meeting minutes.
• Update project schedule to incorporate Amendment No. 1 tasks. Coordination with the City PM on revisions to the project and construction schedule. • Project communication and coordination for all of the services related to the Amendment, including but not limited to coordination of meetings, site visits and communication between City staff and design team staff, including sub consultants. • Additional QA/QC efforts associated with the expanded scope identified herein.

Task 2: Data Gathering, Site Visits and Preliminary Design Report Brown and Caldwell will perform the following additional work as part of this Amendment:
• A life cycle analysis to determine the best diffuser selection for the OWTP. The analysis will evaluate up to four (4) different diffuser manufacturers/styles. The life cycle cost analysis will be completed on a 30-year cycle. It is assumed that the City will provide information such as the aver-age power cost expected over the next 30 years, and any incentive/rebate information that may be available for installing energy efficient equipment. The life cycle analysis will incorporate the following:
o Factors that are monetized:
 Capital Cost
 Energy Cost
 Maintenance/Replacement frequencies and costs
 Total life cycle cost
o Factors that are included but not monetized:
 Blower compatibility
 Vendor competition
 Ease of parts replacement
 Confirmed installation history
o Diffuser types to be evaluated:
 Sanitaire EPDM membrane
 EDI Nanopore Mini Panel
 EDI Nanopore 9” Disc Diffuser
 OTT Magnum Flexsil Tube Diffuser
 Aerostrip Panels
• A short TM (up to 10 pages) will be developed documenting the results. It is assumed that the results will be presented to the City in a virtual 1-hour workshop. It is assumed that three staff from Brown and Cadlwell are present at the virtual workshop. The 806
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
4 purpose of the workshop is to confirm the recommended diffuser and decide on a bidding method (i.e. competitively bid multiple vendors or to sole source). All results will be based on the PDR BioWin outputs which will be transmitted to the various vendors. The vendors will provide airflow and pressure loss calculations for BC’s review and incorporation into this analysis.
• Process modeling of the AST’s evaluating parallel mode vs serpentine mode, including the integration of anaerobic selector zones. Results to be incorporated into the PDR. • Optimization evaluation of the existing CEPT system based on recent water quality data.

Results to be incorporated into the PDR.
• Analyze alternatives for splitting flow evenly into the AST’s using hydraulic modeling methods and recommend the most-suitable alternative considering feasibility, effectiveness and high-level cost. Primary clarifier effluent and RAS discharge will be considered in the evaluation. A comparison of alternatives using the hydraulic model will be incorporated into the PDR.
• Mechanical, structural, electrical and instrumentation design elements associated with the conversion of the existing AST’s from fully aerobic to operation with anaerobic zones as recommended by process modeling. The modifications relating to anaerobic control zones include but are not limited to baffle walls, mixers, and demolition of existing equipment. Results to be incorporated into the PDR. • Miscellaneous mechanical items at the ASTs including replacement of the 3W water lines and valves at the ASTs (3 hose connections per tank) along with foam spray piping and nozzles. Replacement of existing AST drain valves (mud valves) at each AST. • Mechanical and structural design elements associated with the recommended hydraulic (flow splitting) improvements throughout the aeration basins, including the primary clarifier effluent flow and RAS discharge into the AST’s. Capacity impacts to existing interstage and RAS pump stations will be included in the evaluation. However, pump modifications are not included. Results to be incorporated into the PDR.

Task 4 – 50% Design Services
Brown and Caldwell will perform the following additional work as part of the First Amendment:
• Preparation of 50% level drawings including additional general, structural, mechanical, electrical and instrumentation drawings pertaining to the ASTs and primary clarifiers to reflect the scope items herein and the improvements provided within the PDR. • Additional specifications to be included as part of the 50% design package to incorporate the improvements provided in the PDR.

Task 5 – Final Design Services
Brown and Caldwell will perform the following additional work as part of the First Amendment:
• Preparation of 90% and Final Design drawings including additional general, structural, mechanical, electrical and instrumentation drawings pertaining to the ASTs and primary clarifiers to reflect the recommended improvements.
• Additional specifications to be included as part of the 90% and Final Design packages to incorporate the recommended improvements.
807
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
5 Task 6 - Bid Phase Services
Brown and Caldwell will perform the following additional work as part of the First Amendment:
• Responses to requests for information (RFIs) and requests for clarification (RFCs) received during the bid period.
• Incorporate all addenda issued during the Bid Period into a conformed set of contract documents.

Task 8 – GHD Amendment
GHD Inc. (CONSULTANT) will perform the following additional work as part of the First Amendment.

Subtask 8.1 - Additional structural analysis and design Effort relating to Subtask 8 items listed below, is limited to the hours defined in Task 8 – GHD Inc. Fee Estimate of the Rates and Costs as of Rates and Costs as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit.

Subtask 8.1.1 – Structural Evaluation and Analysis - Exiting structures Additional CONSULTANT effort relating to analysis of the primary clarifiers includes the following:
‒ Structural analysis of the existing clarifiers main structural system based on available record information, information from previous tests performed and reports, and methods presented in ASCE 7-16 and the 2019 California Building Code. ‒ Summary of the structural analysis findings and proposed clarifiers’ retrofit/rehabilitation design will be included in final PDR submittal. ‒ Clarifiers’ retrofit/rehabilitation design will be incorporated in 50% design submittal ‒ Clarifiers’ retrofit/rehabilitation design will be incorporated in final design submittal Consultant analysis will be summarized in a standalone technical memorandum, and included with the 50 percent complete design, and will serve as the basis for the design.

Subtask 8.1.2 – Structural design - proposed improvements GHD Inc. will complete additional structural design for the change in the collection of the primary clarifier scum, prior to conveyance to the thickeners. Design will be included in the updated 30 percent complete design drawings.

Subtask 8.1.3 – Structural evaluation and design update to PDR Based on the results of Task 8.1.1 and 8.1.2 above, GHD Inc. will update findings and recommendations in the Preliminary Design Report (PDR), related to the structural conditions and rehabilitation.

Subtask 8.1.4 – Addition structural 50% Design
Based on feedback from CITY on 30 percent complete design, GHD Inc. will update and expand on the design of the additional structural elements identified above to a 50 percent level of completion and will include in the 50 percent submittal package. 808
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
6 Subtask 8.1.5 – Addition structural Final Design
Based on feedback from CITY on 50 percent complete design, GHD Inc. will update and finalize the design of the additional structural elements identified above and will include in the final design submittal package.

Subtask 8.1.6 – Addition structural Construction Phase Services GHD Inc. will provide additional construction phase services including shop drawing and material submittal review, general observation, and additions to the record drawings, regarding the additional structural elements as identified above.

Subtask 8.2 – Additional site civil design - Pavement replacement around the primary clarifiers
Effort relating to Subtask 8 items listed below, is limited to the hours defined in Task 8 – GHD Inc. Fee Estimate of the Rates and Costs as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit.

Subtask 8.2.1 – Pavement Replacement 50% Design
As requested, and directed by CITY, GHD Inc. will prepare the design drawings and details for the removal and replacement of the existing pavement around the primary clarifiers to the limits prescribed by CITY. GHD Inc. design will be based on available, previous geotechnical recommendations, or on a replace in kind basis. This design will include an additional plan sheet for pavement, and existing surface feature removal, and/or salvage, and for replacement by detail or specification, and will be included in the 50 percent submittal package.

Subtask 8.2.2 – Pavement Replacement Final Design
Based on feedback from CITY on 50 percent complete design, GHD Inc. will update and finalize the pavement replacement design, and will include in the final design submittal package.

Subtask 8.2.3 – Pavement Replacement Bid Support
During the bid portion of this project, GHD Inc. will support CITY and CLIENT (Brown and Caldwell) efforts, relating to the pavement replacement design, including responding to bidder questions, and preparation of the conformed documents.

Subtask 8.2.4 – Pavement Replacement Construction Phase Services GHD Inc. will provide construction phase services related to the pavement replacement, including shop drawing and material submittal review, general observation, and additions to the record drawings.

Subtask 8.3 – Additional design - Scum and primary sludge piping replacement Effort relating to Subtask 8 items listed below, is limited to the hours defined in Task 8 – GHD Inc. Fee Estimate of the Rates and Costs as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit.

Task 8.3.1 – Subgrade piping replacement 50% Design
As requested, and directed by CITY, GHD Inc. will prepare the design drawings and details for the removal and replacement of the existing scum and primary sludge piping from each clarifier 809
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
7 to the limits of the pavement replacement around the primary clarifiers. GHD Inc. design will be based on available as-built information and excludes potholing and subsurface utility exploration. This design will include up to four additional plan sheets for piping layout and profile and will include trench bedding and backfill requirements by detail or specification and will be included in the 50 percent submittal package.

Subtask 8.3.2 – Subgrade piping replacement Final Design Based on feedback from CITY on 50 percent complete design, GHD Inc. will update and finalize the subgrade piping design, and will include in the final design submittal package.

Subtask 8.3.3 – Subgrade piping replacement Bid Support During the bid portion of this project, GHD Inc. will support CITY and CLIENT (Brown and Caldwell) efforts, relating to the subgrade piping replacement design, including responding to bidder questions, and preparation of the conformed documents.

Subtask 8.3.4 – Subgrade piping replacement Construction Phase Services GHD Inc. will provide construction phase services related to the subgrade piping replacement, including shop drawing and material submittal review, general observation, and additions to the record drawings.

Subtask 8.4 – Additional design – Odor control alternatives Effort relating to Subtask 8 items listed below, is limited to the hours defined in Task 8 – GHD Inc. Fee Estimate of the Rates and Costs as of January 18, 2022, Exhibit.

Subtask 8.4.1 – Additional odor control improvements 30% design As requested, and directed by CITY, GHD Inc. will prepare the design drawings and details for the addition of odor control covers over the launders, and connection to the new odor control system. GHD Inc. design will be based on the implementation of a single, biological odor control system. This design will include up to four additional plan sheets for launder cover design and connections and by detail or specification and will be included in the 30 percent submittal package.

Subtask 8.4.2 – Additional odor control improvements 50% design Based on feedback from CITY on 30 percent complete design, GHD Inc. will update and expand the additional odor control improvements design to a 50 percent level of completion and will include in the 50 percent submittal package.

Subtask 8.4.3 – Additional odor control improvements Final design Based on feedback from CITY on 50 percent complete design, GHD Inc. will update and finalize the additional odor control improvements design and will include in the final design submittal package.

Subtask 8.4.4 – Additional odor control improvements Bid Support During the bid portion of this project, GHD Inc. will support CITY and CLIENT (Brown and Caldwell) efforts, relating to the additional odor control improvements design, including responding to bidder questions, and preparation of the conformed documents. 810
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
8 Subtask 8.4.5 – Additional odor control improvements Construction Phase Services GHD Inc. will provide construction phase services related to the additional odor control improvements, including shop drawing and material submittal review, general observation, and additions to the record drawings.

811
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
9 RATES AND COSTS AS OF JANUARY 18, 2022, EXHIBIT
812
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
10 813
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
11 814
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (V01/29/15)
12 IRAN CONTRACTING ACT CERTIFICATION
(TO BE EXECUTED AND SUBMITTED WITH THE AGREEMENT)
Public Contract Code Sections 2202-2208
Pursuant to Public Contract Code 2204.(a) A public entity shall require a person that is submits a bid or proposal to, or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with, a public entity with respect to a contract for goods or services of one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more to certify, at the time an Agreement is signed or renewed, that the person is not identified on a list created pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 2203 as a person engaging in investment activities in Iran described in subdivision (a) of Section 2202.5 or as a person described in subdivision 9b) of Section 2202.5, as applicable.

To comply with this requirement, please insert your company/entity and Federal ID number (if available) and complete one of the options below. Please note, California law established penalties for providing false certifications, including civil penalties equal to the greater of $250,000 or twice the amount of the contract for which the false certification was made, contract termination and three-year ineligibility to bid on contract in accordance with Public Contract Code section 2205.

OPTION No.1 – CERTIFICATION
I, the official named below, certify I am duly authorized to execute this certification on behalf of the company/entity identified below, and the company/entity identified below is not on the current list of persons engaged in investment activities in Iran created by DGS and is not a financial institution extending twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) or more in credit to another person or entity, for 45 days or more, if that other person or company/entity will use the credit to provide goods or services in the energy sector in Iran and is identified on the current list of persons engaged in investment activities in Iran created by DGS in accordance with subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code 2203.

Company Name/Financial Institution (printed): Federal ID Number (or n/a):

By (Authorized Signature):
___________________________________________
Printed Name & Title of Person Signing: Date Executed
_____________________________________________ __________________________ Executed in the County of________________________________ in the State of __________________ OPTION No.2 – EXEMPTION
Pursuant to Public Contract Code sections 2203(c) and (d), a public entity may permit a vendor/financial institution engaged in investment activities in Iran, on a case-by-case basis, to be eligible for, or to bid on, submit a proposal for, or enters into or renews, a contract for goods and services. If you have obtained an exemption from the certification requirement under the Iran Contracting Act, please fill out the information below and attach documentation demonstrating the exemption approval.

Company Name/Financial Institution (printed): Federal ID Number (or n/a):

By (Authorized Signature):
_____________________________________________
Printed Name & Title of Person Signing: Date Executed
____________________________________________ ________________________ Executed in the County of_____________________________________ in the State of ____________ 815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
City Council
January 18, 2022
Tatiana Arnaout, PE
City Engineer
First Amendment to Agreement A-8294 with
Brown and Caldwell for Primary Clarifiers and
Activated Sludge Basins Improvement Project
PW 21-17
841
RECOMMENDATION 2
That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a First Amendment to Agreement A-8294 with Brown and Caldwell in the amount of $330,069 for a new not to exceed contract amount of $1,173,413 for additional design work required for the Primary Clarifiers & Activated Sludge Improvements Project PW 21-17 (Project No. 186607). 842
BACKGROUND 3
• Original scope of work for the design phase included inkind replacement of mechanical equipment for the Primary Clarifiers and Activated Sludge Tanks at the OWTP,
additional odor control, and outlining of required seismic improvements based upon the Integrated Master Plan
• The Preliminary Design Report identified the following design parameters required to rehab both treatment
processes and eliminate the bio-towers:
843
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES – PRIMARY CLARIFIERS 4
• Tier 2 structural analysis
• Replacement of scum and primary sludge underground
pipework
• Additional odor control alternatives
• Pavement repair and replacement
844
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES – ACTIVATED SLUDGE TANKS 5
• Bio-win wastewater treatment process simulator
Reconfigure tanks from serpentine to parallel
• Add swing zones to the tanks
• Evaluate and recommend diffusers
• Add structural baffle walls
• Replace mechanical pipework
845

DISCUSSION
6 Approve First Amendment to
Agreement A-8294 with
Brown and Caldwell for
$330,069 for total contract
value of $1,173,413 for
additional design work for the
Primary Clarifiers & Activated
Sludge Improvements Project
PW 21-17 (Project No.
186607)
846
FINANCIAL IMPACT 7
AGREEMENT A-8243
Agreement A-8294 $843,344
First Amendment $330,069
Total Project Cost: $1,173,413
The Primary Clarifiers & Activated Sludge Improvements Project is being funded by the Wastewater Capital Fund. The Project has appropriations of $2.6M for the design phase.
847

QUESTIONS
848
8 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM NO. N.3
DATE: January 18, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Alexander Hamilton, Fire Chief, (805) 385-7700, [email protected] SUBJECT: Purchase Order for South Coast Fire Equipment for Three Fire Engines $2,603,358.21. (0/10/5)

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve and authorize:

1. The Mayor to execute a Purchase Order for South Coast Emergency Fire Equipment in the amount of $2,603,358.21 for the purchase of three (3) Pierce Fire Engines and

2. A budget appropriation recognizing and appropriating $53,359 from the Lease Purchase Equipment Fund (313). (This item did not originate in Committee.)
Please click the following link to view the required Measure M pre-recorded presentation video:
https://youtu.be/GQnIrJaVUjQ

BACKGROUND
The Oxnard Fire Department (OFD) is an all-hazards agency, providing response for a full range of emergency and nonemergency services to the community. These services include, but are not limited to fire suppression, Urban Search & Rescue, emergency medical service, hazardous materials response, vehicle and industrial accident response, ocean and surf rescue, public fire and life safety education, fire investigation, regulation of hazardous material uses, disaster preparedness and inspection of new construction. In the calendar year 2021 OFD responded to 19,227 calls for service.

The OFD fleet consists of eight (8) frontline and six (6) reserve fire engines.

On June 29, 2021, City Council approved the FY21/22 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget that included $2,550,000 in Lease Purchase allocation for the purchase of three (3) fire engines. The three (3) new engines will replace one (1) front line engine that was manufactured in 2005 and two (2) additional front line engines manufactured in 2009. The average mileage for the three (3) engines to be replaced is 130,000 miles. These fire engines are costing nearly twice as much in vehicle maintenance annually compared to newer engines and will be placed in reserve status. Placing the engines into reserve status will allow the retirement of three (3) current reserve status engines that have exceeded the National Fire Protection Association 1901 Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus suggestions that a fire engine service life not exceed 25 years; the engines that will be taken out of service are now 25 years old.

DISCUSSION
Fire Engines
The OFD engine fleet currently consists of eight (8) frontline and six (6) reserve engines. The frontline engines are assigned one per station and are dispatched to emergencies based on the closest resource. Reserve engines are placed in 849
service when a frontline engine is being repaired or when additional staffing is required for mutual aid response or preventative increase in staffing due to a weather event or other known issue in the area.

The City of Oxnard does not currently have a vehicle replacement plan for fire engines, however practice at Los Angeles Fire Department is to replace frontline apparatus after ten (10) years of service and both Ventura County and Ventura City replace apparatus after twelve (12) years. Currently five (5) of our frontline engines are 12 to 17 years old with respective mileage between 103,719 - 150,318 miles.

Fire engines are customized vehicles that may take up to one year to assemble. The three (3) engines identified to be moved to reserve status are E62, E64, and E67. These engines responded to an average of 2,570 calls in 2021, it can be assumed by the time the new vehicles are assembled each frontline engine will log an additional 10,000 miles.

The following table identifies the 8 frontline and 6 reserve fire engines. It is recommended E62, E64, and E67 be replaced and moved into reserve status, allowing E162, E163 and E165 to be taken out of service.

Frontline Engines
Number Model Year Age (Years) Manufacturer Current Mileage E61 2019 3 Pierce 24,678
E62 2009 13 Pierce 125,216
E63 2010 12 Pierce 114,394
E64 2009 13 Pierce 150,318
E65 2010 12 Pierce 103,719
E66 2019 3 Pierce 25,472
E67 2005 17 Pierce 116,967
E68 2015 7 Pierce 73,134
Reserve Engines
Number Model Year Age (Years) Manufacturer Current Mileage E161 2005 17 Pierce 131,413
E162 1997 25 Seagrave 151,300
E163 1997 25 Seagrave 197,310
E165 1997 25 Seagrave 170,562
E166 2005 17 Pierce 140,029
E168 1997 25 Seagrave 131,018
Pursuant to City of Oxnard Ordinance Number 2943, adopted June 19, 2018, the use of “piggyback,” whereby the City 850
utilized another agency or jurisdiction’s solicitation results but enters into a separate contract or issues a separate purchase order with the vendor. For the procurement of the three (3) engines, OFD will “Piggyback” on City of Los Angeles Contract #59710 with Pierce Fire Engines, through the region’s representative company South Coast Fire Equipment, valid through May 31, 2022.

OFD, in partnership with Oxnard Fleet Services and South Coast Fire Equipment have worked hand in hand since the budget adoption to customize the fire engine build to incorporate a “clean cab design”. The clean cab design is one step in the commitment OFD has made to reduce personnel exposure to carcinogens. As cancer is the leading cause of firefighter deaths, the Department is dedicated to taking all cancer prevention measures in the designs of future apparatus, stations, and PPE. However, on December 31, 2021, just after the specification for the engines was finalized and only two days after South Coast Fire Engine provided the final quote, OFD was notified that the price would increase by 7% on February 1. As the clean cab design deviates from the specification utilized by the City of Los Angeles, Pierce is not obligated to honor the contract pricing. A 7% increase is equal to $57,347 per engine, an increase of $172,042 for the three (3) engines.

South Coast Fire Equipment has provided two pricing options. The first is a prepayment option of $867,786.07 per engine including tax, bond, and fees; $2,603,358.21 total. The second option is payment on delivery for a cost of $897,010.44 per engine; $2,691,031.32. To take advantage of the significant cost savings, prepayment is requested for this purchase.

The three (3) engines identified for replacement will be taken out of service and evaluated to be donated to a regional fire academy to train future firefighters or provided to our sister city Ocotlan to serve their community.

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This agenda item supports Public Safety strategy. The purpose of the Public Safety strategy is to restore and modernize the delivery of public safety services to provide for the safety of our neighborhoods and health of our community.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total cost for three engines is $2,603,358.21.

The Fiscal Year 2021-22 budget includes an appropriation and lease proceeds of $2,550,000 in the Lease Purchase Equipment Fund (313)/Project 222201. Approval of the budget appropriation request of $53,359 will fully fund the acquisition of the fire engines and recognize the additional amount of anticipated lease proceeds. Annual payments for the engines under the lease purchase will be included in future budget requests.

The cost to upfit and equip an engine to be response ready is approximately $165,000 per apparatus. Upfitting will take place once the engines have been built, which is estimated to be one year from the placement of the order. The Fire Department will request funds for upfitting to be allocated in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Operating Budget.

COMMITTEE OUTCOME
This item did not originate in Committee.

Prepared by: Amy Van Atta, Management Analyst II, Aaron Baker, Battalion Chief

ATTACHMENTS

1. Quote for Engines

2. BA - Fire Engines Fund 313

3. PO#8457 South Coast Fire Equipment

4. Fire Engine PO Presentation
851
852
Department: Date:

Project/Program
Manager: Phone:

Reason for Appropriation:

Accounts and Descriptions AMOUNT
Fund:

Revenues/Transfers In
53,359
Sub-total Revenues 53,359
Expenditures/Transfers Out
53,359
Sub-total Expenditures 53,359
Net Change to Fund Balance 0
Net Appropriation Change 53,359
Approvals
Department Director
Chief Financial Officer
City Manager
313- 2009 LEASE PURCHASE EQUIP
NON-DEPARTMENTAL (1001)
313-1001-712.79-52 PROCEEDS FROM BORROWING/LINE OF CREDIT FINANCING MACHINERY AND EQUIP.-NEW
FIRE ENGINE REPLCMNTS-3 (Project 222201)
313-2260-826.86-06
Recognize and appropriate additional lease proceeds needed to fully fund acquisition of three Fire Engines

REQUEST FOR BUDGET APPROPRIATION
Fire January 18, 2022
Alexander Hamilton 385-7700

REQUIRES CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION
BA# (Finance Use Only)______________
BA Doc# (Finance Use Only)___________
Revised : 2/23/2012 853
854
855
856

PURCHASE ORDER FOR THREE

FIRE ENGINES
Alexander Hamilton, Fire Chief
1 857

RECOMMENDATION
2 That City Council approve and authorize:

1. The Mayor to execute a purchase order for South Coast Fire Equipment in the amount of $2,603,358.21 for the purchase of three (3) Pierce Fire Engines and

2. A budget appropriation recognizing and appropriating $53,359 from the Lease Purchase Equipment Fund (313)
858
Budget Approved for Replacement of 3 Engines

BACKGROUND
3 $2,550,000 approved for the purchase and
upfitting of three (3) fire engines in Fiscal
Year 2020/2021 Operating and Capital
Improvement Budget in Lease Purchase Fund
313
• Estimate based on December 2018 fire
engine and upfitting costs
• Price has increased from $698,544 to
$867,786 per engine
859
Engine Replacement Plans
City of Oxnard does not have a fire engine replacement plan.

Los Angeles Fire Department
• Frontline replaced after ten (10) years of service
Ventura County Fire Protection District
• Frontline engine replaced after twelve (12) years of service Ventura City Fire Department
• Frontline engine replaced after twelve (12) years of service National Fire Protection Association 1901 Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus suggests a fire engine service life to not exceed 25 years.

DISCUSSION
4 860
Frontline Engines To Be Replaced

DISCUSSION
5 861
Reserve Engines To Be Taken Out of Service

DISCUSSION
6 862
Procurement Process

DISCUSSION
7 Procurement process began July 2021 immediately after budget adoption Vendor selected utilizing City of Los Angeles Contract #59710 • City Ordinance 2943 authorizes the use of “Piggyback” contracts Specification finalized December 2021
• Quote provided by vendor December 29, 2021
Fire Department is notified of 7%
price increase to take effect February
1, 2022 on December 31, 2021.

Increase equates to $57,347 per
engine; a total of $172,042 (before
taxes).
863
Clean Cab Design Modified Conditions of Piggyback

DISCUSSION
8 ● Cancer is the leading cause of
firefighter death.
● Oxnard Fire Department is committed
to taking cancer prevention measures in
the design of apparatus, stations, and
PPE.
● New engines will be built using a
clean-cab design to reduce firefighter
exposure to carcinogens.
● South Coast Fire Equipment will honor
the City of Los Angeles contract price
through January 31, 2022.
864
Prepayment Saves $87,672

DISCUSSION
9 865
Reserve Engines Removed From Fleet

DISCUSSION
10 Reserve engines will be
evaluated and donated.
866
Total Cost for Three (3) Engines is $2,603,358.21
• $2,550,000 allocated in Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Operating Budget Lease Purchase Equipment Fund (313) Project 222201.
• $53,359 budget appropriation is required to acquire the engines. • Upfit costs will be an additional $165,000 per apparatus. Upfitting will not occur until next fiscal year.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
11 867
QUESTIONS?
12 868