Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1999 0217 CC REG ITEM 11GITEM 1 . Gr 0 CITY OF MOORPARK, CAIAFORNIA City Council Meeting of k --I ACTION: CITY OF MOORPARK Y AGENDA REPORT BY: _..._....�..- _....__.� TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community Development Prepared By: John Libiez, Principal Planner - DATE: February 9, 1999 (For 2/17/99 meeting) SUBJECT: CONSIDER ISSUES RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO MOORPARK HIGHLANDS SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT (SPECIFIC PLAN 95 -2 /SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95 -2, AND ZONE CHANGE 95 -4), APPLICANT: MORRISON- FOUNTAINWOOD- AGOURA. BACKGROUND During discussion of issues and concerns related to Specific Plan No. 2 (Moorpark Highlands Specific Plan) City Council identified several potential revisions to the proposed project. The applicant is preparing an alternative for presentation at the March 3, 1999, City Council meeting. DISCUSSION Included in the concerns cited by City Council was a question related to the effect changes to the project may have upon the EIR. Section 15088.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires lead agencies to recirculate an environmental impact report with appropriate notice whenever new information is added to an EIR after the original notice but prior to certification of the EIR. "New information" includes such things as: 1)creating a new impact or more severe impact from a mitigation measure proposed to be implemented; 2) substantial increase in severity of an impact would occur unless mitigation measures are adopted to reduce the impact to a level of insignificance; 3) a project proponent refuses to adopt a mitigation measure or project alternative that could reduce M: \JLibiez \M \eirquestions cc21799stfrpt.doc 000324 City Council Agenda Report Specific Plan No.2 February 17, 1999 Page 2 impacts of the project; or, 4) the draft EIR is so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. Considering the types of changes City Council has suggested for the project to the applicant such as; relocation of some planning area uses, circulation changes affecting non - General Plan project only streets, reduction or reallocation of density, reduction in total dwelling units within the project, or the shifting of the school site or the active park open space use, it appears no new information or impacts of significance that would require recirculation of the EIR would occur. This will need to be further reviewed after submittal of any alternatives and a determination that there are no new significant impacts or changes which require recirculation should be included in the Council's consideration of any project alternatives. STAFF RECOMENDATION Receive and file report. 00®32:]