Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2000 0719 CC REG ITEM 10EMOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council ITEM % • CITY OF MOORPARK, CA.LIFORVA City Council Meeting of gui� iii ,2Ufn0 ACTION: Owwoed 2df Racc &rywwd'aiia t i my- oduced oyair-y-IMP ho. ?&9, FCC d' IV-04 1BY: l .�.,.�.. FROM: Wayne Loftus, Director of Community Development vw Prepared By: John Libiez, Planning Manager/ Advance DATE: July 10, 2000 (Meeting of July 19, 2000) SUBJECT: Consider Response Related to County of Ventura General Services Agency (Parks Department) Conditional Use Permit No. CUP -5107 and Draft Negative Declaration [Happy Camp Canyon Golf Course] BACKGROUND The County of Ventura has been soliciting interest for the development of an eighteen (18) hole golf course with ancillary facilities within Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park for several months. Originally, Ralph Mahan sponsored an application for the design and construction of such a course. The current proponent is Happy Camp Canyon LLC, Richard C. Price, President. The County General Services Agency has entered into a contractual arrangement with Mr. Price to allow development of the facility, subject to obtaining the necessary land use permits and approvals. DISCUSSION Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the proposed golf course project and believes that appropriate comments related to this document and the project as a whole should be returned to Ventura County. Staff has previously commented and discussed the design and orientation of the golf course with Mr. Price. The following is the staff comment within the City Council Monthly report of March, 1999, related to this matter: "Happy Camp Canyon Golf Course: This proposed eighteen -hole golf course project is located within the Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park. Staff reviewed the proposed draft development /management agreement between the County and Mr. Ralph Mahan in February, and determined that no response was S: \Community Development\ Everyone \HCCGCccmemo7.19.00a.doc 000122 Happy Camp Canyon Golf Course July 19, 2000 Page 2 necessary. Staff met with Mr. Craig Price, a partner in the design and development of the course on March 9, 2000, to discuss the planned circulation for the area that affected the design of the project and advised him that the City was strongly interested in insuring potential development of the circulation connection between Specific Plan No. 2, ( "C" Street) and Hidden Creek Ranch Road, to the east as originally designed through Specific Plan No. 8. Staff further advised Mr. Price that the homeowners adjacent to Campus Park Drive, the proposed main access to the park and the golf course, had on several occasions expressed opposition to any road connections that would intensify neighborhood traffic. Staff requested that the neighbors be contacted and effort made to coordinate a possible connection through Specific Plan No. 2, in addition to full connection to Broadway to the north from the planned project. Staff has not received any additional information regarding this matter." The submitted development environmental information do not provided Mr. Price. plan and the accompanying address the concerns previously Staff's concern is that the Initial Study does not adequately address the following issues, nor reach a proper conclusion that either a Mitigated Negative Declaration or EIR is required to adequately address the following: ■ Improper identification of approved development on the west of the project (SP -2 not cited). ■ Previously identified potential connection of "C" Street in SP -2 to the previously approved Hidden Creek Ranch Drive in SP -8. ■ Failure to indicate the presence of the approved SR -23 alignment immediately to the western boundary of Happy Camp Canyon. ■ Does not address impacts to the City of Moorpark local street systems, including Princeton Avenue, Collins Drive or the freeway interchanges that these streets are connected to. ■ Use of an incorrect LOS of "D" for portions of roadways impacted by traffic within the City of Moorpark. LOS - "C" is City adopted standard found in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. ■ Does not completely address potential impacts from lighting of the driving range. 000123 Happy Camp Canyon Golf Course July 19, 2000 Page 3 ■ Does not address or provide for the extension and use of Broadway as a public access route to the proposed facilities. ■ Does not adequately address fault potential such as that found in SP -2 within a similar lineament on the project site. ■ Does not adequately address the impacts of regional traffic and noise on the single- family residential neighborhoods abutting Campus Park Drive and Princeton Avenue. ■ Does not provide analysis of expected drainage flows or identify facilities at the City boundary that may be needed to deal with increased drainage flooding. Additionally, in discussions with the applicant, staff has raised the question of justification to support the viability of another eighteen (18) hole golf course in the City's Area of Interest given the existing courses and the City's approval of two (2) golf courses in the Toll Brothers Planned Development located between Walnut Canyon Road and Grimes Canyon Road at the northern City boundary. Feasibility information has not been provided. Staff must convey responses on the environmental documents to the County Planning Department not later than July 24, 2000. Should Council have any additional comments or questions to be conveyed to the County Agencies involved, staff will incorporate those comments as directed. STAFF RECOMMMATION Direct staff to respond with comments related to the environmental issues and the project as summarized in this report. Attachments: 1. Locational Map 2. Project Plot Plan 3. Ventura County Initial Study- Happy Camp Canyon Golf Course 000124 ATTACHMENT 1 000125 - 111.1 1 4- ATTACHMENT 2 000126 RESOURCEMANAGEMENTAGENCY count y & ventura DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Entitlements: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP -5107 Planning Division Keith A. Turner Director 2. Applicant: County of Ventura, General Services Agency - Parks Department 3. Location: The site is located within the 3700+ acre parcel known as the Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park. The park is located in an unincorporated portion of Ventura County on Happy Camp Canyon Road immediately North of the City of Moorpark and East of Walnut Canyon Road. Primary access to the site is via Campus Park Drive (see EXHIBIT "2 "). 4. Assessor Parcel Numberfs): 500 -0- 281 -01, 500 -0- 170 -16, -17, -21 & -23 and a portion of 500 -0- 170 -19 (see EXHIBIT "3a" and "3b ") 5. Parcel Size: Combined Parcel size is approximately 700 acres. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Boundary is approximately 369 acres (see EXHIBIT "4 "). 6. General Plan Designations: The Ventura County General Plan designates the site as "Open Space" (One Dwelling Unit(fen Acres or Greater). The subject site lies within the Area of Interest of the City of Moorpark. 7. Existing Zoning: "O- S- 160AC" (Open Space, 160 -Acre Minimum) 8. Proposal: To construct an 18 hole public golf course at Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park, consisting of a 4,500 square foot clubhouse, a 4,500 square foot cart bam, a 4,500 square foot maintenance building, a 30 -stall driving range, and a parking area for 150 vehicles. These structures, as well as the main entrance gate, are identified by the attached Floor Plans and Elevations (see EXHIBITS "5" through "10 "). Operational hours will be from dawn to dusk. Lighting will only be provided in the parking lot areas and around the perimeter of the proposed structures for safety and security purposes. 9. Responsible Agencies: Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 4) 10. Trustee Agencies: California Department of Fish & Game 11. Affected Agencies: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the U.S. Army - Corps of Engineers B. STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: California State law requires that an Initial Study (environmental evaluation) be conducted to determine if this project will significantly affect the environment. The Planning Division conducted an Initial Study. Based on the findings contained in the attached Initial Study, it has btren determined that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration (ND) has been prepared. 80o Sojtoj V,c'c• >Vern;e. Lt 1 ?eC. Vc-�tua. CA 930-- ATTACHMENT 3 00012' Negative Declaration CUP -5107 Page 2 of 2 C. PUBLIC REVIEW: 1. Legal Notice Method: Direct mailing to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project boundary and a legal notice in newspapers of general circulation. 2. Document Posting Period: June 23, 2000 to July 24, 2000 3. Comments: The public is encouraged to submit written comments regarding this Negative Declaration no later than 5:00 p.m. on the last day of the above posting period to the Case Planner listed below, RMA/Planning, 800 South Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009. The Planning Division's FAX number is (805) 654 2509. You may also choose to e-mail your comments to kim. rodriguez @mail.co.ventura.ca.us. D. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Prior to approving the project, the decision- making body of the Lead Agency must consider this ND and all comments received during the public review. That body shall approve the ND if it finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment Prepared by: Fx,-nJhd.hJQ .uz7 I(M RODRIGUEZ Planner Phone No. (805)662 -6521 Reviewed for Release to the Public by: c CC PATRICK RICHARDS, Manager Commercial & Industrial Land Use Permits Section Recommended for Approval by Lead Agency by: KEITH TURNER, Director Planning Division ATTACHMENTS: Section 8 - Initial Study Check List Section C - Discussion of Responses Exhibit '2" - Location Map Exhibit "3a' and 3b "— Assessors Parcel Map Exhibit W- Site Plan Exhibits "5" through "10' - Floor Plans & Elevations 000128 i x a CO-< M Co a CO 3 0.0 =DZC WX0 _0Z DO 00 Z Or n N a X O O u� V N C� m i e% TOA/`TC In✓ oAUnJ1^ n�... Tom... ... 500-17 6 L MAY 2 896 1•_,00d N. E: 0 u x Rancho Simi, RM. Bk 3, Pg 7 NOTE-Asseftor's Block Numbers Shown In Ellipses As * *.t.smr r Pbrcel Numberi Shown in Circlba Assessor's Mop Bk5CXXPg.17 County of Ventura, Colif. 2e u 24 Nb m0 0-0 N n U 9 0 '0 —iny� ffrm�' ' � 0 N Z 3> n-0 N 0 0 W" _ N e J C 4I SIMI VALLEY I J f T. 9t � ayu'r�"" � � - ( ST HWY 118 ) ROachO Simi, R. M.SK3, P9.7 NOTE - Asstna's �ixk Nutt Sl�uKn in cjrcl tt s"SsOr7 r'yrttl Nu+Nt►t shown In Clrcin AWtt+lry AlYr/vl Nww Otn sr, w" In squ"ot 187 CITY OF MOORPARK 8 VICINITY Ass@ssor'a Slap 8k.500,P9.28 COUntr Of V#ntUra, Cott 500-28 55 25 A -E $EP 121990 ORD.2946 C�le- 26. PsaC. 29 Tax Rote A re0 67061 10012 16005 _w 10007 UST CLEVATION 4- ..- O F.i l i_liii.ill i l..11 iu SOVTN d2VATION .w.�..w-.<. u..lra. PMT rLZ/ATION CLUBHOUSE i 4 I a � N i Z 00 tea_ �W> o�U- �owm }W_ z N x v00 am < V D J �v a a � a I s CUP -5107 HAPPY CAMP CANYON REGIONAL PARK CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLAN EXHIBIT "6" 000132 n an CA -0 On --1MZ� .mm <G) z OD zr D M A 2101 -91 Zl 'v' 7 NOIlY/.7�3 lSatd NOI1V/�7 HlAOS NOUYn717 HIVON NOtiVAJT3 1SV3 C' J Q O r 0 4 Q -o 9 -w 1 k it i m > , 1 P i i E CUP -5107 HAPPY CAMP CANYON REGIONAL PARK CART STORAGE FLOOR PLAN EXHIBIT "8" 000134 PROP05E0 04F GQU. M. AT- HAPPY CAMP CANYON APPLICANT. COUNTY OF VENTURA. GENERAL 5ERVICES AGENCY ATTN: THERE5A LUOIN 800 50UTK VICTORIA AVENUE VENTURA. CA. 93009 rz —1r 0 4" WA" at�ev rna✓ !4' f� SO' f ELEVATIONS AND PLOOK PLANS FOR MAINTENANCE BUILDING CUP 5107 CUP -5107 HAPPY CAMP CANYON REGIONAL PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING 000135 FLOOR PLANS & ELEVATIONS EXHIBIT "9" l i ..Kyrl►• 4 , Q r f� SO' f ELEVATIONS AND PLOOK PLANS FOR MAINTENANCE BUILDING CUP 5107 CUP -5107 HAPPY CAMP CANYON REGIONAL PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING 000135 FLOOR PLANS & ELEVATIONS EXHIBIT "9" l i I 15�r r-- MAIN ENTRANCE GATE w 0 0 Y a J Z W � OQ C9 C7 W W o owUS' 19 ZZF 0. >0 UQZ= U W W n. Z } a a Q x Jtk; I IUN t INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST PROJECT: CUP 6107 APPLICANT: County of Ventura, General Services Agency LOCATION-- Hannv Came Canvnn Read_ Mnnmark_ CO ISSUE (RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT) PROJECTIMPACT DEGREE OF EFFECT' CUMULATIVE IMPACT DEGREE OF EFFECT" N X PS- M PS N LS PS- M PS GENERAL: 1. GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS AND POLICIES (PLNG.): X X B. GROUNDWATER QUALITY: X X X LAND USE: 2. LAND USE (PLNG.) A. COMMUNITY CHARACTER: X X X X X B. HOUSING: X X X 5. MINERAL RESOURCES (PLNG.) A. AGGREGATE: X x C. GROWTH INDUCEMENT: X X A. SCENIC HIGHWAY (PLNG.): X X RESOURCES: 3. AIR QUALITY (APCD) A REGIONAL X X X X X X X 7. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES (AG. DEPT.) B. LOCAL: X X X X X 4. WATER RESOURCES (PWA) A. GROUNDWATER QUANTITY: X X X X B. GROUNDWATER QUALITY: X X X X C. SURFACE WATER QUANTITY:(FC&PWA) X X D. SURFACE WATER QUALITY: X X X X 5. MINERAL RESOURCES (PLNG.) A. AGGREGATE: X x X B. PETROLEUM: X A. SCENIC HIGHWAY (PLNG.): X X 6. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A. ENDANGERED, THREATENED, OR RARE SPECIES: X B. SCENIC AREA/FEATURE: X X B. WETLAND HABITAT: X X X C. COASTAL HABITAT: X X X D. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A. ARCHAEOLOGICAL: X X E. LOCALLY IMPORTANT SPECIES /COMMUNITIES: X \ / n X 7. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES (AG. DEPT.) A. SOILS: X X B. WATER: X X C. AIR QUALIIY/MICRO- CLIMATE: X X D. PESTS/DISEASES: X X E. LAND USE INCOMPATIBILITY: X x X 8. VISUAL RESOURCES A. SCENIC HIGHWAY (PLNG.): X X B. SCENIC AREA/FEATURE: X X 9. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: X X 10. CULTURAL' RESOURCES A. ARCHAEOLOGICAL: B. HISTORICAL (GSA): C. ETHNIC, SOCIAL OR RELIGIOUS: Rm 11. ENERGY RESOURCES: 12. COASTAL BEACHES & SAND DUNES: 000137 ISSUE (RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT) PROJECT IMPACT DEGREE OF EFFECT' N LS PS- P: M CUMULATIVE IMPACT DEGREE OF EFFECT* N LS PS- M PS HAZARDS: 13. SEISMIC HAZARDS (PWA) A. FAULT RUPTURE: X X B. GROUND SHAKING: X X X C. TSUNAMI: X X D. SEICHE: X X E. LIQUEFACTION: X X 14. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS (PWA) A. SUBSIDENCE: X X B. EXPANSIVE SOILS: X X C. LANDSLIDES/MUDSLIDES: X X 15. HYDRAULIC HAZARDS (PWA/FCD) A. EROSION/SILTATION: X \/ /< X B. FLOODING: X X 16. AVIATION HAZARDS (AIRPORTS): X X 17. FIRE HAZARDS (FIRE): X X 16. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/WASTE A. ABOVE- GROUND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. (FIRE): X X B. BELOW- GROUND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. (EH): X X C. HAZARDOUS WASTE (EH): X X 19. NOISE AND VIBRATION: X X X 20. GLARE: X X X 21. PUBLIC HEALTH: X X PUBLIC FACILITIES/ SERVICES: 22. TRANSPORTATIONICIRCULAT10N A. PUBLIC ROADS AND HIGHWAYS (1) LEVEL OF SERVICE (PWA): X x X (2) SAFETY/DESIGN (PWA): X X (3) TACTICAL ACCESS (FIRE): X X X B. PRIVATE ROADS AND DRIVEWAYS (FIRE) (1) SAFETY/DESIGN: X X (2) TACTICAL ACCESS: X X C. PEDESTRIANBICYCLE (1) PUBLIC FACILITIES (PWA): X X (2) PRIVATE FACILITIES: X X D. PARKING (PLNG.): X X E. BUS TRANSIT: X X F. RAILROADS: X X G. AIRPORTS (AIRPORTS): X X H. HARBORS (GSA): X X I. PIPELINES: X X 23. WATER SUPPLY A. QUALITY (EH): X X B. QUANTITY (PWA/EH): X X C. FIRE FLOW (FIRE): X X 000138 ISSUE (RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT) rttwc� i In rAt, i DEGREE OF EFFECT• l UMULAI Wt IMPAG I DEGREE OF EFFECT• N LS PS- M PS N LS Ps- M PS PUBLIC FACILITIES/ SERVICES (CONT.): 24 WASTE TREATMENT/DISPOSAL A. INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (EH): X X B. SEWAGE COLLECTION/TREATMENT FACILITIES: X X C. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT (SWMD): X jx X D. SOLID WASTE FACILITIES (EHD) X 25. UTILITIES A. ELECTRIC: X X B. GAS: X X C. COMMUNICATION: X X 26. FLOOD CONTROL/DRAINAGE A. FCD FACILITY (FCD): X X B. OTHER FACILITIES (PWA): X X 27. LAW ENFORCEMENT/EMERGENCY SERVICES. (SHERIFF) A. PERSONNEL/EQUIPMENT: X X B. FACILITIES: X X 26. FIRE PROTECTION (FIRE) A. DISTANCEIRESPONSE TIME: X X B. PERSONNEL/EQUIPMENT/FACILITIES: X X 29. EDUCATION A. SCHOOLS: X X B. LIBRARIES (LIB. AGENCY): X X 30. RECREATION (GSA) A. LOCAL PARKS/FACILITIES: X X B. REGIONAL PARKS/FACILMES: X C. REGIONAL TRAILS /CORRIDORS: X �Lx DEGREE OF EFFECT: N = No Impact. LS = Less Than Significant PS -M = Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. PS = Potentially Significant Impact AGENCIES: APCD - Air Pollution Control District PWA - Public Works Agency Ping. - Planning Division GSA - General Services Agency Ag. Dept. - Agricultural Department FCD - Flood Control District Airports - Department Of Airports Fire - Fire Protection District Sheriff - Sheriff's Department EH - Environmental Health Division Lib. Agency - Library Services Agency 000139 SECTION C INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST - DISCUSSION OF RESPONSES PROJECT: CUP 5107 APPLICANT: County of Ventura, General Services Agency LOCATION: Happy Camp Canyon Road, Moorpark, CA GENERAL 1. GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS AND POLICIES: The Ventura County General Plan designates the site as "Open Space" (One Dwelling Unit/Ten Acres or Greater). The subject site lies within the Area of Interest of the City of Moorpark. The Assessors Parcel Numbers are 500 -0- 281 -01, 500 -0- 170 -16, -17, -21 & - 23 and a portion of 500 -0- 170 -19. The property is zoned "O- S- 160AC" (Open -Space, 160 Acre Minimum). The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan Policies, Land Use Designations and existing Zoning and is therefore considered to have no adverse impacts to the General Plan Environmental Goals and Policies. LAND USE 2. LAND USE v } Item A - Community Character: As stated above, the project is consistent with the applicable General Plan and Zoning Designations. The existing Community Character of Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park is identified primarily by mountainous and canyon terrain. The park is bordered by the ampus Park neighborhood of Moorpark on the south, agricultural areas to the east and wes j, and an oil field in the mountainous area to the north. The existing topography can Ley accommodate the proposed golf course and accessory structures with minimal grading, r and as such, is expected to have a less than significant impact to the Community Character. Item B — Housina: The proposed 18 -hole golf course will be located on approximately 369 acres of an existing County Regional Park. No single - family homes are proposed as a part of this project. Therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact on the use of existing housing or create a long -term demand for additional new housing for the area as construction work is short-term in nature and the work force is expected to be generated from the local labor pool. Item C - Growth Inducement: As referenced in Item 1 above, the proposed golf course and accessory structures are within an area planned for "Open Space" uses and the project is consistent with applicable General Plan Policies, General Plan Land Use, and Zoning Designation. The _ project will not reduce any existing impediments to growth in the area and will not result in growth inducing impacts as the sewer line to be installed is a lateral line and will be sized to accommodate only the needs of the clubhouse and the maintenance facility. Therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact to Growth Inducement. RESOURCES 3. AIR QUALITY Item A - Regional Air Quality Impacts: Based on the information provided by the applicant, air quality impacts will be below the 25 pounds per day threshold for reactive organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen as described in Ventura County's Guidelines for the Preparation of Air Qualify A „alyses. Therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on rec Tonal air quality. 000140 Item B - Local Air Quality Impacts: Based on the information, presented in the project application, the proposed project will generate local air quality impacts but those impacts are expected to be less than significant. 4. WATER RESOURCES Item A - Groundwater Quantity: The project is located in the Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency and therefore cannot increase the amount of groundwater that has been used historically. In addition, the project will not adversely affect the quantity of groundwater since this project will use all imported water supplied by the Calleguas Municipal Water District (CMWD) through the County Water Works District No. 1(District). Portions of the subject property are within the boundaries of the District however some portions of the property are not. The property to receive water which is currently outside the district shall be annexed into the District. Therefore, as the project contains no activities that will lead to the degradation of groundwater supplies, there will be no adverse impacts to groundwater quality. Item B - Groundwater Quality: As the East Las Posas Basin is not impacted due to nitrates or other contaminants, the impact to Groundwater Quality is considered to be less than significant Item C - Surface Water Quantity: The amount of impervious surface area added to the site as a result of this project is not considered to be significant. Therefore, the project is expected to have no adverse Impacts on the surface water quantity. Item D - Surface Water Quality: The project will have a less than significant impact on water quality as the project will be conditioned to include measures to effectively prohibit the entry of pollutants into any stream or water system in accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. S. MINERAL RESOURCES: Item A - Asrarenate and Item B - Petroleum The project will have no adverse impact on aggregate resources as the project site is not located within the Mineral Resource Protection Overlay Zone, and because, at this time, there is sufficient resources to meet local needs. Oil resources are considered a worldwide, national and statewide resource, which is beyond the scope of local governments to effectively manage or control (Resource Appendix of the General Plan). 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A Biolovical Baseline Assessment for the park property was prepared in November 1999 by Padre Associates. This assessment included field studies of the 724 -acre project site for general communities, plants, and animals; a detailed mapping and assessment of protected trees; and a wetland delineationflurisdictional determination for Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting. Nine plant communities were identified at the site: scalebroom scrub, purple sage scrub, white sage scrub, coast prickly pear scrub, mulefat scrub, California walnut woodland, coast live oak woodland, California sagebrush scrub, and annual grassland. The vast majority of the site (73 %) contains annual grassland, a lour sensitivity biological habitat. Three of the onsite communities were identified by Padre Associates as considered sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Game: scalebroom scrub (70.9 acres), white sage scrub (24.2 acres), and California walnut woodland (2.1 acres). In addition, the coast prickly pear scrub (23.1 acres) is considered by Fish and Game to be sensitive. The site is primarily a wide canyon bounded by steep to rounded slopes on the east and west. The canyon bottom is largely annual grassland, except for the 000141 alluvial wash area that contains primarily scalebroom scrub. Upper plateaus in the northwest portion of the site and the southwest corner contain annual grassland, while the slopes are primarily sage scrub mixed with live oak and walnut woodland. Item A - Endan-gered. Threatened. or Rare Species: No state or federally listed rare, threatened, or endangered plant species were observed at the site during the field studies conducted by Padre Associates. Work was conducted at the time and in season for listed species with the potential to occur at the site, but none were observed. Special status plants that were observed included those protected by the Ventura County Tree Protection Ordinance (coast live oak, western sycamore, and southern California black walnut) and an unusual, unique occurrence of bur sage, a plant normally found in the southwestern deserts of San Diego County, Arizona and northern Mexico. This unique occurrence is considered to be the probable result of seeds transported to the area via mining trucks or other means. Wildlife habitat value of the site was considered "high" by Padre Associates due to the presence of several rare and declining species. Specifically, sensitive species known or highly probable at the site include the Boast horned lizard (California and federal species of concern [SC]), aaestem-*+vhiptail federal SC), silverly legless lizard (state and federal SC), s wren (state SC), Oooperlh hawk (state SC), loggerhead shrike (state and federal SC), California homed lark (state SC), geldlen .. eagle (state SC), northern harrier (state SC), burrowing owl (state and federal SC), southern California roidow (state and federal SC), San Diego desert woodrat (state and federal SC). The white- tailed kite, a fully protected species (as are all other raptorial birds) was also seen at the site. No state or federal listed endangered or threatened animals are known to exist at the site, though there is the #ftDtial for the federal threatened Sl is tl liraher to be present at the site. A somewhat disjunct population of gnatcatchers are known to exist in the Moorpark area within about one -mile of the site, and suitable bn -eding habitat is present at the site-withim2m coastal ;f age:scn&Y(CSS) present Anrdhe-seayonslopes and hills. Since it was not known if the gnatcatcher was present at the site, a gnatcatcher survey was conducted. This report, entilted, Gnatcatcher Survey at Happy Camo Canyon Park, which was prepared by Jim Greaves (dated June 19, 2000), states California gnatcatchers were not found during the protocol surveys, either in the immediate impact zone of the proposed golf course, or on adjacent slopes of CSS and grasslands. The protocol surveys were conducted in April and May of 2000 under the direction of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The report goes onto say that the absence of California gnatcatchers from this site appears to be the result of two factors: 1) the overall rarity of the species north of Riverside County; and, 2) the CSS habitat on site was not extensive enough or of an .age that would be likely to harbor California gnatcatchers. In addition, although it was of sufficient age, CSS on west (east- facing) 5 "A slopes above the proposed project did not have California gnatcatchers that might forage into the project's potential impact areas. As no gnatcatchers were located on the site and the Project Description has been revised such that that the small ,patches of *CSS to be impacted will be replanted _ adjacent to the impacted portion (around Tee 1), and avoidance will be done for other CSS and riparian locations on site, there is little likelihood that the project will permanently impact potential California gnatcatcher habitats. As such, the project impact degree of effect is now considered to be less than significant. The project would reduce the amount of habitat available for the coast horned lizard, however, it would not eliminate the habitats used by this species at the site. Therefore, it is expected that though its numbers would be reduced, it would still probably persist at the site if still present (the Padre Associates report indicates that it was not seen during the recent surveys, though it was present in prior surveys). This species is expected to occur primarily in the scalebroom scrub area, which has been avoided by the redesign of the golf course. For these reasons, impacts to the habitat of the coast homed lizard is considered to be less than significant. 000142 Item S - Wetland Habit & Due to the lack of hyd ;c. soils at the site, federal wetlands are not present, though about 4.6 acres of jurisd ":tional "waters of the U.S." are present. State wetland habitats present at the site wo•ild include these jurisdictional waters in addition to walnut woodland and mulefat scrub, totaling approximately 8 acres. As such, impacts to wetland habitat is considered to be less than significant. Item C - Coastal Habitat: The project site is not within the coastal zone, but rather is in an upper watershed of the Arroyo Simi, which eventually drains to Calleuguas Creek. Because of the distance from the coast, no adverse impacts on coastal resources are anticipated. Item D - Miaration Corridors: Padre Associates identifies Happy Camp Canyon as an important wildlife migration corridor. Development of the site as proposed with a golf course is not expected to significantly decrease the movement of larger animals through the site as the course would not be lighted at night and no particular barriers to movement would occur such as fencing. The alteration of habitat features through the introduction of maintained landscaping would primarily effect smaller animals by altering the connectivity of local populations by the introduction of unsuitable habitat. Except for the coast homed lizard, no small animal species are likely to be significantly affected by such isolation since sufficient open space lands are retained along the east and west slopes of the canyon and upper plateaus. Impacts to migration corridors is considered to be less than significant given the current golf course conceptual design (open links with minimal fairway and landscape alteration). Item E - Locally Important Species /Communities: No walnut woodland or prickly pear scrub is proposed for removal and no impacts to these communities are anticipated. A small portion of white sage scrub habitat would be removed, but the amount to be removed is not considered significant on a local or regional basis. No protected tree species are proposed for direct removal by the golf course design, and based on the Proiect Descriation, irrigation will be directed away from coast live oak trees to prevent secondary losses. Scalebroom scrub is considered to be a sensitive plant community due to past losses of this alluvial fan- related series by suburban development and flood control projects. The golf course design includes landscaping for fairways, greens, and tee boxes in primarily annual grassland habitat, but has several flight lines that cross the scalebroom scrub habitat and six golf cart crossings. The proposed golf course would result in a direct loss of 0.3 acres of this habitat within the project site due to golf cart paths. Based upon these concerns, the project was both redesigned to lessen the impact of the scalebroom scrub area, and a Habitat Preservation Plan was developed with input from the applicant and the County Biologist (Rincon Consultants, Inc.) to install low level split rail fencing to keep the golfers out of the scalebroom scrub and to keep the carts on the paths. No significant impacts to other sensitive species are anticipated based on the golf course design since these species are expected to occur in greatest numbers in the other undisturbed natural habitats present at the site. The 0.3 acre loss of the scalebroom scrub will be replaced, onsite, at a minimum 2:1 ratio by converting annual grassland areas outside of the fairway and adjacent to retained scalebroom scrub. The recommendation by the County Biologist is that the replanting occur west of the 18th fairway. Therefore, the impact of Locally Important Species /Communities is now expected to be less than siginifrcant 7. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Item A — Soils• The proposed .golf course would be located on soils designated "Grazing" under the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, Important Farmlands Maps. No loss of important agricultural soils would occur from development of the golf course, therefore, no adverse Impacts are expected. 00043 Item B - Water: Ventura County Waterworks District No.1 would deliver imported water for irrigation of the golf course, sanitation, and fire protection, purchased from the Calleguas Municipal Water District. As a result, development of the golf course would not result in the diversion of groundwater that is currently used to irrigate crops. According to the Proiect Description, a state- of- the-art irrigation system will apply precise amounts of irrigation water to the golf course, such that only the turf zone is irrigated, and no run -off occurs. The irrigation system will therefore protect the quality of the aquifer by reducing water use and eliminating percolation below the root zone. Provided that best management practices are implemented for use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, operation of the golf course would have no adverse impacts to ground or surface water quality. Item C - Air Quality/Micro Climate: The proposed golf course would not result in increased dust or prohibit solar access that would adversely affect agricultural production on nearby properties. Therefore, no adverse impacts are expected to Air Quality/Micro Climate related issues. Item D - Pests/Diseases: The proposed golf course abuts agricultural property to the west and northeast. Due to the differences in elevation between the golf course and the agricultural operations, and the distances from the proposed turf areas /non- native landscaping to agricultural production, less than significant impacts from pests and/or diseases introduced by the golf course are anticipated to occur. Item E - Land Use Compatibility: The project would not result in the direct removal of land from agricultural production. However, land in agricultural production is located immediately to the west and northeast of the proposed golf course. Due to differences in elevation between the proposed golf course and the adjoining agricultural operations, and the current use of the project site for recreational hikers, land use conflicts associated with agricultural practices (including the use of farm equipment and pesticide applications) are expected to be less than significant. The proposed parking area, driving range, and pedestrian JJ` path are located in close proximity and at similar elevation to the southwest comer of ` . �✓ the orchards to the east. The project design includes the provision of an 8 -foot chain Y %"F link fence along the orchards' southwest property line. Therefore, access to the orchards from the golf course would be prohibited, and the potential for trespassing, vandalism and pilferage would be reduced to less than significant. 8. VISUAL RESOURCES Item A - Scenic Highway and Item B - Scenic Area/Feature: Policy 1.7.2.4 of the County General Plan, states that a project would have a significant impact if it would "degrade visual resources or significantly alter or obscure public views ". Highways 118 & 23 are classed as "eligible" for County Scenic Highway designation C' however the project is located a distance of greater than one -half mile and, since the r Mt location of proposed building pads will not effect predominate ridgelines, there will not be any potentially significant visual impacts. Additionally, as there will be no significant land formation modification as the grading will be minimal, the proposed project will have a less than significant effect on the visual resources of the area. 9. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES Based upon review the'Resource Management Agency's Unified Mapping System.(UMS), the proposed project is not within or located adjacent to any known paleontological resources. Therefore, there will no adverse impacts on paleontological resources. 10. CULTURAL RESOURCES Item A — Archaeological & Item C - Social or Reif, d2M According to the June 16, 2000, report entitlf d Phase 11 Test Excavations and T 000144 Determinations of Significance at CA -VEN -1127 AND —1128. Vents -a County. prepared by W & S Consultants, test excavations and determinations (f significance were conducted at the two prehistoric archaeological sites. The Phase II fieldwork involved mapping, surface collecting procedures and the hand excavation of tsst pits on each site. These tests failed to result in the identification or recovery of archaeological specimens or artifacts of any kind at either location. The locations of CA -VEN -1127 and —1128, based on the test excavation results, do not constitute true archaeological sites. Therefore, the proposed project is expected to have a less than significant impact to archaeological, social, or religious sites. Item B — Historical According to the June 16, 2000,. report entitled Phase /I Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance at CA -VEN -1127 AND —1128 Ventura County. prepared by W & S Consultants, the Happy Camp Golf Course study area, appears to have been peripheral to the historical development of the region. The large majority of the site has remained in open space and has been used for livestock and farming. Accordingly, beyond its use as a peripheral grazing area for cattle and farming, the study area figures very little if at all directly in the history of the area. Therefore, the historical impacts as a result of this project are expected to be less than significant. 11. ENERGY RESOURCES The project alone and cumulatively will have less than a significant impact on the renewable resources of solar, wind, and hydraulic power. The Uniform Building Code regulates construction of structures with regard to energy efficiency. Therefore, there would be no adverse impact as a result of this project as the energy necessary to maintain a golf course and the accessory structures would not be used in a wasteful manner. 12. COASTAL BEACHES & SAND DUNES This project is not located within the Coastal Zone of the County's Local Coastal Program. Therefore, this project will have no adverse impact on the coastal beaches and sand dunes. HAZARDS 13. SEISMIC HAZARDS Item A - Fault Rupture: Pursuant to the Countywide General Plan, Hazards Appendix, Figure 2.2.1b, no indications of faulting were identified on the proposed project site. As no known active or potentially active faults project into or appear to cross through the property, the potential for fault rupture on the proposed project site is considered very low. Therefore, there would be no adverse impacts relating to fault rupture. Item B - Ground Shaking: The primary geologic hazard relative to site development is ground shaking from earthquakes originating outside of the site area. The site is located within an active seismic area where past earthquakes have caused considerable ground shaking. Based on the low probability of shaking occurring during the economical life of the structures, and the type of construction anticipated it is recommended that the Uniform Building Code (UBC) guidelines for structural design be followed or considered as minimum requirements. Therefore, the adverse impacts, relating to ground shaking, would be considered td be less than significant Item C - Tsunamis and Item D - Seiches: Pursuant to the Countywide General Plan, Hazards Appendix, Figure 2.6, the proposed project is not located in a Tsunami and or Seiches Zone. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts relating to tsunamis and seiches. 0100145 Ism E - Liquefaction: Pursuant to the _Countywide General Plan, Hazards Appendix, Figure 2.6, the proposed project is not located within a Liquefaction Zone. As such, the potential hazard due to liquefaction should be considered negligible. Therefore, there would be no adverse Impact relating to liquefaction. 14. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS item A - Subsidence and Item B - Expansive Soils_ If subsidence were to take place the majority of settlement would occur during construction and be minimal. Prior to construction, the expansive nature of the soils would be taken into consideration for the design of the foundations. Therefore, there would be no adverse impacts relating to subsidence and expansive soils. Item C - LandslidesiMudslides: Pursuant to the Geotechnica/ Engineering Report for Happy Camp Canyon Golf Course, prepared by Earth Systems Consultants (December 14, 1999), the proposed project is located in a canyon with relatively steep slopes. The report indicates that landslides of these slopes could occur from strong ground shaking. However, the proposed structures are set sufficiently away from these slopes. Therefore, impacts relating to landslides /mudslides are considered to be less than significant 15. HYDRAULIC HAZARDS item A - Erosion /Siltation: Pursuant to the Project Description, grading will occur around a Flood Control red line channel and some of the grading is in the 100 -year flood plain subjecting the project site to erosion /siltation. However, when construction is completed, the proposed project will have no erosion or siltation. During grading erosion and increased siltation will occur, both the Ventura County Building Code and the Uniform Building Code requires storm damage prevention measures to reduce this potential impact. Therefore, the adverse impacts relating to erosion /siltation, would be considered to be less than significant Item B — Floodina: Due to the project location within a 100 -year flood plain and a District jurisdictional stream traversing the project site, the proposed project location would be subject to flooding. However, as it will be necessary to obtain District approval and a Watercourse /Encroachment Permit prior to any activities on the site, and the proposed building sites are located outside the 100 -year flood plain, any adverse impacts relating to flooding would be considered to be less than significant 16. AVIATION HAZARDS Since the proposed project is not located within two miles of any public airport, there will be no adverse impacts, alone and cumulatively, relative to air traffic safety. 17. FIRE HAZARDS The potential impacts to this are considered to be less than significant as the project will be required to comply with the Uniform Fire Code 1997 ed., Section 1103 as adopted and amended by the VCFPD Ordinance No. 23 for Fire Hazard Abatement and also the Uniform Building Code required for building standards. 18. HAZARDOUS MATERIALSIWASTE Item A - Above -ground Hazardous hil aterials: Project impact is expected to be less than significant as any hazardous materials will be required to comply with the Uniform Fire Code 1997 ed., Article 80 as adopted and amended by the VCFPD Ordinance No. 23. 000146 Item B - Below- ground Hazardous Materials: The proposed project includes the use of hazardous materials. Improper storage, handling, and disposal of these materials could result in the creation of adverse impacts from hazardous materials. Compliance with existing State regulations will reduce potential impacts to a level considered less than significant. Item C - Hazardous Waste: The proposed project may generate hazardous waste. Improper storage, handling, and disposal of these materials could result in the creation of adverse impacts to public health. Compliance with existing State regulations will reduce potential impacts to a level considered less than significant 19. NOISE/VIBRATION Activities related to the grading of building pads, construction of the Clubhouse, Cart Barn, & Maintenance Building could result in an increase in noise and vibration. However, these increases will occur in an 'open- space" environment and would be temporary during construction. Once these structures/buildings are completed and occupied, no significant construction noise or vibration will occur. The home closest to the nearest tee box is approximately 500 feet. It is anticipated that any noise associated with the operational phase of the golf course will be for short periods of duration. The project will be conditioned to minimize noise by measures such as utilizing electric mowers and, .if necessary, restricting the hours that mowing will allowed. Therefore, there would be less than significant impacts relative to noise /vibration. 20. GLARE The project proposes to utilize shielded low- pressure sodium lighting for security purposes in the parking lot areas and down lighting surrounding the perimeter of the structures. The nearest home is 4,200 feet from the parking lot. Based on the information presented in the Project Description, the size of the subject parcels and surrounding parcels, this project will result in the creation of additional light or glare upon surrounding properties however the impact is expected to be less than significant 21. PUBLIC HEALTH No adverse impacts to public health were identified during the review of the proposed project PUBLIC FACILITIES /SERVICES 22. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION ads & Highways 1 Leye1aUSeiWce w&(2}SaieW /Design: e proposed project,. will generate additional traffic on the local public road — Happy Camp Road, Park, and Highway 118. The 1998 Congestion Management Program Level of Service (LOS) monitoring shows State Highway 118 to be at an unacceptable LOS of "E ". The acceptable LOS for State Highway 118 is "D ". As requested, the applicant has submitted oriG %i, destiryat da d.,supporting the traffic study: tri di, ©!4 tt ;$Itow there will, be less tfian significant impacts t+ .Highway 118. To address the cumulative adverse impacts of traffic on the Regional Road Network, the Ventura County Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance 4071 (Fee) and General Plan Amendment 94-3 require that the Transportation Department of the Public Works Agency collect a Traffic Mitigation Fee from development. This development is subject to Ordinance 4071. As a- result, the Level of Service and safety of the existing road would remain consistent with the County General Plan. Therefore, adverse impacts relating to Level of Service and Safety/Design will be less than significant Item A - Public Roads & Highways (3) Tactical Access: Potential adverse impacts to Public Roads relative to Tactical Access will be less than 00014'7 significant as safe tactical access for public roads is adequate and meets VCFPD standards. Item B - Private Roads & Driveways f1)Safetu 1Design and (21 Tactical Access: The existing and new access will comply with the Public and Private Road Guidelines and will be consistent with the minimum standards required by the County Fire District. Therefore, adverse impacts to Private Roads relative to Safety/Design and Tactical Access will be less than significant. Item C -Pedestrian/ Bicycle (1) Public Facilities and (2) Private Facilities: -. The Transportation Department comments that the existing roads in the proximity of the proposed project site have provided adequate facilities pursuant to the County's Road Standards and the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Therefore, the Transportation Department considers that the adverse impacts relating to the supplementary addition of pedestrians and bicycles into the area would be less than significant. Item D - Parking: All parking for the construction phase of this project will be provided for on -site. The operational phase of the project will be conditioned to meet the County's Zoning Ordinance requirements. This project will not warrant any additional off-street parking. Therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant Impact on parking. Item E - Bus Transit, Item F - Railroads. Item G - Airports, and Item H - Harbors: This project is not served by a public transportation system or near any harbor facility due to the "open space" nature of the area. Therefore, the project will have no adverse impact on these facilities. Item I - Pipelines: No gas or oil pipelines are located in the area. Therefore, the project will have no adverse Impacts on these facilities. 23. WATER SUPPLY Item A — Quality: The public water system that will serve domestic water to this project is regulated by the State Department of Health Services. The quality of domestic water must be in compliance with applicable State drinking water standards. Design and construction of the proposed project must conform with applicable State and Building Code requirements pertaining to water systems. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts to the quality of water supplied by the public water system expected as a result of this project. Item B - Quantity: There are no adverse impacts to Water Supply Quantity because this project is in a geographic location where a properly designed and constructed well would provide a supply of domestic water sufficient to serve this project on a permanent basis. In - addition, the project will be served domestic water by the Water Works District No. 1. Item C - Fire Flow: The project will be conditioned to have the required water supply for fire protection per VCFPD Ordinance 23. Therefore, the potential impacts to Fire Flow are expected to be reduced to a less than significant level. 24. WASTE TREATMMYT/DISPOSAL The project will not utilize an on -site sewage disposal system. Public sewer service is available from the Sai.itation District. The district has indicated that adequate sewer capacity is available or this project. Therefore, the project will have no adverse impacts relative to on- ;ite sewage disposal. 000148 Item C - Solid Waste Facilities: Any development project in the County that generates solid waste could have a potentially significant impact on the demand for solid waste disposal capacity in Ventura County. However, since waste is both imported into and exported out of Ventura County, solid waste disposal capacity is a regional issue. Therefore, unless the magnitude and /or type of solid waste generated by a specific project is extraordinary, any nexus between the potential environmental impacts of a specific project and regional solid waste disposal capacity at landfills is, at best, problematic. Ventura County is required, however, to demonstrate to the State that a minimum of 15 -years of in -county disposal capacity exists and is available to county waste generators. At this point in time it appears that there is more than adequate solid waste disposal capacity available at the landfills serving our region. Pursuant to the Proiect Description submitted, the Solid Waste Management Department has stated that the waste generated by this project will fall below the Departments thresholds of significance to solid waste facilities. Therefore, the adverse impacts relating to the solid waste facilities would be less than significant. Item D - Solid Waste Facilities: The proposed project does not include a solid waste facility. Therefore the project will have no adverse Impacts relating to solid waste facilities. 25. UTILITIES Item A - Electric, Item B - Gas and Item C - Communications: Existing electrical, natural gas, and communication facilities are currently installed up to the park gate at the terminus of Campus Park Drive. Underground installation of utilities to the project site will be necessary to adequately serve the proposed project. As there are existing electrical, natural gas, and communications facilities in the immediate area, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact. 26. FLOOD CONTROUDRAINAGE Item A - FCD Facility: A District jurisdictional watercourse traverses the project site. As such, a Watercourse/Encroachment Permit will be necessary for any activities to occur within the project site. Therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact related to Flood Control Facilities. Item B - Other Facilities: The proposed project site grading would take into account the potential surface water run- off on the site. The surrounding existing drainage facilities adequately protect the site from flooding from street run -off. Therefore, there would be no adverse impacts relating to flooding induced by drainage facilities not under the regulatory authority of the Flood Control District. 27. LAW ENFORCEMENTIEMERGENCY SERVICES Item A - Personnel/Equipment and Item B - Facilities: According to the Sheriffs Department, the project site is located approximately 7 miles northwest of the East County Sheriff's Sub - Station on Olsen Road. The Sheriffs Department has determined that the project will have no significant effect on the services provided in the area. Therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact related to law enforcement personnel, equipment, and facilities. 28. FIRE PROTECTION Item A - Distance /Response Time and Item B - Personnel /Equipment/Facilities: The project is located approximately -2 miles northeast of County Fire Station 42 (Moorpark Station — 782 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark). Additional equipment and personnel can be dispatched from County Fire Station No. 40 (Mountain Meadows Station - 4185 Cedar Springs Street, Moorpark), which is approximately.5 miles 00G149 southwest of the project site. Therefore, as there are adequate facilities and personnel for fire protection, the project impact is expected to be less than significant. 29. EDUCATION Item A — Schools and Item B - Libraries: The proposed golf course will not introduce any additional students into the Moorpark Unified School District or into the Moorpark Library system. Therefore, this project will have no adverse Impacts to present or proposed school facilities or libraries in the area. 30. RECREATION Item A - Local Parks/Facilities, Item B - Regional Parks/Facilities, and Item C - Regional Trails /Corridors: The proposed project is expected to have no adverse impacts on local parks and facilities. The project will facilitate use of the site as a local park. The proposed project is expected to have no adverse Impact on regional parks and facilities. The project will facilitate use of the site as a regional recreation facility. The proposed project is expected to have no adverse Impact on the regional trails /corridor system. A project will have a significant impact on recreation if it will cause an increase in the demand for recreation, or impede future development of recreation parks and facilities or regional trails and corridors. This project will not have a significant impact on recreation but will in fact provide new opportunities for local and regional recreation and continue to provide access to both local and regional trails and corridors. 0001510 D. MANDATORY Fit IDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE YES/ NO MAYBE Based on the infortna: ion contained within Sections B and C: 1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the x environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the x disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one that occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long -term impacts will endure well into the future). 3. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively x considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effect of other current projects, and the effect of probable future projects. (Several projects may have relatively small individual impacts on two or more resources, but the total of those impacts on the environment is significant). 4. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial x adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? E. DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT On the basis of this Initial evaluation: [XJ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION should be prepared. (J I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures) described in section C of the Initial Study will be applied to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION should be prepared. [ J I find the proposed project, individually and /or cumulatively, MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.* (J I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [ J I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. KIM RODRIGUEZ K, 0 Signature of Person Reo6nsible for Adkiinistering the Project Date: June 20, 2000 *EIR Issues of Focus: N/A 00G.151