The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA REPORT 2003 0507 CC REG ITEM 10D111EN/1 / 0 . �i• C_- oc , prvveei, TT CITY OF MOORPARK AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council e FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Plic Works David Bobardt, Planning Manager DATE_: April 25, 2003 (Council Meeting 5 -7 -03) SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared on Behalf of Project No. 8026: Spring Road Widening Between Flinn Avenue and New Los Angeles Avenue DISCUSSION A. Project Description 1. Project Limits: The limits of the project extend from "old" Flinn Avenue to New Los Angeles Avenue (see Exhibit 1). 2. Project Scope: The scope of work for the Spring Road Widening Project is generally summarized as follows: • Acquisition of additional street right -of -way along the east side of the street; • Construction of additional pavement width and new curbs, gutters and sidewalks along the east side of the street (see Exhibit 2); • Construction of a raised, landscaped center median (see Exhibit 3); • Relocation of the traffic signal poles at the northeast corner of Spring Road and New Los Angeles Avenue; • Construction of a double left -turn lane for south -to- east left - turners at the intersection of Spring Road and New Los Angeles Avenue (see Exhibit 4); • Restriping of the street to include painted Bike Lanes; • Reconstruction of masonry walls and other private improvements on the east side of the street; • Reconstruction of parkway landscaping and irrigation; • Removal and replacement of trees along the east side of the street, as required by the project. Spring Rd MND_a 0 00 osz Spring Road Widening Mitigated Negative declaration April 25, 2003 Page 2 3. Tree Replacement: As mentioned above, the project will require the removal of approximately twenty -nine (29) mature trees. The project will include the planting of one twenty -four inch (24 ") box trees for each tree removed. B. Environmental Review The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires environmental review for certain public projects that would result in physical changes to the environment. To comply with CEQA, staff prepared an Initial Study (Exhibit 5) to determine if the proposed Spring Road widening project would result in any significant effect on the environment. The conclusion of the Initial Study was that potentially significant noise, aesthetic, and biological effects of the project could result, due to the construction of the proposed street improvements. These potential effects could be mitigated to a less -than significant level by limiting construction hours and by providing replacement parkway trees. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit 6) was prepared and noticed for public comment from April 4 to April 25, 2003. No public comments were received during this period. A Resolution (Exhibit 7) has been prepared for City Council consideration to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. It should be noted that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration considered the widening of Spring Road between the Southern California Regional Rail Authority railroad tracks and New Los Angeles Avenue. Subsequently, the northerly limits of the Spring Road Widening Project [Project 8026] was revised to begin at Flinn Avenue, with the Spring Road widening north of Flinn Avenue to be undertaken as a part of the Flinn Avenue Realignment Project [Project 80371. Project 8037 was found to be exempt from environmental review. C. Project Implementation 1. Design: The design for the project is nearing completion. It will be necessary to seek and obtain a permit from Caltrans for the work to be done at the northeast corner of New Los Angeles Avenue and Spring Road. 2. Right -of -Way: Upon adoption of the subject Mitigated Negative Declaration, it is the intent of staff to proceed with efforts necessary to acquire the additional street rights -of -way required for the project. It is anticipated that all rights -of -way will be acquired by June of 2004. Spring Rd MND_a 0 Spring Road Widening Mitigated Negative declaration April 25, 2003 Page 3 3. Construction: Upon completion of the acquisition of the required rights -of -way (June 2004), the project should be ready to advertise for receipt of bids. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution NO. 2003- adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Project No. 8026: Spring Road Widening. Attachments: Exhibit 1: Map Exhibit 2: Cross - Section Exhibit 3: Plan Exhibit 4: Striping Plan for Double Left -Turn Lane Exhibit 5: Initial Study Exhibit 6: Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit 7: Resolution Spring Rd MND_a 0 Spring Road Widening Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit 1 Location Map U-) I FLIINN ROPErT AVE. FIT LH--- AVE. rs •.� `n - I �� L J Lug NN C. L s 00,00-SIS J7' WET � n I I II II I ii II 6 I I . II I VARIES O— - – -�'-- _ – --- – – — m U N � Q I I I -P SPRING RnAD U ` —GRIND EDGE AND �i: N TACK COAT. 3' X 1" TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS GRIND AT JOIN LINE �O a N U) 4J NOT TO SCALE �4J� �4 04-H X co %w 8\ 1 QCurb QCurb & Gutter QMedian 37' 7' AC EAST f�' I O VERLA Y I C� 7 7' 12' 1 I VARIES WIDENING 6 4" AC O VARIES ix 8" PUB GRADE T01 27. MAX. i 12'f 1EA9 I - '.:,: I I I -P SPRING RnAD U ` —GRIND EDGE AND �i: N TACK COAT. 3' X 1" TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS GRIND AT JOIN LINE �O a N U) 4J NOT TO SCALE �4J� �4 04-H X co %w 8\ 1 - -arf �� vat I ffm I` f � �a Mt , m oli$ A 5TR E T LINN I ' I f ; �`'$�� I � I I � i • � , �tl ,� , . TAB J , �s ;I( i Ll I f i 19I I I — ?�> l I 1 IjI I � ,AYE . –� � °-0 If- �..�:, ,�! ��il i::. � r , � I I ! f � �, r. !r f W LOSJANGELES AVENUE II fl 1 en Jill U) 0 .rq 4-) flo � 124 U "0 -P -H rd a) -0 z (0 0 z3 M fx a) -P 4-) 0) � —1 -H -rq � 4-J cn - -arf �� vat I ffm I` f � �a Mt , m oli$ A 5TR E T LINN I ' I f ; �`'$�� I � I I � i • � , �tl ,� , . TAB J , �s ;I( i Ll I f i 19I I I — ?�> l I 1 IjI I � ,AYE . –� � °-0 If- �..�:, ,�! ��il i::. � r , � I I ! f � �, r. !r f W LOSJANGELES AVENUE II fl 1 en Jill Spring Road Widening Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit 4 Plan: Double Left-Turn Lanes �j AGGEL) RCD V I , 1696 0 0 0 G" . �,'_ _81 11�K 4t t , I M fl I . . . . . . . . . . . Jig 6� 4141 ; LOS AVENUE 0 0 0 G" . �,'_ _81 Project Title: Spring Rd. Widening -*�� Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6200 Case No.: Project 8026 Contact Person and Phone No.: Ken Gilbert (805) 517 -6255 Name of Applicant: City of Moorpark (Public Works Department) Address and Phone No.: 799 Moorpark Ave, Moorpark, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6255 Project Location: Spring Road between New Los Angeles Avenue and High Street General Plan Designation: n/a Zoning: n/a Project Description: Right -of -way acquisition along Spring Road and widening of street to provide bike lanes and landscaped median. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: n/a North: Residential and commercial uses. South: Shopping centers on each side of Spring Road at New Los Angeles Avenue. East: Residential, commercial, and industrial uses with some vacant land. West: Primarily residential uses with some industrial and commercial uses near High Street Responsible and Trustee Agencies: None. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental Significant X factors checked below would Impact" or 'Potentially Significant Unless be potentially Mitigated, affected by this project, involving at as indicated by the checklist on the least following one impact thatis a 'Potentially pages. Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality X Biological Resources Hazards and Hazardous Materials Cultural Resources Hydrology/Water Quality Geology /Soils Land Use /Planning X Mineral Resources Noise Population /Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities /Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance None DETERMINATION: 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. Mitigation measures described on the attached Exhibit 1 have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Prepared by: �1rs� Reviewed by: Date: " 3/ ` -� Dat . ' 3 r .0 3 1 000099 Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 INITIAL STUDY EXHIBIT 1: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Prior to removal of any trees along Spring Road, landscaping and irrigation plans prepared by a licensed landscape architect shall be submitted to the community development director for review and approval. Existing trees to be removed shall be replaced with minimum 24" box -size trees. New trees shall be installed within one (1) year of completion of sidewalks and concrete median curbs. Monitoring Action: Review of landscaping plans, field inspection Timing: Prior to tree removal, After installation of landscaping Responsibility: Community Development Director 2. Construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday as specified in Chapter 15.26 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. Monitoring Action: Review of construction specifications Timing: Prior to approval of contract Responsibility: Director of Public Works AGREEMENT TO PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 95070 (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Article 6), this agreement must be signed prior to release of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for public review. I, THE UNDERSIGNED PROJECT APPLICANT, HEREBY AGREE TO MODIFY THE PROJECT DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE ABOVE - LISTED MITIGAT tl EA U S IN THE PROJECT. gnature of Projedt Applicant Date 2 000100 Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact A. AESTHETICS — Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X 2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but X not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 3) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? 4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Response: The road widening would remove 29 ornamental trees, including pine trees, birch trees, pear trees, elm trees, an ash and an oak tree, along with other landscaping along Spring Road. The project would, however, replace the existing landscaping with a new landscaped median. Mitigation is included that replacement trees shall be provided. New street lighting will be installed as part of the project, however, since the street is already lit, this is considered a less -than significant impact. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: Prior to removal of any trees along Spring Road, landscaping and irrigation plans prepared by a licensed landscape architect shall be submitted to the community development directorfor review and approval. Existing trees to be removed shall be replaced with minimum 24" box -size trees. New trees shall be installed within one (1) year of completion of sidewalks and concrete median curbs. B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, the City of Moorpark may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources agency, to non - agricultural use? 2) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? 3) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? Response: This project does not affect agricultural resources. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. 3 Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact C. AIR QUALITY — Would the project: 1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable x air quality plan? 2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute x substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 4) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 5) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X X X Response: The widening of Spring Road does not include the addition of any motor vehicle lanes, and would therefore not increase its capacity. Rather, bike lanes would be added in each direction, resulting in a potential for reduction of vehicle miles traveled. With no growth - inducing impacts that could result in increases in air pollution, no adverse impact is expected. Construction dust may result from the widening activities, but the size of the project is too small to result in significant fugitive dust as defined in the Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines. Sources: Project description, site plans, Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District November 2000. Mitigation: None required. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? .2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? 3) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X X X X 4 00010; Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat X wnservation plan Response: This project, in an urbanized location, does not affect natural biological resources. Mitigation is included for the removal of existing parkway trees (See aesthetics). With mitigation, no significant adverse impact is expected. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. E. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project: 1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historic resource as defined in §15064.5? 2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 3) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? 4) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Response: This project involves the grading and paving of the existing right -of -way and additional right -of- way to be acquired. The land has previously been cleared and graded, leaving a remote possibility of cultural resources existing on site. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project: 1) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death Involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? 5 X X X X ®0003 2) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 3) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 4) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact X X X Response: This project does not include the construction of any buildings. Soil erosion is not expected, since the site will be landscaped. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS — Would the project: 1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 3) Emit hazardous emission or handle hazardous or acutely X hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 4) Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 7) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 6 ®00:.04 Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Response: This project does not affect hazards or hazardous materials. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY — Would the project: 1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? 4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? 5) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 7) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 8) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving i) flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X X X X X X X X X ii) inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Response: This project involves minor widening of Spring Road. Proper NPDES Best Management Practices will be employed during construction. Sources: Project description, site plans. 7 +�. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 8) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Response: This project does not affect hazards or hazardous materials. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY — Would the project: 1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? 4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? 5) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 7) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 8) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving i) flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X X X X X X X X X ii) inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Response: This project involves minor widening of Spring Road. Proper NPDES Best Management Practices will be employed during construction. Sources: Project description, site plans. 7 +�. Potentially Significant Impact Mitigation: None required. I. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project: 1) Physically divide an established community? 2) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 3) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Significant Less Than With Significant No Mitigation Impact Impa Response: This project involves the widening of Spring Road to accommodate bicycle lanes in both directions. Spring Road is designed consistent with the Circulation Element Highway Network Plan. Sources: City of Moorpark General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, project description, site plans. None required. X X X J. MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the project: 1) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 2) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Response: This project does not affect mineral resources. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. K. NOISE — Would the project result in: 1) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 2) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 3) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 4) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X X X X Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Response: Construction noise could be significant on residential uses to the east and west of Spring Road. Mitigation is included to restrict construction hours, reducing this impact to less -than significant. Sources: City of Moorpark General Plan, Moorpark Municipal Code. Mitigation: Construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday as specified in Chapter 15.26 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. L. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: 1) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly ( for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly ( for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 2) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Response: The widening of Spring Road will accommodate bicycle lanes and will not stimulate additional population and housing growth. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. M. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? g X X X X 0400:107 Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Other public facilities? Response: This project does not affect public service levels. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. X N. RECREATION 1) Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 2) Does the project include recreational facilities or require X the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Response: This project does not affect parks or recreation. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. O. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC — Would the project: 1) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation X to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 2) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 4) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 5) Result in inadequate emergency access? X 6) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X 7) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Response: This project will accommodate bicycle lanes on Spring Road between New Los Angeles Avenue and the rail crossing south of High Street. Spring Road will continue to have 4 travel lanes, consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Highway Network Plan. 10 -L Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Sources: City of Moorpark General Plan, project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS — Would the project: 1) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 2) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 3) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 4) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 5) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 6) Be served by the landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 7) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X X X X X X 0 Response: This project does not involve any land uses that would affect water supplies, wastewater, or solid waste. Sources: Project description, site plans. Mitigation: None required. Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history of prehistory? 2) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, X but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effect of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and effects of probable future projects)? 11 V Spring Rd Widening Project 8026 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 3) Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Response: This project involves the widening of the right -of -way by 12 feet and the roadway by 10 feet along Spring Road between High Street and New Los Angeles Avenue. Parkways and medians will be landscaped. The area of work is fully urbanized. Sources: Project description, site plans. Earlier Environmental Documents Used in the Preparation of this Initial Study None Additional Project References Used to Prepare This Initial Study One or more of the following references were incorporated into the Initial Study by reference, and are available for review in the Community Development Office, City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021. Items used are referred to by number in the Response Section of the Initial Study Checklist. 1. The City of Moorpark's General Plan, as amended. 2. The Moorpark Municipal Code, as amended. 3. The City of Moorpark Procedures for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines adopted by Resolution No. 92 -872 4. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. & California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section 15000 et. seq. 5. Letter from Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works dated October 25, 2001 detailing project description. 6. Memo from Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works dated February 15, 2002 providing additional information on project description. 7. Spring Road Widening Project Tree Survey dated May 30, 2002 from Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works. 12 000:.x.0 i ii it i � I' L %l�rl It i J ha , f t y. •'6r, �a�l I I __ JI i } Legend Tree # Species Diameter 1 Ash I 9" 2 Pine 12" 3 Pear ! 8" 4 Birch I 8" 5 Birch I 10" 6 Pine 12" 7 Pine 9" 8 Pine 12" 9 Elm 4" 10 Elm 12" _ 11 Pine 20" 12 Elm 12" 13 Pine 20" 14 Elm 12" 15 Pine 22" 16 Pine 18" 17 Elm 4" 18 Elm 12" 19 Pine 14" 20 Elm 10" 21 Pine 20" 22 Oak 8" 0 G_I . . . .................. .e end Tree # 1 2 3 7 —2 13 14 15 —6 17 18 19 fo— fl— f2— Diameter 91, 12" 8. 8- 10, j-07, I � E I I I ' i i i I I� i, III I i • I i �� i r eft end Tree # Species I Diameter 1 Ash 2 Pine 2 — 3 Pear 1 81, 4 Birch j 8" 5 1 Birch 10" 6 Pine �___ 7 Pine 1 _12"_� 91, 8 Pine 12° 9 Elm 4„ 10 Elm 12" 11 Pine 20^ 12 Elm 12" 13 Pine 20" 14 Elm 12" 15 Pine 22» 16 Pine 18° 17 Elm 4" 18 Elm 12" 19 Pine 14" 20 Elm 101, 21 Pine 20» 22 Oak 8" MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517 -6200 The following Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Procedures of the City of Moorpark. Public Review Period: April 4, 2003 to April 25, 2003 Project Title /Case No.: Spring Road Widening (Project 8026) Project Location: Spring Rd., Moorpark, Ventura County. Project Description: Right -of -way acquisition along Spring Road and widening of street for bike lanes and landscaped median. Project Type: Private Project X Public Project Project Applicant: City of Moorpark Department of Public Works, Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director Finding: After preparing an Initial Study for the above - referenced project, revisions have been made by or agreed to by the applicant consistent with the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study. With these revisions, it is found that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City of Moorpark, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (Initial Study Attached) Responsible Agencies: None. Trustee Agencies: None. Attachments: Initial Study with Mitigation Measures and Monitoring and Reporting Program Contact Person: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California, 93021 (805) 517 -6281 MADBobardt \M \CEQA \Draft Env. DocumentsTroposed MND Spring Rd.doc 000114 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PROJECT NO. 8026: SPRING ROAD WIDENING WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to conduct environmental review on certain projects that would result in a physical change to the environment; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared in compliance with CEQA for proposed Project No. 8026: Spring Road Widening, in order to determine if any significant environmental effects would result from the project; and WHEREAS, the conclusion of the Initial Study was that, with the incorporation of mitigation measures as conditions of approval, no significant effects would result from proposed Project No. 8026 and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Mitigated Negative Declaration was given in accordance with CEQA with comments accepted between April 4, 2003 and April 25, 2003 and no comments were received during this period. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. CONSIDERATION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: The City Council has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Project No. 8026: Spring Road Widening, together with any comments received during the public review process. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: The City Council finds on the basis of the whole record for Project 8026: Spring Road Widening, including the Initial Study and any comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment with the inclusion of mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, that these mitigation measures are incorporated into the project as conditions of Resolution No. CC -2003- Page 2 approval, and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Moorpark and is hereby adopted. SECTION 3. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program identified in the Initial Study prepared on behalf of Project 8026: Spring Road Widening, is hereby adopted. SECTION 4. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of May, 2003. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk