Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1997 1210 CC SPCMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California December 10, 1997 A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on December 10, 1997 in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 7 :17 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Hunter led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Evans, Perez, Wozniak and Mayor Hunter Absent: Councilmember Teasley Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Nelson Miller, Director of Community Development; Deborah Traffenstedt, Senior Planner; Captain Mike Lewis, Sheriff's Department; Lillian Hare, City -- Clerk; and Lisa Pope, Deputy City Clerk 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: None. 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. Consider Continued Public Hearing for Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project (Specific Plan No. 8 /Specific Plan No. SP -93 -1, General Plan Amendment No. GPA -93 -1, and Zone Change No. ZC- 93 -3), Applicant: Hidden Creek Ranch Partners (Last Public Hearing That Testimony Will be Taken on the Environmental Impact Report). Staff Recommendation: Accept public testimony, close the public hearing, and direct staff to prepare a draft resolution for EIR certification for City Council consideration at the December 10, 1997 meeting. (CONTINUED ITEM - HEARING CLOSED) Mr. Miller summarized the staff report and also addressed the City Attorney's written guidelines for reviewing the adequacy of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). ^' In response to Mayor Hunter, Dana Privitt from BonTerra Consulting described the alternatives analyzed in the project EIR. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Miller clarified that the adverse unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR and staff Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 2 December 10, 1997 report are those that were determined to be potentially significant even with the implementation of feasible mitigation measures, and that an EIR is required to be prepared for significant impacts not fully mitigated. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Privitt described why the project alternatives do not avoid all of the adverse unavoidable impacts that would result from the project. She indicated that only the No Development Alternative would result in no environmental impacts and would avoid significant unavoidable impacts that are associated with the proposed project. She further identified that the Decreased Residential Development Alternative, consisting of 2,850 dwelling units and avoidance of agricultural lands, would avoid the significant adverse land use impact that would result from loss of prime farmland. Mr. Miller explained that reducing the project size may reduce an impact, but that the impact could still be significant and adverse. In response to Councilmember Evans, Ms. Privitt clarified that the Project would impact approximately 118 acres of prime farmlands. Mr. Miller referred the Council to Attachment 1 to the staff report, which was a memorandum describing the action of the Ventura County Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee on December 4, 1997. He further explained that the Committee's decision was to forward a recommendation to the County Board of Supervisors that the Committee regretted the loss of agricultural land, but found that if the project goes forward, the agricultural properties should be included in the area proposed for development. In response to Councilmember Wozniak, Ms. Privitt explained that Valley Fever is addressed in the Air Quality section of the EIR and in the EIR Responses to Comments document. Ms. Privitt also indicated that the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) does not regulate Valley Fever, but does require dust control mitigation measures, including a requirement that face masks should be worn by construction personnel during grading. She also indicated that County Environmental Health does not require any conditions for control of Valley Fever, other than the APCD —' dust control measures, and summarized the EIR dust control mitigation measures. In response to Councilmember Wozniak, Mr. Miller concurred that if additional dust suppression measures are determined to be appropriate and feasible when a development project Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 3 December 10, 1997 is under consideration, those measures could be imposed as conditions of approval. Councilmember Perez stated that the City could issue a stop work order if dust is found to be a problem. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Miller clarified that "state of the art" mitigation measures for Valley Fever are already imposed as dust control requirements and that the EIR recommends that all mitigation measures should be employed. In response to Councilmember Evans, Ms. Privitt explained that the 203 cases of Valley Fever referenced in Mr. Art Lenox's correspondence was based on an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association on Valley Fever outbreak in Ventura County following the Northridge Earthquake. Mayor Hunter requested that staff summarize the significant unavoidable adverse impacts and proposed mitigation measures. Ms. Privitt summarized the significant adverse impacts and mitigation measures for biological resources. Mr. Miller clarified that impacts to oak trees had been reduced by project modifications. Ms. Traffenstedt clarified that deletion of the Lagoon interchange would save approximately 114 oak trees. Ms. Privitt clarified that the redesign for Planning Unit 41 would save approximately 618 oak trees, and that oak tree impacts could be further reduced at the development project stage. Ms. Privitt summarized the significant adverse impacts and mitigation measures for aesthetics and clarified that a conservative approach was taken in the EIR. She further explained that if the project was visible from selected viewpoints, and there would be alteration of views, impacts were considered significant. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Privitt identified that _ the lighting and glare mitigation measures were on page 3.5 -18 of the EIR (Volume V), and referenced measure No. 8. She also identified that additional light and glare mitigation measures had been agreed to by the applicant. Mayor Hunter referenced the EIR Summary Table description of significant traffic impacts after mitigation. Ms. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 4 December 10, 1997 Privitt provided clarification that traffic impacts in the City can be mitigated, and that the presumption is there would be a City traffic mitigation fee and improvement program for cumulative impacts and that the fee would be required in addition to project improvements for direct impacts. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Miller clarified that the City has not entered into an agreement with the County that would require payment of the County's traffic mitigation fee for impacts on the County's roadway system. In response to Councilmember Evans, Mr. Miller clarified that a bikeway along Collins Drive would require more detailed design and in combination with an additional right -turn lane would require approximately 18 feet of right of way take from the City's park along both Collins Drive and Campus Park Drive. Ms. Privitt summarized air quality impacts and clarified that the project would result in significant cumulative air quality impacts as would any project of similar size. She also stated that Carbon Monoxide impacts had been recalculated based on current approved emission factors and ipact modeling requirements, and that Carbon Monoxide impacts would not be significant. Mayor Hunter identified that the next significant impact to be discussed was water service. Mr. Miller referred the Council to the letter attached to the December 3 staff report from Calleguas Municipal Water District, and indicated that the Calleguas letter addressed long -term water availability. Mayor Hunter identified that the final significant impact to be addressed was solid waste disposal. Ms. Privitt summarized the potential impacts. In response to Councilmember Wozniak, Ms. Privitt identified that Pima County, Arizona, Lighting Control Ordinance could be used to develop additional light and glare control mitigation measures. Mayor Hunter asked that further information be provided to the Council to explain to what extent Valley Fever is a ._ threat from large -scale mass grading as compared to everyday agricultural operations. Mayor Hunter also requested further information on mitigation measures for the Moorpark College Observatory impacts. He questioned whether standards versus relocation were the only available options. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 5 December 10, 1997 Councilmember Evans requested further information on grading for agricultural operations, including how much earth movement typically occurs. He also requested clarification regarding square miles of impact for the 203 cases of Valley Fever reported following the Northridge Earthquake. Mayor Hunter requested information on Valley Fever cases resulting from construction of the State Routes 23 and 118 Direct Connector. Councilmember Wozniak requested specific clarification on what portions of the Pima County Ordinance would be applicable. MOTION: Councilmember Wozniak moved and Councilmember Evans seconded a motion to continue this item to January 7, 1998. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 5. CLOSED SESSION: None was held. 6. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Councilmember Wozniak moved and Councilmember Evans seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The time was 8:40 p.r ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffe edt, City Clerk