HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1988 0601 CC REG ITEM 09EJOHN PATRICK LANE
Mayor
ELOISE BROWN
Mayor Pro Tern
JOHN GALLOWAY
Councilmember
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D.
Councilmember
BERNARDO M.PEREZ
Councilmember
MAUREEN W. WALL
City Clerk
MOORPARK
M E M O R A N D U M
ITEM 9.�;
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
THOMAS P. GENOVESE
City Treasurer
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
DATE: May 25, 1988 (CC meeting of 6/1/88)
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - APPEAL NO. 4 -
US SPRINT NETWORK ROUTE DEVELOPMENT
(3ack�c round
The US sprint Communications Network Route Development proposes
to install an underground fiber optic communication cable directly
within the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way through the City
of Moorpark. The Southern Pacific Railroad property is currently
zoned M -1.
On May 2, 1988 the Planning Commission considered an appeal by
US Sprint regarding the Director of Community Development
decision to require an Industrial Planned Development permit.
After considering the matter the Commission upheld the decision of
the Director of Community Development.
Section 8141 -0.3 of the Moorpark Municipal Code requires all
industrial uses within an "M" zone to be established under the
review procedures of a Development Plan.
Discussion
Section 8141- 1.2.10 of the City's zoning code (see attached) lists
permitted uses within the M -1 zone. It was the opinion of staff
that since fiber optic communication cables were not listed; this
section appeared to be the most logical place to put such a use.
PJR:crl
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
May 25, 1988
Page 2
Section 8141 -1.5 of the code (see attached) lists oil and gas
transmission lines as requiring a Conditional Use Permit. One
could argue that fiber optic cables might also be placed within
this section.
Regardless of which section one views, it is staff's opinion that
an approval, with possible conditions, is the correct procedure to
address the applicants request.
The applicant states that there are to be no above grade structures
and once work is completed no evidence of the cable will remain.
If the purpose of the Development Permit or Conditional Use Permit
is to consider conditions of development and there does not appear
to be any in this case; the process comes under question.
Recommendation
1. Uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and require
the processing of an Industrial Planned Development; or
2. Determine that the code does not address this specific use
and that the City Council finds the purpose and intent of
the Industrial Planned Development best served by not
requiring an Industrial Planned Development.
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of 198
By-
PJR:crl
USPRINTE /CHRONI
C I T Y OF M O O R P A R K
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
APPEAL FORM
TO: City Council
Planning Commission
Appeal No.
3
I hereby appeal the decision of the Director of Community Development which
was given on April 13 , 19 88
The decision was as follows : That US Sprint Communications CamDanv must file an Industrial
Planned Develo;xnent permit based on Section 8141 - 1.2.10 and 8141 -0.3 of the Mborpard Municipal Codes
per letter dated April 13, 1988 from Patrick J. Richards. Said letter is attached hereto and made a
part hereof as Exhibit A.
The grounds of appeal are: (attach extra sheets as needed)
.) n,e dM „menrs -__ *_he env; mnnantal studies for Ventura Countv are beiriR processed at this time for
our Ne�ative Declaration, 2) US Sprint is placing an underground fiber optic communications system
cable directly within the Southern Pacific railroad right -of -way; therefore there will be no above
grade structures and that US Sprint is an interstate carrier with no distribution points within the
city of Moorpark.
I request that the appropriate decision - making body take the
following action: That the requirement for an Industrial Planned Development permit or
a, )nditional Use Pei—iit be waived based on the r oundo a, stated ab� e for this anneal.
Name of Appe 1.1 a n t US Sprint Communications Company
Address of A-1 1 ant 973 Fast Pront St.. Ventura. (:a1i.fornia 93001
'Telephone Number of Appellant ( 805 ) 643 -4083
Is the appellant a party in the application? YES If not, state
basis for filing appeal as an "aggrieved person ".
/�� q!6�
RAJJDAI r ( ature of p ellant)
Contract; Field lent for US Sprint Network Route
Deve1oV -Pnt
Date: -- - A:)ril
5/84
JOHN PATRICK LANE
Mayor
ELOISE BROWN
Mayor Pro Tern
JOHN GALLOWAY
Councilmember
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D.
Councilmember
BERNARDO M. PEREZ
Councilmember
MAUREEN W. WALL
City Clerk
April- 13, 1988
EN M
---M-OORPARK
Mr. Ketly B. Brackman
U.S. Sprint Communication Company
973 E. Front Street
Ventura, Ca. 93001
RE: PROPOSED FIBER OPTIC NETWORK
Dear Mr.. Brackman:
Page 1 of 3
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
THOMAS P. GENOVESE
City Treasurer
First of all I would like to apologize for the length of time that has
elapsed since you first contacted me.
The City Attorney has advised me that no franchise is required by the
City and the City's Zoning Code under Section 8141 - 1.2.10 allows such
public services used as a permitted use within the M -1 Zone. The railroad
right —of. —way is currently zone M -1 thru the City of Moorpark.
Section 8141 -0.3 of the Moorpark Municipal Code requires that all industrial
uses in all "M" Zones are subject to established review procedures including
approval. of a Development plan as appropriate and subsequent to issuance
of a Zoning Clearance. Therefore, U.S. Sprint must file with the City
of Moorpark a request for an Industrial Planned Development permit. The
filing fee is $1,2Z)O and you must appear before the City Planning Commission
for approval. I would suggest that you stop into my office so the process
and timing can be better explained.
Should you have any questions regarding the above please feel free to
call. me.
Si, ncereIy,
trick. .J. /Ichar-d's
Director o� Community Development
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
911 IIC �
5
PaEe 3 of 3
Sec. 8141 - 1.2.10 - Fublic service uses, such as electri-
cal distribution substations, telephone exchanges or
communications buildings, post offices, fire and police
stations, water and gas local service Facilities, broad-
casting studios, radio and microwave transmission towers,
and similar uses;
Sec. 8141 - 1.2.11 - Agriculture, except the raising of ani-
mals and fowl for commercial purposes or the sale of any
products at retail on the premises;
Sec. 8141- 1.2.12 - The reasonable expansion or evolution
of a legally established use whose expanded or altered
sphere of activity may include uses or operations normally
considered M -? cr M -? rvnPS of 11sac or operations but which
are capable by various means of meeting the performance
standards established for the LM -1 District;
Sec. 8141 - 1.2.13 - Other similar uses which the Planning
Director finds compatible with the Principally Permitted
Uses described herein; consistent with the purpose and intent
of the M- 1,District and not of a type to adversely affect
the use of adjoining properties. The Planning Director
may make findings based on these criteria or may refer to
the Planning Commission for hearing certain controversial
classification matters. Appeals from the findings of the
Planning Director shall be made within ten (10) days in
writing to the Planning Commission (AEI. ORD. 2845 - 5/14/74).
Sec. 8141 -1.3 - Accessory Uses - The following are the acces-
sory uses permute in the ►1 -1 District:
Sec. 8141 -1.3.1 -- Limited repair operar. ions for products
described as Principally Permitted Uses and commercial
sales and service incidental to a Principally Permitted
Use, provided such operations are housed as a r art of t'.:e
building or buildings comprising the basic operation;
Sec. 8141 -1.3.2 - Dwelling units, limited to not more than
one per establishment, for security or maintenance per-
sonnel and their families, when located on the ?remises
where they are employed in such capacity. No other resi-
dential use shall be permitted;
Sec. 8141 -1.3.3 - Emoloyee recreation facilities and play
areas;
Sec. 8141 -1.3.4 - Restaurant, cafe, or cafeteria operated
in conjunction with a Principally Permitted Use for the
convenience of oersons emoioyed on the premises;
439 OC - i
EXHIBIT "A" Page 2 of 3
ARTICLE 23
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
Sec. 8141 -0 - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS EXPLAINED
Sec. 8141 -0.1 - Effectuation - The provisions of this ordin-
ance shall become effective thirty (30) days following the
prescribed public hearings resulting in adoption of ordin-
ances by the Board of Supervisors which reclassify existing
manufacturing zoned lands to industrial districts;
Sec. 8141 -0.2 - Purpose - The explanation contained herein is
intended to serve as a guide for understanding and interpret-
ing the provisions of the industrial regulations in order to
provide consistent and equitable application and enforcement;
Sec. 8141 -0.3 - Industrial Regulations Established - The three industrial
districts established in this Article are as follows: M -1, Industrial Park
District; M -2, Limited Industrial District; and M -3, General Industrial
District. For each district, there is a statement of.purpose, a generalized
description of the different types of uses permitted, and a designation of
property development and operational performance standards. Industrial uses
in all districts are subject to established review procedures including
approval of a Development Plan or Conditional Use Permit, as appropriate,
and subsequent issuance of a Zoning Clearance. A Development Plan shall be
processed as a discretionary administrative permit pursuant to Article 43;
`AM. ORD. 3057- 9/16/75 -AM. ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83)
Sec. 8141 -0.4 -- Factcrs Con::i-dered in Writing t::e Ordinance -
The following factors are basic considerations in the design
of the industrial districts:
Sec. 8141 -0.4.1 - The reed
development and upt:taL'L0na1
expected in each district;
for a clear definition of what
Sec. 8141 -0.4.2 - The need for a clear definition of what
means of protection are afforded industrial developers and
operators, surrounding urban uses, and the general public;
Sec. 8141 -0.4.3 - The need for flexibility to permit adapt-
ability to changes in industrial modes of operation and
the most expeditious processing of industrial location
matters;
/+34 OC -2
CUSTOMER'S ORDER NO. DATE
19 C!
NAME
ADDRESS
SOLD By CASH I c 00 CHARGE ON ACCT MDSE. RETD I PAID OUT
• DESCRIPTION
TAX
TOTAL 0C)
ALL CLAIMS AND RETURNED GOODS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THIS BILL.
"N
65161 RECD BY
5R330
TAX
TOTAL 0C)
ALL CLAIMS AND RETURNED GOODS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THIS BILL.
"N
65161 RECD BY
5R330
FA0
Sec. 8141 - 1.4.10 - Commercial and service type uses which
are intended primarily to serve the needs of the M -1
District are compatible with the permitted types of in-
dustrial uses or will not interfere with the orderly
development of the industrial area;
Sec. 8141- 1.4.11 - Churches, temples, or other buildings
used for religious worship. (REP. ORD.3549- 6/2/81/EN. ORD.
3553- 7/21/81)
Sec. 8141 -1.5 - CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES (PLANNING DIRECTOR) - Subject
to the approval of a conditional use permit from the Planning Director or
designee as provided in Article 43, the following uses may be permitted,
provided they meet the purpose and intent of this Article and the provisions
of this Chapter:
(ADD. ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83)
Sec. 8141 -1.5.1 - Oil and gas drilling, production, and transportation, and
Ci1P nece S d ; attclu l ei% uSC= 3n.A _ struct7S_e -_ ; but eve-ltidin-o g refining
- -o r
processing, and manufacturing thereof; (ADD. ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83)
Sec. 8141 -1.5.2 - Pipeline and Transmission Lines - The aboveground
facilities and structures associated with pipelines and transmission lines
ocated on private property unless otherwise preempted by State law;
ADD. ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83]
4- -1
t -
PUBLIC REVIEW OF A DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The Planning Division is processing the following land use permit. Based
on the Initial Study findings, this project may have a significant effect
on the environment and a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act.
PERMIT NO.: CUP-4491
APPLICANT: U.S. Sprint Communications Co.
LOCATION: The project is located within the right -of -way of the Southern
Pacific Railroad from the Los Angeles County Line on the east, through
Simi Valley, Moorpark and ending in the City of Camarillo. Only the
portion of the project within the unincorporated jurisdiction is addressed
in this draft document.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposed to install a buried fiber
optic communications cable wholly within the railroad right -of -way.
The public review period is from April 24, 1988 to May 24, 1988. The
Environmental Report Review Committee will hold a public hearing at 1:30
p.m. on May 25, 1988 in Room 344, Hall of Administration, 800 S. Victoria.
Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009. You may attend this hearing or submit written
coniments to .lames Carus,,, R.t% I'l.aair.g, 800 South Victoria Avenue,
Ventura, CA 93009. Please call (805) 654 -2453 for more information.
f.
�i
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
count: of VEntura P�anninc DivJision
1. Entitlement: conditional Use Permit No: 4491
2. Amlicant: U.S. Sprint (xmnmications Catpany
3. Locat (see attached maps Exhibit "A ") The project is located
within the Southern Pacific Railroad riot- of-way from tae
easterly County line at Santa Susan through Simi Valley,
Moorpark, Los Pesas Valley, Somis and ending in the City of
Camarillo. The portion of the project within the unincorporated
jurisdiction is the subject of this document. Other
jurisdictions shall permit the project within their cwn
territories.
4. Assessor Parcel Number and Size: Several (see AP list found in
Exhibit "B ")
5. General Plan Designation: Open Space, Agriculture, Urban, Rural
CatMMity (Open Space and Conservation Element).
6. EXiSting Zoni*Y?: AE (Agricultural Exclusive) ; OS- 40 acre (Open
space 40 acre minimum lot size)
7. : The applicant proposes to place a buried fiber optic
ocimnmications cable entirely within the Southern Pacif is
Railroad right -of -way. The cable corridor shall run from
Burbank, Las Angeles County through Ventura County, and the
Cities of Simi Valley, Moorpark, and Camarillo. See Exhibit "A"
for the cable route.
9. Responsible Agencies: California Department of Fish and Game;
California Department of Transportation (CAL'IRANS)
California State law requires that an Initial Study (environmental
evaluation) be conducted to determine if this project could
significantly affect the environment. An Initial Study was conducted
by the Planning Division to evaluate the potential effect of this
project on the environment. Based on the findings contained in the
attached Initial Study, it has been determined that this project could
have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act (Sec. 15073). Tae
potentially significant effects identified can be reduced to a less
than significant level if the proposed mitigation measure-- are adopted
as Conditions of Approval.
28. Biological Resources: A biological resources investigati:m
was conducted by Dames and Moore along the Prtire cable
corridor. The results of the investigation indicate that tie
only potentially significant impacts will occur at one off - bridle
creek crossing at Arroyo Las Posas. The cable corridor travers s
a riparian woodland/thicket for a distance of approximately 2)0
feet. No sensitive plant or animal species were observed at th.s
site; however, to mininize the impacts of cable installati m
through the stream and riparian habitat, the following mitigati n
measures have been formulated: - K tGr1Vt J
800 Sowh V lnria Avenue, VenLra, CA 03009
1988
nn r „
a. Th minimize the severity of crushing of vegetation and to
allow natural revegetation to occur more quickly, rubber
tired construction vehicles shall be utilized to the extent
practicle during cable installation.
b. Tb minimize disturbance to natural vegetation and
habitats, clearing arxi grading shall be minimized where
there is substantial native vegetation.
c. The width of the disturbance zone shall be minimized to
the extent practicle; construction vehicles shall be
excluded from traveling or turning around in undisturbed
areas outside the cable corridor.
d. Where natural and/or sensitive habitats would be
disturbed, vegetation shall be trimmed rather than removed.
e. The width of the disturbance zone at streams that are
traversed off - bridge shall be minimized to lessen the
impacts on the stream channels.
D. FUffidC REV1l~3+1:
1. Jagal Notice Mfethod: Direct mailing to property owners within
300 feet of the proposed prom wry-
2. Ibamient Posting Period: April 24, 1988 - May 24, 1988
3. 1?nrirc:.n� �1p1t Review Ccamittee Hearin Dade: May 25,
1988
4. Hall Of Administration, MUl.ti- Purpose Room, Room 344,
bird Floor.
5. �L! : 1:30 p.m.
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
•.11 I� I' .I .1 -
The Environmental Report Review Committee recommends that the
decision - making body find that the above environmental doc ument has been
completed in compliance with the California Envirormiental. Quality Act.
Chair, Erivirorz ental Report Date
Review Committee
A. Iocation Maps
B. Assessor Parcel List
C. Initial Study
D. Biological Assessment Excerpts
E. Cultural Resource Assessment Dweipts
080 -0- 020 -020
163 -0- 010 -200
163 -0- 020 -010
163 -0 -030 -010
163 -0- 010 -190
060 -0- 050 -010
060 -0- 050 -060
060 -0- 010 -060
060 -0- 010 -010
060 -0 -010 -020
060 -0- 030 -110
060 -0 -310 -030
060 -0 -310 -120
060 -0- 320 -245
060 -0- 220 -120
060 -0- 110 -040
060 -0- 090 -010
060 -0- 100 -010
060 -0 -220 -110
060 -0- 078 -020
060 -0 -078 -010
060 -0 -100 -080
060 -0 -110 -030
060 -0 -081 -010
060 -0 -078 -030
VENTURA COUTNY TAX PARCELS
060 -0 -066 -010
060 -0- 380 -090
060 -0- 380 -070
008 -0- 160 -345
008 -0 -160 -100
615 -0- 300 -030
615 -0- 300 -090
637 -0- 070 -150
637 -0- 070 -140
637 -0- 070 -060
637 -0- 070 -020
637 -0- 140 -400
637 -0- 030 -320
500 -0- 291 -075
500 -0- 340 -250
500 -0- 291 -065
500 -0- 340 -320
500 -0 -340 -310
500 -0- 360 -325
500 -0- 340 =260
500 -0- 360 -030
500 -0- 360 -315
500 -0- 340 -270
503 -0- 060 -170
503 -0- 050 -010
EXHIBIT "B"
/4:R
500 -0- 270 -050
230 -0- 061 -07--
230 -0- 061 -C30
230 -3- 051 -D7�'
230 -0 -061 -060
216 -0- 054 -045
216 -0- 052 -055
216 -0- 053 -C25
216 -0- 052 -04`
216 -0- 150 -195
646 -0- 200 -03C
A. PROJECT INFORMATION INITIAL STUDY 13
1. Project No.: Conditional Use Permit No. 4491
2. Name of Applicant: U.S. Sprint Communications Co.
3. Project Location: From the easterly County line at Santa Susane t:nr -.:r.:
the Cities of Simi Valley and Moorpark, and the Los Posas Valley to the
City ot Uamarllio. — —
4. Project Description: The aplicant proposes to install a buried fiber �-
communications cable comp Iefiy J Parisi -- —
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Land Use
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, alter the planned
land use of an area?
Z. Growth Inducement
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, induce growth in an
area?
3. Housing
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional
housing?
4. General Plan Consistency
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, conflict with any
environmental goal, objective,
policy or program of the General
Plan?
5. Mineral and Oil Resources
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
a. The depletion of mineral or
oil resources?
b. Hampering or precluding
access to or the extraction
of, mineral or oil resources?
?age 1 EXHIBIT "C"
Impact? Signif'_cact?
Yes Maybe No Yes Ma_ vbe So
X
I
X
6. Solid Waste Facilities
Will the project, individually
or cumulatively, have an effect
upon solid waste disposal
facilities?
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
7. Air
a. Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
(1) Deterioration of regional
ambient air quality?
(2) Localized air quality
impacts?
(3) Objectionable odors?
b. Will the project be impacted by:
(1) Air pollutants from a nearby
emission source? .
(2) Objectionable odors?
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
8. Earth
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in or be impacted
by:
impact' slzn.`.can-
Yes `!avbe No Yes `lacbe
I
x'
i
i
a. Unstable earth conditions or
changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements,' `I
compaction or overcovering of
the soil?
C. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique
geological or physical features? -
i
e. An increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or
off the site?
f. Changes to the deposition or
erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the
channel of a river or stream or
the bed of the ocean or any bay, X
inlet or lake?
g. Geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground
failure, liquefaction, or similar
hazards?
9. Transportation /Circulation
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
a. The generation of additional v f
vehicular movement'
Page 2
b. An effect on existing parking
facilities, or demand for new
parking?
C. An impact upon existing trans-
portation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns
of circulation or movement of
people and /or goods?
e. Alterations to rail traffic?
f. An increase in traffic hazards
to motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
10. Flood Control
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in or be
impacted by:
a. Changes to absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the route
and /or amount of surface water
runoff?
b. The alteration to the course or
flow of flood waters?
C. The exposure of people, property
or unique natural resources to
hazards such as flooding or
tsunami?
d. An effect on a channel or stream
regulated by the Flood Control
District?
e. Changes in currents, or the course
of direction of water movements,
in any body of water?
f. A flood plain indicated on the
Ventura County Flood Insurance
Rate Maps?
11. Water Resources
I
- _.I/
-- — '>/� I — -- —
X I
I
i
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in or be impacted by:
a. A decrease of surface water
quantity? —
—
I
b. The degradation of surface water
i
quality?
N,
C. A decrease of groundwater
quantity?
d. The degradation of groundwater
quality?
e. A high groundwater table?
Page 3
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
12. Sanitation
If the project will utilize an
individual sewage disposal system,
can the sewage generated by the
project create an adverse health
impact?
13. Water Supply
Will the project not be provided
with a long -term water supply of
adequate quantity and quality?
14. Risk of Upset
Does the project, individually or
cumulatively, involve a risk of
releasing hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset
condition?
15. Human Health
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard
or potential health hazard
(excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
16. Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in impacts
on fire protection due to:
A. The distance /response time from
nearest fire station?
b. The availability of personnel
or equipment?
C. The location in a high fire
hazard area?
d. The design of roads and
circulation?
e. The water supply and
distribution system?
f. The hazardous nature of the
project?
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
17. Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in impacts
on law enforcement due to:
a. The design of the project?
b. The design of roads and
circulation?
C. The location of the project?
Page 4
lmvact? Sign:f cant'
Yes Mavbe No Yes `,av:e No
- I -
i
I
-- - X 1- -- -
— — X I — —
1
I
i
I
i
I
a. Sewers or sewage treatment
plants?
Page 5
_ :ioacc?
-3 ::::
:eS "avbe So
Yes ".a•: jp_
GENERAL
SERVICES AGENCY
18.
Recreation
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in impacts
on recreational opportunities
or facilities?
19.
Harbors
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in an impact
x
on harbors?
AIRPORTS DEPARTMENT
20.
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in impacts on:
a. Air traffic safety?
-
b. Existing airport facilities?
i
— !
I
—
AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT
21.
Agricultural Resources
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
a. The conversion of prime
agricultural land to other
uses?
X
b. The loss of productive crop land
or soils?
C. An. adverse effect on adjacent
agricultural land?
— \
AREAS TO BE COMPLETED BY THE AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTERING 7F_E P4'
22.
Visual Effects
Will the project, individually or
I
cumulatively, result in the obstruction
I
of a scenic resource or view open to
the public, or will the project result
in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
23.
Light and Glare
!
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, produce light or glare?
24.
Noise and Vibrations
Will the project, individually or
i
or cumulatively, result in the ex-
posure of people to increased noise
or vibrations?
I
4
25.
Public Facilities and Utilities
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, have an effect upon,
I
or result in a need for new or
altered services in any of the
I
following areas:
a. Sewers or sewage treatment
plants?
Page 5
b. Water mains or storage
facilities?
C. Electrical transmission
facilities?
d. Natural gas facilities?
e. Communication facilities?
f. Educational facilities?
26. Ener
Will the project:
a. Result in an increase in demand
upon existing sources of fuel or
energy?
b. Use fuel or energy in a wasteful
manner?
27. Cultural /Ethnic Resources
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
a. Disruption, alteration,
destruction, or adverse effect
on a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site or paleon-
tological site?
b. Disruption or removal of
burials or cemetery?
C. Inducement to trespass,
vandalism, or desecration
of cultural resources?
d. The potential to cause a
physical change which would
affect unique values of an
ethnic or social group?
e. The potential to conflict with
or restrict existing religious,
scientific, or educational uses
of the area?
f. Adverse physical or aesthetic
effects to any historic structure
or feature, or to any structure
or feature eligible for designa-
tion as a county landmark?
28. Biological Resources
Will the project, individually or
cumulatively, result in:
A. Change in the diversity of
species, or numbers of any
locally sensitive or unique
plant species.
b. Disturbance or reduction in
the numbers of any State or
Federally listed rare, threatened
or endangered plant species or
their habitats?
Page 6
Impact° S12n1:,1cz :_°
Yes "favbe No :es ".a- -- e
i
- - X
X
-
A
C. Introduction of new plant
species into an area, or the
introduction of a barrier to
the normal replenishment of
existing species?
d. Change in the diversity of
species, numbers or habitat of
any animal species which are
locally sensitive or unique?
e. Disturbance or reduction in the
numbers of any State or Federally
listed rare, threatened or
endangered animal species or
their habitats?
f. Introduction of new animal
species into an area?
g. Introduction of barriers to
movement of any resident or
migratory fish or wildlife
species?
h. Introduction of factors adverse
to the existing ecological
balance?
i. Introduction of substances,
human activity, structures or
other factors that would damage,
change or hamper an existing
locally sensitive or unique
ecosystem?
DISCUSSION OF RESPONSES TO CHECKLIST
(Agency responses are attached here.)
Page 7
Yes "!avbe No es
i
i
I
�I
�i
x
x
D
E.
Yes Maybe do
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. Does the project have the potential
to significantly degrade the quality 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 o.f
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
2. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short -term, to the dis-
advantage of long -term, environmental
goals? (A short -term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long -term impacts will
endure well into the future). X
3. Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (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 which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[ J I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on =he
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION should be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect :.n
this case because the mitigation measure(s) described in Section C of
the Initial Study will be applied to the project. A MITIGATED MEGA VE_
DECLARATION should be prepared.
[ ] I find the proposed project, individually and/or cumulatively, '14Y have
a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL. INF.aC -I
REPORT is required.*
Si nature of Person Responsible
fo Administering the Project
*EIR Issues of Focus:
Page 8
n
Date
•1
1. Land IIse: The subject parcels are currently utilized as railrcid
right -of -way. The cable project is permitted in each of the zones it
traverses. Therefore, no impact on planned land uses in the proje :t
area are evident.
2. GD74h : The proposed project shall not remove constrain s
to growth in the areas traversed by the cable.
3. Wgind: No additional employees requiring housing are needed for tie
project.
4. Ge3MI Plan (xiisistenx'v: A review of the proposed General P7 in
" Goals, Policies and Programs ", indicate that the proposed proje..t
shall not conflict with the environmental goals, policies and progrr as
found in that document.
5. Mineral and Oil Fincuroes: The project is to be located undergm nd
and therefore shall not hamper access to mineral or oil resources.
6. Solid Haste Facilities: The project shall produce an insignificz. -it
amount of solid waste that can be adequately disposed of at exist,,.-)g
disposal facilities.
7. Air:
a(1) Based on the criteria contained in Ventura County's Guidelir?s
for the Preparation of Air Quality lymct Analyses, the subject
project will have an impact on air quality, but the impact will ne
less than significant.
a(2) Based on information conained in the project description
questionnaire, the project is not expected to result in localized Eis
quality impacts.
a(3) Based on the information contained in the project description
questionnaire, the project is not expected to result in objection&le
odors.
b(1) Based on the information presented in the project description
questionnaire, the subject project will not be impacted by nary
emission sources.
b(2) Based on the information presented in the project- description
questionnaire, the subject project shall not be impacted by
objectionable odors.
The Public Works Agency camrents that the project, as amended by the
applicant at the request of the transportation Division shall not he.ve
any impacts on the above noted areas of ern.
11. Water Rescutves: The Public Works Agency oamrents that their
concerts relating to impacts on ground and surface water wens addressed
and adequately mitigated with the required improvements imposed on
CUP -4171. Therefore the continued operation of the subject quarry shell
not have a significant impact on either ground or surface waters.
12. Sanitatirn: The project shall not require an on -site sewage dispeeal
system.
13. Water Supply: Domestic water is not required for this project.
r ••
14. Risk of Upset: Bared upon information contained in the project
description questionnaire, no hazardous substances will be utilized as
part of the project.
15. H=an Health: No envirormental health hazards are expected from the
project.
16. Fite Ptvteotirn: No project impacts on fire prevention are evident
from the information submitted with the application.
17. Sheriff's Department: Due to the design and nature of the project,
the Sheriff's Dept. can serve the project with existing personnel and
equ ipnent .
18. t� ticri: The project is not located near any recreational
facilities.
19.1: The project does not utilize any harbor facilities.
20.�o t�: The project is not located near airport facilities, nor
will the project utilize airport facilities.
NA - - 9 L
(a) The project is not located on prime agricultural lard.
(b) Tte project location shall not result in the loss of productive
soils.
(c) The nature of the project indicates that no impact on adjacent
agricultural lands are expected.
22. Visual Effects: The project shall not have a visual impact due to
its location under ground.
23. Light and Glare: No lighting is required or proposed for this
project
24. Nose and Vibration: The only noise impacts associated with the
project world be construction phase effects. As this impacted is
toTporary, they are less than significant.
25. Public Facilities and Utilities:
(a) The project does not utilize public sewers.
(b) The project does not utilize a water system.
(c), (d), (e) No utilities are required for this project.
(f) The project will not permamently employ any work force, and
therefore shall not have an impact on educational facilites.
26. : Energy usage is a concern on a national and state -wide
level, and generally beyond the scope of local regulation.
27. CuultnralZMnic Resarrces: A Phase I archaeological survey was
conducted along the entire cable corridor by Dames and Moore. No impacts
to cultural resources are expected along this portion of the cable
corridor. A copy of the Phase I survey has been filed with UCLA.
28. Bio ogical Resources: A biological survey survey was completed for
the corridor in December 1987. The results of the survey indicate that
impacts may occur at off - bridge stream crossings where the cable will cut
thrrkxjh riparian habitats. The consultant determined that the potential
impacts would be less than significant due to the narrowness of the
iisturbance area. The Lead Agency does not agree with the consultant's
determination has included mitigation measures suggested by the biologist.
3.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ALONG THE CABLE CORRIDOR
3.1 HABITATS OCCURRING IN THE CABLE CORRIDOR
Because the cable corridor is within the Southern Pacific railroaa r :2nt
of -way, the dominant habitat traversed by the route is ruderal (i.e., dis:uz jea
areas). It is the only habitat traversed in 10 of 16 segments (Table 3 -1). :n
the remaining six segments, ruderal habitat represents greater than 95 percent
j of all areas traversed by the corridor. Other habitats within the corridor are
freshwater marsh, brackish marsh, riparian thicket, and riparian scrub. "`.ese
habitats are described below.
3.1.1 Ruderal
Ruderal habitat consists of previously disturbed areas which have rev,ve-
tated naturally to various degrees with weedy plant species. This hab tat
occurs throughout the length of the cable corridor (Figures 3a -3p). :'he
railroad tracks and immediately adjacent areas are regularly maintained to ;re-
f
vent plant growth that may inhibit operation of the railroad. However, two
plant species consistently encroach upon the railroad bed in the project a ea,
I including mesa prickly -pear (0_puntia littoralis) and feather top (Pennisitum
villosum). The mesa prickly -pear is a native cactus shrub which is fairly 3m-
mon in Venturan coastal sage scrub vegetation. The feather top is an inva ive
' naturalized perennial grass which is primarily restricted to the rail cad
right-of -way and along certain roadbanks in the region. Ruderal areas wi hin
the right-of -way beyond the cleared area usually contain plant species comm;nly
associated with the adjacent vegetation type.
Wildlife species known or likely to occur in ruderal habitat within the
cable corridor include species that readily adapt to continuous man-.ace
i
disturbances. During the surveys, the most frequently observes: species ,,ere
western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), European starling (Stu:nus
vulgaris), and house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus). Broad-footed mole (S`ap. ;nuw
latimanus) and Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) burrows were notek. in
! localized areas. Rock doves (Columba Livia) are expected to use rail cad
bridges and overpasses for nesting during spring and summer.
I
123.1/5 -3.0 -1 3 -1
EXHIBIT "D"
?.1.2 Freshwater Marsh
This habitat occurs :n the cable corridor at one small basin in
Segment 4 (Figure 3 -1d). The marsh area is approximately 75 feet long and
:ocated on the east side ol: Santa Susana Pass. Freshwater marsh vegetation
consists of emergent perennial monocot (grass -like) herbs which occupy season-
ally and /or permanently flooded habitats. Common and characteristic plant spe-
cies of freshwater marsh vegetation in the vicinity of the cable corridor
include California bulrush (Stir us californicus) and cattails (Typha ssp.).
Freshwater marsh usually occurs in palustrine and estuarine habitats such as
streambeds, margins of estuaries, and man -made drainages.
Because the only freshwater marsh along the cable route is quite small and
relatively sparsely vegetated, its value as wildlife habitat is very low.
Common amphibians such as western toad (Bufo boreas) and Pacific treefrog (Hyla
r�esilla) are likely to occur there. Several species of birds and mammals,
including mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginianus), and raccoon (Procyon lotor) are expected to obtain water from
this small marsh. Tracks of the latter species were observed at this location
during the field surveys.
3.:.3 Brackish Marsh
This habitat is traversed by the cable corridor at three locations in
Segment 15, including Carpinteria Creek, along the northwest edge of
Carpinteria Salt Marsh, and Arroyo Paredon (Figure 3 -1o). The plant species
composition of this habitat is similar to that of freshwater marsh. However,
unlike the freshwater marsh, tidal influence was apparent at the three areas of
brackish marsh.
The value of these brackish marshes as wildlife habitat varies. Because
Arroyo Paredon and the- area near the Carpinteria Salt Marsh are relatively
smaL11, both appear to be quite limited in abundance and diversity of wildlife
species. Common amphibians (such as western toad and Pacific treefrog) are
expected in this habitat. In addition, several common species of birds could
use brackish marshes and surrounding areas for breeding and /or winter cover.
3 -2
Iq
Ri ?arian thicket provides habitat for a diversity of wildlife species,
particularly when it is adjacent to riparian woodland. Amphibians and reptiles
that could potentially occur in this habitat include ensatina ( Ensatina
eschszholtzi), black - bellied :salamander (Batrachoseps nigriventris), western
fence lizard, and gopher snake (Pituophis melanoLeucus). The abundance and
diversity of birds in this habitat are expected to be relatively high
throughout the year. Species observed during the surveys included Anna's hum-
mingbird (Calypte anna), mourning dove, bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), and
plain titmouse (Parus inornatus). Male Least Bell's vireos (Vireo bellii
Zusilius) were observed in 1985 in nearby riparian woodland at Arroyo Simi.
Sma:l numbers of this species may forage in riparian thicket during spring, but
are :•ot known to breed in the area. Mammals known and expected to be common in
this habitat include desert cottontail (SyLvilagus audubonii), black- tailed
;ack rabbit .(Lepus californicus), Botta's pocket gopher, California ground
squirrel (Spermophilus beechevi), and raccoon.
3.i.:. Riparian Scrub
This habitat occurs in the cable corridor at the confluence of a small
drai-age and Arroyo Las Posas near Somis (Figure 3 -1h), and at the Ventura
River in Segment 12 (Figure 3 -11). In addition, it occurs in combination with
ripa ian thicket at Arroyo Simi in Segment 6 (Figure 3 -1f).
Riparian scrub is similar in plant species composition to riparian
thicket, but generally contains shorter, less dense vegetation and more weedy
spec.es. Common and characteristic species include mule fat, castor bean
(Ric nus communis), tree tobacco, and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), along
with scattered small arroyo willow shrubs.
The abundance and diversity of wildlife species known or likely to occur
in iparian scrub along the cable route are somewhat lower than in riparian
thicket. Species observed during the surveys included western fence lizard,
Anna's hummingbird, American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), scrub jay
(ADh!locoma coerulescens), plain titmouse, desert cottontail, and California
ground squirrel.. In addition, one eastern fox squirrel (Sciurus niger), a spe-
cie`a introduced primarily into city parks, was observed.
23.:/5 -3.0-4 3 -4
• J
White-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophyrs) and house finches were aour an_
during the field surveys. Two sensitive species that occur in =tie Carp.nt er:a
J Salt Marsh, Belding's savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi. an
southern marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomvs megalotis limicoia), could pC -ter.-
J tially use the adjacent brackish marsh occasionally.
3.1.4 Riparian Thicket
This
habitat (mixed
This habitat occurs in the cable corridor at three
locations,
inc :sc,ing:
(1) Arroyo Simi in Segment 6 (Figure 3 -If); (2) Arroyo
Paredon in
Segmerc
(Figure 3 -1o); and (3) adjacent to Carpinteria State
Beach in
Segme,.t ::
(Figure 3 -1o). Riparian thicket consists of large shrubs
dominated
by muse fat
addition
to those previously described include quail
(Baccharis salicifolia) and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). These two spe-
cies form dense stands, often in conjunction with
elderb?rry
(Sambucus
mexicanus), tree tobacco (Nicotiana 1� auca), and giant
reed (Arundo doc;ax'.
Understory species include perennial herbs and vines such
as mugwort
(Artemie:a
_ dou lasiana), common horseweed (Con za canadensis), Ferris'
giant scouring
rush
(Eauisetum x ferrissii), rice grass (Oryopsis miliacea),
California
black :,err::
7 (Rubus ursinus), and curly dock (Rumex crispus)
.J
7
This
habitat (mixed
with riparian scrub) is
traversed by :Fe
J
corridor
for approximately
2000 feet at Arroyo Simi.
Plant species present :..
addition
to those previously described include quail
brush (Atriolex lent :for -
mis) and
small pepper trees (Schinus molle). The
riparian thicket at s
location
is continuous with
riparian woodland (characterized by :he presence
trees) which
occurs outside
of the cable corridor.
The riparian thicket at Arroyo Paredon is adjacent to, and primari.y wes-
of, the brackish marsh. At this location riparian thicket is nearly noao•:_ -
tally arroyo willow. The total length of this habitat is aporcxi^..:e ::
750 feet.
Riparian thicket also occurs adjacent to Carpinteria State Beach, app ;..
mately one -half mile east of Carpinteria Creek. The cable corridor w;:: :a-
verse about 600 feet of this habitat. Although arroyo willow shrubs dom :iar
at this location, introduced ornamental specie!; are also present, :nc.
my.oporum (y oporum laetum).
s
123.1/5 -3.0 -3 3 -3
3.2 HABITATS OCCURRING AT THE PROPOSED P.O.P. AND REGENERATION SITES QO
Habitats at four proposed P.O.P. sites and two proposed regeneration sirs
were evaluated. The P.O.P. sites are located in Segments 2, B, 11, and :5, =._
the regeneration sites are located in Segments 5 and 14 (Figures 3--lb, e, 'h. K.
n, p). Sizes of proposed regeneration and P.O.P. sites are 12 feet by 3 :___
and 32 feet by 12 feet, respectively. All proposed sites are located in mostly
unvegetated areas within the railroad right -of -way. As such, each wit. :)e
constructed in ruderal habitat, similar to that described in Section 3.1.1.
3.3 STREAM AND DRAINAGE CROSSINGS
The cable corridor traverses numerous perennial, intermittent, end
ephemeral streams, drainages, and washes (hereafter referred to as stream:).
Twenty -seven of the largest streams were evaluated, including type of crossing
(on or off bridge) and the presence or absence of natural habitats at and ad_a-
cent to the crossings (Table 3 -2). Included in that total are four separe.ce
crossings of Arroyo Simi (Figure 3 -1f) and crossings of both the main chan:ei
and north fork of the Ventura River mouth (Figure 3 -11). Seven streams have
been channelized in the vicinity of the crossings and contain little or no
vegetation.
Sixteen of the 27 streams would be crossed on bridges. In each case, the
cable would be attached to the bottom or side of a bridge in a conduit. 7.1e
stream channel and accompanying vegetation would not be disturbed. At Arrc•yo
Simi and the Ventura River mouth, relatively small areas of riparian vegetation,
between consecutive crossings would be disturbed. These areas are discussed
in Section 3.5.
The remaining 11 crossings would be off bridges, through the stream cht;n-
nel. At these crossings the cable would be buried at depths greater than ::-,e
minimum 42 inches. At nine of the 11 streams traversed off bridges, vegecac:.on
in and adjacent to the channel is mostly absent or limited to introduced an.a
scattered native species of low density, including tree tobacco, myepor•.Im,
castor bean, and coyote brush. Habitats containing brackish marsh and riparian
vegetation occur at Carpinteria Creek and Arroyo Paredon in Segment 15
(Figure 3 -10). Both areas are described in Section 3.5.
123.1/5 -3.0 -5 3 -5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
S Sprint Communication:; Company proposes to install a 96 -mile long
`_':)e: )otics cable between Burbank and Santa Barbara, California. A:) part of
_ne it ,)posed project Dames 6 Moore completed a Phase 1 cultural resources sur-
fev 3:ong the proposed construction corridor. The entire corridor is within
t e •ig : ^t -of -way of the Southern Pacific Railroad.
Prefield studies and field survey resulted in the identification of 65
arc:,,teolagical sites within 0.25 mile of the proposed construction corridor.
"we ^.:v -seven of these sites are located within or immediately adjacent to the
Sout :tern Pacific Railroad right -of -way. Field survey identified 11 sites
within or immediately adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of -way
that actually crossed the proposed US Sprint construction corridor. Few sites
exteid into the construction corridor because the cable route i:s usually .
loc�:ed within 10 to 20 feet of the centerline of the tracks. As a result,
host of the construction corridor is located within cut or filled areas used to
hake a revel r�ilbed for the tracks.
No sites were located within the the proposed US Sprint construction
corr.dor in arras under the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County, or the Cities
of l)s Angeles and Burbank.
A total of 15 sites occur within the railroad right -of -way in areas under
the jurisdiction of Ventura County; only three of these sites are expected to
be :irectly affected by the proposed project. One site occurs in the City of
Oxna-d which could also be directly affected by cable construction activities.
Six sites were located within the railroad right -of -way in Simi Valley, but are
not expected to be subject to direct impacts. No archaeological sites were in
or naar the cable corridor in the Cities of Moorpark, Camarillo, or Ventura.
-ive archaeological site:3 occur in the railroad right-of-way in the City
of Carpinteria, of which three could be directly affected by the project. Four
twelve sites in the right -of -way in areas under the jurisdiction of Santa
3a7cara County could be similarly affected. No archaeological sites +ere in or
near the cable corridor in the City of Santa Barbara.
EXHIBIT "E"
Section 3.0 of this report presents an evaluation of potential :moac:s
the proposed project in the above sites. This section also ?resents recommt :-
dations for mitigation of direct impacts to these sites. Section 4.0 provic s
a summary of the impact evaluation and recommendations, including measures _o
protect sites from indirect impacts during construction and procedures ;r
discovery during construction.
Subsequent to the completion of the Phase 1 survey, US Spr::t
Communications Company revised their construction schedule and will lay or:,
that portion of the line between Burbank and Camarillo at the ?resent time. 0
archaeological sites are located within the proposed US Sprint construct:�r.
corridor between Burbank and Camarillo.
J
123.3/2 -EX -2
JOHN PATRICK LANE
Mayor
ELOISE BROWN
Mayor Pro Tern
JOHN GALLOWAY
Councilmember
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D.
Councilmember
BERNARDO M. PEREZ
Councilmember
MAUREEN W. WALL
City Clerk
MOORPARK ITEM�t -9
M E M O R A N D U M
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYLJ KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
THOMAS P. GENOVESE
City Treasurer
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development•
DATE: June 8, 1988 (CC meeting of 6/15/88)
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - APPEAL NO. 4 - US
SPRINT NETWORK ROUTE DEVELOPMENT
Back rg ound
US Sprint appeared before the City Council at the regular meeting
of June 1, 1988 to consider whether or not their proposal to
install a fiber optic cable through the City required an Industrial
Planned Development Permit ( I PD) .
The Council considered this matter and directed US Sprint to work
with staff so as to prepare an agreement regarding current and
future restrictions and conditions by the City.
The Council determined that an I PD was not needed if such an
agreement could be approved by both parties.
The public hearing on this matter was left open by the City Council
and continued to the meeting of June 15, 1988.
Discussion
Staff has been able to meet only once with US Sprint since the
Council's June 1, 1988 meeting. As of the drafting of this
memorandum there has not yet been a resolution to a draft
agreement.
Recommendation
Continue this matter to the Council's meeting of July 6th and
direct staff to continue working with US Sprint for an agreement
resolution. MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
MO
City Council Meeting ^:'. "ARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Mating
of l�, —,198 of ACS= 198
ACTION:
ACTION:
799 Moorpark Avenue A )Moo ark, California 93021
USPRINTF /CHRONI Dy "'t � By
1) 529 -6864