Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 1986 0514 PR SPC n 0 0 0 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA Special Meeting Wednesday May 14, 1986 1 . CALL TO ORDER 2 . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3 . ROLL CALL 4 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 5 , 1986 April 2 , 1986 5 . COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC 6 . BUSINESS ITEMS A. Parks Rules and Regulations Consideration and review of the Rules and Regulations for City parks and recreation facilities . B . Open Space , Conservation and Recreation Element Consideration and review of the Draft Open Space , Conservation and Recreation (OSCAR) Element . ( ITEM B. continued to May 21, 1986 ) C . Parks Master Plan Consideration and review of the Parks Master Plan. D . Community Center Rules and Regulations Consideration and review of the Rules and Regulations for the Moorpark Community Center. E . F . Rules and Regulations for Youth Dance Consideration and review of the Rules and Regulations to be applied to Youth Dances . G. Response to Letter from Tina Gedney Consideration of possible response to letter received from Tina Gedney regarding development of railroad property . ® ® - PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Agenda Page 2 7 . STAFF UPDATES A. Youth Dance Reports ( 3/28 and 4/11) B . Basketball and Volleyball League Report C . Summer Recreation Update D . Peach Hill Park (Wall , Drain and Building) FILE COPY Michael Brandman Associates Environmental Research•Planning and Processing• Resource Management April 28, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Allan Schoff, Project Manager SUBJECT: Draft Open Space, Conservation and Recreation (OSCAR) Element introduction The Community Development Department is recommending approval of the draft Open Space, Conservation and Recreation (OSCAR) Element and the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. The City of Moorpark is required by the state to adopt elements of a general plan. Among the California state law required elements are the open space and conservation elements. They are required so that each city develops a comprehensive guideline for the protection and proper management of natural resources. According to state general plan guidelines, the conservation element should: (a) promote the protection, maintenance and use of the states natural resources; (b) prevent the wasteful exploitation, destruction and neglect of the state's natural, resources; and (c) recognize that natural resources must be maintained for their ecological value as well as for their direct benefits to people. The open space element should include: (a) an inventory of privately and publicly owned open space lands; (b) goals and policies for preserving and managing open space lands; and (c) specific programs which the legislative body intends to pursue in implementing its open space plan. Beyond the basic requirements, local governments may choose to consider other, locally relevant issues in their general plan. Although the recreation element is not required by state law, the City of Moorpark has included this as a component to the OSCAR Element of the General Plan. As a part of the general plan, state law requires the policies and implementation measures for these issues must be internally consistent with those of each required element. Proposal The OSCAR Element states goals, policies and programs for two mandated general plan elements, open space and conservation, and for one optional element, recreation. The Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Elements are complementary and, as permitted by state law, can be combined into a single 3140 Red Hill Avenue,Suite 200,Costa Mesa,CA 92626, (714)641-8042 Parks and Recreation Commission Memorandum April 28, 1986 Page 2 element, as in the City of Moorpark Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element. Since requirements for the Conservation Element closely parallel those for an Open Space Element, they can be combined. Similarly, recreation programs are linked to open space and conservation programs end parks and recreation facilities constitute a major open space resource. Since the three elements are closely related, they were combined to establish a comprehensive and coherent policy. Statement of Environmental Findings An Initial Study was conducted by the firm of Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. (MBA) under contract to the City of Moorpark. The Initial Study was conducted to evaluate the potential effects of the adoption of the OSCAR Element. Based on the findings contained in the attached Initial Study, it has been determined that this project would not have a significant effect on the environment. Subsequent Planning Commission and City Council Action Following review of the draft OSCAR Element by the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Element will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Recommendations City staff recommends approval of the Draft OSCAR Element - • CB/mw JN 226-0007 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM City of Moorpark Background I. Name of Proponent City of Moorpark 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 805/529-6864 3. Dote .of Checklist Submitted April 2➢t,1AAR 4. Agency Requiring Checklist 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable nr,ft nSr4P element II. Environmental Iagocts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No I. Earth. Will the proposal result in: o. Unstoble earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? _X_ c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of bench 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, inlet or lake? X Yes Maybe No g. Exposure of people or property to geolo- gic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: o. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of di- rection of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pat- terns, or the rote and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any altercation of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an oquifer by cuts or excavations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water .supplies? X i. •Exposure of people or property to water re- lated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X Yes Maybe No Li. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: •a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, gross, crops, and aquatic plants)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X c. Introduction of new species of plants into on area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X d. Reduction in ocreoge of any agricultural crop? X 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X c. Iniroducfian of new species of animals into on area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of cnimols? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantial alteration of the present or plonned land use of on area? X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rote of use of ony natural resources? X Yes Maybe No b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X 10. 'Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an occident or upset conditions? X b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evocuation plan? X II. Population. Will the proposal oiler the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the humor populoti&n of an area? X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create o demand for additional housing? X 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substontiol additional vehiculor movement? X b, Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X c. Substantial irrpoct upon existing transpor- tation systems? X d. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, roil or air traffic? X f. lncreose in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposol hove an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: X o. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X c. Schools? X Yes Maybe No d. Parks or other recreational focilities? _X_ e. Mointenonce of public facilities, including roods? X f. Other governmental services? X 15. Energy. Will the proposol result in: o. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon exist- ing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of on oestheticolly offensive site open to public view? X 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? R 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X r . Yes Maybe No b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? X c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential in-act area? X 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self sus- taining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of - long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impoct 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 c. Does the project have irrpocts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may in-poct on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those in-pacts on the environment is significant.) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Ill. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation IV. Determination(To be completed by the Lead Agency) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 8. The OSCAR Element proposes additional park and recreational facilities in the City of Moorpark that would result in the alteration of present and proposed land uses. However, an environmental analysis would be conducted on a site- by-site basis for each proposed park and recreational facility. 14. The OSCAR Element proposes additional park and recreational facilities that would require maintenance and operations services. 19. The OSCAR Element proposes additional park and recreational facilities, that would have a beneficial impact upon the quantity and quality of existing recreational opportunities. I . ' On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT hove a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I_1 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be o significant effect in this case X because the mitigation measures described on on attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environ- ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. bale Signature For