The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA REPORT 2007 0502 CC REG ITEM 09A ITF 11 - A. 1'r*'OF MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA GitY Council Meeting of___,4_. %5'- —2007 MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council j� FROM: Mar Lindley, Director of Parks, Recr ation, and Community Services!" Y Y� � Dave Bobardt, Planning Manage r L, 1 DATE: April 11, 2007 (CC Meeting of 5/2/2007) SUBJECT: Consider the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report BACKGROUND On February 4, 2004, the City Council approved the removal of five California Pepper trees on High Street. Findings from three independent certified arborists had determined that the trees posed a risk to life and property. Additionally, the Council directed staff to implement the tree planting plan recommended in Michael Mahoney's Pepper Tree Evaluation report. Mr. Mahoney is the City's current consulting arborist and the last of the three arborists to have evaluated the trees. On March 1, 2004, legal action was filed against the City alleging that the City violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in its decision to remove the five trees. On March 19, 2004, the Superior Court issued a preliminary injunction, prohibiting the City from removing the five trees. On June 16, 2004, the Council rescinded its earlier action regarding the tree removals and directed the City Manager to execute a contract with a qualified consultant(s) to prepare a Tree Management Plan and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The City again retained the services of Mr. Mahoney to prepare the tree maintenance plan and the services of LSA Associates, Inc. to prepare the EIR. October 28, 2004, a settlement agreement was executed. DISCUSSION Sometime around 1900, a collection or grove of California Pepper trees was planted along High Street. Over the years, the grove of trees has provided a beautifying theme for the old downtown area. We do not know how many, if any, of the existing trees are a part of the original grove. The City has taken care to maintain the individual trees in a &\Community Services\ADMINISTRATIVE\CC Reports\2007\5-2-2007 (Pepper Tree Plan and EIR).doc 000043 Honorable City Council May 2, 2007 Page 2 manner that will prolong their lives and mitigate any risks they may pose as they age. Since it is acknowledged that trees do not live on in perpetuity, and they will eventual die, our goal has been to maintain the look and feel the grove provides. Over the years, and generally in conjunction with street and sidewalk improvement projects, the City has planted new Pepper trees. Finding appropriate planting space on High Street is made more difficult due to the expansion and improvements to the street's infrastructure over time, including street pavement, curbs, sidewalks, underground and above ground utilities, all of which were not present at the time the grove was originally planted. To help the City manage its efforts to maximize the enjoyment the grove offers, it directed the preparation of a tree maintenance plan. The California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan (Plan), prepared by Michael Mahoney (Attachment 1), identifies Tree Management Categories, development/age stages and their characteristics: Young Trees, Shade Trees, Veteran Trees, and Senescent Trees. Under each category, the Plan identifies maintenance steps that should be performed. The report also summarizes the steps to be taken from the initial identification of an appropriate planting site, through the life of a tree, up to the time it attains senescent status and should be removed. Additionally, the Plan includes an evaluation of each existing tree and recommends maintenance activities to be performed on the tree. If approved by the City Council, it is staff's intent to carryout the maintenance activities as outlined in the Plan, including regular maintenance, evaluations, and plantings. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIONS Actions to be considered by the City Council prior to approval of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan include certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), making findings for significant impacts, and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Certification of Final EIR — The City Council, after having been presented with, reviewed, and considered the information contained in the Final EIR, needs to determine whether or not the Final EIR is complete and adequate and has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Moorpark as lead agency. Findings to make these determinations have been provided by staff in the attached draft resolution (Attachment 4). The City contracted with LSA Associates, Inc. for the preparation of an Initial Study and Draft EIR for this project. The Draft EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2006051024 (Attachment 2), identified and analyzed certain potentially significant effects that could occur as a result of the maintenance plan along with mitigation measures that would reduce or otherwise eliminate these significant impacts. It also identified and analyzed alternatives to the maintenance plan. The Draft EIR was circulated for public review 000044 Honorable City Council May 2, 2007 Page 3 and comment beginning on January 9, 2007 and ending on February 23, 2007. In addition, an opportunity to provide oral comments on the Draft EIR was provided at a public hearing of the Planning Commission on February 13, 2007. The City received only one comment letter on the Draft EIR (from the County of Ventura Transportation Department); no speakers appeared before the Planning Commission at the public hearing. A Final EIR (Attachment 3) was prepared by Community Development staff. It includes the Draft EIR, a list of commentators, comments on the Draft EIR, and the City's responses to the comments received. The one commentator was sent a copy of the proposed response as required by CEQA. Findings on Significant Effects — The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, provides that: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur: (a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. (2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report." (b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment." The EIR identified significant impacts with respect to aesthetics, biological resources, and cultural resources. All of these impacts could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with the adoption of mitigation measures (Finding (a)(1)). Substantial evidence to support these findings is documented in the attached resolution. 000045 Honorable City Council May 2, 2007 Page 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program — The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, included in the attached resolution with the findings, identifies the monitoring/reporting method, responsibility, and timing for the implementation of each mitigation measure identified in the Final EIR. These mitigation measures are enforceable as conditions of approval on the maintenance plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 2007- certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, making findings for significant impacts, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approving the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan 2. Draft Environmental Impact Report (Transmitted under Separate Cover) 3. Final Environmental Impact Report 4. Draft Resolution No. 2007- Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, Making Findings for Significant Impacts, Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Approving the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan 000046 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN HUGH Srr.LF,.r -MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA 00004'i CC ATTACHMENT 1 Maintenance Plan 2 1.1 SCOPE This tree maintenance plan addresses a discrete collection of 50 California Pepper trees (Schinus molle) growing in portions of the public right-of-way along East High Street :.$ . ' ' ' tt fir" / ' .' r. ,' from its intersection with Moorpark Avenue to the 400 :y ' tr A it ' ' block of East High Street in Moorpark, California. - S 1.4 y � 'y ` r y-- ,, Several of the trees may be remnants of an original 4 ,...�.t 'A y;d iF` +3 planting at this location in the year 1900 by Robert . . Poindexter, a city founding father. The trees are included , ,-�s '_ . in Ventura County's Historical Landmark List. The .. ,'r i _ purpose of this maintenance plan is to provide a realistic istic ,� �,`';1_ , __; a �,. :,�. framework to accomplish an a pp arent dichotomy of needs: sustain the legacy of the original trees and deliver r= g Y f .SST= ,.. ',;$ , appropriate care to maximize the benefits of boulevard �'� ,' shade trees while minimizing increased risk to people 1 g p p AI: lit`, 41 ?. t '* and ro ert as a result of their resence in this vital cit Y. . corridor. . N-4 -f,„: , mil;14 1 r [ ._ 1.2 Joined together, trees growing in the parkway along F-77 1*- -,:', ' High Street are a collection: a grove of pepper trees, #II :t'' g g p pp r : - which unify the High Street district and identify its vivid iL history. It is fundamentally noteworthy that trees are living organisms and they develop along an evolving progression from their origin to their decline. Furthermore, trees cultivated in congested municipal J oined together, environments are known to have reduced life spans, with the progression from origin to decline occurring along a trees growing in the these are among shorter timeline. Additionally, note that t ese a e a o g parkway along High the oldest remaining specimens of California pepper Street are a trees in the region. The species was first introduced to California at the San Luis Rey Mission in San Diego collection; a grove County in the 1830's (Landscape Plants For Western of pepper trees, Regions, Bob Perry, 1992) a mere 60 to 70 years before which unify the Mr. Poindexter planted them here. Therefore, it is unrealistic to anticipate that the trees can provide district and identify benefits as boulevard shade trees in perpetuity, and some a vivid history degree of risk is unavoidable when the service life of aging trees is extended toward its greatest limits. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000048 lima Maintenance Plan 3 2.1 REFERENCE A site sketch has been prepared to distinguish individual { ° trees and to show their relationship to the other trees and • ;- m a ' ' �,. basic infrastructure at this locale. This site sketch is not a . ,A' *;S:C4. document prepared to scale and it does not capture each . .,;-, element of the infrastructure, it is intended to represent !., . the trees in a linear fashion-one that simplifies their ��` � presence and their progression through the corridor. , '. �{ ��ti s, The format is taken from the earlier study Arboilst s i„; f `, 4 �• 4. �. F:.`-, Resort: Selected Hi.h Street Pe •er Trees-December # aY It',' _ 1:4 .i4 *, 2003, undertaken to identify trees that may or may not - ,,x y y y E .- � - .'' �i ,,- `d ' merit reservation, provide management concepts is to i i '1 E �r`` ; ' `kiLL_:�;I T ! c-: �, _ _ protect specimens t h at merit preservation, and identif y senescent trees with a potential for increased risk of -- - - _"y ` damage or injury that warrant transitioning out of the .'TA city's urban forest. Some of the symbols used in this r; - expanded site sketch reflect findings provided in the Via_ - . '• -j initial 2003 study. Please see the site sketch, attached. Two tree symbols are Two types of spaces are typically found in this corridor: spaces restricted at the soil surface by pavement used to distinguish on a114 sides resulting in an approximately 8-foot by 10- significant size foot opening (a restricted growing space) and spaces that differences in the are relatively unrestricted - typically setback from the street side curb and gutter by 5-feet and relatively Study- . un r estr i cted o n other sides (an unrestricted growing • - a smaller tree space). Other growing spaces can be found in the grove as determined by individual or distinctive site features. that was recently planted or which The current version of the site sketch captures all has relatively California peppers, large and small, which are found in small cano py the corridor. Twenty-six of the trees are indicated with architecture the small tree symbol; 15 on the north side of the street and 12 on the south side. Please note that some of these isk - a larger tree that smaller trees were indicated in the site sketch F'rep ared for has relatively the previous study,but due to the scope of that work extensive canopy they were not treated in detail. Twenty-four of the trees architecture are indicated with the large tree symbol. Five of the California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000049 Maintenance Plan 4 older tree symbols are outlined in red, 11 are outlined in yellow, and 8 are outlined in green. These indicators are ... young trees, shade . maintenance used to organize the trees by general a trees, veteran trees, categories. Categories identified here are: young trees, and senescent shade trees, veteran trees, and senescent trees; additional trees... descriptive information is provided later in this report. 2.4 Reference is made to the trees by'tag number' or'no tag number', and the numbering sequence starts at the Everett X west end on the north side, and ends on the west end on 80nli.t vo n the south side. The progression begins consistent with s - the succession of street addresses,but at the east end of the grove the sequence runs in opposite progression on = =-- -- the southern segment. The city-wide inventory of trees E High uses a reference system that is tied to the street address, -?a', vi; stn P,P4; Y and tree numbers are utilized only when more than one e Dorothy Ave - kr d tree exists at an address. Sites without addresses are i south Ruth A assigned a fictitious address and designated as such d Other conventions are also applied to trees on the side of w == corner lots, on the backside of lots that run perpendicular from one street to another all the way through a city block, and other contrary site-related features. Some significant features become apparent by studying the visual impact of the site sketch. If periodic _. _. reforestation did not keep pace gaps might occur in the 41 (fire station) linear corridor of trees as they progress in the grove. Where a gap in the grove exists at the parkway in front of Z Magnolia St. the new Fire Station (corner of High Street and Magnolia 0 Iti,, ' _ (restaurant) Street), California pepper trees had originally occupied 441: to i .——._...—-.. the space,but due to converted land use the space no " 4 (residence) longer seems appropriate for trees. It is reasonable to expect that vital municipal services and other critical factors may impact the designation of existing and future (blacksmith's shop) _ _ _._._._ _ _ t r ee s i tes, a n d, while for pu r poses o f long-range management it is most useful to organize the corridor into available tree sites and not existing tree sites,it is foreseeable that some percentage of designated spaces will be modified over time. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 00000 Maintenance Plan S t.S\" :;4;: 3.1 TREE MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES _ Fo r purposes of this maintenance plan, management young trees... categories within a variable-aged grove of trees include: / 41%4yhlI, • YOUNG TREES and available sites-these include sites where trees have been removed and no replacement has been installed, recently planted sites, and sites with young expanding tree canopies shade trees... • SHADE TREES where the canopy is sufficient to produce abundant protection from solar radiation 4 ` f. and yet not restrict pedestrian or vehicular traffic to- • VETERAN TREES with tall,broad canopies that merit -- `� ongoing preservation by managing their growth for veteran trees... threats to biological health or mechanical stability • SENESCENT TREES that do not merit preservation; trees in locations that should not be designated as :r>; tree sites-i.e., tree to be removed senescent trees... sketches from Veteran Trees:A guide to good management, English Nature 4.1 YOUNG TREES Young trees are characterized by their introductory and early developmental status. It is intended that all sites resulting from removal of grove trees, when appropriate for growing trees that attain large proportions, will be filled with new young plants in due course. Note that some existing trees occupy locations that are inadequate - x g pY q t for long-term cultivation of California pepper trees. The .�., g p pp e y - physical tasks of evaluating the viability of a planting site, situatin g new appropriately tree ro riatel within the pp p Y confines of a specific location, and physically installing the new tree include important considerations. Services and techniques for maintaining g desirable tree - characteristics or resolving undesirable tree characteristics within this category include: California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 0000i Maintenance Plan 6 Tree site designation and allocation of space call for a minimum 8-foot by 8-foot opening in the pavement; the tree must be centered in the opening, and overhead clearance must be available, Investigation of underground services;notification of underground services alert, Provisions for temporary supplemental irrigation Installation of the tree according to current best practices; a 24-inch box specimen tree provides the greatest opportunity to assure a healthy new start, - Installation of systems for supplemental stability; Y pp r standard specifications generally indicate two lodge pole stakes installed parallel to the roadway, sufficiently stable and inserted in a vertical Ra MM orientation slightly beyond the periphery of the M,i soil originally occupied in nursery container y1.-0 !N� a;. - 4� Lj. �r (removed at time of installation), one or two tie straps are recommended determined by the degree of excessive flexibility of the young tree stem, the stem should have sufficient room to gentle to response move in res entle breeze but steady p the yi a t L` tree against forces that might over load the young e .tsJp Vii- ,4k. R 2 4 : �k F1~� ' '� tree's stability, '` 7 4: Monitor and maintenance of supplemental ' stability systems, - Pruning treatments to train and direct growth, - Pruning treatments to maintain clearance. Several interim phases of the young tree category include site preparation, installation, establishment, and early development. As noted previously, site preparation is an important step in maximizing the success of the tree and preparing it for a potentially long service life. Installation procedures, including proper selection of healthy nursery stock prior to installation, also contribute to rapid establishment and healthy future development. Establishment is considered to have occurred when the new tree's roots have colonized the California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000052 Maintenance Plan 7 native or existing soil, growing out beyond the confines of the nursery container and the zone of prepared soil surrounding the periphery of the new tree's root ball, undertaken to encourage new root development. Supplemental stability systems (tree stakes) should be removed once the tree is established. Early development includes management of branches and foliage growing low in the tree's architecture—temporary structures that promote early development but which will eventually be removed, and directing the developing architecture to support a stable and healthy future canopy. 4.3 Studies have shown that installation and establishment of a new tree is improved when an optimum size nursery stock is utilized. Trees smaller than 24-inch box specimens are prone to substantial damage from vandalism and negligence, and they may be somewhat less tolerant of interruptions in their early care. Trees larger than 24-inch box specimens require special handling, are less commonly available, and may have been subjected to maintenance treatments and early care at the nursery that are not consistent with long term health and stability. Twenty-four inch box specimen trees are about 5 years old when they attain that size (older trees in a 24-inch box are cramped, develop poor root structure, and should be avoided). Young trees exist in the landscape for about 10 years before they attain sufficient canopy height and spread to merit a mature size and structure. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000053 Maintenance Plan S 5.1 SHADE TREES Shade trees are characterized by their function as producers of solar shade and their status as major y. architectural features of the boulevard environment. It is a incumbent on these living structures to afford sufficient . clearance for pedestrian and vehicular traffic and — - r; 4 adequate clearance from adjacent structures and rk infrastructure so that l damage and or injury are avoided. g Y Services and techniques for maintaining desirable tree characteristics or resolving undesirable tree r;} �.- } r characteristics within this category include: ,. '� - Inspections to monitor tree health and stability, „Frei, 4 - Pruning treatments to maintain clearance, ., . , ; r i, * - Pruning treatments to manage load and weight ''' = k, , distribution, r, ni`� j ` g '' 4* :'' - Pruning treatments to establish a redundant i a 4 branching hierarchy throughout the canopy, :::,11, ( it',0... - - ' \ ,..,.m, `` .. „ - Specialized pruning or other treatments to correct or respond to unforeseen circumstances. Jr f O , { t 3 Yr, 5.2 California peppers that meet the High Street or , 3 I ,,4,1i.ii' : maintenance criteria as shade trees occupy a . .,..,-,1 developmental stage ranging from about 15 years old to - � � � f�_ ;�: p g g g Y . an undetermined point in the future when their level of r tl - maturity begins to wane, and deterioration and decline ,.- f . become manifest. Various events activities and ...M. # :' ° *I: occurrences may combine to initiate decline; trees that x�` - decline along a protracted timeline may have been managed less well, may have been subjected to special '`. circumstances that resulted in injury or damage to the tree, or may have received inadequate interim maintenance. According to normal current conditions o-.+ that appear to prevail throughout southern California, ° "r•YI s t,a 9 s•!,, q.: ,. California peppers thrive as shade trees for about forty or E ;. fifty years before they begin to substantially deteriorate. irtt ' 4 A /- i-.,,a 3: Factors that tend to induce deterioration and decline itu. t `rz ' k TF' include restrictive growing environments, encroachment k - ` , F by new development or construction, inclement weather, ,*.7v,--,-,1* , AL:.1 ittl deferred maintenance, and other potential causes. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000054 Maintenance Plan 9 6.1 VETERAN TREES 4 A tree entering the developmental phase where it is relatively static in energy production may or may not - 4 respond positively to routine maintenance and corrective . . pruning. Inspections of shade trees become more significant as the tree ages, and maintenance decisions AEI, , for the older mature tree should focus primarily on--"ii - treatments to prolong its life. Ideally, routine a maintenance over the first 50 or 60 years included pruning techniques that developed the canopy structure, * --, -- lia one which accommodates incremental modifications to ', `' reduce its size. Services and techniques for maintaining ., - desirable tree characteristics or resolving undesirable tree characteristics within this category include: 1 . - Inspections to monitor tree health and stability, � , f- .. r. - Pruning/treatments to manage load and weight distribution,..„. ts A ,. r. — Pruning/treatments to reconstruct a tree canopy, I it n - Tree removal. * ti l't ''''s, '-' 4-. - , 't .,.., ,)„, „Jo:. , t :ill Deteriorating tree e conditions will be evident when n 1 t a z.‘ "is g.. e . , i , primary or secondary branches begin to fail, or when Y. T . g „ :. routine pruning has been determined to be insufficient to _ k ,,, Y , remedy weight distribution or other architectural ra Y g conditions within the tree canopy. These factors, or the �'- anticipation of corresponding conditions, should activate p fre y` M=i _ authorization of a thorough inspection by a qualified \ ; : ,, arborist. The distinction between a mature shade tree S.- requiring routine maintenance and a tree that should be ,it; i 4,.,-. . --.;.4t:rt: .-.4.?, ,, s categorized as a veteran tree can be a matter of degree. .re ft,. ._� h Indications that a tree has reached veteran tree status are - ' x 40), determined by a qualified arborist as a result of field .°- evaluations. The qualified arborist should provide a S.,-- 1 1' ': written report to document existing conditions of the „, ' -,-;;,W 4 4 . * R f f+'3R , ,: tree's health and stability, and provide recommendations .,.. "*11 _ t.e G' to mitigate interim deficiencies. Routine inspections by a ' --*: ''4,,,,,cs' ,i, 'F qualified arborist should occur on no less frequently than kik on an annual basis once a tree achieves veteran tree status. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 6000E5 E Maintenance Plan 10 6.3 Initial inspections of the grove have been prepared 'Historic tree spaces using specific formats to perform 1) hazard assessments, are conserved, a and 2) to evaluate the structural integrity and conditions reasonably safe, of health. The first format is useful when it is important to identify specific threats to the community from an shady, tree-lined apparent defective tree; the second format is useful in street is realized, making fundamental assessments and it should be suitable adopted for future reporting by the qualified arborist. By focusing on five individual attributes: the root zone, relics ... for the sake trunk, major scaffold limbs, smaller branches and twigs, of posterity' and the foliage, a thorough examination of the tree is conducted and reported. These attributes are rated from ...mission of the 1 to 4- 1 indicating extreme problems, 2 indicating major scenario presented problems, 3 indicating minor problems, and 4 indicating in the 2003 study no apparent problems. The roots, trunk and scaffolds are ... trees tend to develop assessed both for health and stability; stability is not along a certain considered a major factor of the smaller branches and twigs and the foliage. A condition summary is indicated progression... for each tree and a rating assigned to the condition summary. In the 2003 study (see Table 2 Arborist's ... maintain the Report: Selected High `street Pepper frees December 4 landscape with 2003), indications reported correspond to percentage expressions extrapolated as:fairly low, low, very low, and variable-aged trees... poor. Future reports are likely to include some sustain the landscape indications ranging from fairly low to very low. An additional column should be provided to indicate in perpetuity.., specific notes relevant to each tree. ... removal of old Some trees may experience damage or injury so senescent trees ... extreme that it would be unreasonable to mitigate the renewal by installing conditions by pruning or other treatments. The impact may be that, if treated, an extremely disfigured tree healthy young would result, or, treatments may be insufficient to replacements ... maintain the public health and safety. It is anticipated assure achievement that these factors would rarely abound, nevertheless, in such cases it would be appropriate to simply remove and of a perpetual historic replace the tree thereby excluding other measures that resource ... California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000 OE 45 Maintenance Plan 11 typically would be taken to prolong the service life of a less severely damaged tree. 7.1 SENESCENT TREES a While some trees may be severely damaged in inclement ` weather, damaged by negligent or accidental acts, or g organisms doomed for other reasons, all livin � g — eventually die and cease to contribute useful service. Prevailing conditions that characterize senescent trees include: - r vermin otherwise Wasted specimens that attract ve min or of erw se kw represent a significant public nuisance, - Specimens producing less than 10 percent live t 5 tissues determined by mass, Deteriorated specimens in locations where substantial public interest is in favor or replanting with a new tree. - Thresholds for trees that progress to senescent status are apparent and it is highly advisable that such :. determinations be made prior to catastrophic failure. Such failures may occur as a result of evolving } r deterioration and progression into senescence, or they 'J may occur as a result of a significant event. !sr " A qualified arborist must carefully evaluate trees that are k - a subjected to significant damage as a result a major storm; -4.:iQi4 ,' _ struck by vehicle; intentional vandalism; or other unique occurrence very soon after the event. The target vicinity within the fall line of any portion of the remaining tree must be immediately cordoned-off and restricted from the public until the arborist has evaluated the tree's stability. If it is apparent to the arborist that the tree cannot be rehabilitated such that it may eventually be restored as a shade tree, or that it may be transitioned to veteran tree status, the tree should be removed and consideration given for its replacement. Procedures for rehabilitating a damaged or deteriorating tree are indicated elsewhere in this study. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California Maintenance Plan 12 The event that triggers condemnation of a senescent tree is based on assessments and evaluations provided in report(s) prepared by a qualified consulting arborist. These reports must establish a context for the condition of the tree, and show clear evidence of progressive extreme decline and/or significant deterioration, and the documentation must draw upon criteria or evaluation framework that are defensible, acceptable within the standards of the arboricultural industry, and clearly applicable as determined by authorities at the City of Moorpark. Two examples of such a process are described in the hypothetical events as follows: First scenario 'The shade tree tagged #12 in front of the Cactus Patch y Restaurant at 197 E. High Street is significantly damaged it. ., , when a cement truck traveling westbound drifts too close to the pedestrian right-of-way and strikes the tree.' 'The impact breaks two-thirds of the canopy away (red- i , :it, shaded area in the ' 'icture, left . The remaining) gp ortion `' leans over the restaurant at an extreme angle, and a large ,` wound remains in the stem where the broken portion was torn away.' 'Conditions might even be so extreme ' A that, in order to protect public health and welfare a ij`�'- determination is made by safety officers that the sa;y-' 1 remaining portion of the tree should be removed r - i • ' g p = immediately.' 'If it is apparent that the scene can be secured temporarily, a qualified arborist is summoned to inspect the tree, provide an evaluation, and prepare a written report.' 'It is likely that the arborist will condemn this tree due to the severity of the damage inflected to the otherwise healthy shade tree, and the site would be prepared for a replacement California pepper tree.' Second scenario 'The large old pepper tree tagged #26 is situated in a very restrictive planter abutting the parking lot entry to Kahoots Feed &Supply at 360 E. High Street.' 'An entry California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000058 Maintenance Plan 13 into the adjacent parking lot at the Moorpark METROLINK Station also abutts the restrictive planter.' 'Several inspections and evaluations have been f7 conducted on the tree, including the recent inspection in I December 2000 by a qualified consulting arborist, when the tree was noted as having a HIGE FAILURE `` POTENTIAL.' 'The hazard rating system utilized in 2000 was based on methodology contained in A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas _ :r -�_ - - by Math n and Clark.' Another recent inspection provided in August 2003 was more general, but it called start for an additional assessment process utilizing special * t-, instruments and analysis.' -,..._] -• _ 'In December 2003 an indepth report was prepared by .� k-rit another qualified consulting arborist, using a `~ Resistograph-an instrument specifically designed and g manufactured to determine the relative degree of decay cal.g a g - :.r:.-P. in internal woody tissues and producing a wax strip that o displays the results of the measurement.' 'Assesssment .� � s criteria recommended by the Council of Tree and 0 > r 1 -- Landscape Appraisers, which includes a thorough assessment of five attribute l categories (roots, stem, major g „N � limbs, minor limbs, and foliage), and employing a rating Faso = F- methodology, was also used to describe and characterize 1 biological health and mechanical stability of the tree.' �� When employed by a qualified diagnostition, as performend here,both the instrument and analysis 1. ! if__ _,t_ a methology provide a very comprehensive evaluation of the tree.' 'Findings conveyed in the assessment report ..... ...,..... Sc.._li'• I. indicated that the tree was senescent and should e removed.' Accordingly, these scenerios illlustrate two different __ _ _ ._..: examples of appropriate thresholds to trigger removal of a tree. In each case, evidence is provided by qualified experts to the jurisdictional authority, recommendations are taken into consideration, and, when appropriate, a I t senescent tree is removed. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,C__alifornia 000059 Maintenance Plan 14 8.1 SUMMARY OF MAINTENANCE TASKS AND TRIGGERS The following is an incremental listing of maintenance tasks, procedures, and their triggers: • A site becomes available j1,. • Underground services alert is contacted to identify 41 potential subterranean conflicts . • The site is surveyed to determine if adequate space young trees... is available to accommodate a mature California ............... pepper tree's canopy • The site is surveyed to determine if adequate space �� is available in the pavement opening to cultivate a 24-inch box specimen California pepper tree and ,A - ' raise it to maturity; cut or otherwise modify the t - F ".L es pavement to accommodate a minimum 5-foot by 5- t 0 moth ! 90. 8ackk foot opening g ,, (�F� ---...;14-g ..,—. • Select a new 24-inch box specimen tree conforming of, r`- ,.t I to the highest nursery standards available • Install the new tree according to best management 0 practices • Provide supplemental support systems according to best management practices ;tar ) • Provide supplemental irrigation until the tree is , . .'�1 established Co., is'''' 'Illv a" ......e.,) • Provide pruning treatments to direct growth and avoid conflicts; avoid excessive removal of foliage, shade trees... retain foliage originates that on inates low in the tree's , architecture for an extended period ;' y ► A • Trees attain shade tree status when they provide , , A ,A v*"; { ' substantial solar shading, provide clearance for g ifi't, { .'F.:.3 . : 1 vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and contribute as an engineering and aesthetic attribute in the street t s k 4140.`...,., , ', {.4 T side environment: ,, * lititi, , ,,,.. . 4,N ▪ Provide clearance pruning as needed Ahmo ` p g .. • Provide routine pruning on a maximum 4-year cycle *.i. At , according to best management practices,,,., _ L_____ , 1 , t • Task tree care personnel to report any deficiencies ,i1 . ,, ___ _‘_... F , that are found during routine tree maintenance activities California Pepper Grove—High Street Moorpark,California k_ .. ...,.t,,,,.; k Maintenance Plan 15 1 i • Monitor older large shade trees for potential. : deterioration , ' :-.1..\ killik, -41i • Monitor trees that have been damaged or injured' 4 p t due to inclement weather, negligent or accidental a ''Ni ''e _4,,,, acts, or other reasons 113.1/4 . ` , 'cx • Trees attain veteran tree status when they become '' 49 ',', .6.. , ''' relatively static in energy production and may not Y g p t{ , respond positively to routine maintenance and corrective pruning "' ' • Authorize a qualified arborist to evaluate the veteran tree on an annual basis (or more frequently) ,",, • Procure and process a written report from the ,� �' :.� qualified arborist a'.1 ' �r; - - w 4 a , r. �,:�. `I • Provide pruning treatments to reconstruct a tree ,,,, -. -,. canopy, as needed, according to the specifications of veteran trees... a qualified arborist • Provide maintenance recommendations, including ` removals, based upon the evaluation of a qualified arborist • Trees attain senescent tree status when they a '- 4` *, produce less than 10% live tissues determined by n f .. mass, are wasted specimens that attract vermin or , . __-;,--_ A 4. r, ,4, otherwise represent a significant public nuisance, or senescent trees... when substantial public interest favors replacement • Consider the merits of the site and its appropriateness for replacement with a new California pepper tree based upon site restrictions and encroachment criteria; replace the tree when appropriate. 4 California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000061 Maintenance Plan 16 ,,ii*ie. e f a _ ~ � Z t 9.1 YOUNG TREES FOR INSTALLATION AND 4 t :41. {g Nt,,��Y- , ' ESTABLISHMENT TREATMENTS .E ` 1 r 4 4 7 I Tag/site #15 This 2.5-inch caliper newly installed tree is _ I - growing in a typically restricted growing space. It is staked with double stakes. The tree has not yet established. Monitor the tree's progress;provide 4�', •}. - " supplemental irrigation on a regular basis; trim the tops of the stakes away from lower branches (cut the stakes— not the branches) and remove the stakes and ties as soon „ TREE as it is determined that the tree can stand unaided; avoid removing any live foliage until expansion of the canopy intensifies. T-ag/site #25 This 4-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. The tree is becoming 3 o. progress;established. Monitor the tree's ro ress;p rovide 4 i,imitt _, ..,...... supplemental irrigation as needed;provide routine imink , - _, pruning techniques as needed, direct the development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an east/west axis, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid possible and 4 excessive strain, drooping, ossible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward -._ 3 '` TREE growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree . (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). t t Tag/site #48 This 4-inch diameter tree is growing in a -4 typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic 3 sidewalk and curb/gutter. The tree is becoming established. Monitor the tree's ress•ro provide p g �p - - a $ su pp lemental irrigation as needed;provide routine 44'4- , pruning techniques as needed, direct the development of Pik ,,'.., ' temporary heavily on major scaffold limbs on an east/west axis, thin ‘11 p orar Y -- - _W foliage heavil laden limbs to avoid excessive strain,I i, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy . TREE architecture, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent live foliage). California Pepper Grove—High Street Moorpark,California 000062 Maintenance Plan 17 10.1 YOUNG TREES WITH EXPANDING CANOPIES AND THEIR MAINTENANCE NEEDS Tag/Site #7 This 8-inch diameter tree is growing in a � g g `ty k typically restricted growing space. The tree is pr established and requires routine maintenance treatments. A Monitor the tree's progress;provide supplemental irrigation during periods of extended drought, as g gp g needed; provide routine pruning techniques as needed, direct the development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an east/west axis, prune to thin foliage on o heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, g• and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). TREE Tag/site #24 This 7-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. The tree is established and requires routine maintenance treatments. The tree has developed with a pronounced lean to the sout h(toward High Street) in disproportionate ate { encroachment of the canopy into the roadway. Monitor t, �-: the tree's progress;provide su pp lemental irrigation during periods of extended drought, as needed; provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques to counter canopy encroachment; provide routine pruning g techniques as needed, direct the development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an east/west axis, rune to thin foliage e on heavily laden limbs to avoid '� ' p g Y excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward TREE growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California iOOO63 Maintenance Plan 18 Tag/site #40 This 8-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic sidewalk and curb/gutter. The tree is established and E.-:$,�i `: _ t requires routine maintenance treatments. The tree is : ' 7§ �- `�-' situated in very close proximity to the adjacent tree �. - rY p tY adjacent ` �` (tagged #41) resulting in an inclusion of the two canopies. s ,* ',4q` 5= �g °�.!�- This tree has a dominant canopy at this time• Monitor .. ' 't -_ ' 0 r .,. the tree's progress; provide supplemental irrigation as r 1 ;. ` . - # ' L ce needed;provide crown reconstruction pruning t &b, s techniques to counter canopy encroachment, provide ovide` :, ter• , routine pruning techniques as needed, direct the ' development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an ,—..............1.— ...-2.41114„,' A east/west axis, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden kl ,*.. limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible f - _: �` r �� breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and IF :_ TREE promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #41 This 7-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic sidewalk and curb/gutter. The tree is established and requires routine maintenance treatments. The tree is �.:' situated in very close proximity to the adjacent trees } t rY p tY adjacent#40 and#42 and the cano ies are im actin each 4 - h ?, (sites #42) p impacting other. This tree has a subordinate canopy at this time. Monitor the tree's progress;provide su pp lemental ,.. it0 s , irrigation during periods of extended drought, as .. i, needed; provide crown reconstruction pruning .S techniques to promote development of adjacent tree's " " ` g II. ` "' t canopy; provide routine pruning techniques as needed, Idirect the development of temporary major scaffold ,, limbs on an east/west axis, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, 4 TREE and e�ossible breakage, heading-back terminal ends p g g and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California Maintenance Plan 19 Tag/site #50 This 10-inch diameter tree is growing in an atypical growing space-it is set back about 2' from the monolithic boardwalk/sidewalk and a gravel/asphalt parking lot exists about 3'behind the tree; its canopy is restricted by an adjacent tree growing 25 feet to the west. =, The tree is established and requires routine maintenance treatments. The tree has developed with a pronounced . 'r «T w, lean to the west (toward tree tagged #51) resulting in an _, . fin,, -,ca,4,F,-;;; :'::44; . fi j inclusion of the two canopies. Neither tree is ti. ' t .,: `=. * � .?,,,i4.,£ . subordinated at this time• Monitor the tree's progress; „A.,„qkists -.. t provide supplemental irrigation as needed; provide i p pp g p ' i crown reconstruction pruning techniques to counter a� .a T�� p g q <:g ..4,, #s3,t%. . 3 :, - canopy encroachment, provide routine pruning .4b`' F techniques as needed, direct the development of E at t i4,,,„ • f }Y - temporary m scaffold limbs on an east/west axis, _�� p rY l `}' 1.Viti .. '� - p rune to thin foliage on heavily Y laden limbs to avoid immuummur ,•_^ 1 excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid TREE heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #51 This 10-inch diameter tree is growing in an atypical growing space-it is set back about 2' from the ' `�l °. monolithic boardwalk/sidewalk and a gravel/asphalt ` arkin lot exists about 3'behind the tree•its cano is p g pY' � . = Yip restricted by adjacent trees growing 23 feet to the west ,- x-'`.r '.. " it = ;3 and 25 feet to the east. The tree is established and ''''t'i. �y '" w are ' *: :11t3,2° i- `' �' i • r requires routine maintenance treatments. Adjacent trees °i on each side are situated in very close proximity to this .�..�y� - , rY p tY ��,`,.r.`_s tree resulting in an inclusion of the three canopies. None lit, ' .0 .I` O►" of these trees are subordinated at this time. Monitor the a a--, `' ? 4 tree's progress; provide supplemental irrigation as i i i ,_, p g p pp g 1 Y needed; provide crown reconstruction pruning I.- techniques to counter canopy encroachment, provide ail . routine pruning techniques as needed, direct the . - t I p g q " ... development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an TREE p p Y J east/west axis, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California Maintenance Plan 20 breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #52 This 7-inch diameter tree is growing in an atypical growing space—it is set back about 2' from the r '* monolithic boardwalk/sidewalk and a ravel/as halt g p parking lot exists about 3'behind the tree;its canopy is -4k ~, t _. �' : restricted by an adjacent tree growing 23 feet to the east. ._ ��: � y adjacent g g y' The tree is established and requires routine maintenance treatments. The tree has developed with a pronounced v. k' ' ' ��:, `.6.,, }-,A,',4 lean to the west and their canopies are growing toward r each other. Neither tree is subordinated at this time , :, 4, ': There is a wire girdling the trunk about 7 feet up from " grade—this restrictive device must be removed at the °)!!4,,,,i‘ %. ,,,,,waL.1:4 wk. ' ei. .,.._,,,,. .7' ..":=__ _ ' earliest opportunity. Monitor the tree's progress; r� =T rovide su lemental irri ation as needed; provide p pp g p FL '''' -.--- -**' 1 _A crown reconstruction pruning techniques to counter - TREE canopy encroachment, provide routine pruning techniques as needed, direct the development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an east/west axis, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California Qeo(wE; Maintenance Plan 21 11.1 SHADE TREES AND THEIR MAINTENANCE NEEDS Tag/site #1 This 23-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space with a park-style bench located about 10 feet north of the planting site. The tree has a canopy that extends about 30 feet high and as wide. The main stem leans to the north (away from High Street),but its dense canopy has become reoriented toward the south. Multiple primary scaffold limbs _ : originate from the main stem about 12 feet up from grade. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis (at least annually and at times of inclement weather), vit.y f especially sections that extend over (and therefore tend to e threaten) the vicinity of the park bench; provide crown t al reconstruction pruning techniques to improve scaffold i t "1:044 branch attachment and arrangement, provide routine ,. € 4 pruning techniques as needed, prune to maintain . adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street ..- q g and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, prune to thin MN foliage heavily e on heavil laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, .._ TREE drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development , while maintaining tree health. , , i ii 44.4. *: ¢E. °' . Tag/site#2 This 21-inch diameter tree is growing in a y ,' typically restricted growing space with a park-style :..ti,-, . % , • r . bench located about 10 feet north of the planting site. �� *_ )0'1 The tree has a canopy that extends about 35 feet high and g pY g s 1 5':, `::.: 25 feet wide. One or more of the primary scaffold limbs �� . i p r'Y -•,' ,* , ,_ ? 4 x are oriented toward the east and originate from the main ,. �� . •Y . stem about 8 feet up from grade. Monitor the tree's �� I- stability on a routine basis (at least annually and at times ;,', `i' of inclement weather);provide crown reconstruction ill. ,_.= ` -.. i pruning techniques to improve scaffold branch attachment and arrangement, provide routine pruning TREE techniques as needed, prune to provide adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000067 Maintenance Plan 22 pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site #3 This 19-inch diameter tree is growing in a t ti ..Y typically restricted growing space. The tree has a canopy r n '�, that extends about 40 feet high and as wide. The main s8 2 scaffold limbs are well distributed to support the canopy � t: architecture; the lowest one originates about 8 feet up 3 , from grade. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine NAi - '* !,,,,,,, 41,4,. ,... ,. basis; provide routine pruning techniques as needed, ' prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, 1 ilit[:' prune rune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid g Y • • _ ' OA _ , excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid -_ _ k terminal ends and promote an upward TREE growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site #4 This 15-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. The tree has a canopy -, . that extends about 30 feet high and 25 feet wide. The } : : ;` 't . main stem leans to the west and its dense canopy has f5 � , regenerated from a branch architecture altered by severe t. :, pruning. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis; provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques to improve scaffold branch attachment and arrangement,it t" ilf. m ) p g `-��- z' 6 ' provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to 3 , j provide adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High �� it #-4 i-? ! i �,, ,, A Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, prune to,, , . - .*: thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive g Y - 4 strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading- _ back terminal ends and promote an upward growing - p p g g TREE canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000068 Maintenance Plan 23 possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #5 This 14-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. The tree has a canopy that extends about 35 feet high and as wide. The tree was somewhat over pruned previously and the main . . scaffold limbs originate low in the canopy architecture; ,. the lowest major scaffold limb bifurcates from the stem about 6 feet up from grade and the canopy is raised high and distributed among four roughly co-dominant F ' scaffolds that are oriented on an east/west axis. Monitor t. ;., , , it the tree's stability on a routine basis;provide crown _ reconstruction pruning to promote branch develop lower in the canopy, provide routine pruning techniques as yJp needed, prune to maintain adequate clearance for IL E vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic • •••. along the sidewalk, prune to thin foliage e on heavily g ewa � p g Y T RE E laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. A �` �_5 j Tag/site #8 This 38-inch diameter tree is growing in a x -fi typically restricted growing space with a park-style 24,, ' .4, : ,('v 4 bench located about 10 feet northwest of the planting site. . ` The tree has a canopy that extends about 50 feet high and %I ' 14., 60 feet wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 10 feet*11 04 up, progressive branching of primary and secondary t scaffold limbs occurs throughout the canopy promoting a 1 .tli ' w 4 li . ' t is-511 J1430. i , g pY p g well distributed branch architecture. Several of the scaffold limbs are long and horizontal and tend to be , ,:,.., ,,, 1 i' , , ,„ heavily loaded toward branch ends. Monitor the tree's 1 stability on a routine basis;provide crown reconstruction —OA I pruning techniques along the long horizontal limbs t � p g q g g to -_ TREE promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, provide routine pruning California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000(W9 Maintenance Plan 24 techniques as needed, prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well-placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Taglsite #10 This 12-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. It does not have a z: number tag attached to the trunk at this time. The tree ft, i ' has a canopy that extends about 25 feet high and 35 feet *t 4 , 47,. --.,,, -;,,i,�' 4 x,71 wide. Multiple primary scaffold limbs originate from the k�:� -� ' = p p ry;,,, 7. i ',;., . ,, 'Y,# main stem about 8 feet up from grade with a horizontal y -a t .*' orientation. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine Y 3 ft K basis; provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques _ to improve scaffold branch attachment and arrangement, , y provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to provide adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, rune to � p g � p At.Aar,,a ,, TREE thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading- back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy . � development while maintaining tree health. e p g s y . ,^ ..f ~ " Ta site #11 This 15-inch diameter tree is growing in a } ti 4 � 4, typically restricted growing space. It does not have a i . -) ' B -, number tag attached to the trunk at this time. The tree Ili`'-#., ' 14 • has a canopy that extends about 35 feet high and as wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 8 feet up, i t 7 i� progressive branching of primary and secondary scaffold } limbs occurs throughout the canopy promoting a well t _ . g pY p g w� distributed branch architecture. Monitor the tree's TREE stability on a routine basis; provide routine pruning California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California OOOO7O Maintenance Plan 25 techniques as needed, prune to provide adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk,prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site #12 This 18-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. It does not have a u C number tag attached to the trunk at this time The tree ;4. has a canopy that extends about 35 feet high and 40 feet wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 6 feet up, p progressive branching of primary scaffold limbs with sharp-angled crotches occurs throughout the canopy. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis with rP".2 particular emphasis on the attachment of limbs with rt vtit sharp-angled crotches;provide crown reconstruction idd pruning techniques to improve scaffold branch attachment and arrangement, provide routine pruning si techniques as needed, prune to maintain adequate { clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and r �w �, ` i pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, prune to thin 1 TREE foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #14 This 25-inch diameter tree is growing in a modified typically restricted growing space-the planter pops out into the roadway a distance of about 4 feet. The tree has a canopy that extends about 20 feet high and as wide. Multiple primary scaffold limbs originate from the main stem about 12 feet up from grade and support a dense, asymmetrical canopy. Monitor the tree's stability California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000071. Maintenance Plan 26 =` on a routine basis;provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques to improve scaffold branch attachment and 1/4 + �fit; ,. '.. arrangement, provide routine pruning techniques as e,- „ ...if, needed, prune to provide adequate clearance for _ '4b vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic * *-- io, ., ) i , '' along the sidewalk, pmne to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and ` � possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and .� p g promote an upward growing war g g cano p pY architecture, avoid 111., 4 , . * !;_ over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree A - - _ ---' health. TREE Tag/site #16 This 39-inch diameter tree is growing in a modified typically restricted growing space-the planter pops out into the roadway a distance of about 4 feet. The Y tree has a canopy that extends about 50 feet high and 60 . �� pY g s ',3 . :r '.t r. feet wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 20 feet ,.. •. , zY 'f up, progressive branching of primary and secondary } P scaffold limbs occurs throughout the canopy producing . , ,±,.., i . : an especially high canopy architecture. Several of the 041t. ' `' ' scaffold limbs are long and horizontal and tend to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. Monitor the tree's pN f stability on a routine basis;provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques along the long or horizontal limbs to - ,t promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, provide routine pruning . �: - ~ techniques as needed, prune to maintain.adequate - TREE clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well-placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000072 Maintenance Plan 27 Tag/site #20 This 17-inch diameter tree is growing in a k - typically restricted growing space. The tree has a canopy ,$ that extends about 25 feet high and as wide. Initial stem Y i bifurcation occurs about 8 feet up, progressive branching of primary and secondary scaffold limbs occurs *4 throughout the canopy promoting a well distributed branch architecture. Removal of one or more low horizontal limbs may improve the canopy form and Yet reduce long-term pedestrian clearance re q uirements. . fik Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis• provide ami „ routine prunin.g techniques as needed, p rune to provide adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic long the sidewalk, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, TREE drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site #21 This 23-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space with a park-style bench located about 10 feet east of the planting site. The tree has a canopy that extends about 20 feet high and 30 feet wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 6 feet up with multiple primary scaffold limbs originating low on the main stem and extending along a horizontal angle. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis, especially sections that extend over (and therefore tend to threaten) " the vicinity of the park bench;provide crown .• ;,._ _ reconstruction pruning techniques to improve scaffold branch attachment and arrangement, provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to provide TREE adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but California Pepper.Grove--High Street Moorpark,California 000073 Maintenance Plan 26 take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #27 This 15-inch diameter tree is growing in an atypical growing space that is 15 feet deep but only 5 feet wide. The tree has developed with a pronounced lean to tt, the south; its canopy extends about 20 feet high and 25 . py g swgimeir feet wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 4 feet up with multiple primary scaffold limbs originating with narrow crotch angles, low on the main stem, and extending along a low,horizontal angle. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis, especially sections that i , extend over (and therefore tend to threaten) the vicinity t r, t, of the parking lot; provide crown reconstruction pruning , 1":14 pitr _ i techniques to improve scaffold branch attachment and i,„,t, - - .....- . arrangement, provide routine pruning techniques as vi.li - - _ needed, prune to provide adequate clearance for TREE vehicular and pedestrian traffic, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. , i Fag/site #28 This 11-inch diameter tree is growing in an y atypical growing space that is 9 feet wide but the trunk is only 1 foot west and 2 feet south of pavement edges. Large surface roots (6-inches in diameter and 4-inches in Y diameter-see detail photo)have been cut on the north n side,behind the direction of the tree's lean, to avert '� encroachment with adjacent pavement. This treatment a; i p 3 tends to destabilize the tree. The tree has one low k s. horizontal scaffold limb extending to the south;its g -� - canopy, 20-foot high and as wide, is otherwise TREE symmetrical. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis, especially sections that extend over (and therefore tend to threaten) the vicinity of the parking lot; provide pruning treatments to remove the low branch and California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000074 Maintenance Plan 29 improve the branch distribution, provide routine f pruning techniques as needed, prune to provide 41t*N. adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, t }4 prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid if 40 heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy TREE #2 8 development while maintaining tree health. When the opportunity arises to replace the tree the new specimen should be centered in the growing space. Tag/site 435 This 32-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic F sidewalk and curb/gutter. The tree has a canopy that extends about 30 feet high and 60 feet wide. Initial stem bifurcation occurs about 20 feet up, progressive p� p g branching of primary and secondary scaffold limbs occurs throughout the canopy producing an especially high canopy architecture. Several of the scaffold limbs are long and horizontal and tend to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. Monitor the tree's stability on a a r routine basis;provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques along the long horizontal limbs to promote -r branch development and architectural structure closer E; E toward the main stem, provide routine pruning TREE techniques as needed, prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well-placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). California Pepper Grove--High Street Moorpark,California 000075 Maintenance Plan 30 Tag/site #37 This 13-inch diameter tree is growing in an , ?4 � �2 s j° ' atypical growing space with 9 feet between a building y� ,.- y y 9 w 4 r -�[ and the monolithic sidewalk• Additionally, the space is essentially unlimited in its width. The tree has 1, f ff �� developed with a pronounced lean to the north, away � p p Y 4 ,4 , t from the building. The tree has one low horizontal } A 4 ° ° scaffold limb extending to the north;its canopy, 20 feet 4 *, .4, 1 high and as wide, would otherwise be symmetrical. IV" �,,. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis, especially the impact of and potential pressure from the root zone as it develops in the vicinity of the adjacent building; provide pruning rovide runin treatments to remove the low branch and improve the branch distribution, provide routine p , p ... .,,,Illanill. TREE pruning techniques as needed, prune to provide adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid R 3 heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward -Y . f growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect ct cano pY • kt ..� ,Y, • development while maintaining tree health.*t vs, ,, �q R.. _ Tag/site #38 This 14-inch diameter tree is growing in an `" atypical growing space that is 5 feet deep-the tree trunk.a, abuts a sidewalk section extended into the planter to ,,,, t- h mi accommodate an ornamental street lamppost. Imminent conflict is likely adjacent the adjacent meanderin sidewalk. meandering Monitor the tree's stability and its impact on adjacent TREE structure and infrastructure;provide routine pruni migosismai ng techniques as needed, prune to maintain adequate - !Immo "'' _ clearance for vehicular and p edestrian traffic and clearance from the building roof, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, I f,„,.,,,4,...0 AI' and e�ossible breakage, heading-back terminal ends p g g and promote an upward growing canopy architecture — avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). When an • opportunity arises to replace the tree the new specimen should be accommodated by the growing space. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000076 1 Maintenance Plan 31. Tag/site #42 This 11-inch diameter tree is growing in an atypical growing space 4 feet east of brick paving (on the west side) and the tree's stem is 3 feet south of the sidewalk on the north side, which was extended to allow pedestrians to meander around an ornamental street lamppost. A potential future encroachment conflict is likely with the adjacent paved surfaces. The tree has a Y l p ,, low, horizontal canopy architecture that extends about 18 . ,,/ a , ilt A" -�: feet above ground and westward, somewhat toward the e4 gazebo. Monitor the tree's stability and its impact on s. r,t adjacent structure and infrastructure; provide crown •3 ,,, I r 4 . ,_ „, reconstruction pruning techniques along the long Ark ` '. `(. --c horizontal limbs to promote branch development and is `+ ` architectural structure closer toward the main stem, °"' provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to ,,A,,, maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian E`I!t • traffic and clearance from the gazebo, prune to thin g , p TREE foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, avoid heading-back terminal ends and promote an upward growing canopy architecture, avoid over pruning the tree if possible but take necessary steps to redirect canopy development while maintaining tree health. Tag/site #43 This 42-inch diameter tree is growing in an R ir, x r - ' atypical growing space-and potential conflict is likely 4: ' - :4.. with the adjacent paved surfaces. Additional conflicts . Q are likely with high voltage utility power lines that run r` i . T I, t 4.- along the south side of the tree. The tree has a canopy ''. I' 1 i f I 4 -41)._ ,,,, , '* * .fi. -: .J that extends about 40 feet high and 55 feet wide. Due to itos q2 t,_? the phototropism and its effect on plant growth, portions _. ;+ of the tree canopy will have an inclination to encroach ` . 'Y` 5 r f kt into the vicinity of these energized conductors. Unless . ,. s maximum clearance standards are met, clearance pruning will occur by agents of the utility company and the interests of the tree will be secondary at best. (Utility 1. 1 - line clearance is conducted in accordance with � - TREE requirements of General Order 95, Rule 35 of The California Public Utilities Commission). Initial stem California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California OOOO7r Maintenance Plan 32 bifurcation occurs about 10 feet up, progressive branching of primary and secondary scaffold limbs occurs throughout the canopy promoting a well distributed branch architecture. Several of the scaffold limbs are long and horizontal and tend to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis;provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques along the long horizontal limbs to provide maximum clearance from high voltage utility lines, promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well-placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site #46 This 41-inch diameter tree is growing in a � g g typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic 1 sidewalk and curb/gutter, though there is a concrete pad K., :. 4 with a park bench a short distance to the east of the tree }4 . _ base. Other potential conflicts are possible with high `It voltage utility power lines that run along the south side of the tree. The tree has a canopy that extends about 50 feet high and 50 feet wide. This tree has a co-dominant stem architecture and initial stem bifurcation occurs a g secondary 6 feet u . Lateral branchin d p scaffold limbs occurs high in the canopy resulting in severe canopy architecture. Several of the secondary scaffold limbs are long and horizontal, and may develop a tendency to become overloaded toward branch ends. TREE Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis;provide crown reduction pruning techniques along the long horizontal limbs to promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 4,/ f .; Maintenance Plan 33 provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, promote an upward growing canopy architecture and routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well- placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site #47 This 40-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic - „-� _ sidewalk and curb/gutter, though the adjacent tree (#46) ' � is growing with its trunk only 20 feet away to the east r`' : , ` and high voltage utility p ower lines run along the south th . �. . 4 , :-,. - 't side of the tree. The tree's canopy extends about 50 feet ILIk .• e high and as wide. The tree leans to the south and little of '� ` ° , its canopy architecture extends to the north or to the east.,i, i , , It_ _ °..` `kt Lateral limbs extending to the south have been truncated :''', i'''' ' i 4 t � _ due to the high voltage utility lines. Additionally, a new . i , i 4 le4' p 4:44' ,$ L. tree has been installed adjacent and to the west, also a Y canopy about 20 feet awa • The cano of this tree must be modified over time if the small new tree is to develop. . its AL full form. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis; provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques on the = - i TREE north and south side to promote lateral branching and natural branch structure, provide crown reduction pruning techniques on the west side to provide solar radiation exposure for the adjacent new tree, provide routine pruning techniques as needed, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage,routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well-placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000079 Maintenance Plan 34 to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Tag/site#49 This 51-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic sidewalk and curb/gutter. The tree's canopy extends about 50 feet high and 70 feet wide. Three primary scaffold limbs bifurcate from the stem about 6 feet above 4 , _ , _, ,,,,jr, ,. „ grade and triangulate in such a fashion as to avoid the ,, 3 . y vicinity of power lines that run along the south side of tee. the tree. A utility pole and associated communications a lines are located beneath and extending through the canopy; this infrastructure has minor relevance to tree PY r_ maintenance. Monitor the tree's stability on a routine 4 . ,, „,,1 x basis; provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques Alt p P g q along the long horizontal limbs to promote branch b ` development and architectural structure closer toward f `j" ' f""r the main stem, provide routine pruning techniques as nowir TREE needed, prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street, prune to thin foliage on heavily laden limbs to avoid excessive strain, drooping, and possible breakage, routinely reduce horizontal canopy expansion by selectively cutting back terminal ends to appropriate-sized and well-placed lateral branches, avoid over pruning the tree (remove up to or less than but no more than 20 percent of the live foliage). Illte ' '''' I '4,4- 12.1 VETERAN TREES AND THEIR MAINTENANCE NEEDS Tag/site #6 This 39-inch diameter tree is growing in.a �i typically restricted growing space. Previous assessments A indicate extreme problems with trunk stability and major 4 I problems with both the health and stability of scaffold jii; k limbs. The tree's canopy extends about 50 feet high and pY g e' . , 60 feet wide. The initial stem bifurcation is about 20 feet ` ' - _ up, progressive branching of secondary scaffold limbs -n� occurs throughout the canopy producing an extensive TREE but especially high canopy architecture. Several of the California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000080 Maintenance Plan 35 scaffold limbs are long and horizontal and tend to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years;progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #9 This 40-inch diameter tree is growing in a i typically restricted growing space. In addition to paving/surface restrictions the tree is situated in close i proximity to the adjacent tree (#8); they were planted 20 feet on center. Allowing for reasonable canopy extension I te s , and healthy long-term development, a minimum „, . �{j specification for trees this size should be 30 feet on gg . i- : : .. ":, center. Previous assessments indicate extreme problems F ". with trunk stability and major problems with both the . 4 n g health of scaffold limbs and smaller branches and twigs. . "* ' The tree's canopy extends about 55 feet high and 60 feet - ''' i- f :} . wide. The initial stem bifurcation is about 10 feet up, ro ressive branching of secondary scaffold limbs occurs � # I,. p g g Y lif i. .. . , throughout the canopy producing an extensive canopy architecture. Most or all of the scaffold limbs are long, ...-If'411 'fir ' ....-k----i -, :: and horizontal and tend to be heavily loaded toward j `� branch ends. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction _ TREE pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years; 1' g Y progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000081 Maintenance Plan 36 but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #13 This 43-inch diameter tree is growing in a modified typically restricted growing space-the planter pops out into the roadway a distance of about 4feet. Previous assessments indicate major problems with both F root stability and scaffold stability,� r,� - ty ty, and extreme problems related to a large trunk cavity and decay. The r tree has a ronounced lean to the north and has a canop4 y pY ` . extending about 40 feet high and 60 feet wide. The initial I F :_ • ! stem bifurcation is about 10 feet up with 5 primary scaffold limbs and progressive branching of secondary : dj t'sr f scaffold and smaller branches and twigs throughout the .-- s canopy. Each of the scaffold limbs is long and horizontal pY g p ' , . -.- l' ,,4,- x 41 and tends to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. i Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an 4 p g TREE annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years; progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. ._Y i; 1 ag/site #17 This 41-inch diameter tree is growing in a ° `f' modified typically restricted growing space-the planter F . s 4 a z *41 . '' ; pops out into the roadway a distance of about 4 feet. } ' Previous assessments indicate extreme problems with . *. roots stability and trunk stability and major problems 4,!etc, ' , e 4 with the health of the roots. This tree's condition -I ,,,..7' ,• ' 1 ' � � warrants ongoing consideration for its useful . it f contribution to the grove. The tree's canopy extends I about 50 feet high and 44 feet wide. The one large lateral " '` qq '` limb originates about 8 feet up from rade• it is truncated � i. " p g �EE about 10 above its point of origination. The rima 1= p rY California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000082 Maintenance Plan 37 scaffold bifurcation is about 20 feet up and extensive branching of secondary scaffold limbs occurs throughout the canopy producing a narrow and especially high canopy architecture. Several of the scaffold limbs are long and tend to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years;progressively reduce the length of long limbs each year to gradually promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #23 This 40-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically restricted growing space. Previous assessments indicate major problems with the stability of the trunk f - and the scaffold limbs. The tree's canopy extends about �,�'3 40 feet high and 44 feet wide. This tree has co-dominant ' stem architecture and initial stem bifurcation occurs r ; about 8 feet u p. Lateral secondary scaffold limbs occur high in the canopy resulting in canopy architecture exerting severe leverage on weakened primary structure " elements. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction • z d pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 ears; p g Y progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each g ear to gradually promote branch Y Yp development and architectural structure closer toward k -11111 the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques 11 until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety TREE prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular traffic on High Street and pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000083 Maintenance Plan 38 Tag/site #30 This 37-inch diameter tree is growing in an atypical growing space-19 feet wide and 26 feet deep, with a monolithic sidewalk and curb/gutter. Previous Y assessments indicate major problems with the health and stability of the trunk and the scaffold limbs. The tree's { canopy extends about 40 feet high and 47 feet wide. The .,. initial stem bifurcation is about 15 feet up, with 3 , . • :. _ - i primary scaffold limbs and secondary scaffold and p rY rY --it, r #`' smaller branches and twigs throughout the canopy. A Several of the major lateral limbs are long,horizontal, y .� #• �, and tend to be heavily loaded toward branch ends. ill t ,k, A F - Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an '. . % 4F annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years;progressively, 40 - reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs -., .„ - z w each year to gradually promote branch development and r- architectural structure closer toward the main stem, TREE delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Tag/site #31 This 36-inch diameter tree is growing in a ` s typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic 3 sidewalk and curb/gutter. Previous assessments indicate T # / i major problems with the health and stability of the trunk E ii and the stability of scaffold limbs. The tree's canopy extends about 35 feet high and 52 feet wide. This tree has :X� g k - a co-dominant stem architecture and initial stem .' ` bifurcation occurs about 8 feet up. Lateral primary R` scaffold limbs occur high in the canopy resulting in an t :_ •4 _ elevated canopy form. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction priming on an annual schedule for a • minimum of 5 years;progressively reduce the length of - 4 • -w � long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually �.X ` " � Y p TREE- promote branch development and architectural structure _ - closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic but, over time, develop well placed 4 California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000064 i Maintenance Plan 39 new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #32 This 25-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic z5 . - sidewalk and curb/gutter. Previous assessments indicate extreme problems with root stability and major problems with trunk and scaffold stability and scaffold health. The tree's can opy extends about 30 feet high and 43 feet wide with most of the canopy on a north south axis due to its close proximity to an adjacent tree (#31). The main stem bifurcation is about 15 feet up. Initiate extensive crown tt z reconstruction pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years;progressively reduce the length of { long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually #Y 4 Vglootot-01 promote branch development and architectural structure = closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning — TREE techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #33 This 30-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic sidewalk and curb/gutter. Previous assessments indicate major l maj problems with root stability. The tree's canopy p tY ' a{ Ky extends about 30 feet high and 39 feet wide. This tree has a co-dominant stem architecture and initial stem �`+ S bifurcation occurs about 15 feet up.u Lateral primary p rY s. '41V 4 z=� scaffold limbs occur high in the canopy resulting in an elevated canopy form. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years;progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually r -$ 'T. promote branch development and architectural structure riMi111111111111111 NOW 111— closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning �- TREE techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California oOOOL5 Maintenance Plan 40 and pedestrian traffic but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #36 This 59-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a meandering sidewalk, placing the tree in an open space between the sidewalk and High Street. A park bench is located on the north side between the tree and High Street, directly under the lean. Previous assessments indicate extreme `'` problems: with root health, major problems with root s r } ;Y t v k a stability and scaffold limb stability, and due to a large v cavity and decay major problems with the trunk health. 4i. SA ,i4, a, # s R y` , The tree's canopy extends about 45 feet high and 66 feet '*,ii! V. '' A I, wide. This tree has a co-dominant stem architecture and ktiiiii , initial stem bifurcation occurs about 15 feet up. Lateral $ i s primary scaffold limbs occur high in the canopy resulting o ., , fib. P -� ��, in an elevated canopy form. The initial stem bifurcation 4.6.-.�,, . .�` is about 10 feet up with additional bifurcation of scaffold it. ,, 4 '1 * r 1 ita, limbs about 5 feet higher. Many of the scaffold limbs are iuiliokiliMirir-- f !!".• long and horizontal and tend to be heavily loaded TREE toward branch ends. Remove the park bench away from --- p Y this location and relocate it where it will not present a potential high risk for damage or injury in case of tree failure. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years; progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. Tag/site #44 This 33-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a meandering sidewalk, placing the tree in an open space between the California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 0000a ti 4 Maintenance Plan 41 sidewalk and High Street. A potential aerial conflict exists with high voltage utility power lines that run along the south side of the tree. Previous assessments indicate extreme problems with scaffold limb stability, and major problems with trunk stability and scaffold limb health. _; The tree bifurcates at about 10 up with 3 primary p p 7' scaffolds, progressive branching of secondary scaffold limbs occurs producing an extensive canopy supported 1. i'. by long lateral limbs that tend to be heavily loaded °; ; Y_ toward branch ends. Initiate extensive crown reconstruction pruning on an annual schedule for a minimum of 5 years;progressively reduce the length of long vertical and horizontal limbs each year to gradually - == TREE promote branch development and architectural structure closer toward the main stem, delay other routine pruning techniques until crown reconstruction is well underway, safety prune to maintain adequate clearance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic but, over time, develop well placed new sprouts to extend canopy architecture lower on the stem. 12.1 SENESCENT TREES—REMOVALS AND REPLACEMENTS Tag/site #22 This 48-inch diameter tree is growing in a r is .4 r modified typically restricted growing space-the planter a � out into the roadway a distance of about 4 feet. The -_. 6f rt pops Y w 40, . tree has a canopy that extends about 45 feet high and 53 r , %t �� feet wide. Previous assessments indicate extreme I. t:♦ } i problems with root stability, trunk stability, and scaffold 4t, ,44.4i4 i �r )ill limb stability and the tree has a severe lean to the west. - ,i!lip41,......, .ry. i } Due to conditions of instability that cannot be mitigated ' '''.. : ?ta !k* '''' ,' It ' a' the tree should be removed at the earliest opportunity, ;t $ ' Vii 1 the site should be prepared for replanting and a new tree � :� �,. � ,� p p p g •� ;, _ ` :. {$' should be installed at this location. Please see planting t ` :` specifications, enclosed. s A TREE California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 4 0000S? Maintenance Plan 42 , , Mir Tag/site #26 This 52-inch diameter tree is growing in a � � � modified typically restricted growing space—the planter . pops out into the roadway a distance of about 4 feet. The -``4, tree has a canopy that extends about 45 feet high and 43 - pY g i '} :' . feet wide. Previous assessments indicate extreme . ; 4 problems with trunk stability and scaffold limb stability. Due to conditions of instability that cannot be mitigated t � ' ,; the tree should be removed at the earliest opportunity '-' and the site should be studied for its appropriateness as a �� f . \ ; ' ; designated tree site or a site designated part as art of the historic California Pepper grove. If it is determined that WeLl ' r.-�- ` s replanting is appropriate a new tree may be installed at ., _,.„1. � _.. this location. Please see planting specifications, enclosed. TREE ... Tag/site #29 This 33-inch diameter tree is growing in a **la- .� ° modified typically restricted growing space—the space is .:......... rt, '4..b . a 5-foot by 5-foot planter and the tree's trunk is . approximately 1-foot away from the paving in each 4 direction. The tree has a canopy that extends about 35 ' pY feet high and 39 feet wide. Previous assessments indicate extreme problems with trunk stability and scaffold limb stability. Due to conditions of instability that cannot be mitigated the tree should be removed at the earliest opportunity and the site should be studied for its . s= appropriateness as a designated tree site or a site , . N designated as part of the historic California Pepper V,4 , , . ' ,e' '' t ■r ;4 . r..+ grove. If it is determined that replanting is appropriate a„T., kr,., new tree may be installed at this location.,, . t tri ' e t 4 r. e , .., ., , *,,, , , , , , i . , , , ,- ,,p.....„-i,.r.i. _.„., ....____:i.— ,:,i-: 4 , __ •,...e.att. ~{ - .. - TREE California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000088 Maintenance Plan 43 Tag/site #34 This 29-inch diameter tree is growing in a typically unrestricted growing space with a monolithic sidewalk and curb/gutter. The tree has a canopy that extends about 30 feet high and 46 feet wide. Previous assessments indicate extreme problems with root 't'f,,,' ?- , , ' stability and major problems with trunk health and 7 ` . ' " { { . stability and scaffold limb health and stability. Due to �"- 7_ � ' conditions o f in stab ili ty a n d extensive h ea lth challenges : ,' , , the tree should be removed at the earliest opportunity, z� , , 4 , ��*��: :�� . ,.w�,.�k, ;E . ?" -r----._p- - the site should be prepared for replanting and a new tree --A should be installed at this location. Please see planting p g TREE specifications, enclosed. .. Tag/site #45 This 35-inch diameter tree is growing in a 4 z .- - 3 ,. F $ typically unrestricted growing space with a meandering ss _ ', sidewalk and concrete pads with park benches a short . ,� p p i .4 distance from the tree base on both the east and west '. f .e., ' f sides. In addition, high voltage utility power lines that - ' " j, . s, run along the south side of the tree. The tree has a A. . °. ` ', canopy that extends about 45 feet high and 45 feet wide. � .� ' ` Previous assessments indicate extreme problems with Y trunk stability and major problems with scaffold limb stability. Due to conditions of instability the tree should be removed at the earliest opportunity, the site should be 1 _ _ —411 iii ,----; f prepared for replanting and a new tree should be ,,, ,,,�, ,,, ,,, "' installed at this location. Please see planting TREE specifications, enclosed. u ATTACHMENTS • Site sketch (1 page, 11x14 format) • Planting detail and specifications (2 pages) • Pruning details and specifications (ANSI Documents) California Pepper Grove-High Street Moorpark,California 000089 High Street California Pepper Trees Draft Maintenance Plan Site sketch Moorpark Av. tag #1 tag #2 tag/#52 tag #3 tag #4 tag tag #51#50 Walnut St. . --tagi t5.------------- i_. 137 High St. -38'o/c (market) � tag #49 � --44'o/c _I tag #48 52'o/c 1 (vacant lot) --_-tag_la - ( ) �--1 192 High St. ----- _ _ _ _ A-k---------------45`01c-- __._.... �.�.21'o/c -� tag #47^ 165 High St.(old station) o #8 - - - - N g ,� (professional building) tag #46 ; Zoo/c g -I tag #45 (storefront) -- .-------------------- -------- i .,tag #10._..._..._..._.._..._..._.._..._......_(storefront) tag #44 . , tag #11 38'o/c - (storefront) i Cl) tag 12 .,.._.._.._..,.._.._.._.._.._.._. ...m_ ._x- __. . tag#4 (restaurant) i tag #41c s .. .. . . y,.,.-H,..._. (storefront) tag #40F 0) Bard St. = t #13 }-44'o/c o 213 Hi i s —� h St. g tag #38� is (vacant building) tag #37 5610/c ! ! tag #36 ag #14 233 High St. 72'o/c (professional building) tag/#15 _ . _._ _ -- 57o/c 255 H i h St. tag #35 a #16 g (mulched lot) g -------g — (storefront) j tag #34 tag #17 273 High St. (residence) tag #33 —_ .--....- ! ii" (fire station) tag #32 Illir tag #31 4111t_ii ......_. 4,,--1 Magnolia St. tag #20 (restaurant) tag #30 p ._._._. ._._._ _ ._ ._._._ _•r.. (p arkin g lot) tag #21 (residence) tag #29 tag/#28 __i tag/#27 a g #22 349 High St.(blacksmith's sho f 0 090 tag #26 CC ATTACHMENT 2 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN (Provided under Separate Cover on January 8, 2007) 000091 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN CITY OF MOORPARK VENTURA COUNTY,CALIFORNIA S A December 2006 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN CITY OF MOORPARK VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Parks,Recreation,and Community Services Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark,California 93021 Prepared by: LSA Associates,Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 (951) 781-9310 LSA Project No.MPK530 w LSA December 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1-1 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT.............................................................................................1-2 1.3 IMPACTS,MITIGATION,AND LEVEL OF IMPACT SUMMARY TABLE......1-2 1.4 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED.......................1-2 1.5 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES.........................................................................1-3 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE......................................................................................2-1 2.1 PURPOSE.................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT...2-2 2.3 AREAS OF PUBLIC CONCERN OR KNOWN CONTROVERSY.......................2-3 2.4 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT DISCUSSED IN THE EIR........................................................................................2-3 2.5 EFFECTS NOT FOUND TO BE SIGNIFICANT....................................................2-4 2.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT................................2-7 2.7 EIR MITIGATION MONITORING.........................................................................2-7 2.8 DOCUMENT FORMAT...........................................................................................2-7 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION....................................................................................................3-1 3.1 BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................3-1 3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING.................................................................3-1 3.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................3-2 3.4 MAINTENANCE PLAN OBJECTIVES..................................................................3-5 3.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REQUIRED...........................................................3-6 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION...................................4.1-1 4.1 AESTHETICS........................................................................................................4.1-1 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...............................................................................4.2-1 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES...................................................................................4.3-1 5.0 ADDITIONAL TOPICS REQUIRED BY CEQA.................................................................5-1 5.1 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED.................................................................................................................5-1 5.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS........................5-1 5.3 GROWTH INDUCEMENT......................................................................................5-2 6.0 ALTERNATIVES..................................................................................................................6-1 6.1 ALTERNATIVE UNDER CONSIDERATION.......................................................6-1 6.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED.............................................6-2 6.3 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS ..................................................................................6-3 6.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE..........................................6-4 R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\000-TOC.doc(12/27/2006) 1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEM B ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 7.0 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY...............................................................................7-1 8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS..........................................................................................................8-1 8.1 CITY OF MOORPARK............................................................................................8-1 8.2 LSA ASSOCIATES,INC.........................................................................................8-1 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION/NOTICE OF PREPARATION MAILING LIST/NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\000-TOC.doc(12/27/2006) 11 FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES 3.1 Regional and Project Location Map.......................................................................................3-3 3.2 California Pepper Tree Illustrative Plan.................................................................................3-4 4.1 Viewpoints 1 and 2..............................................................................................................4.1-2 4.2 Viewpoints 3 and 4..............................................................................................................4.1-3 4.3 Viewpoints 5 and 6..............................................................................................................4.1-4 TABLES 1.A Environmental Summary of California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan................................1-5 4.1.A Existing Trees......................................................................................................................4.1-5 6.A Comparison of Project Alternative with the Proposed Project...............................................6-4 R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\000-TOC.doc(12/27/2006) 111 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Executive Summary for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State of California Clearinghouse No. 2006051024, has been prepared according to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. This EIR has been prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) on behalf of the City of Moorpark to (1) assess the foreseeable individual and cumulative impacts of the proposed project's physical development on the environment; (2) identify means of offsetting, avoiding or minimizing potential adverse environmental impacts; and (3) evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21002.1. This EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15120 through 15161 regulating EIRs. The EIR process provides an opportunity for the public to review and comment upon the potential environmental effects, and contribute to the environmental analysis. The City must respond to significant environmental issues identified during the public review process. The City determined that an EIR should be prepared to analyze the potential impacts associated with approval and implementation of the proposed project. On May 3, 2006, the City distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to local and regional responsible agencies and other interested parties. At the close of the 30-day NOP public review period, three agencies provided comment on the scope of the EIR A copy of the NOP and the responses received during the 30-day public review period are contained in Appendix A of this document. Comments received during the NOP scoping period have been considered in the preparation of this EIR. Based on the potential impacts of the proposed project, including cumulative impacts, and the comments received, this EIR evaluates the following environmental issues: • Aesthetics • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources These environmental issues are addressed in Section 4.0 (Environmental Analysis) of this EIR. Based upon the analysis provided in the Initial Study for the proposed project (Appendix A) all impacts associated with agricultural resources, air quality, geology and soils,hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, traffic, and utilities and service systems were determined to be "Effects Not Found to be Significant" according to Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines and are not further addressed in this EIR. A summary of these issues and why they are not included in detail in this EIR is provided in Section 2.0. RAMPK530\Draft EIRU.0 Executive Summary.doc(12/27/2006) 1-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 7006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT The City of Moorpark proposes a tree maintenance plan to address maintenance of the 49 California pepper trees on High Street. The proposed project extends approximately 0.2 mile on High Street, between Moorpark Avenue and the 400 block of High Street in the City of Moorpark. The tree maintenance plan addresses a discrete collection of 49 California pepper trees grouped into four categories: young trees, shade trees, veteran trees, and senescent trees. These existing trees along High Street are of basic two types: small trees (small canopy and diameter of trunk) and large trees (extensive canopy and older). The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 49 pepper trees and proposes services and techniques for maintenance of different categories of the California pepper trees on High Street. The primary goal of the maintenance plan is to provide a realistic framework by which the legacy of the original trees is sustained and appropriate care is delivered, while minimizing the risk to people and property due to the existence of old, senescent trees on the public right-of-way. 1.3 IMPACTS,MITIGATION,AND LEVEL OF IMPACT SUMMARY TABLE Table LA, Environmental Summary of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, located at the end of this section, summarizes project impacts, mitigation measures, the level of significance of impacts after mitigation, and unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project. 1.4 AREAS OF KNOWN CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED In addition to a summary of each significant effect and the proposed mitigation measures to reduce or avoid that effect, CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)requires that areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency (City of Moorpark) be stated in the EIR summary. This discussion also includes issues raised by other agencies and the public, and issues to be resolved including the choice among alternatives that would mitigate the significant effects identified in the EIR. As of the close of the 30- day NOP public review period, three agencies provided continent on the scope of the EIR. Response letters received are included in entirety in Appendix A of this EIR. A brief summary of the response letters received is provided as follows. 1. State of California, Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit, May 4, 2006. This letter was sent to reviewing State agencies with the NOP, requesting their comments within 30 days of receipt of the notice. 2. County of Ventura Public Works Agency, Transportation Department. This letter expresses the agency's opinion that because additional traffic generated by the project would be temporary, there would be no cumulative impact of this project on County roads. This letter identifies mitigation to reduce the impact of construction related trips on State Route 118. The agency recommends restricting construction/maintenance trips between the hours of between 6:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. The letter also note's that the agency's review of the project is limited to impacts the project would have on the County's Regional Road Network. 3. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District. This letter states that the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District concurs with the findings of the Initial Study, and the proposed project would not result in exceedence of air emissions thresholds of significance or violate any air RAMPK530\Draft EIR\1.0 Executive Summary.doc(12/27/2006) 1-2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY quality standards. The letter also recommends that trucks carrying pruned material comply with the State Vehicle Code. Maintenance of the pepper trees for public safety involves decisions to sometimes severely prune or remove and replace an individual specimen. These options have raised substantial local public interest in the decisions that will be made in the draft Maintenance Plan. 1.5 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES Alternatives Considered and Rejected A number of possible alternatives were initially considered and rejected because they could not accomplish the basic objectives of the project (which are stated in Section 3.4 of this EIR), or were considered infeasible. The reasons for not selecting the rejected alternatives are discussed below. Alternative Use of Project Site. The trees are located within an existing public right-of-way. The location of the trees within an existing public right-of-way on a developed street excludes the potential for an alternative use of the project site by structures or buildings. The project site is limited in size and would not provide adequate area for such uses. Therefore, alternative uses for the site would be restricted to the replacement of the existing California pepper trees by some other type of tree or no replacement. The replacement of the California pepper tree grove on High Street by another type of tree or no replacement would not meet the project objective of preserving the pepper tree stand as a cultural resource for the community. The trees are part of the existing streetscape and character of High Street; some have been located along High Street since their planting in 1901. The trees are considered to be a historical attribute to the City of Moorpark and provide reference to the founding elements of the City. Some of the existing trees date back to the early 1900s when Robert Poindexter, a City founding father, planted trees along High Street. The purpose of the project is to provide a maintenance plan that preserves the grove while providing appropriate care and minimizing the risk to people and property due to the existence of senescent' trees on the public right-of-way. Removing the trees from their existing location and replacing them with another type of tree or not replacing the trees would not meet the objectives of the project. Therefore, the alternative use of the project site was rejected as an alternative to the proposed project. Off-Site Location. The removal of the trees on High Street and replanting in a different location is not a feasible alternative as it would not preserve the existing character of High Street. The grove has been located along High Street since 1901 and is part of the downtown character. The trees are considered to be an attribute to the City of Moorpark and provide reference to the founding elements of the City. Due to the trees longstanding presence on High Street, it has become an integral part of the downtown visual environment, and provides a sense of place for the High Street streetscape. The removal of the trees and placement at a different location would not meet the objectives of the project and therefore was rejected as an alternative. Growing old;aging. RAMPK530\Draft EIR\1.0 Executive Summary.doc(12/27/2006) 1-3 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEME ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Alternative Considered One alternative is analyzed in greater detail in Section 6.0 of the EIR. Due to the nature of the proposed project, which does not include the development of any land or the construction of any structures, and is limited to maintenance activities on a discrete collection of trees located along an existing street,the range of reasonable alternatives to consider is limited. Alternative 1: No Project/Existing Conditions. Under the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative, the proposed project would not go forward. As stated previously, the No Project discussion should consider what is reasonably expected to occur, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure, in the foreseeable future should the project not go forward. In this instance, the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative considers routine maintenance of trees and emergency maintenance of trees as is the case currently. This involves maintenance every 10 to 18 months on average by the City's tree maintenance contractor. Under the"No Project Alternative," senescent trees are not removed and replaced,as in the case of the proposed maintenance plan. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\1.0 Executive Summary.doc(12/27/2006) 1-4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DECEMBER 2006 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Table 1.A—Environmental Summary of California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan Level of Significance Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation Aesthetics Less than Significant: • Impacts to Light and Glare. None required. Not Applicable • Cumulative Impacts. Potentiaill Significant: Impact 4.1.1. The proposed project may result in a significant 4.1.1.a.All pruning and maintenance applied to the California pepper trees,as Less than Significant. impact to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its described in the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, shall be done surroundings. Through implementation of the California Pepper under the supervision of a certified arborist. Trees Maintenance Plan the existing character of the pepper trees will be altered through pruning and other maintenance activities. 4.1.1.6. All maintenance tasks, procedures, and triggers shall be carried out accordingly as described within the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. Impact 4.1.2.The proposed project may have a substantial adverse Refer to Mitigation Measures 4.1.La and 4.1.Lb Less than Significant. effect upon scenic vistas. Through the adoption of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, scenic vistas from adjoining areas will be altered through the reduction of foliage. Impact 4.1.3. The proposed project may substantially damage Refer to Mitigation Measures 4.1.La and 4.1.Lb Less than Significant. scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The California pepper trees are of historical significance to the City of Moorpark. Biological Resources Less than Signs scant: Not Applicable • Impacts to Sensitive or Special Status Species. None required. • Impacts to Riparian Habitat. • Impacts on Federally protected Wetlands. • Impacts Wildlife Species or Corridors. • Impacts upon an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. • Impacts to Local Policies or Ordinances. • Cumulative Impacts. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\1.0 Executive Summary.doc(12/27/2006) 1-5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 1006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Table LA—Environmental Summary of California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan Level of Significance Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation Potentially Signifcant.• Impact 4.2.1.The proposed project may conflict with local policies 4.2.1.a. Subsequent to the removal of any tree within the California pepper Less than Significant. or ordinances protecting biological resources. tree stand on High Street, the City-designated contractor responsible for tree maintenance shall replace the removed specimen in kind with a California pepper tree(Schinus molle)as called for in the maintenance plan. Impact 4.2.2.The proposed project may result in the disturbance of 4.2.2.a. Protective measures shall be required to ensure compliance with the Less than Significant. active nests, if they are present in the trees during maintenance MBTA, and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and activities. 3800.Prior to tree maintenance activities,a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting survey consisting of two (2) surveys conducted on separate days, within 72 hours immediately preceding tree maintenance activities, e.g., trimming branches or tree removal. 4.2.2.b. If pre-maintenance nesting surveys result in the location of active nests, no tree maintenance procedures shall take place in the tree with the active nest until such time the young have fledged and become independent of the nest. A qualified biologist shall determine if a buffer area should be established around the tree with the active nest. Cultural Resources Less than Significant: • Impacts to Archaeological Resources. None required Not Applicable • Impacts to Paleontological Resources. • Human Remains. • Cumulative Impacts. Potentially Significant: Impact 4.3.1. Implementation of the proposed maintenance plan 4.3.1.a. Subsequent to the removal of any tree within the California pepper Less than Significant. would result in the removal of senescent and decaying trees.As the tree stand on High Street, the City-designated contractor responsible for tree trees are considered a historic landmark,the removal of trees would maintenance shall replace the removed specimen in kind with a California result in a significant impact to the California Pepper tree stand. pepper tree(Schinus molle)as called for in the maintenance plan. UMPK530\Draft EIR\1.0 Executive Summary.doc(12/27/2006) 1-6 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE This Environmental Impact Report(EIR)has been prepared to evaluate environmental effects that would result from implementation of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan(proposed project)in the City of Moorpark, Ventura County, California. The City of Moorpark is the Lead Agency and has the responsibility for preparing and certifying this EIR prior to approval of the proposed project.The City of Moorpark has the authority to make decisions regarding discretionary actions relating to implementation of the proposed project. This EIR is intended to serve as an informational document to be used by the City in assessing the environmental effects of the proposed project and alternatives and mitigation measures recommended to avoid or minimize identified significant impacts. This document is also a public disclosure document available to agencies and the public for review and comment prior to consideration of the discretionary actions required for project approval. 2.1 PURPOSE This Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2006051024) has been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with a maintenance plan for 49 California pepper trees located along High Street within the City of Moorpark. This EIR also discusses alternatives to the proposed maintenance plan and proposes mitigation measures that will offset,minimize,or otherwise avoid any significant environmental impacts that may be associated with the proposed project. This EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.;the Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act(California Code of Regulations,Title 14,Chapter 3);and the rules,regulations,and procedures for implementing CEQA as adopted by the City of Moorpark. Under the current CEQA laws,an EIR must be prepared whenever it can be fairly argued,on the basis of substantial evidence, that a project may have a significant effect on a historical resource (Guidelines Section 15064). The objective of this EIR is to inform City of Moorpark decision-makers, representatives of other affected/responsible agencies, the public, and other interested parties of the potential environmental effects that may be associated with the proposed maintenance plan. Authority According to Section 15002 of CEQA Guidelines,the basic purposes of CEQA are to: • Inform government decision-makers and the public about the potential significant environmental effects of proposed activities; • Identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; RAMPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEM E ER 2 00 6 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE • Prevent significant,avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governing agency finds the changes to be feasible; and • Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved. Intended Use of this EIR The City of Moorpark,as the Lead Agency,has the responsibility for preparing the EIR for the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan,since it has the authority to review and approve the proposed maintenance plan. The City has prepared this EIR as a stand-alone document; it is not tiered from any previously certified environmental document(s). The EIR is intended to provide decision-makers and the general public with relevant environmental information to use in considering approval of the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan by the Moorpark City Council.This EIR may also be used for additional future actions necessary to implement the maintenance plan. 2.2 PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT This Draft EIR is being distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, and interested parties,as well as to persons who requested a copy of the Draft EIR in accordance with Public Resources Code 21092(b)(3).The Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft EIR is also being distributed as required by CEQA.During the 45-day public review period,the Draft EIR and technical appendices will be made available for review. Written comments on this Draft EIR should be addressed to: Mary Lindley,Director of Parks,Recreation, and Community Services City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark California 93021 Phone: (805) 517-6200 Fax: (805) 529-8270 After the 45-day public review period,written responses to all significant environmental issues raised will be prepared.These responses will be available for review for a minimum of 10 days prior to the time that Moorpark City Council certifies the Final EIR. The Draft EIR, the Final EIR (which includes the comments on and responses to the Draft EIR), findings, and a mitigation monitoring program will be included as part of the environmental record for consideration by the decision-makers for the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan. The City of Moorpark formally initiated the environmental process with circulation of a Notice of Preparation(NOP),which was sent to responsible agencies and interested individuals for a 30-day review period from May 4 to June 2, 2006.An NOP is a brief notice that the Lead Agency plans to prepare an EIR for a project. The purpose of the NOP is to solicit guidance from agencies and individuals as to the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the EIR. Within 30 days after RAMPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-2 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN DECEMBER 2006 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE receiving the NOP,responsible agencies are to provide the Lead Agency with specific details about the scope and content of the environmental information related to the responsible agency's area of statutory responsibility. This information must be included in the Draft EIR. The NOP and the responses to the NOP from agencies and individuals are included in Appendix A of this EIR. 2.3 AREAS OF PUBLIC CONCERN OR KNOWN CONTROVERSY Prior to issuance of the Draft EIR by the City,public concern for the California Trees on High Street was expressed in regard to the following: • Protecting the identity and character of the High Street created by the presence of the trees; and • Potential for removal of or modifications to the trees that would negatively affect the visual and historic character of the High Street. 2.4 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT DISCUSSED IN THE EIR Through its initial review, the City has determined that an EIR is required to fully evaluate potential impacts related to aesthetics/visual resources,biological resources,and cultural resources resulting from implementation of the proposed project. These issue areas,or EIR topics,were identified as part of the Initial Study(IS)prepared by the City dated May 1,2006,and distributed May 4,2006 (Appendix A). Aesthetics/Visual Resources Activities proposed as part of the Maintenance Plan include removal of existing thick foliage when pruning the crowns of trees,and removal and replacement of trees under certain circumstances. As the existing California pepper trees along High Street are a prominent landscape element,all pruning,crown reconstruction,and replacement activities can affect the visual character of the surrounding area.Section 4.1 identifies aesthetics and visual resource impacts of the proposed project. Biological Resources al to support both raptor and songbird nests due to the presence of the The project site has the potenti trees.Nesting activity typically occurs from mid-February through mid-August.Activities conducted as part of the Maintenance Plan could result in the disturbance or destruction of active nests.Although the City of Moorpark has not designated the pepper trees themselves along High Street for preservation,the existing grove was, prior to Moorpark's incorporation, designated as a local historic resource by the County of Ventura. Section 4.2 identifies impacts to biological resources,including impacts to nesting birds and conflicts with preservation policies,resulting from the proposed project. Cultural Resources The grove of California pepper trees covered by the Maintenance Plan had been designated by the County of Ventura as Historic Landmark Number 72.The proposed Maintenance Plan identifies replacement of 2-3 RAMPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2 00 6 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE decaying trees in kind by the same species trees in appropriate spaces,as well as maintenance activities, such as pruning and removal of dense foliage that would,at least temporarily,affect the visual character of the trees.Section 4.3 identifies impacts to cultural resources that would result from implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan,including whether modifications to existing trees that would occur under the Maintenance Plan are compatible with their designation as a local historic resource. 2.5 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT The Initial Study prepared for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan(Appendix A) identified environmental effects of the proposed project found to have no impact or a less than significant impact.. There are no changed circumstances that would necessitate a change in the analysis provided in the IS. Consequently, detailed analysis of the following issues is not provided in the EIR because the project would either have no effect on the issue or would produce a less than significant effect associated with the issue. Agricultural Resources The project area is located along High Street and is not within Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance or zoned for agricultural use.Therefore,the Maintenance Plan does not conflict with any agricultural zoning,nor does it involve conversion of any existing agricultural uses. No agricultural activity occurs on-site,nor is the property zoned for such operations.The IS determined that the proposed project will not result in the conversion of any agricultural land to other uses,nor would it conflict with any zoning for agricultural uses; therefore, no impacts associated with agricultural resources would occur. Air Quality The IS determined that the implementation of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan does not involve activities that could exceed relevant air emissions thresholds of significance and would not, therefore,violate any air quality standards.Pruning and other maintenance measures will be short-term and temporary conditions. For these reasons, the IS determined that the proposed Maintenance Plan would result in no impacts associated with air quality. Geology and Soils As determined in the IS,the pepper trees included as part of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan are not located on a known earthquake fault,in a landslide area,in an area subject to seismic-related ground failure,or other unstable ground. Additionally,as the pepper trees covered by the Maintenance Plan are not located on expansive soils prone to failures and the project does not require the use of septic tanks, the IS determined that no impacts associated with geology and soils would occur with implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan. RAMPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Hazards and Hazardous Materials The IS determined that the proposed Maintenance Plan activities will not involve the manufacture or use of hazardous materials.While potentially hazardous materials such as pesticides and fertilizers are likely to be utilized during implementation of the Maintenance Plan,the IS determined that impacts from the proposed project related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant. Hydrology and Water Quality The IS determined that because the proposed project would not result in ground disturbance exceeding one acre, the proposed Maintenance Plan would not require an NPDES permit. Tree maintenance activities associated with the proposed Maintenance Plan would not result in changes to site drainage flows.Additionally,the IS determined that there is no significant risk involving flooding or inundation of the site.For these reasons,the IS determined that no impact associated with hydrology and water quality would occur with implementation of the Maintenance Plan. Land Use and Planning The IS determined that because the project site is an existing commercial street, the proposed maintenance of existing trees along High Street would not divide an established community. The proposed Maintenance Plan would not conflict with any existing habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans.As noted in the IS,the downtown area(which includes the location of the proposed Maintenance Plan)is located within the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Plan.Implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan would not result in any conflicts with the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Plan or any other applicable land use plan. Accordingly, the IS determined that no impacts associated with land use and planning would occur with implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan. Mineral Resources The project site is not known to have any mineral resources and,hence,the proposed project will have no impact on mineral resources; therefore,no impact related to mineral resources will occur. Noise The project site is not located in an area of noise-sensitive uses. Although implementation of the Maintenance Plan will generate short-term,intermittent increases in noise during pruning,replanting,and crown reconstruction activities associated with the project, the IS determined that these impacts are temporary and would not result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels above the existing levels. Additionally,the IS determined that the project site is not located in an area of noise-sensitive uses,nor is the project site located within two miles of a public or private airport. For these reasons, the IS determined that impacts associated with noise would be either no impact or less than significant. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Population and Housing The proposed Maintenance Plan does not involve the construction of any structures. Additionally, implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan would not result in the removal of any structures, including housing.For these reasons,the IS determined that the proposed Maintenance Plan would have no impacts related to population and housing. Public Services Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, and Other Recreational Facilities. The IS determined that the project would result in no impacts associated with the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities,police protection facilities,and/or schools.Additionally,as the proposed tree Maintenance Plan pertains only to the stand of California pepper trees located along High Street, impacts to parks and other recreational facilities are less than significant. Public Facilities and Infrastructure. The IS determined that maintenance conducted as part of the Maintenance Plan would require the use of City staff and financial resources. However, because maintenance already occurs on these trees, the Maintenance Plan would not result in greater levels of maintenance effort than would otherwise occur;the maintenance activities would simply occur on a pre- planned basis. Therefore,the IS determined that impacts on other public facilities are anticipated to be less than significant. Recreation As determined by the IS, the proposed project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or any other recreational facility within the City of Moorpark. No construction or expansion of recreational facilities is proposed in the Maintenance Plan;therefore,no impacts associated with recreation would occur with implementation of the proposed project. Transportation/Traffic Implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan would not increase the traffic load or result in changes to the level of service on area roadways.The IS determined that the Maintenance Plan would not result in any impacts on air traffic patterns.Activities associated with the proposed maintenance plan could result in some temporary loss of on-street parking or temporary lane closures while maintenance activities are undertaken. However, these conditions are temporary and would occur only intermittently, affecting access and parking only during the period of the maintenance.For these reasons,the IS determined that impacts associated with emergency access and inadequate parking capacity are less than significant.Due to the nature of activities included in the proposed Maintenance Plan,the IS determined that there would be no impact related to hazards from design features, air traffic patterns, increase in traffic load, and exceedances of level of service standards. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-6 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Utilities and Service Systems Wastewater,Water,Storm Drainage,Landfill,and Solid Waste Regulations.The IS determined that the project would have no impacts on utilities and service systems. As the proposed project is a tree maintenance plan and does not modify existing or planned land uses,it would not result in a demand for or construction of new water facilities or water treatment facilities. The proposed Maintenance Plan would retain the existing amount of landscaping within the High Street right-of-way and would not increase water use.Because the proposed project does not involve grading,the Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements do not apply to the proposed project,and no NPDES permit is required.The IS determined that the proposed maintenance plan may result in a small increase in green waste due to increased maintenance activities; however, such green waste will be produced only intermittently and would be generated without implementation of the project. All green waste would be managed and disposed of pursuant to City solid waste source reduction guidelines.For these reasons,the IS determined that the proposed Maintenance Plan would result in no impacts relative to utilities and service systems. 2.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT CEQA(CEQA Guidelines,Section 15130(a))requires the discussion of cumulative impacts of a project when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.As required by CEQA,where a Lead Agency determines that a project's effect is not cumulatively considerable, a Lead Agency need not consider that effect significant, but shall briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable.Due to the unique nature of the proposed project,which would not result in the development of any land or result in the construction of any structures,there are no other projects or plans that would combine with or in conjunction with the proposed maintenance plan create a cumulatively significant impact. Potential cumulative impacts associated with the project's impacts on aesthetics, biological resources, and cultural resources are addressed in Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3, respectively. 2.7 EIR MITIGATION MONITORING A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) will be prepared to comply with the requirements of State law(Public Resources Code,Section 21081.6).State law requires the adoption of an MMRP when mitigation measures are required to avoid significant impacts.The monitoring program is intended to ensure compliance during implementation of the program.An MMRP would be adopted by the City Council concurrent with certification of the Final EIR for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, if the plan is to be approved. 2.8 DOCUMENT FORMAT To assist the reader's review of the document,the following describes the format of this EIR. Section 1.0 provides a summary of the EIR document, identifies potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures, describes the level of significance of each impact following mitigation, and summarizes the program alternatives with a relative comparison of impacts. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-7 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN DECEMBER 2006 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Section 2.0 describes this EIR's purpose,focus,legal requirements,cumulative impacts,and includes an outline of the document's format and content. Section 3.0 details the description for the proposed maintenance plan in terms that are relevant to this environmental review. Section 4.0 evaluates the impacts associated with the proposed maintenance plan. This section is organized according to the following framework: • Environmental Setting.Information in the existing setting contains a discussion of the environmental conditions(natural and built)in existence at the time this EIR was prepared.Environmental setting information provides the reader with the "baseline" from which future impacts are analyzed, and provides a standard against which to measure these impacts. • Thresholds of Significance.Determinations regarding the significance of potential impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan are provided.These thresholds represent the criteria used in this EIR to determine whether identified impacts are significant. • Impacts and Mitigation Measures Analysis. An analysis of potential impacts of the proposed maintenance plan is presented in this section. This discussion focuses on the impacts of implementation of the proposed plan,and includes potential short-ternl/long-term and direct/indirect project impacts,and consistency with applicable planning documents or regulations.The measures proposed to mitigate any potential impacts of the proposed California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan are identified.A conclusion is provided as to whether implementation of the proposed mitigation will reduce the proposed project's impacts to a level that is less than significant. • Cumulative impact.An assessment is made as to whether the Maintenance Plan,when combined with other projects or plans,may have a significant cumulative impact. Section S.0 contains discussions of additional topics required by CEQA,including unavoidable effects of the proposed General Plan,significant irreversible environmental changes and growth inducing impacts. Section 6.0 contains discussion of alternatives to the proposed maintenance plan.As allowed by CEQA, the impacts of these alternatives are evaluated at a more general level than the analyses of the proposed maintenance plan that is contained in Section 4.0.This section evaluates the proposed effects of the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative(maintenance of trees on a case-by-case basis,as needed). Sections 7.0 and 8.0 contain listings of organizations and persons consulted in preparation of the EIR, references,and the EIR preparers. The Appendix contains copies of the Initial Study,Notice of Preparation(NOP),NOP mailing list,and NOP comment letters. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction.doc(12/27/2006) 2-8 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project description provided in this section of the EIR is in conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 and the City of Moorpark's rules to implement CEQA. It describes the location, boundaries, and existing setting of the project(pepper tree maintenance plan),the project's objectives, and sets forth a description of the project that is analyzed in Section 4.0 of the EIR. 3.1 BACKGROUND In 1901, John Nubee and John Barrett planted a row of California pepper trees along each side of an unpaved road for Robert W.Poindexter,who had received title for the present site of Moorpark from a United States grant in 1887. Poindexter plotted local street alignments, and named the area after the Moorpark apricot.' One of these streets was High Street, which was destined to become the center of Downtown Moorpark. During a 1981 Historic Resource Inventory(HRI),prior to the incorporation of the City of Moorpark,the County of Ventura identified the High Street Pepper Tree stand as a local historic resource. The 1981 survey indicated that the original tree stand extended from Moorpark Avenue to Magnolia Avenue,with no pepper trees remaining west of Walnut Street. That record noted the presence of 29 (of an original 40+)trees (Everett 1981). Recent studies by professional arborists confirm that older trees exist in the aforementioned alignment,although younger pepper trees have been planted in place of the missing ones to reflect the original landscape,totaling 52 (Mahoney 2003). At the time of the 1981 survey, Ventura County's adoption of Ordinance No.4225 (Cultural Heritage Ordinance),and designation of the High Street pepper tree grove as County Historic Landmark No.72, High Street was a State-maintained highway.Records indicate that designation of the pepper tree grove as a County historic landmark explicitly recognized Caltrans'ability to conduct normal maintenance of the trees within the grove. Subsequent to the County's action,the City of Moorpark was incorporated in 1983.Although the pepper tree grove has never been designated as historic by the City of Moorpark,the County's designation of the grove as County Historic Landmark No.72 remains.As a result,issues of potentially significant impacts occurring to a designated historic resource have been raised in response to City efforts to remove pepper trees that are in poor condition along High Street. 3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The proposed project,California Pepper Trees Management Plan, is located within the public right-of- way on High Street in the City of Moorpark,California.The City of Moorpark is located in southeastern Ventura County,50 miles north of Downtown Los Angeles.The project site,High Street,is the primary City of Moorpark website,www.ci.mooil2ark.ca.us/facts.htm,site accessed June 26,2006. 3-1 R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\3.0 Project Description.doc(12/27/2006) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES UAINTENANCE PLAN DECEMBER 2006 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION east-west roadway through the historic Downtown area of Moorpark.The project site is also within the Moorpark Redevelopment project area. Figure 3.1 shows the project location within the City of Moorpark. California pepper trees (Schinus molle) line the northern and southern sidewalks of High Street. This street functions primarily as the Downtown main street,with businesses and offices located on either side of the street.Because of the trees' longstanding presence on High Street,they have become an integral part of the Downtown visual environment. A Metrolink rail line runs parallel to High Street, approximately 400 feet to the south of the High Street. The California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan is directed toward defining a maintenance program for the 49 California pepper trees located along the north and south sides of High Street,between Moorpark Avenue and the 400 block of High Street.The trees that are the subject of the proposed maintenance plan are located within and adjacent to the roadway right-of-way for High Street(Figure 3.2).The portion of High Street subject to the proposed maintenance plan is generally commercial in character along the north side of the street,with a mix of public and commercial uses located along the south side of the street.The larger,older trees with their wide canopies along High Street are the street's dominant visual feature. 3.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Moorpark proposes a tree maintenance plan to address the 49 California pepper trees on High Street. The proposed project extends approximately 0.2 mile on High Street, as shown in Figure 3.2. Although 52 California pepper trees were determined to be present as part of the historic stand,two of the pepper trees are not located within the High Street right-of-way and are therefore not included as part of the Maintenance Plan. In addition, one young tree was lost in early 2005 after the tree survey was completed.The Maintenance Plan therefore addresses a discrete collection of 49 California pepper trees grouped into four categories young trees,shade trees,veteran trees,and senescent trees.These existing trees along High Street are of basic two types:small trees(small canopy and diameter of trunk)and large trees(extensive canopy and older). The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 49 pepper trees,and proposes: • Specific services and techniques for maintenance of different categories of the California pepper trees on High Street.Each tree,tree grouping,or area is categorized based on the criteria of age,condition (health),canopy,and the type of planter space. • Priorities for filling existing vacant sites with trees in order to enhance the management of the existing grove. In 2003, the trees were assessed using a health and stability process and an analysis of internal wood decay using a Resistograph® (California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, Mahoney 2003). The assessment of trees has led to the following categories for the purpose of maintenance: 1. Young Trees; 2. Shade Trees; 3. Veteran Trees; and 3-2 RAMPK530\Draft EIR\3.0 Project Description.doc(12/27/2006) pQ CAMPUS PARKDRIVE Project Locatio HIGH STREET ENUF W PRINO� 1 a � a J ! LOS A EL'ES AVENUE 1 W 1 i .— °— -- ---'--°-- ---------------- — -------- Regional Location ' Ventura County Los Apgeles County; r Project Area Pacific Ocean —� N 0 0 10 20 1,500 3,000 N MILES FEET L S A FIGURE 3.1 . PROJECT AREA -+ UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD -1 CITY OF MOORPARK California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan Environmental Impact Report SOURCE:US Census(2000) Regional and Project Location R:\MPK530\G\Reports\EIR\reg—loc.nLxd(12/27/06) 1 Moorpark Av. tag#1 t ii�to #2 ,` - l g tag#52 '; tag#3 tag#51 -4-4 to #4 9 �. � 9 tag#50 Walnut St. tag#5 _ 137 High St. 38'o/c (market) tag#49 7 44'o/c J to 52 o/c- tag#48 y. (vacant lot) 192 High St . — 45`o/c ..°--- 21'o/c r tag#47 165 High St. (old station) ag .; 9 � (professional building) tag#46 � j�20'o/c 52'o/c tag#9 tag#45 (storefront) 50'o/c J ...................... , tag#10 (storefront) 38'o/c tag#44 tag#11 (storefront) tag#12 , tag#4 Y (restaurant) (storefront) tag#41 4.ffx iw�w.� ..: tag#40° cm _ Bard St. -, I tag#13 ��44'o/c 213 High St. tag#38 21- (vacant building) L._ tag#37_...... s-56'o/c t' tag#36 W.#14 _ 233 High St. 4 72'o/c (professional building) tag#15 . 57 r o/c 255 High St. (mulched lot tag#35 to•#16 ( ) (storefront) tag#34 40r tag#17 273 High St. tag#33 (residence) it (fire station) tag#32 tag#31 ,. .,a,., Ma•nolia St. ' —''''''''''' tag#20 (restaurant) tag#30 "W (parking lot) tag#29 tag#21 (residence) tag#28 tag#27 tag#22 349 High St. tag#26 (blacksmith's shop) Symbol Type of Tree #of Trees 361 High St.0 401- Young 10 tag#23 (vacant lot) 'C?40 Shade 23 tag#24 NO SCALE Veteran 11 to #25 415 High St. Senescent 5 g (vacant lot) YOUNG TREE L S A (SMALLER SIZE) FIGURE 3.2 CtSHADE TREE (LARGER SIZE) VETERAN TREE (LARGER SIZE) 0 SENESCENT TREE California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan (LARGER SIZE) Environmental Impact Report P SOURCE:CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN,HIGH STREET-MOORPARK,CA California Pepper Tree Illustrative Plan R:AMPK530\G\Reports\EIR\pepper tree plan.cdr(12/27/06) LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEM EER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4. Senescent Trees. Further,the maintenance plan identifies each tree individually and recommends management practices for each of them. Overall,these are summarized below: I. Young Trees and Available Sites. There are ten young trees with expanding canopies within the project site. These trees require monitoring, supplemental irrigation, supplemental stability, and routine pruning. Some of these trees require separate individual maintenance measures to address their conditions. 2. Shade Trees.Twenty-three of these trees are established and have grown with a good shade canopy. The maintenance plan identifies several measures for them. One measure includes monitoring the tree's stability on a routine basis,especially sections that extend over park benches,vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic. Additional measures include pruning for clearance, load and weight distribution,canopy shape, and response to unforeseen circumstances. 3. Veteran Trees.Eleven trees are veteran trees exhibiting very large canopies. Some of these trees' canopies are in conflict with utility lines and others show trunk cavity and decay. Several of them have extreme problems with trunk stability, health, and stability of scaffold limbs. Some of the maintenance measures recommended include extensive crown reconstruction,pruning on an annual basis,and reduction of long vertical and horizontal limbs to promote crown architecture close to the main trunk. 4. Senescent Trees . The maintenance plan identifies five trees for removal and replacement. These trees show extreme problems with root and limb stability,planter size,and location.The maintenance plan would include replanting of new trees in place of the decaying and aging veteran trees,based on the planting specifications. The maintenance plan also describes the two basic planting spaces:restricted and unrestricted.Generally, restricted planting spaces are filled with soil and mulch with pavement/curb on all sides.They are usually about 8 feet by 10 feet in most tree spaces. Some of the trees have a highly restricted planting space. Unrestricted planting space for the trees occurs when there is pavement on one side and soil and mulch bed on the other. Tree planter spaces are rather inconsistent throughout this grove. 3.4 MAINTENANCE PLAN OBJECTIVES The primary goal of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan is to provide a realistic framework by which the legacy of the original trees is sustained and appropriate care is delivered,while minimizing the risk to people and property due to the existence of old, senescent trees on the public right-of-way. The project objectives include the following: • Inventory the existing state of trees along High Street and identify appropriate tree maintenance measures; • Provide a means by which the pepper tree grove and its planting spaces can be safely preserved as a cultural/historic resource for the community; and R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\3.0 Project Description.doc(12/27/2006) 3-5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEM BER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Promote and maintain the visual ambience provided by the presence of the pepper trees along High Street. 3.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS REQUIRED The proposed California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan requires the following approvals from the City of Moorpark: • Adoption of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan by the Moorpark City Council.The City of Moorpark is the lead agency for this project. No responsible agencies have been identified as having permit authority over this project. R:NPK530\Draft EIR\3.0 Project Description.doc(12/27/2006) 3-6 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION 4.1 AESTHETICS Environmental Setting The project site is located in the City of Moorpark along High Street between Moorpark Avenue and the 400 block of High Street. This section of High Street is considered to be the historic downtown area of the City. The grove of the California pepper trees (Schinus molle) is one major visually identifiable attribute of the downtown. The grove of California pepper trees currently line the northern and southern sides of High Street and are located within the roadway right-of-way. The proposed project includes the establishment of a maintenance program for 49 California pepper trees. Several of the trees are very large, tall with thick and dropping foliage which is characteristic of this species. Some of the trees are younger, smaller in trunk and height. The larger, older trees with their wide canopies along High Street are one of the street's most dominant visual features. Furthermore, there are no other species of trees on this segment of High Street, which further enhances the unique character of the pepper trees. Figures 4.1 through 4.3 show the pepper trees from several viewpoints along High Street. The trees are considered to be a historical attribute to the City of Moorpark and provide reference to the founding elements of the City. Some of the existing trees date back to the early 1900's when Robert Poindexter,a city founder,had the trees planted along High Street. The row of trees is referred to by the City of Moorpark as the grove of California pepper trees. In addition, the trees are included in Ventura County's Historical Landmark List. Surrounding Uses. The existing street character is occupied by land uses ranging from office buildings, small retail outlets, restaurants, a Metrolink (station), and a fire station. High Street includes a collection of buildings that are of colonial and ranch styled architecture. The architectural height along High Street is currently two stories with the tallest building being the rail station facade (Figure 4.2, Viewpoint 4). The sidewalks, roads, and rights-of-way are in good condition and well maintained. The existing sidewalks along High Street meander around the California pepper trees creating an irregular pathway, emphasizing their organic nature. Character-Defining Features of the California Pepper Trees. The California pepper trees are characterized as having leaves that are fern-like; a strong fragrance similar to pepper, and off-white flowers with reddish seeds. The California pepper trees are native to tropical regions of South America. They are fast growing trees that reach an average height and width of 30-40 feet. The willowy drooping manner, typical of the pepper trees provides a sense of conformity to all the buildings and land uses along High Street. Several of the trees are older with large canopies that provide shade and traditional character to the street. The pepper trees are complemented by outdoor furniture and spaces. Currently, the City has placed benches, a gazebo, and other street furniture around and beneath the trees (Figure 4.2). R:\MPK530\Drag EIRA I Aesthetics.doc(12/27/2006) 4.1-1 ,, ‘., . .,__IT, i: _...:: ,: , - 4 ,'''-'1:111I 'r r a . t _ w _ ; �_ _ 8 i £ ' • _ $B l' ,! r _AI- .n‘'''''-- ''i t 1*_: '.- tu ,-11 - ,.- ,..„. , • _ ............._ .. ••_„ , .. ____ ,.. . „._._ .. ... a. , :... _If! '___:,„Mik___111 _____ __:- ---"*"."11. - . , _ 4 --, i , ‘,..........--,,,,.... m wt — VIEWPOINT 1 '43 ftp , y ..,`S 4/....,•. ., s 1.4 {�� f,gs it r `� >i - . ,,# t.•'S ! _ - # '}�-, '€; ti n :'I:- ..ar.,'4• •�� I,' -"%:h- t. i -il,,: ' '-4 4..if'.' „A..-. ''*''1'-:''''.q - ''1Vri V '--- * T-ii - ' '- ''14. ' ;.' „ - - ' It'. 1.*_4 .. ,., ,. itt N. - '.1 -. . .*...,-,-',., ,-A. ., 70;..... -1, . : -. I 4-11-'* . Sl‘f* *1 ' : : * t ''. ''- t _ ' . .. . ... .- , ,. :,. . ,4 t ,-•'441 4, 4, .. .._., , - , , '. _It r t ! 1- ik. , 'kir'1 ti 3 , L 1 .• I . ,_, i ' ') E ,lift � f. :41alr 41,_ ,._.. 4 _ #i_. _ •_ ___....... a VIEWPOINT 2 LSA FIGURE 4.1 California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan Environmental Impact Report Viewpoints if R:AMPK530\G\Reports\EIR\viewpoints.cdr(12/27/06) r i i.iiik ._ " B { -: v,.cgs----- .t i __--- - "„_ ,41,,lir at _ � 7\ ` 1 �J i s \V a \\. \ iiill --- r , . . ,... .. ,: • t r w., . , _-/I- . . , .VIEWPOINT 3 R'4?' . ''' 't* :. - itt,.-1. :,:. °ate � q+ , t i , j•-!.. . ,* (eye ', . ,. oi. , , ,.„, -),_ . ,. _ :a, t y t y i. (IA 7.,;* ' -- . -,-.; : 1 !r` 4`}. -i ,.s f-r, E # E!' ''111 c ti ) 4W ;,.4i;;:i'.4. 't e .. !` - r• . , * %,•'.*, i- - „ .'), , ,,-,-, • )4, . . 1 . iie . --- ---7: s.- t'-'s *-.' ' t._. allir_..... .-, .. .i.; , _. --, ,;,;.-wC -*.,.:3/4.4 - .....-„, 1....,,,, .-i ,, i ';',. , ."'-': `1 ! 1. p ''''' 7;41---1'144- -'*: 't.,. iii 1***,, t 4/(1 ' ;4--',;':11.:, '1''' tikl ''; Nk ''.44 ' )' . . li . -r i eft ` ` VIEWPOINT 4 L S FIGURE 4.2 California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan Environmental Impact Report Viewpoints R:AMPK530\G\Reports\EIR\viewpoints.cdr(12/27/06) 1 t a sr s 4, _ , 1,,,, , . -..: ..„:, ...:iii.,4: . - —:- . :-:!,'s,`,it" . • s= 3 x s ,F 1 9 � k, S y • 3 :a!4'1" ' ''. ' ' s 111! ,.. t . 4i4S• , .� _ i - Liu . .. � I _1�..t� ! .�� 'rte..-__, „ - , -1E,P--1 i ,,,,..:..,„„ I '_ = ...W_ .,-,,,.,,.....„. ,.,. — ..:....,r -- --- __ - --. _"-ter _emu ='- VIEWPOINT 5 t '"€ ten:i ;PT s s a .4 1 . A . } d- i ,s > € 4` 4 i.p. �1. � � 'a._�fn _.� $s mat a>' , 4 �;`it ;€ : T . ,€1_ mss f�� - A t f} ,P!:i'S-ct,,1„.',.p,..-,.,?-,*4',/,:..-,,4);*,7, J.,„ '*'' ;‘:' ' t-,-.,..'' fIKAil .' — ' .- tr, ' F`7 • -; - - F_ . - , 414 ' . -. - e , i ip qi, ° :' —1:11I 1- j,--j—I t"-- '-'' , 'I—4'11 111111:". -.'" ir _ . —. w---------,1 ,lit . . ' ,i_* -_ . an.,f F_ a tt,to t-it t t __. - - _ s - " A, _- _ _ m . VIEWPOINT 6 L S FIGURE 4.3 California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan Environmental Impact Report Viewpoints R:\MPK530\G\Reports\EIR\viewpoints.cdr(12/27/06) LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMB ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.1 AESTHETICS The character-defining features along High Street are distinguished through the landscaping of the California pepper trees. Unlike the typical uniformed urban design practice of streetscape where canopied trees are placed in geometrical form, the trees along High Street are presented in rather an organic progression; such that they do not appear to be placed in any formal arrangement. In addition, the grove does not appear to have a well defined boundary. The trees are imbalanced and form no particular pattern. This asymmetrical collection of trees is unique and establishes a community character that builds upon the local natural history of the area while providing aesthetic appeal to the streetscape. Existing Conditions of the Trees. The proposed project encompasses 49 existing California pepper trees along the 400-yard stretch of High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road. As indicated in previously referenced Figure 3.2, there are four(4)smaller trees on the north side and six (6) smaller trees on the south side; a total of ten(10). Thirty nine (3 9) larger trees are distributed with nineteen(19)on the north side and twenty(20)on the south side.' See Table 4.1.A. Table 4.1.A—Existing Trees Larger Trees Smaller Trees North Side 19 4 South Side 20 6 Total=50 39 10 Larger Trees.There are 39 larger trees. The large trees are in varying conditions,both externally and internally, with diameter (11 to 59-inch) and large canopies (60-70 feet). The Maintenance Plan identifies five (5) trees as "hazards" and recommends that they be removed. In addition, there are at least eleven(11) other trees that can be considered veteran trees. Some of these show problems with trunk stability, stability of scaffold limbs, trunk cavity, decay, and some show a pronounced lean. The Maintenance Plan recommends that aggressive tree maintenance be established for these eleven(11)trees. Smaller Trees. There is a total of ten (10) young trees with 7-inch to 2.5-inch diameter trunks. Some of these trees are leanin g toward a d the street, whsle some have canopies impacting those of adjoining trees. Routine tree maintenance practices are recommended in the Maintenance Plan for these trees. Existing Viewpoints.Existing viewpoints along High Street in the City of Moorpark are those of the California pepper trees and their aesthetical value to the adjoining area. Previously referenced Figures 4.1 through 4.3 depict various viewpoints along High Street. Viewpoint 1. Viewpoint 1 is a view facing west along High Street at Magnolia Street with the fire station located in the right corner. This image displays the large canopies of the California Source:California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan,2005,Figure 2.3. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\4.1 Aesthetics.doc(12/27/2006) 4.1-5 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEME ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.1 AESTHETICS pepper trees and the excessive amount of shaded areas. It also demonstrates the unique character that is produced by these trees, such that the frames of the trees dominate the area in height and width. The buildings that occupy the street are overshadowed by the existing California pepper trees(Figure 4.1). Viewpoint 2. Viewpoint 2 is a view of the north side of High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Walnut Street. This view captures trees with tag #21 (on the left) and tag #3 (on the right). The two trees are considered to be shade trees and the overgrowth of foliage demonstrates the overshadowing upon the adjacent buildings. Implementation of the maintenance plan will reduce the existing amount of foliage through appropriate pruning and maintenance activities (Figure 4.1). Viewpoint 3. Viewpoint 3 looks east on High Street between Walnut Street and Bard Street. This view shows the meandering sidewalks along the street that are indicative of the historic downtown California pepper tree grove. This view also portrays the formation of the trees along the road edge. Street furniture occupies areas around or adjacent to the trees as depicted within this view(Figure 4.2). Viewpoint 4. Viewpoint 4 is a view looking south on High Street between Walnut Street and Bard Street. The rail station is currently the tallest building on High Street. The tree on the left side is Tag#45 and has been identified by the Maintenance Plan as an aging tree that will need to be removed and replaced due to safety concerns. The trees on the right are Tags #46 and #47, which are determined to be shade trees and will require appropriate pruning and maintenance (Figure 4.2). Viewpoint 5. Viewpoint 5 is a view looking east down High Street at Bard Street. The vacated building on the left is shaded by the tree with Tag #13. This tree has been determined to be a veteran tree and requires crown reconstruction, as well as development of its architectural structure. Adjacent trees within this image are considered to be shade trees and require pruning and maintenance. This view depicts the typical streetscape and the vastness of the mature trees in comparison to adjacent buildings(Figure 4.3). Viewpoint 6. Viewpoint 6 demonstrates the irregular and organic growth of the majority of the trees along High Street. This particular tree is Tag#4 located on the north side of High Street just west of Walnut Street. The tree has grown with a significant lean to the west. This particular tree is considered to be a shade tree and will require pruning and long-term maintenance(Figure 4.3). Tag number is used in the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan as identification for each tree. Figure 3.2 (in Chapter 3)shows the location of each tree along the High Street right-of-way and identifies each tree by tag number. R:\MPK530\Draft EIRAA Aesthetics.doc(12/27/2006) 4.1-6 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.1 AESTHETICS Policies and Regulations: City of Moorpark General Plan Land Use Element Policy 15.3 Natural and cultural resources having significant educational, scientific, scenic, recreational or social value shall be protected and preserved. Policy 18.1 All downtown area revitalization efforts shall preserve, as appropriate, a historic theme reflective of the community's origin. Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element Policy 1.3 Develop an architectural and landscape architectural design theme throughout the City that will serve as a guideline and a functional expression to promote the unique aesthetic and visual qualities through future developments. Policy 4.3 Conserve, preserve and enhance the quality of biological and physical environments throughout the City of Moorpark. Require restoration of those areas unsatisfactorily maintained or subsequently degraded. Thresholds of Significance Potentially significant impacts are identified based on the significance criteria as determined by CEQA. The effects of the project on aesthetic resources are considered to be significant if the proposed project would: • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; • Substantially damage scenic resources, including,but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway; • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; and/or • Create a new source of substantial light and glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area Impacts and Mitigation No Impact Light and Glare. The implementation of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan would not create a new source of substantial light and glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. The maintenance plan does not include the addition of any structure or light fixture that would impose additional light along High Street. The proposed project is directly related to the maintenance of the California pepper trees; thus the proposed project will have no impact upon substantial light and glare introduced into the area. RAMPK530\Draft EIRAA Aesthetics.doc(12/27/2006) 4.1-7 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LEA ASSOCIATES, INC. CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN DECEMBER 1006 SECTION 4.1 AESTHETICS Significant Impacts Impact 4.1.1: The proposed project may result in a significant impact to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Through implementation of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, the existing character of the pepper trees will be altered through pruning and other maintenance activities. Impact Analysis: The implementation of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan may affect the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. The existing visual character of the site presents an organic growth. The maintenance plan is proposed to alter the existing vistas of the pepper trees through the extraction of thick foliage,pruning methods, architectural structuring and replacement of senescent trees. The Implementation of the maintenance plan will affect the existing visual character by reduced foliage and street character. To ensure that substantial adverse affects upon scenic vistas would not occur,the mitigation measures presented below shall be implemented. Mitigation Measures: applied to the California pepper trees, as described in 4.1.1.a All pruning and maintenance the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, shall be done under the supervision of a certified arborist. 4.1.1.b All maintenance tasks, procedures, and triggers shall be carried out accordingly as described within the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. Level of Significance after Mitigation: Adherence to Mitigation Measures 4.1.La and 4.1.Lb will reduce impacts related to the existing visual character or quality of the site to a less than significant level. The tree maintenance activities have the potential to significantly impact the aesthetics of the street. Crown reconstruction, replacement, pruning, and other measures will affect the visual character of the trees and,therefore,the street. The Maintenance Plan recommends measures that will affect/change the physical appearance of the trees. Further, some of the old aging trees would be replaced by the same species but not necessarily the same size of the tree. All maintenance activities, if carried out concurrently, would result in reduced foliage and thus a changed appearance of the street. Implementation of the mitigation measures will ensure that modifications to the California pepper trees will not substantially alter the visual character or quality of the site. Therefore a less than significant impact will result with the adoption of the proposed project. Impact 4.1.2: The proposed project may have a substantial adverse effect upon scenic vistas. Through the adoption of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, scenic vistas from adjoining areas will be altered through the reduction offoliage. The proposed project may have a substantial adverse effect upon scenic vistas. Scenic vistas observed from adjoining areas of High Street may substantially change due to the reduction of foliage resulting from implementation of the proposed project. The reduction in foliage will clear the streetscape and allow vistas of the existing buildings to become apparent along High Street. However, the placement of the trees as identified by "tree spaces"will not be altered. Therefore, the historic pattern involving irregularly located trees will remain. To ensure that substantial adverse affects upon scenic vistas would not occur,the mitigation measures presented previously shall be implemented. 4.1-8 RAMPK530\Draft EIR\4.1 Aesthetics.doc(12/27/2006) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.1 AESTHETICS Mitigation Measures:Refer to Mitigation Measures 4.1.La and 4.1.1.b. Level of Significance after Mitigation: Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.1.1.a and 4.1.1.b will reduce impacts related to scenic vistas to a less than significant level. The Maintenance Plan recommends measures that will affect the physical appearance of the trees.All maintenance activities, if carried out concurrently, would result in reduced foliage and thus a changed appearance of the street. Implementation of the mitigation measures will ensure that modifications to the California pepper trees will not substantially alter the scenic vistas. Therefore a less than significant impact will result with the implementation of the proposed project. Impact 4.1.3: The proposed project may substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The California pepper trees are of historical significance to the City of Moorpark. Although High Street in the City of Moorpark is not considered a state scenic highway, the street consists of scenic corridors and aesthetic resources comparable to those within designated state scenic highways. The California pepper trees along High Street create a positive image for the community of Moorpark, preserve the historical significance of the community, and promote community identity. The implementation of the Maintenance Plan will alter the existing scenic resources through pruning and maintenance practices. To ensure that substantial impacts to scenic resources will not occur, the mitigation measures presented previously shall be implemented. Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measures 4.1.1.a and 4.1.l.b. Level of Significance after Mitigation: Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.1.La and 4.1.Lb will reduce impacts related to scenic resources to a less than significant level. The Maintenance Plan recommends measures that will affect/change the physical appearance of the trees. All maintenance activities, if carried out concurrently, would result in reduced foliage and thus a changed appearance of the street. Implementation of the mitigation measures will ensure that modifications to the California pepper trees will not result in substantial damage to scenic resources within the scenic High Street right-of-way. Therefore, a less than significant impact associated with substantial damage to scenic resources will result with the implementation of the proposed project. Cumulative Impacts As discussed in Chapter 2.0, due to the unique nature of the proposed project, which would not result in the development of any land or result in the construction of any structures, there are no other projects that would combine with or in conjunction with the proposed maintenance plan create a cumulatively significant impact.As such,there are no cumulatively considerable aesthetic impacts. RAMPK5300raft EIRAA Aesthetics.doc(12/27/2006) 4.1-9 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMB ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Environmental Setting The project site comprises a streetscape setting. The proposed project includes the maintenance of forty-nine(49)California pepper trees that are located along High Street in the City of Moorpark. The trees are situated on the north and south sides of the street and range from small to large with no particular pattern. There are a total of fifty-two (52) trees in the tree stand; however, two (2) of the California pepper trees are located outside the right-of-way and one young tree was lost in early 2005 after the tree survey was completed therefore,are not included within the Maintenance Plan. Vegetation. The California pepper trees are indigenous to tropical regions of South America. They are characterized has having leaves that are fern-like, a strong fragrance similar to pepper, and off- white flowers with reddish seeds. They are fast-growing trees that reach an average height and width of 3040 feet. Several of the trees are older with la rge canopies that extend over 40 feet in width. The largest tree within the project area extends about 50 feet high and 70 feet wide. Policies and Regulations Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Section 3503. Section 3503 of the California Ish and Game Code prohibits the destruction of bird nests except as otherwise provided for in the code. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act similarly protects the nests of migratory birds. These regulations apply to the individual nests of these species, but do not regulate impacts to the species' habitats. City of Moorpark General Plan. Open Space,Conservation and Recreation Element: Goal 4 Preserve and maintain the physical and biological environment from future growth- related degradation. In those areas where degradation is inevitable, ensure the restoration of affected areas. Policy 4.3 Conserve, preserve, and enhance the quality of biological and physical environments throughout the City of Moorpark. Require restoration of those areas unsatisfactorily maintained or subsequently degraded. Thresholds of Significance Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the effects of the project on biological resources are considered to be significant if the proposed project would: • 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 F sh and Game or U.S.I'sh and Wildlife Service; • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Ish and Game or U.S. I'sh and Wildlife Service; RAMPK530\Draft EIR\4.2 Biological Resources.doc(12/27/2006) 4.2-1 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES • 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; • 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; • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance;and/or • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan. Impacts and Mitigation Measures No Impacts Impacts to Sensitive or Special Status Species. Sensitive wildlife and bird species are not known to inhabit the pepper tree grove. The implementation of the maintenance plan will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the Californian department of lsh and Game or U.S. Eli and Wildlife Service; therefore no impact will occur. Impacts to Riparian Habitat or other Sensitive Natural Community. The project area contains introduced and ornamental tree species only, the maintenance of which will not affect a riparian or sensitive natural community. The project site does not contain any drainage features that would be considered under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers or the CD6. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project will have no impact on these resources. Impacts on Federally Protected Wetlands.As discussed above,the project area contains introduced and ornamental tree species only, the maintenance of which will not affect wetland areas. The project site does not contain any drainage features that would be considered under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers or the CDFI. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project will have no impact on these resources. Impacts upon an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. The proposed project is not located within an area that is adopted by any Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. The California pepper trees are not indigenous to the area and therefore the actions proposed within the proposed project will not affect sensitive biological species that would be protected under an ° adopted Habitat Conversation Plan,no impact on these resources will occur. R:\MPK530\Draft EIRA2 Biological Resources.doc(12/27/2006) 4.2-2 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEM E ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Significant Impacts Impact 4.2.1. The proposed project may conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Impacts to Local Policies or Ordinances: There is a potential that the proposed project would conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Although the City of Moorpark has not designated the pepper trees themselves along High Street for preservation, the County of Ventura, prior to Moorpark's incorporation, designated the existing grove of California pepper trees along High Street as a local historic resource, identified by Ordinance No 4225, and Historic Landmark No 72. This ordinance is not specific to biological resources or tree ordinances; however, it is specific to cultural resources and is therefore further discussed within the Cultural Resources section of this EIR (Section 4.3). The local ordinance purpose is to preserve and protect public and private historic, cultural and natural resources. The pepper trees,however, are not a native species; they are identified as a biological resource that is significant to the City and County as a historical resource due to their original planting by Robert Poindexter, a City founding father, in the year 1901. The implementation of the proposed project maintenance measures to the pepper trees will not alter the natural resource and historical relevance of the trees. The proposed project and/or maintenance plan will benefit the existing trees, through longer life spans and preservation. Therefore, the potential for conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources with implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures: 4.2.1.a Subsequent to the removal of any tree within the California pepper tree stand on High Street, the City-designated contractor responsible for tree maintenance shall replace the removed specimen in kind with a California pepper tree(Schinus molle). Level of Significance after Mitigation. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.2.1.a will reduce impacts related to historic resources to a less than significant level by replacing removed trees with California pepper trees,thereby ensuring the continued preservation of the historic tree stand. Impact 4.2.2. The proposed project may result in the disturbance of active nests, if they are present in the trees during maintenance activities. The project site has the potential to support both raptor and songbird nests due to the presence of the trees. Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the E'deral Mi gratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Nesting birds are known to inhabit the area, and may nest in the pepper trees along High Street.Maintenance activities to the trees along High Street may result in disturbance of nesting birds, creating a significant impact. The implementation of the mitigation measures below would reduce potential impacts to nesting bird species to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: 4.2.2.a Protective measures shall be required to ensure compliance with the MBTA and California I'sh and Game Code Secti ons 3503, 3503.5, and 3800. Prior to tree maintenance activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting survey consisting of RAMPK530\Draft EIRA.2 Biological Resourccs.doc(12/27/2006) 4.2-3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES two (2) surveys conducted on separate days, within 72 hours immediately preceding tree maintenance activities,e.g.,trimming branches or tree removal. 4.2.2.b If pre-maintenance nesting surveys result in the location of active nests, no tree maintenance procedures shall take place in the tree with the active nest until such time the young have fledged and become independent of the nest. A qualified biologist shall determine if a buffer area should be established around the tree with the active nest. Level of Significance after Mitigation. Adherence to Mitigation Measures 4.2.2.a and 4.2.2.b will reduce impacts related to nesting birds to a less than significant level by ensuring compliance with the Ederal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Cumulative Impacts As discussed in Chapter 2.0, due to the unique nature of the proposed project, which would not result in the development of any land or result in the construction of any structures, there are no other projects that would combine with or in conjunction with the proposed Maintenance Plan create a cumulatively significant impact. As such,there are no cumulatively considerable biological impacts. R:\MPK530\Draft EIRA.2 Biological Resources.doc(12/27/2006) 4.2-4 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES Environmental Setting The High Street pepper tree stand was originally planted in 1901 by John Nubee and John Barrett for Robert W. Poindexter. Robert W. Poindexter received the title to the present site of Moorpark from a United States grant in 1887. Robert Poindexter plotted local street alignments and named the area after the Moorpark Apricot. In 1981, a Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) was conducted that identified the High Street Pepper Tree stand as a historic resource. The tree stand was designated as Ventura County Historic Landmark Number 72 in October 1981. At the time of the HRI, the project location was under the jurisdiction of the County of Ventura. The City of Moorpark was incorporated in 1983. Although the High Street pepper tree stand is no longer under County jurisdiction, the tree stand retains its historic landmark designation. The HRI of 1981 indicated that the original tree stand extended from Moorpark Avenue to Magnolia Avenue, with no pepper trees remaining west of Walnut Street. The HRI form noted the presence of 29 of an original 40+trees. Many of the older trees exist in the aforementioned alignment,although younger pepper trees have been planted in place of the missing ones to reflect the original landscape,totaling 52.There are a total of fifty-two (52)trees in the tree stand;however, two (2) of the California pepper trees are located outside the right-of-way and one young tree was lost in early 2005 after the tree survey was completed. Although 51 trees are present in the area, only 49 are located within the High Street right-of-way and only those 49 are included as part of the Maintenance Plan. Policies and Regulations California Health and Safety Code. The California Health and Safety Code states that if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition.' If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the Coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours,the Native American Heritage Commission. California Environmental Quality Act. A historic resource includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social,political, military, or cultural annals of California.2 The California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)mandates that lead agencies consider a resource to be"historically significant"if it is listed or meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources. Such resources meet this requirement if they are (1) associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California history, (2) associated with the lives of important persons in the past, (3) embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, and/or (4) represent the work of an important creative individual or possesses high California Health and Safety Code,Division 7,Dead Bodies;Chapter 2,General Provisions,§7050.5. 2 Public Resources Code,Section 5020.1(j). R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\4.3 Cultural.doc(12/27/2006) 4.3-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEME ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES artistic value.' These criteria mimic the criteria utilized to determine eligibility for the National Register for Historic Places(NRHP). Ventura County Ordinance No. 4225. This Ventura County ordinance establishes the Ventura County Cultural Heritage Board, and established the functions and powers of the Cultural Heritage Board. Section 1362 this ordinance establishes the applicability of the ordinance: The Cultural Heritage Ordinance shall have force and effect only in the unincorporated areas of the County. However, any declared landmarks or points of interest existing as of the effective date of this ordinance, regardless of their location in the county, shall retain their declared status. Any time in the future, if the territory upon which a dedicated landmark or point of interest is situated is annexed to any city, it shall also retain its declared status. City of Moorpark Municipal Code Chapter 15.36. This chapter establishes the historic preservation authority of the City and identifies criteria by which a landmark may be designated (Section 15.36.060(B)). Thresholds of Significance Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the effects of the project on cultural resources are considered to be significant if the proposed project would: • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5; • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5; • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature; and/or • Result in any disturbance of human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Impacts and Mitigation Measures Less than Significant Impacts Impacts to Archaeological Resources. The proposed Maintenance Plan is located within the public right-of-way on High Street. The project is located within an existing developed environment. Activities that would occur as part of the maintenance plan are limited to actions on the trees themselves. While some trees within the grove are senescent and decaying and may require removal and replacement, implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to archaeological resources due to the developed nature of the surrounding area. The project area has Public Resources Code,Section 5024.1(c). RAMPK530\Draft EIRA.3 Cultural.doc(12/27/2006) 4.3-2 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMB ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES been previously disturbed by the installation of sidewalks, the roadway, nearby buildings, and the planting of the trees themselves. Ground disturbance associated with the Maintenance Plan would be limited to the immediate area of each tree. Due to the previous amount of ground disturbance in the area, and the limited ground disturbance associated with tree maintenance activities, impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant with implementation of the proposed maintenance plan. Therefore,no mitigation is required. Impacts to Paleontological Resources.The maintenance activities proposed in the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan are generally not activities which would result in ground disturbance. Minimal ground disturbance may result from the removal of senescent trees and the planting of new trees consistent with the Maintenance Plan. The trees included in the Maintenance Plan area are planted along a developed street. The development of the existing roadway, curbs, sidewalks, and buildings along High Street would have required a large amount of ground disturbance that would have likely result in the discovery of or destruction of existing paleontological resources. As ground disturbance associated with the maintenance plan would be limited to the immediate area of each tree, and the area has been previously disturbed by the installation of sidewalks, the roadway, nearby buildings, and the planting of the trees themselves, impacts to paleontological resources are less than significant with implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan.No mitigation is required. Human Remains. The proposed project is limited to maintenance techniques laid forth in the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. Maintenance activities proposed in the plan include inspections, pruning treatments, installation of systems for supplemental stability, removal of senescent trees, and planting of new trees to replace removed trees. While some of the maintenance activities, such as removal of senescent trees and the planting of new trees, will result in ground disturbance, the trees are located in planters along High Street within existing sidewalks. As ground disturbance associated with maintenance activities is limited and the entire area contains existing development including buildings, sidewalks, and roadways, which would have required extensive ground disturbance at their construction, the likelihood of uncovering human remains is remote. In the unlikely event human remains are discovered during grading or construction activities, State law (Health and Safety Code §7050.5)requires: ...that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made determination of the origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98.The county coroner must be notified immediately of the find. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner is required to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant(MLD). With the permission of the owner of the land or his/her authorized representative, the descendant may inspect the site of the discovery. The descendant shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification of the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Because adherence to provisions of Health and Safety Code §7050.5 is required of all development projects, and because adherence to the requirements in State law sufficiently mitigates for potential impacts to human remains, impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains are less than RAMPK530\Draft EIRA3 Cultural.doc(12/27/2006) 4.3-3 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMB EE 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES significant. Because potential impacts associated with this issue are less than significant, no mitigation is required. Significant Impacts Impact 4.3.1.Implementation of the proposed maintenance plan would result in the removal of aging and decaying trees.As the trees are considered a historic landmark, the removal of trees would result in a significant impact to the California pepper tree stand. Impact Analysis: As discussed in the existing setting, the stand of California Pepper Trees along High Street was designated as Ventura County Historic Landmark No. 72 in 1981. While the City of Moorpark incorporated in 1983 and the tree stand was no longer located within unincorporated Ventura County, the tree stand maintained its designation as Historic Landmark No. 72. Because the trees within the stand are a locally recognized historic resource (County Landmark No. 72) they meet CEQA's definition of a historical resource as defined in CCR Title 14,Chapter 3, §15064.5 (a)(2): A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in section 5O20.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. Therefore, the removal of or damage to the trees could constitute a significant effect on the environment. The Maintenance Plan includes various maintenance activities including supplemental stability systems for some trees, various degrees of pruning, and the removal and replacement of senescent trees. The purpose of the activities proposed in the Maintenance Plan is to maintain the tree stand, while minimizing the risk to people and property due from old, senescent trees in the public right-of-way. With the exception of the removal of senescent, damaged, or hazardous trees, the maintenance activities proposed in the Maintenance Plan would serve to enhance the tree stand by providing stability systems, irrigation, and pruning to prevent decline of the health of the trees. While the tree stand is considered a cultural resource, the trees are also living resources, and have a limited life span. While the Maintenance Plan includes the removal of dying trees,the Maintenance Plan does not cause the death of the trees. The trees will die when they reach the end of their life span, regardless of the implementation of a Maintenance Plan. The Maintenance Plan is necessary to maintain the cultural integrity of the tree stand as a whole. With the tree stand designated as a historical resource, the removal of decaying and senescent (or damaged or hazardous) trees would result in significant impacts to the stand of California pepper trees located along High Street, as eventually each tree within the stand will reach the end of its lifespan and be removed. This is a significant impact and mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure: Adherence to previously referenced Mitigation Measure 4.2.1.a (see Section 4.2)will reduce potential impacts related to historic resources to a less than significant level. Level of Significance after Mitigation: Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.2.1.a will reduce impacts related to historic resources to a less than significant level by replacing removed trees with California Pepper trees,thereby ensuring the continued preservation of the historic tree stand. RAMPK530\Draft EIRA3 Cultural.doc(12/27/2006) 4.3-4 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEME ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SECTION 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES Cumulative Impacts As previously discussed, the project is unique in that it would not result in the development of any land or result in the construction of any structures. Due to the lack of development or construction of structures, there are no other projects that would combine with or in conjunction with the proposed Maintenance Plan create a cumulatively significant impact. As such, there are no cumulatively considerable cultural impacts. R:\MPK530\Draft EIRA.3 Cultural.doc(12/27/2006) 4.3-5 5.0 ADDITIONAL TOPICS REQUIRED BY CEQA 5.1 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED Implementation of the proposed California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan would not result in any significant and unavoidable environmental effects. With implementation of mitigation measures identified in Section 4.0, all impacts associated with the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level. 5.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The CEQA Guidelines mandate that the EIR must address any significant irreversible environmental changes which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126(c)).An impact would fall into this category if: • The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; • The primary and secondary impacts of the project would generally commit future generations to similar uses; • The project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental incidents associated with the project; and/or • The proposed consumption of resources is not justified(e.g., the project results in wasteful use of energy). Determining whether the proposed project may result in significant irreversible effects requires a determination of whether key resources would be degraded or destroyed in such a way that there would be little possibility of restoring them. The project site is located within the public right-of-way on High Street, which is a city street occupied by existing buildings. The project will not commit any new land to urban development, as the project site is within the existing right-of-way, and the project does not propose any development. No significant mineral or scenic resources will be lost as a result of project implementation. While the trees themselves are considered a cultural resource,the trees are also living resources, and have a limited life span. While the Maintenance Plan includes the removal of dying trees, it does not cause the death of the trees; the trees would die when they reach the end of their life spans, regardless of the implementation of a Maintenance Plan. Therefore, while the Maintenance Plan involves the removal of dying trees, which is considered a cultural resource, the plan includes replacement of dying trees, which would serve to maintain the cultural integrity of the tree stand. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Maintenance Plan would not result in the loss of any cultural resource. Energy resources will be utilized in the ongoing maintenance of trees. However,their use is not expected to negatively impact the availability of these resources. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\5.0 Other CEQA Topics.doc(12/27/2006) 5-1 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 5.0 ADDITIONAL TOPICS REQUIRED BY CEQA 5.3 GROWTH INDUCEMENT CEQA requires a discussion of ways in which the proposed project could be growth inducing. The CEQA Guidelines identify a project as growth inducing if it fosters economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing either directly (such as by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (such as through extension of roads or other infrastructure) in the surrounding environment(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d)). Under CEQA, growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental, beneficial, or of little significance to the environment. Typically, growth inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent master plans and land use plans. Significant growth impacts could also occur if the project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently permitted by local or regional plans and policies. The proposed California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan does not include the development of any land or the construction of any structures for commercial, residential, industrial, or any other uses. The proposed project simply provides a mechanism for routine maintenance of the California Pepper Trees located on High Street within the existing tree stand. While the proposed project may result in an incremental increase in workload for the contractor that handles tree maintenance for the City, the proposed California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan would not result in the generation of any significant number of new jobs because this routine maintenance would occur without the project. As the proposed project does not include the construction of any residential uses,job generating uses, or the extension of any infrastructure, it cannot be considered growth inducing, neither directly or indirectly. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\5.0 Other CEQA Topics.doc(12/27/2006) 5-2 6.0 ALTERNATIVES CEQA (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6)requires that an EIR include a discussion of a reasonable range of project alternatives that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project while avoiding or substantially reducing any of the significant effects of the project. CEQA further states that the discussion of alternatives must focus on alternatives that reduce project-related impacts, "...even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly. If a project alternative would meet the project objectives and would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, the decision-maker should not approve the proposed project unless it determines that specific technological, economic, social, legal, or other considerations make the project alternative infeasible." The analysis provided in Section 4.0 determined that there are no impacts that will remain significant after mitigation. All impacts are considered less than significant or are reduced to below the level of significance with mitigation. The analysis of alternatives for this project are limited by the fact that there are no alternatives that could avoid or substantially reduce significant effects of the project (as the project does not have any significant effects) and by the fact that the project does not include the construction of any structures or disturbance of land,the project is simply a tree maintenance plan for trees within an existing street right-of-way. As stated above, alternatives shall be selected that can reduce the significance of identified impacts and"feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the proposed project." Thus, in order to develop a range of reasonable alternatives, the project objectives must be considered. Project-related objectives identified include: • Provide a realistic framework by which the legacy of the original trees is sustained and appropriate care is delivered, while minimizing the risk to people and property due to the existence of old,senescent trees on the public right-of-way; • Inventory the existing state of trees along High Street, and identify appropriate tree maintenance measures; • Provide a means by which the pepper tree grove and its planting spaces can be safely preserved as a cultural/historic resource for the community; and • Promote and maintain the visual ambience the presence of trees provided along High Street. 6.1 ALTERNATIVE UNDER CONSIDERATION The following scenario has been identified as a potential alternative to implementation of the proposed project. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\6.0 Altematives.doc(12/27/2006) 6-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.0 ALTERNATIVES Alternative 1: No Project/Existing Conditions Under the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative,the proposed project would not go forward. As defined in the CEQA Guidelines, the no project discussion should consider what is reasonably expected to occur, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure, in the foreseeable future should the project not go forward. In this instance, the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative will consider the circumstances under which the project does not proceed (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6 (e)) and maintenance of trees would be limited to routine pruning every 10 to 18 months and emergency maintenance. Emergency maintenance of the trees would include maintenance when a tree becomes hazardous and poses a risk to public safety (such as branches that could injure pedestrians,branches that could interfere with roadway traffic, or trees that have become unstable). Emergency tree maintenance would also include the removal of dead trees and the replacement of dead trees with new California pepper trees. The"No project"alternative does not provide a long-term plan for the maintenance of each tree within the grove. Also under the "No project" alternative, senescent trees are not removed and replaced, as in the case of the proposed Maintenance Plan. 6.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED In determining a reasonable range of alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR, possible alternatives were considered and, for a variety of reasons, rejected. Alternatives were rejected because they could not achieve the basic objectives of the project or were considered infeasible. The reason for not selecting each of the rejected alternatives is discussed below. Alternative Use of Project Site The trees are located within an existing public right-of-way. The location of the trees within an existing public right-of-way on a developed street excludes the potential for an alternative use of the project site by structures or buildings. The project site is limited in size and would not provide adequate area for such uses; therefore, alternative uses for the site would be restricted to the replacement of the existing California pepper trees by some other type of tree. The replacement of the California pepper tree grove on High Street by another type of tree would not meet the project objective of preserving the pepper tree stand as a historic resource for the community. The trees are part of the existing streetscape and character of High Street; they have been located along High Street since their planting in 1901. The trees are considered to be a historical attribute to the City of Moorpark and provide reference to the founding elements of the City. Some of the existing trees date back to the early 1900s when Robert Poindexter, a City founding father, planted the trees along High Street. The purpose of the project is to provide a maintenance plan that preserves the trees while providing appropriate care and minimizing the risk to people and property due to the existence of old, senescent trees on the public right-of-way. Removing the trees from their existing location and replacing them with another type of tree would not meet the objectives of the project; therefore, the alternative use of the project site was rejected as an alternative to the proposed project. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives.doc(12/27/2006) 6-2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMa ER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.0 ALTERNATIVES Off-Site Location The removal of the trees on High Street and replanting in a different location is not a feasible alternative as it would not preserve the existing character of High Street. The trees have been located along High Street since 1901 and are part of the downtown character. The trees are considered to be a historical attribute to the City of Moorpark and provide reference to the founding elements of the City. Due to the trees longstanding presence on High Street, they have become part of the downtown and provide a sense of place for the High Street streetscape. The removal of the trees and placement at a different location would not meet the objectives of the project and therefore was rejected as an alternative. 6.3 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS The following discussion compares the impacts of the alternative with the impacts of the proposed project, as detailed in Section 4.0 of this EIR. A conclusion is provided in Section 6.4 for each impact as to whether the alternative results in one of the following: (1) reduction or elimination of the impact; (2) a greater impact than the project; (3) the same impact as the project; or(4) a new impact in addition to the proposed project impacts. Alternative 1: No Project/Existing Conditions Aesthetics. The No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative is for routine maintenance of the pepper trees every 10 to 18 months, or as needed, basis. Similar to the proposed project, the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative would not create a new source of substantial light and glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. This alternative would result in increased aesthetic impacts compared with the proposed project, as the poorly shaped senescent trees would not be replaced with younger trees that would enhance the canopy on High Street. Biological Resources. Under the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative, maintenance would be conducted on trees within the tree stand when determined to be necessary. The trees have the potential to support both raptor and songbird nests. Nesting activity typically occurs from mid- February through mid-August. Raptors and songbirds are not known to inhabit the pepper tree grove; however, compliance with the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act during emergency maintenance procedures will ensure impacts to migratory bird nests remain less than significant. The project is located within an existing street right-of-way, surrounded by sidewalks, the roadway, and buildings nearby. There would be no direct impact to riparian habitat; Federal or State listed, endangered, or threatened species; species of concern; or fragmentation of habitat or wildlife corridors.No impacts to wetlands or habitat conservations would occur. Similar to the proposed project,under this alternative, all impacts to biological resources would be less than significant. Cultural Resources. No impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources would occur under the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative. Additionally, no potential to uncover human remains would occur. The stand of pepper trees was designated as a historic landmark by Ventura County in 1981. The maintenance activities under the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative include the removal of senescent or hazardous trees from the tree stand on a case-by-case basis and the RAMPK530\Draft EIR\6.0 Altematives.doc(12/27/2006) 6-3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 1006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.0 ALTERNATIVES replacement of the removed trees with new pepper trees. As the removed trees are being replaced with California pepper trees, the tree stand would be preserved. Similar to the proposed project, the development of this alternative would result in the preservation of the tree stand, which is a historic landmark.As such, impacts to cultural resources under this alternative are less than significant. Conclusion. Under the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative, impacts associated with aesthetics would exceed aesthetic impacts caused by the proposed project in that the trees would not be shaped in accordance with a long-term maintenance plan. Impacts associated with biological and cultural resources would be similar as compared with the proposed project. 6.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE The following discussion compares the impacts of the alternative with the impacts of the proposed project, as detailed in Section 4.0 of this EIR. A conclusion is provided for each impact as to whether the alternative results in one of the following: (1)reduction or elimination of the impact; (2) a greater impact than the project; (3) the same impact as the project; or (4) a new impact in addition to the proposed project impacts. Table 6.A compares the impacts of the alternative with those of the proposed project. Table 6.A—Comparison of the Project Alternative with the Proposed Project Environmental Issue Proposed Project Alternative 1 No Project/Existing Conditions Aesthetics G -4 Biological Resources H Cultural Resources G H Notes: G=Less than significant impact,with or without after mitigation. =>=Greater than significant impact,with or without after mitigation. F=As compared to the proposed project,the impact is reduced. -+=As compared to the proposed project,the impact is greater. H=As compared to the proposed project,the impact is similar. CEQA requires that the environmentally superior alternative be identified. An examination of Table 6.A reveals that impacts associated with biological and cultural resources would be similar to the proposed project for the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative. Aesthetics-related impacts for the No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative would be greater than the proposed project. Thus, the proposed project is the environmentally superior alternative. While CEQA requires analysis of alternatives to determine feasibility of attaining most of the basic objectives of the project while avoiding or substantially reducing any of the significant effects of the project,the project did not have any significant effects. The alternatives analysis was further limited by the nature of the project, which is a maintenance plan for trees located within an existing street right-of-way. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives.doc(12/27/2006) 6-4 7.0 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY California Environmental Quality Act Public Resources Code, State of California, §§21000-21178,as amended January 1,2006. California Code of Regulations, State of California, § 15000 et seq., as amended January 1, 2006. City of Moorpark City of Moorpark General Plan. City of Moorpark website,www.ci.mooMark.ca.us/facts.htm, site accessed June 26,2006. Draft California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan,City of Moorpark,December 2005. Historic Resources Evaluation, Moorpark Theatre,45 High Street, Moorpark, California, San Buenaventura Research Associates,February 8,2002. R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\7.0 References and Bibliography.doc(12/27/2006) 7-1 8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 8.1 CITY OF MOORPARK Mary Lindley,Director of Parks,Recreation&Community Services David A. Bobardt,Planning Manager Michael Mahoney, Consulting Arborist 8.2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Ray Hussey,AICP,Associate Meenaxi R. Panakkal, Senior Planner Sheryl Horn, Environmental Planner Tabitha Kevari,Assistant Planner Steven Dong, Technical Editor Nancy Hasegawa,Word Processor Margaret Gooding,GIS/Graphics Specialist Sheryl Woodard,Document Production R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\8.0 List of Preparers.doc(12/27/2006) 8-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DECEMBER 2006 CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN APPENDIX A INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION/NOTICE OF PREPARATION MAILING LIST/NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS R:\MPK530\Draft EIR\8.0 List of Preparers.doc(12/27/2006) 1 INITIAL STUDY HIGH STREET PEPPER TREE MAINTENANCE PLAN CITY OF MOORPARK VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA September 2005 INITIAL STUDY HIGH STREET PEPPER TREE MAINTENANCE PLAN CITY OF MOORPARK VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark,California 93021 Prepared by: LSA Associates,Inc. 1650 Spruce Street, Suite 500 Riverside,California 92507 (951)781-9310 LSA Project No. MPK530 September 2005 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE.......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION........................................................ 1 1.3 FINDINGS OF THIS INITIAL STUDY................................................................................... 1 1.4 EXISTING DOCUMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE............................ 1 1.5 CONTACT PERSON................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................................3 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION.............................................................................................................3 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................................3 2.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS.......................................................................................................5 3.0 INITIAL STUDY.............................................................................................................................8 A. AESTHETICS......................................................................................................................... 11 B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES............................................................................................. 11 C. AIR QUALITY....................................................................................................................... 12 D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES................................................................................................. 13 E. CULTURAL RESOURCES.................................................................................................... 14 F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS........................................................................................................ 14 G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS................................................................... 16 H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY............................................................................ 17 I. LAND USE AND PLANNING.............................................................................................. 18 J. MINERAL RESOURCES....................................................................................................... 19 K. NOISE..................................................................................................................................... 19 L. POPULATION AND HOUSING...........................................................................................20 M. PUBLIC SERVICES...............................................................................................................21 N. RECREATION........................................................................................................................21 O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC............................................................................................22 P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS................................................................................23 Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.................................................................24 4.0 PREPARERS AND ADDITIONAL REFERENCES....................................................................26 4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS...........................................................................................................26 4.2 ADDITIONAL PROJECT REFERENCES USED TO PREPARE THIS INITIAL STUDY 26 FIGURES 2.1 Regional and Project Location.........................................................................................................4 2.2 California Pepper Tree Illustrative Plan...........................................................................................6 RAMPK530\Inital Study_Fortn_Ciry.doc(9/9/2005) 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This Initial Study analyzes the impacts associated with the implementation of a proposed maintenance plan for existing California pepper trees located along High Street in the City of Moorpark(High Street Tree Maintenance Plan). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, this Initial Study has been prepared in order to identify changes in the physical environmental that may result from the proposed maintenance plan, evaluate whether the proposed project may result in significant impacts on the environment, and determine the appropriate form of environmental documentation required by CEQA. This Initial Study examines the activities included in proposed tree maintenance plan for the grove of California pepper trees (Schinus molle) situated on High Street in the City of Moorpark. Pursuant to Section 15063 of State CEQA Guidelines, all phases of the proposed project's implementation and operation are considered in this Initial Study. This Initial Study contains a description of the proposed project; its location; a matrix identifying the anticipated environmental effects of implementing the proposed project; potential mitigation measures that might mitigate any significant effects; and an evaluation of the project's consistency with existing land use plans, zoning and other applicable jurisdictions. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State and local CEQA Guidelines,the City of Moorpark is the Lead Agency, and is charged with the responsibility of deciding whether or not to approve the proposed project(High Street Tree Maintenance Plan)as set forth in Section 2.1 of this Study. 1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION No previous environmental study and analysis has been undertaken for the proposed project. 1.3 FINDINGS OF THIS INITIAL STUDY After evaluating the range of potential environmental effects that could result from implementation of the proposed maintenance plan, this Initial Study has concluded that there is a potential for significant environmental effects related to Aesthetics,Biological Resources,and Cultural Resources.Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report to evaluate these impacts is therefore required. 1.4 EXISTING DOCUMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE High Street Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan,2005. 1.5 CONTACT PERSON The lead agency for the Initial Study for the "High Street Tree Maintenance Plan" is the City of Moorpark.Any questions about the preparation of this Initial Study,its assumptions,or its conclusions should be referred to: RAMPK530Qnital Study_Fortn_City.doe(9/9/2005) Mary Lindley,Community Service Director City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Telephone: (805) 517-6200 Fax: (805) 529-8270 RAMPK530Unital Study_Porm_City.doc(9/9/2005) 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project,"High Street Pepper Tree Management Plan,"is located within the public right-of- way of East High Street extending approximately 0.2 mile between Moorpark Avenue and the 400 block of East High Street in the City of Moorpark,California.This street functions primarily as the Downtown main street,with businesses and offices located on either side of the street.A Union Pacific rail line runs parallel to High Street,approximately 400 feet to the south.Figure 2.1 shows the project location within the City of Moorpark. Moorpark is located in southeastern Ventura County, 50 miles north of Downtown Los Angeles. The project site,High Street,is the primary east-west roadway through the Downtown area of Moorpark.A portion of the project area also falls under the jurisdiction of the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. California pepper trees(Schinus molle)currently line the northern and southern sides of High Street.The proposed California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan is directed toward establishing a maintenance program for the 52 California pepper trees located along the north and south sides of East High Street. The trees that are the subject of the proposed maintenance plan are located within and adjacent to the roadway right-of-way (Refer to the High Street Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan). The portion of High Street subject to the proposed maintenance plan is generally commercial in character along the north side of the street, with a mix of public and commercial uses located along the south side of the street. The larger, older trees with their wide canopies along High Street are the street's dominant visual feature. 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Moorpark proposes a maintenance plan for the 52 California pepper trees on East High Street.The existing trees along High Street are of basic two types:small trees(small canopy and diameter of trunk) and large trees(extensive canopy and older). The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 52 pepper trees,and proposes: • Specific services and techniques for maintenance of different categories of the California pepper trees on High Street.These categories are assigned based on the criteria of age,condition(health),canopy, and the type of planter space. • Replacement of trees when it is determined that the old,dying trees need to be removed. The maintenance plan identifies activities that range from routine maintenance to specific solutions for the different conditions presented by the trees. Some of the routine maintenance activities are: • Provide supplemental irrigation on a regular basis; • Trim the tops of the stakes away from lower branches; • Monitor the trees' stability on a routine basis; • Direct the development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an east-west axis; and • Prune the foliage on heavy limbs. RAMPK530\1nital SNdy_Fom_City.doc(9/9/2005) 3 3 `I Cam pus?&Qr Project Location 0 t--LosAn 9 eles Ave • , f _.J LL P r7l J tca F- LH"I ILI V Lli F f...... F 7 ---------- Regional Locationi__ Project Area Ventura County LAngeles-County 17 0 1,500 3,000 io 20 FEET MILES L S A FIGURE 2.1 PROJECT AREA UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CITY OF MOORPARK City of Moorpark EIR Initial Study SOURCE:US Census(2000) Regional and Project Location R:\MPK530\G\Reports\IS\\regjoc.mxd(09/09/05) Other recommended activities are aimed at promoting a balanced growth in the foliage. These are: • Promote an upward growth of the canopy; • Avoid heading-back terminal ends; • Prune on an annual basis; • Monitor the tree's stability on a routine basis; and • Prune to avoid excessive foliage on limbs. Some of the specific solutions for trees that have heavier canopies involve following activities: • Provide crown reconstruction pruning techniques; • Direct the development of temporary major scaffold limbs on an east-west axis; • Extensive crown reconstruction; • Reduction of long vertical and horizontal limbs;and • In case of some of the older decaying trees,removal and replacement. The primary goal of the California pepper tree maintenance plan is to provide a realistic framework by which the legacy of the original trees is sustained,appropriate care is delivered while minimizing the risk to people and property due to some of the old, senescent trees on a public right-of-way. The project is proposed to meet the following objectives: • Inventory the existing state of trees along High Street and identify appropriate maintenance activities for each tree within the project area; • Protect the public health and safety from potentially hazardous conditions that may be associated with aging trees in the project area; • Provide a means by which the existing pepper tree grove and its planting spaces can be preserved as a cultural/historic resource for the community; • Identify appropriate vacant sites within the project area where newly planted California pepper trees could enhance the grove; and • Promote and maintain the visual character of East High Street that the presence of the pepper trees provides. 2.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS The grove of California pepper trees is located on High Street in the City of Moorpark on the south and north sidewalk of the street. Several of the trees are very large,tall with thick and dropping foliage as is characteristic of this species. Some of the trees are younger, smaller in trunk and height. There are no other species of trees on this segment of the High Street. The proposed project encompasses thirty-two (32) of the total fifty-two (52) existing and future California pepper trees along the 400-yard stretch of High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Street. As indicated in Figure 2.2,there are fifteen(15) smaller trees on the north side and twelve(12) smaller trees on the south side;a total of twenty-seven(27).Twenty-five(25)larger trees are distributed with ten(10)on the north side and fifteen(15)on the south side.Two(2)of these trees are slightly off- site as seen in Figure 2.2 (Source: Figure 2.3,California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, 2005). R:\MPK530Qnital Study_Fom_City.dm(9/9/2005) 5 Moorpark Av. tag#1 tag#2 no tag/#52 tag#3 tag#519#4 tag#49 Walnut g{ 137 High St. ............. .................. " — 38'o/c (market) taa#50 44'o/c e6mic tag#48 (vacant lot) 192 High St tag#47 165 High St. (old station) tag (professional building) tag#46 20'o/c : ............... tag#45 >' ............._.....................(storefront).... tag#10 (storefront) _..,..._................._............__...._.............._......... .; tag#44 tag#11 (storefront) tag#443 ._tag#t2 .. .._. ..._ (restaurant) (storefront) tag#41 d '� , tag#40 a Bard St. to #39 g — . �� ............ 9 = d" 44'o/c 213 High St. tao#13 tag#38 9 (vacant building) tag#37 j 56'o/c .___..........._._...._.._...._......._...._.............._...__..,__....._..._.__.. tag#36 a#14 233 High St. 72'o/c (professional building) t tnoo /#15 5 57'o/c 255 High St. (mulched lot) tag#35 #16 (storefront) to #34 tag#17 273 High St. Tam J (residence) tag#33 _...___...___.._........_....__,.._............. __.____... .... .._. (fire station) tag#32 tag#31 MaaSnoolia St. ..... . ................... tag#20 (restaurant) tag#30 (parking lot) tag#21 (residence) tag#29 ' no tag/#28 no tag/#27 g#22 349 High St. tag#26 (blacksmith's shop) _ .... ..............................................._............................. _...._............... 361 High St. tag#23 (vacant lot) off site) __ no tag/#24 (off site) tag#25 415 High St. (vacant lot) L S A FIGURE 2.2 NO SCALE City of Moorpark EIR Initial Study SOURCE:CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN,HIGH STREET-MOORPARK,CA California Pepper Tree Illustrative Plan R:,MPK530\G\Reports\IS\pepper tree plan.cdr(9/09.05) Larger Trees Smaller Trees North Side 10(one off-site) 15 (one off site) South Side 15 12 Total=52 25 27 The trees are in varying conditions,both externally and internally. Several of the trees are mature with large diameter(45-to 59-inch)and large canopies(60-70 feet).Most of these older trees are approaching senescence and can be expected to deteriorate considerably. There are at least eleven (11) other trees that can be considered veteran trees. Some of these show problems with trunk stability, stability of scaffold limbs, trunk cavity, decay, and some show a pronounced lean. There are seven(7)young trees with 7-inch to 10-inch diameter trunks. Some of these trees are leaning toward the street,while some have canopies impacting those of adjoining trees. Newly planted trees are typically 2.5 inches to 4 inches in diameter. These trees have yet to become established. Detailed tree-level analysis has been conducted by a certified arborist and the Tree Maintenance Plan describes the current conditions of each tree and its planting space.The maintenance plan describes the two basic planting spaces: restricted and unrestricted. Generally, the restricted planting space is filled with soil and mulch with pavement/curb on all sides. It is usually about 8 feet by 10 feet in most tree spaces.Some of the trees have highly restricted planting space.Unrestricted planting space for the trees occurs when there is pavement on one side and soil and mulch bed on the other.Tree planter spaces are inconsistent in size and shape throughout this grove (refer to California Pepper Trees —Maintenance Plan). RAMPK530\Inital Study_Fonn City.doc(9/9/2005) 7 3.0 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021 (805) 517-6200 Project Title: High Street California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan Case No.: Contact Person and Phone No.: Mary Lindley,Community Services Director (805)517-6216 Name of Applicant: City of Moorpark Address and Phone No.: 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Tel: (805) 517-6200 Project Location: The project site extends approximately 0.2 mile along both sides of East High Street, between Moorpark Avenue and the 400 block of East High Street. General Plan Designation: General Commercial Zoning: C-OT [Commercial Old Town] Project Description: The City of Moorpark is considering a maintenance plan for 52 existing California pepper(Schinus molle)trees located along East High Street.These trees,several of which were planted in 1901, line the northern and southern sides of High Street The maintenance plan encompasses range of actions from basic routine maintenance, pruning, and crown reconstruction to replacement of old, decaying trees by similar species. Overall, the maintenance plan identifies each tree individually and recommends management practices specific to each tree. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North: Offices South: Retail,Public Parking,MetroLink station East: Spring Street—General Commercial [Zoning: Comm.Planned Development] West: Moorpark Avenue — General Commercial; Light Industrial [Zoning: Old Town Commercial] Responsible and Trustee Agencies: None ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact"or 'Less Than Significant With Mitigation,"as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. R:\MPK530Unita1 Study_Pocm_city.doc(9/9/2005) 8 X Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality X Biological Resources X Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards and Hazardous Hydrology/Water Land Use/Planning Materials Quality Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing r_1 Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required Prepared by: Reviewed by: Date: Date: RAMPK53011nital Study_Fortn_Ciry.doc(9/9/2005) 9 INITIAL STUDY EXHIBIT 1: MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 1. All mitigation measures will be identified in the Environmental Impact Report. Monitoring Action: Timing: Responsibility: AGREEMENT TO PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 (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 MITIGATION MEASURES IN THE PROJECT. Signature of Project Applicant Date RAMPK530Unital Study_Focm_City.do (9/9/2005) 10 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, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 3) Substantially degrade the existing visual X character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 4) Create a new source of substantial light or X glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Response: The activities set forth in the High Street Maintenance Plan have the potential to significantly impact the visual appearance of East High Street by permitting removal of existing thick foliage when pruning the crowns of trees,and by permitting the removal of trees under certain circumstances.As the existing California pepper trees along East High Street are a prominent landscape element, all pruning, crown reconstruction, and replacement activities can affect the visual character quality of the site. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005).. Miti ag tion: To be identified in the EIR. 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 Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 1)Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland, X or Farmland 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 X agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? RAMPK530\Inital Study_Form_City.doc(9/9/2005) 11 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 3) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which,due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? Response: The East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan will have no impact on the agricultural resources as the site is not in an agricultural use or adjacent to any agriculture use.Hence, there is no conflict with any agricultural zoning,nor does the Plan involve conversion of any agricultural uses. Sources: California Department of Conservation:Ventura County Important Farmland Map(2000) Mitigation: None required. C.AIR QUALITY—Would the project: 1)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of X the applicable air quality plan? 2) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 4° 3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net X 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 X pollutant concentrations? 5) Create objectionable odors affecting a X Mn substantial number of people? Response: The activities involved in the Tree Maintenance Plan do not involve activities that could exceed relevant air emissions thresholds of significance and will not,therefore,violate any air quality standards. Pruning and other maintenance measures will be short-term and temporary conditions. Sources: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines(2003). Mitigation: None required. _, RAMPK530Wital Study_Fo—_City.dm(9/9/2005) 12 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact D.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X directly or through habitat modifications,on s 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 X 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 3) Have a substantial adverse effect on X 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 X 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? 5) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted X Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Response: The project area contains introduced and ornamental species only, the maintenance of which will not affect sensitive biological species or wetland areas. Although the City of �. Moorpark has not designated the pepper trees along East High Street for preservation,the existing grove were, prior to Moorpark's incorporation designated as a local historic RAMPK530Unital Study_Fmm_City.doc(9/9/2005) 13 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact resource. Whether the proposed tree maintenance plan would conflict with the preservation policies of the County's designation will be addressed in an environmental impact report. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan (2005), County of Ventura-Cultural Heritage Board Landmark No. 72 Miti ag tion: To be identified in the EIR. E.CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project: 1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the X significance of a historic resource as defined N in§15064.5? 2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the X significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 3) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 4)Disturb any human remains,including those X interred outside of formal cemeteries? Response: The stand of California pepper trees on High Street was identified as a historic resource by the County during a 1981 Historic Resource Inventory(HRI)prior to the incorporation of City of Moorpark,at which time it was designated as Ventura County Landmark Number 72.The maintenance plan identifies replacement of decaying trees by similar species trees, as well as maintenance activities,such as pruning and removal of dense foliage that would, at least temporarily, affect the visual character of the trees. Whether such activities modifications to the existing trees are compatible with their designation as a local historic resource will be addressed in an environmental impact report to be prepared for the proposed maintenance plan. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan (2005), County of Ventura-Cultural Heritage Board Landmark No. 72. Mitigation: To be identified in the EIR. 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: R:WPK530Unita1 SNdy_Fonn_City.doc(9/9/2005) 14 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as X 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? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv)Landslides? X 2)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X 3)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is X 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 X Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 5) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Response: The stand of California pepper trees is located on the site since 1901.It is not known to be a site on a known earthquake fault,landslides,subject to seismic-related ground failure,or other unstable ground. It is not located on expansive soils prone to failures nor does the project require any use of septic tanks. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005), General Plan Safety Element(2001). Miti ag tion: None required. RAMPK530Qnital Study_Fotm_Ciry.doc(9/912005) 15 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact G.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: 1) Create a significant hazard to the public or X the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 2) Create a significant hazard to the public or X the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 3) Emit hazardous emission or handle X hazardous or acutely 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 X list of 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 X use plan or,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 X airstrip,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 7) Impair implementation of or physically X interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 8) Expose people or structures to a significant X risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands RAMPK530\inital Study_Form_City.doc(9/9/2005) 16 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Response: The proposed project involves tree maintenance activities,such as pruning,removal and new planting of similar species. The project will not involve the transport, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials. Potentially hazardous materials such as pesticides, fertilizers are likely to be used during project execution. The transport, storage, and handling of these substances are routinely conducted with tree maintenance activities. Therefore,potential impacts associated with the use,transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials will be less than significant. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005), General Plan Safety Element(2001). Miti g tom: None Required. H.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: 1)Violate any water quality standards or waste X discharge requirements? 2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies X 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 X 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 X 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 X would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or R:NPK5309nita1 Study_Form_City.doc(9/9/2005) 17 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than _ Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6) Otherwise substantially degrade water X quality? 7)Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard X 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 X 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 ii)Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? X Response: The proposed tree maintenance plan will not result in ground disturbance that would u require obtaining an NPDES permit.The site drainage flows from current conditions will not be modified as the result of tree maintenance activities.The maintenance plan does not include activities that would deplete any existing groundcover or degrade the water quality. There is no significant risk involving flooding or inundation of the site. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005),General Plan Safety Element(2001). Mitigation: None Required. I.LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: 1)Physically divide an established community? X 2) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, X 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 X conservation plan or natural community R:\MPK530Unita1 Study_Fom_City.doc(9/9/2005) 18 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact conservation plan? Response: The project site is an existing commercial street. The proposed maintenance of existing trees along East High Street will not,therefore,divide an established community.As noted in the discussion of biological resources,there are no sensitive biological resources within the project area. In addition, there are no existing habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans affecting the project site,which encompasses the parkways along a downtown street. The downtown area also falls under the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Plan. There are no provisions in the Redevelopment Plan addressing maintenance of the existing pepper trees. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005),General Plan Land Use Element(1992); Moorpark Redevelopment Agency-Five Year Implementation Plan 2005-2009. Miti ag t`ion: None required. J.MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: 1)Result in the loss of availability of a known X mineral 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- X important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Response: The project site is not known to have any mineral resources and hence the proposed project will have no impact. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005),General Plan Open Space,Conservation, and Recreation Element(1986). Mitigation: None required. K.NOISE—Would the project result in: 1) Exposure of persons to or generation of X 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 X excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? - RAMPK5304nital SNdy_Fo'm_Ciry.doc(9/9/2005) 19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 3)A substantial permanent increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 4)A substantial temporary or periodic increase X in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 5) For a project located within an airport land X use plan or,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 X airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Response: The project site is not located in an area of noise-sensitive uses. In addition, implementation of the maintenance plan will generate short-term,intermittent increases in noise during pruning,re-plantation,and crown reconstruction activities.However,these impacts are temporary and will have no permanent increase in ambient noise levels above the existing levels.The project is not located within two miles of a public or public use or private airport. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005),General Plan Noise Element(1998). Mitigation: None required. L.POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: 1) Induce substantial population growth in an X area, either 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 X housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3) Displace substantial numbers of people, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? RAMPK530Unita1 Study_Folm_City.dm(9/9/2005) 20 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Response: The proposed project does not involve construction or removal of any new housing or other types of buildings. It will not induce any growth in population or housing or any displacement of existing housing.Thus,this issue will not be further analyzed in the EIR. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005). Mitigation: None required. M.PUBLIC SERVICES—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: 1)Fire protection? X 2)Police protection? X 3) Schools? X 4)Parks? X 5)Other public facilities? X Response: Implementation of the Tree Maintenance Plan will require provision of staff and financial resources.It is not anticipated,however,that the proposed maintenance plan will result in greater levels of maintenance effort than would otherwise occur. Rather, the proposed maintenance plan will provide pre-planning to the activities that would likely have otherwise occurred on an ad-hoc basis.Thus,impacts on parks and other public facilities are anticipated to be less than significant. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan (2005), General Plan Safety Element (2001), General Plan Open Space,Conservation, and Recreation Element(1986). Mitigation: None required. N.RECREATION—Would the project: 1) Increase the use of existing neighborhood X and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 2) Include recreational facilities or require the X construction or expansion of recreational R:NPK530Unita1 SWdy_Form_City.doc(9/9/2005) 21 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Response: The proposed project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or any other recreational facility within the City of Moorpark. No construction or expansion of recreational facilities is projected in the Tree Maintenance Plan. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005),General Plan Open Space,Conservation, and Recreation Element(1986). Mitigation: None Required. O.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: 1) Cause an increase in traffic which is X substantial in relation 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, X a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, X including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 4) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature (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 X programs supporting alternative trans- portation(e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? Response: The proposed project will not increase the traffic load and the level of service from the existing or future conditions that would occur without the proposed project.There will be R:VNPK530Unita1 Study_Form_City.doc(9/9/2005) 22 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact no impact on air traffic patterns either as there is no change involved in the existing land use. Activities associated with the proposed maintenance plan could result in some temporary loss of on-street parking of temporary lane closures while activities are undertaken.However,these conditions are temporary and would occur only intermittently, affecting access and parking only during the period of the maintenance. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan(2005),General Plan Circulation Element(1992). Mitigation: To be identified in the EIR. P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project: 1) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements X of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 2)Require or result in the construction of new X 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 X stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 4) Have sufficient water supplies available to X serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 5)Result in a determination by the wastewater X 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 X permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 7) Comply with Federal, State, and local stat- X utes and regulations related to solid waste? RAMPK530Unital SNdy_Fomi_City.doc(9/9/2005) 23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Response: The proposed project does not modify existing or planned land uses and,therefore,will not result in a demand for construction of new water facilities or water treatment facilities. The proposed maintenance plan will retain the existing amount of landscaping within the High Street right-of-way and will not increase water use. Because the proposed project does not involve grading,Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements do not apply to the proposed project. The proposed maintenance plan may result in a small increase in green waste due to increase maintenance activities; however, such green waste will be produced only intermittently. All green waste will be managed and disposed of pursuant to City solid waste source reduction guidelines. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan (2005), Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures(2002). Mitigation: None required. Q.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1) Does the project have the potential to X 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 of the major periods of California history of prehistory? 2) Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects 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.) 3)Does the project have environmental effects X which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Response: The tree maintenance activities have the potential to significantly impact the aesthetics of the street. Crown reconstruction,replacement,pruning and other measures will affect the visual character of the street.The Tree Maintenance Plan recommends measures that will affect/change the physical appearance of the trees.Further,some of the old senescent trees R:WPK530Unita1 SNdy_Fortn_City.doc(9/9/2005) 24 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact would be replaced by the same species but not necessarily the same size of the tree. All maintenance activities,if carried out concurrently,would result in reduced foliage and thus a changed appearance of the street. The project activities will result in short-term, temporary noise levels associated with pruning,replanting as well as other associated impacts. Sources: East High Street Tree Maintenance Plan (2005); County of Ventura-Cultural Heritage Board Landmark No. 72; General Plan Noise Element (1998); General Plan Circulation Element(1992). EARLIER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS USED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS INITIAL STUDY East High Street Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan. California Dep't of Conservation: Ventura County Important Farmland Map(2000). Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines (2003). County of Ventura-Cultural Heritage Board Landmark No. 72. General Plan Safety Element(2001). Moorpark Redevelopment Agency-Five Year Implementation Plan 2005-2009. General Plan Open Space,Conservation,and Recreation Element(1986). General Plan Noise Element(1998). General Plan Safety Element(2001),General Plan Open Space,Conservation,and Recreation Element (1986). General Plan Circulation Element(1992). Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures(2002). RAMPK530Wital Smdy_FonnCity.doc(9/9/2005) 25 4.0 PREPARERS AND ADDITIONAL REFERENCES 4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS This document was prepared under the direct management of the City of Moorpark as Lead Agency for the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment and position regarding the environmental consequences of the proposed project.The Lead Agency was assisted by LSA Associates,Inc. 4.1.1 City of Moorpark Mary Lindley,Community Services Director Dave Bobardt,Planning Manager/Advanced Planning 4.1.2 Lead Consultant LSA Associates,Inc. (LSA),Environmental/Planning Consultants Lynn Calvert-Hayes,Managing Principal Meenaxi R.Panakkal, Senior Planner Steven Dong,Editor Jennifer Schuk,Graphics Sheryl Woodard,Production 4.2 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. Environmental Information Form application and materials submitted on (Date to by supplied by M. Lindley.) 2. Comments received from(departments)in response to the Community Development Department's request for comments. 3. The City of Moorpark's General Plan,as amended. 4. The Moorpark Municipal Code,as amended. 5. 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 6. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et.seq.and California Code of Regulations,Title 14 Section 15000 et. seq. 7. Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines,November 14,2000. RAMPK530\h ital SNdy_Folm_Ciry.doc(9/9/2005) 26 NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT n CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805)517-6200 To., Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report The City of Moorpark will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information that is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The project description, location, and the potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. A copy of the Initial Study(® is ❑ is not) attached. Due to the time limits mandated by state law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to David A. Bobardt at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. Project Title: California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan Project Location: Within the public right-of-way of High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road. Moorpark Ventura City(nearest) County Project Applicant EIR Consulting Firm Name: City of Moorpark Name., LSA Associates, Inc. Street Address: 799 Moorpark Avenue Street Address: 1650 Spruce Street,Suite 500 ctty/stat&zip: Moorpark,CA 93021 cftylstate/Ztp: Riverside,CA 92507 Contact., Mary Lindley contact: Meenaxi R. Panakkal Telephone. (805)517-6200 Telephone: (951)781-9310 Project Description: The City of Moorpark proposes a maintenance plan for the 52 California pepper trees on East High Street.The existing trees along High Street are of basic two types:small trees(small canopy and diameter of trunk)and large trees(extensive canopy and older).The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 52 pepper trees,and proposes specific services and techniques for maintenance of different health categories of the California pepper trees on High Street.The maintenance plan identifies activities that range from routine maintenance to specific solutions for the different conditions presented by the trees. Date: May 1,2006 Signature: - Namelritte: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager Telephone: (805)517-6200 AWPK530\1nitial Study Apr06\NOP.doc Carl Morehouse(6) Caltrans,District 7 State Clearinghouse(15) County of Ventura IGR/CEQA Program Manager 1400 Tenth Street Resources Management Agency IGR Office 1-10c P.O.Box 3044 Planning Division 120 Spring Street Sacramento,CA 95812-3044 800 South Victoria Avenue Los Angeles,CA 90012 Ventura,Ca 93009-1700 California Dep't of Parks and Recreation Ventura Co.Transportation Commission Office of Historic Preservation 950 County Square Drive Suite 207 th 1416 9 Street Rm. 1442 Ventura,CA 93003 Sacramento,CA 94296-0001 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9► Governors Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Arnold Schwmeaeggsr Seen Governor Notice of Preparation May 4,2006 To: Reviewing Agencies Re: California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan SCH# 2006051024 Attached for your review and conunent is the Notice of Preparation(NOP)for the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan draft Environmental Impact Report(E1R). Responsible agencies must transmit their comments on the scope and content of the NOP,focming on speci5e information related to their own statutory.responsibility,within 30 days of receipt of the NOP from the Lead A eg My. This is a courtesy notice provided by the State Clearinghouse with a reminder for you to comment in a timely manner. We encourage other agencies to also respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the environmental review process. Please direct your comrnents to: Mary Lindley City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark.CA 93021 with a copy to the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number noted above in all correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions about the environmental document review process,please call the State Clearinghouse at (916)445-0613. Sincerely, ` �Vq Scott Morgan Project Analyst,State Clearinghouse Attachments cc:Lead Agency 1400 TRNTH STREET P.O.BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 96812.3044 TEL(916)448-0613 FAX(916)3234018 www.opr.ca.gov Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCfiV 2008051024 Project Title California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan Lewd Agency Moorpark.City of Type NOP Notice of Preparation Description The City of Moorpark proposes a maintenance plan for 52 California pepper trees on East High Street. The existing trees along High Street are of basic two types:small trees(small canopy and diameter of trunk)and large trees(extensive canopy and older). The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 52 pepper trees,and proposes specific services and techniques for maintenance of different health categories of the Caifomia pepper trees on High Street The maintenance plan Identifies aciivities that range from routine maintenance to speddic solutions for the different conditions presented by the trees. Lead Agency Contact Nacre Mary Lindley Agency City of Moorpark Phone (805)517-6200 i`ax email Address 799 Moorpark Avenue City Moorpark State CA tip 93021 Project Location COMW Ventura city Moorpark Region Cross SVwefs East High Street and Moorpark Avenue Parcel No. Various Township Range Section Base Proximity to; Highways 23,118 Airports none RaP/wsys UPPR 4'Yelerways Schools 3 different schools Land use Project Issues AestheticNisual;Agdcutttrai Land;Air Quality;Archaeologic•HISM1110;Biological Resources; Drainage/Absorption;Flood PlainlFlooding;Geologic/Seismic;Landuss;hAnerals;Noise; Population/Housing SaWice;Pubic Services;Recxsation/Parics;Schools/Universities;Septic System; Sewer Capacity:Solt Erosion/Comp Grading;Solid Waste;To)dc/Hazardous;TnwWCircuistion; Vegetation;Water Qualry;Water SuppV,,WetlafxYRiparian;Wildlife Reviewing Caitrans,District 7;California Foray Patrol;Department of Water Resources;Department of Fish Agencies and Game,Region 5;Department of Forestry and Fire Protection;Native American Heritage Commission;Department of Parks and Recreation;Public Utilities Commission;Regional Water Quality Control Board,Region 3;resources Agency Dots Received 05/04/2006 Start of Review 05/04/2006 End of Review 06/02/2006 Note; Blanks in data fields resuft from insuffident inionnation provided by lead agency. .+va +++.vtrrrrrautlrl LiSlt ❑ County: SCH# -1esou CBS ef,on.... Fist&Gar"Raglan s Robed Flow" Public�illfas CosupissIon ❑ Cells".District a �T _ Dan KopWaky Regional Water QuaNty Contest Resources�s Agency ❑ J�Y O ��4 ❑ ��Commission ❑ Came.District 9 B Fish&Game R Gayle;Rosander Dept,of Basting&Waterways Don ChsdtYlrAc Region 5 ❑ Time Regional Ptennfny ❑ kwQCB 1 David Johnson Ageacy(�rAt ❑ Caltrt,ns.t)l strict 10 Cathleen Hudson Habtist Conservation Program Cherry JWAUN Tate Durres NOM(',oast Region(1) Ceefomis Coasts) ❑ Flah&Game Raglan i �-••� Coramisston ❑ Coltrane,bistrtet 11 L..! RWQCB 2 ENzzabWA.Fuchs Gebdnn Gatchoi a [l ea Frans&Hgttsinro Mob drso Em�lromnentel OvGUment Habitat Cansaivation Program ErMM nator Colorado River Board ❑ Cattrana-Division of ❑ Coltrane.District 12 Garakt R.Zknms © Fish&(lame R Bob San Frandeco Bay Region(2) inter efilan 6 UM I►sronsstics Joseph —i TammyAgan SandyHesnerd RWQCB 9 1 Copt.of Conservation InYMMUno,Habitat CMVWvgft F—� al C+:ntral Coast ion 3 Roseanne Tsyior Program ❑ Caltrarte.plarrsing � Reg ( ) California Energy ❑ Dept.of Fish&Gams M Tani Panowe 'sir Reeourrxs Board ❑ RwQC8 4 Cwmisslon George lasso CallwA a Highway Patrol ❑ Rodgers,Tome Rodgers,Akpod Paul Rains Merino Region Shirley Kelly m Lerner WS Angeles Region(4) Dept.of Forestry&Fire of Spacial Projects ❑ RWQCB as pr twkn 019r Dew mwnr r ❑ Transportation Pro)ecis Central Valley Region(5) ❑ Housing&Communlb' Ravi Barrel sm Alen Robertson ❑ Food&Agriculture Development ❑ Rwma sF Office of Historic Steve Shaft, Use Mchols ❑ Industrial Projects Central Valley (S) Preservation Dept.of Food and Agdcu tum Housing Poky Division M tce Tollstnr Wayne Donaldson ❑ depart,of Gaaeral 8"Aces ❑ RWQCB SR Public School Cauttualon DBDt.of 7renar �+n+r,.., ❑ CaNtimde Integrated Waste Cenhet Valley Region(5) Dept er parka&Recreation — •.- a�t Board Environmental SStewerdship Reddirrq 9rmsch Otfrce Section Dept of Geneml Servloes ❑ RwtiC9 e Robert Siam ❑ Caltrans.District 1 ❑ 8111114 Water Resources Control Lahordan Region Reclemotion Board Environm"A 8srvloM Section RexJadonan %erd (B) NOD**Jones ❑ Dept.of Hselth services ❑ Cattrans,District 2 JIM Hodcenber y ❑ RWQCB ev S.F.Bey Conservation& Veronica Mailoy MsMd1n0 GonwAaz Division of Financial Aeslatenoe I-Shot►tan Region(6) OsV•t.Caarm. Dept.al HesitFripr Nft Water VldonAes aranch O1ece Steve h4ckdarn two � ❑ Ca�patts 8 ❑ �water Resources Contrat ❑ C�� Basin A Water Resources; — �ri Boards Regan(7) © Cattram.District t Student Intem,4L11 Waxer Dustily RWQCB 8 Nadsll Ga Agency TIM Bade Certifoeiion Una N� ❑ Delta Protection Commission Division of Water QuaUty Santa Ana Region(a) Debby Eddy ❑ Colts.,,watrtot 5 ❑ 8gte Water ❑ RWQCB 8 ❑ tNilcs of Erna �ns,DI Steven Hamra control Board Son Diego Reston(8) Conservancy Dernls Castrtilo y Services ❑ Cstirsaa,District a r Dlvisi0n of Water Rights ❑ t3ovemoes Oro"of planning Mwo Umbaurn iJ ish aqd Gati7g &�� g ofToadcSub:lances Contra! ® Caltrans,Obtrtet 7 CEQA Trading Cerdw Depart.of Fish&Dame state Cislringhouse Cheryl J.Poorwn Scott Flint ❑ D"artm"of Pesticide K"olatien ❑ 01h6r �1 Environmental Services Division a Native��c�H°dtags ,i Fish&(Berne Region 1 Debbie Treadway Donald Koch Fish&08ms Region 2 Oast Updated on 04112MB Banky Curtis RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY Planning Division of Vatm Chrisbpher Sie e 0WCW Past-e l=ax Note 7671 0M June 1,2006 Flom •se David gobardt, Planning Manager �ea t +eM Community Development Department � r }'1v rmxr City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue j Moorpark,CA 93021 ! FAX#;(806)6294270 j SUBJECT: California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan; 4otice of Preparat n of Draft EIR Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above subject document. Attached are the comments that we have r ived resulting fro n an intra-county review of the projects. Any responses to these comments should be sent direct y to the corn mente r, with a copy to Cad Morehouse, Ventura County Planning Divl ion, L#1740, 800 So, Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009. if you have any questions regarding any of the comment i, please contact t le appropriate respondent. Overall questions may be direc ed to Carl Morqhc jse at (805)654-247ti. Sincerely, V-1-./m 11f ch-h"IW St hens County Planning Director G.iP/annfna Oivisiont0ulside Envaonmanta�Docwmenrsu4eeooriie LettersuKaap Attachment County RMA Reference Number 06-024 I s 900 South Victoria Avenue, t#1740, Ventura, CA 93009 (805) 0 4-2481 Fax (805) 4-2509 PrMsea an Recycled Paper VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT Memorandum T0: Carl Morehouse,Phuuvng DATE: June 5,2006 FROM: Alicia Stratton SUBJECT: Request for Review of Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the California pepper Tree Maintenance Plan,City of Moorpark(Reference No.06-024) Air Pollution Control District staff has reviewed the subject project notice of preparation for a draft environmental impact report(DEIR),which ie a proposaJ for a maintenance plan for the 52 California pepper firms on Fsast High.Street in the City of Moorpark. The existing trees alongPIigh Street arc of two basic typos; small trees and large trees. The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 52 trees,and proposes specific services and techniques for maintenance of difl'Brent health categories of the California pepper trees. The maintenance plan identifies activities that range from routine maintenance to specific solutions for die difl'erem conditions proscmted by the trees. We concur with the findings of the initial study that implementation of the maintenance plan does not involve activities that could exceed air emissions thresholds of signifleanre, and will not,therefore,violate any air quality standards, pruning and other maintenance measures will be short-term and will not involve activities that may result in excessive fugitive dust and particulate matter. We recommend the following conduion be applied to the maintenance plan to prevent plant material and debris from spilling over onto public streets and rods: "All trucks that will haul pruned material off site shall comply with State Vehicle Code Section 23114,with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F),(e)(2)and(e)(4) as amendod,regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets and roads." If you have any questions,please call me ut 645-1426. PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY TRANSPORTATION DFPARTM'ETrT Traffic,Advance Planning&Permits Division MAY 2 4 7006 MEMORANRU-M DATE: May 22,2006 TO: Resource Manugement Agency,Planning Division Attention: Carl Morehouse FROM: Nazir Laiani,Deputy Director Susir,C - Review of initial Study and Notice of Preparation OP)of it Draft Env ronmental bripact Report(DEER). California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan for 52 Ci ifomia Pepper trees ocated on High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring ad in the City of I 400rWk Lead Agency. City of Moorpark The Public Works Agency--Transportation Department has review the Initial Study d NOP for a T)EIR for the proposed project. The project is the maintenan of 52 California P per trees located on tligh Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Ron in the City of Moo ark, The plan will analyze the health of the trees and provide specific service and routine maint a for the different conditions presented by the trees. The plan also includes oviding suppleme irrigation on a regular basis,trimming and pruning,and replacement of the es when needed. a offer tliel following comments: i. Any additional traffic generated by this project will be tompo . Therefore,th will be m cumulative impact of this project on County toads and the prof t proponent will not required to pay any traffic impact mitigation fee. 2. To mitigate the unpact of construction related trips on SR 18, west of the cit,r limit, the construction/niainta=ce related trips on SR I 18 in the Sornib rea should be restrici ed bttwoad the hours of 6;30 a-=to 9:00 a.m.and 3:30 pan.to 6:30 p.m.. Our review of this project is limited to the impacts this project may have on the Count) s Regional Road Network. Please call me et 6542080 if you have questions. x:�rxnNSroRU�wrrton_e�,�,�aa-0�4 a�rx.a.e FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SCH No. 2006051024 City of Moorpark Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 000092 CC ATTACHMENT 3 CONTENTS 1. Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), LSA Associates, December 2006 2. List of Persons, Organizations, and Public Agencies Commenting on the Draft EIR 3. Comment Letters Received on the Draft EIR 4. Responses to Comments 000093 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (Provided under Separate Cover) 000094 2 LIST OF PERSONS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PUBLIC AGENCIES COMMENTING ON THE DRAFT EIR 1. February 8, 2007 Letter from Nazir Lalani, Deputy Director of the County of Ventura Public Works Agency Transportation Department— Traffic, Advance Planning & Permits Division 2. February 22, 2007 Letter from Terry Roberts, Director, State Clearinghouse No other comments were received. 000095 3 COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT EIR (Attached) 000096 4 FEB-21-2007 08:51 FROM:RMR PLANNING DEPT 805 654 2509 TO:Cita of Moorpark P.1'4 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY Planning Division county of ventu ra �m r February 21, 2007 Post=tt*Fax Note X671 Data z ��'� pesos► To Cn►'G. 1✓ From_�` -�\ David 8obardt, Planning Manager coMept. c°. Community Development Dept. P110no# Pt,° Ci ty of Moorpark Rux# Fax N 799 Moorpark Ave. Moorpark FAX#: 532-2540 Subject: DEIR for the Calif. Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan i Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject document' Attached are the comments that we have received resulting from intra-county review of the subject document. Your proposed responses to these comments should be sent directly to the commenter, with a copy to Chuck Anthony, Ventura County Planning Division, 01740, 80Q S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009. I If you have any questions regarding any of the comments, please contact the appropriate respondent. Overall questions may be directed to Chuck Anthony;at (805)654-3683. j Sincerely, i I K Ilodriguez County Planning Director G:Sonning Dfvlslonlpu&de Envimnmentel Documentslfte"nse Lettersl Attachment County RMA Reference Number 06-024-1 800 South Victoria Avenue, L#1740,Ventura, CA 93009-1740 (805)8542481 FAX (805)854 �!�no FEB-21-2007 08:51 FROM:RMA PLANNING DEPT 805 654 2509 TO:City of Moorpark P.2/4 PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY o TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT • Traffic,Advance Planning& Permits Division w MEMORANDUM DATE: February 8, 2007 TO: Resource Management Agency,Planning Division Attention: Chuck Anthony FROM: Nazir Lalani,Deputy Director,,k SUBJECT: Review of Initial Study and Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR), California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan for 52 California Pepper trees located on High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road in the City of Moorpark Lead Agency: City of Moorpark The Public Works Agency--Transportation Department has reviewed the Initial Study and DEIR for the proposed project. The project is the maintenance of 52 California Pepper trees located on High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road in the City of Moorpark. The plan will analyze the health of the trees and provide specific services and routine maintenance for the different conditions presented by the trees. The plan also includes providing supplement irrigation on a regular basis, trimming and pruning, and replacement of the trees when needed. We offer the following comments: L Any additional traffic generated by this project will be temporary. Therefore, there will be no cumulative impact of this project on County roads and the project proponent will not be required to pay any Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee(TIMF). 2. To mitigate the impact of construction related trips on SR 118, west of the city limit, the construction/maintenance related trips on SR 118 in the Somis area should be restricted between the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Our review of this project is limited to the impacts this project may have on the County's Regional Road Network. Please call me at 654-2080 if you have questions. r:\TRANSPOR U.anncv\Non_Count�A06-024-I MPK.dnc 000.038 FEB-21-2007 08:51 FROM:RMA PLANNING DEPT 805 654 2509 TO:Citg of Moorpark P.3/4 COUNTY OF VENTURA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM DATE: January 9, 2007 TO: Distribution List as Checked Below -TIM F- — J FROM: Chuck Anthony, Phone-654-3683, FAX-654-2509 1 SUBJECT: Non-County("Outside") Environmental Document Review Notice RMA Reference #: 06-024-1 Document Type: VigUnvironmental Impart Project: QIffmiia PWM Trees Maint mnoe Plan,State Clearinghouse itz 20051024 Lead Agency: Qty of Moorpgark Lead Agency Contact: David A. SobardL Planning Manager Phone #: 805.517.6281 Your written comments must be received by Noon Feb. 21, 2007. Therefore, please make allowances for brown mail travel time. You can also telafax your comments W me at 654-2509,or email them m chuck-andwy@ventura.org. At the direction of the Board of Supervisors, any County of Ventura agency/department comments regarding"outside"(non-County)environmental documents shall be coordinated through the County Planning Director. If you wish to comment on the subject project, please do so in a letter or memo suitable fix publication. On your response,pkwe WAaw a Hhe RASA 1&UgmmV number for thus proms If your agency/department does not wish to comment on the subject project, then please indicate so below*and return this memo to me before the deadline date indicated above. A limited number of full copies(_ six(6) ) were received by the RMA. Therefore,you may review the full document at the RMA offices(please call me first)or you may request a full copy directly from the lead agency's contact person indicated above. *No comment;sign date Phone ui�m�a nia rw-n•rs.i��r Distribution A 5500 Airports Dept.,T. McNamee M 5200 Harbor Dept., L. Krieger B 6200 Ag. Commissioner, R. Graham N 1730 RMA/Env. Health, M. Talent C 4951 APCD,A. Stratton P 1740 RMA/Planning,T. Newman D 5400 Fire Protection District, Planning Sect. R 1740 RMA/Cult. Heritage, K. Hocking E 1000 GSA/Parks, A. Oshita S 1740 RMA/LCA,3. Bulla F 1600 PWA/Development Services, B. T 1740 RMA/Legal Lots, L. Windt Trushinski (Memo Only) U 1740 RMA/Ag. Policy, H e3900 PWA/Env. &Eng. Resources, R. Pakala V 1740 RMA/Biology, L. Chattin 1610 PWA/Watershed Protection District, W 3320 Sheriff, 3. Pratt x S.E.A.C.O.N. K 1600 Resources D, Panaro Y L 1620 7�'\'�V Attachment d.. i'j0'7 b G.'IP/aniangLivi an►Q tia�En�r�r►rn�y�Geavn�axs�Ot�siaeE,DR1"t7ffl01x0*EQR!odo'- RM0"2¢I..JAN '? Igo 00099 Location # 1740 pNNN- T'ransportat ot,3 AAA!'.w.•1•�. /:�Lr-:� �..��..� t1�-,�••w. PIi ^a znnn FEB-21-2007 08:52 FROM:RMA PLANNING DEPT 805 654 2509 TO:City of Moorpark P.4/4 aK e r zt o Moarark COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT:PLANNING-BUILDING AND SAFETY-CODE COMPLIANCE 799 Moorpark Avenue,Moorpark,California 93021 (605)517.6200 fax(805)532-2540 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT(EIR) CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO,2006051024 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR) has been prepared for the City of Moorpark on behalf of the Califomia Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan_ PROJECT LOCATION: High Street Public Right-of-Way, City of Moorpark, California(Ventura County) DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: The City of Moorpark is proposing a tree maintenance plan to address maintenance of the 49 California pepper trees on High Street. The proposed project extends approximately 0.2 miles on High Street, between Moorpark Avenue and the 400 block of High Street in the City of Moorpark. The primary goal of the maintenance plan is to provide a realistic framework by which the legacy of the original trees is sustained and appropriate care is delivered, while minimizing the risk to people and property due to the existence of old, senescent trees on the public right of way_ ANTICIPATED SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS DISCUSSED IN THE DRAFT EIR: The Draft EIR discusses the proposed project's impacts associated with Aesthetics, Biological Resources, and Cultural Resources. All significant effects of the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of mitigation measures_ The project site is not included on any list of hazardous waste sites prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: Copies of the Draft EIR may be reviewed at the Community Development Department, City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, 93021 and the Moorpark Library, 699 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, 93021 during normal business hours. An electronic copy of the Draft Program EIR is available for viewing on the City's web site at www.ci.moorpark.ca.us and may also be purchased on a CD-ROM at City Hall. If you have any questions on this, please contact David A. Bobardt at(805)517-6281. REVIEW PERIOD: Written comments on the Draft EIR will be accepted by the City of Moorpark from January 9, 2007 to February 23, 2007. Comments must be received by the Community Development Department no later than 5:00 P.M.on February 23, 2007 in order to be included in the Final EIR. Please address Comments to: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark CA 93021 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission at a special meeting on February 13, 2007, on or after the hour of 7:00 P.M. in the Community Center at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, 93021 in order to accept oral and written testimony on the Draft EIR. Any person wishing to comment on the Draft EIR may present oral or written comments to the Planning Commission at this hearing. Si usted tiene preguntas relacionadas con esta propuesta, comuniquese por favor con Mr. Joseph I+iss dentro del Departamento del Desarrollo de is Comunidad,at telefono(806)517.6226. Batty K. Hogan, Community Development Director (Date) 000:100 PATRICK HUNTER KEITH F.MILLHOUSE ROSEANN MIKOS MARK VAN DAM JANICE PARVIN Mayor Mayor Pro Tom Councilmember Counellmember Councilmomber STATE OF CALIFORNIA °1 &a9 W Z 7f N s Governor's Office of Planning and Research o z �• ,�ap�� State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit �'ATFOFCAL,F�Pa\p Arnold Schwarzenegger Cynthia Bryant Director Governor February 22,2007 �- ..�T, I 6 David A. Bobardt MAR 2 - 2007 City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue 3: ORPARK Moorpark, CA 93021 Subject: California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan SCH#: 2006051024 Dear David A.Bobardt: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Draft EIR to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on February 21,2007, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents,pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at(916)445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project,please refer to the ten-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, Terry Roberts t� Director, State Clearinghouse 000101. 1400 TENTH STREET P.O.BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 TEL(916)445-0613 FAX(916)323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2006051024 Project Title California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan Lead Agency Moorpark, City of Type EIR Draft EIR Description The City of Moorpark proposes a maintenance plan to address the 49 California pepper trees on High Street. The maintenance plan analyzes the health and setting of each of the 49 pepper trees and proposes services and techniques for maintenance of the different categories of the California pepper trees on High Street. The primary goal of the maintenance plan is to provide a realistic framework by which the legacy of the original trees is sustained and appropriate care is delivered,while minimizing risk to people and property due to the existence of old, senescent trees on the public right-of-way. Lead Agency Contact Name David A. Bobardt Agency City of Moorpark Phone (805) 517-6281 Fax email Address 799 Moorpark Avenue City Moorpark State CA Zip 93021 Project Location County Ventura City Moorpark Region Cross Streets High Street and Moorpark Avenue Parcel No. Township Range Section Base Proximity to: Highways 23, 118 Airports Railways UPPR/Metrolink Waterways Arroyo Simi Schools Chapar-ral MS,Walnut Canyon ES, Flory ES, Community HS Land Use Public Right of Way/Commercial Old Town/Downtown Specific Plan Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual;Archaeologic-Historic; Biological Resources; Cumulative Effects Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 3; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Public Utilities Commission; Office of Historic Preservation; Department of Health Services; Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Department of Water Resources; Department of Conservation; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 7 Date Received 01/08/2007 StartofReview 01/08/2007 End of Review 02/21/2007 000:162 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS February 8, 2007 Letter from Nazir Lalani, Deputy Director of the County of Ventura Public Works Agency Transportation Department— Traffic, Advance Planning & Permits Division 1. The City concurs with the comment that the project would have no cumulative impact on County Roads, as routine tree maintenance involving the use of tree pruning trucks would be limited to one or two times per year for approximately three days each time. It should be noted that routine maintenance has been performed on the trees for many years and is part of the baseline conditions. Implementation of the maintenance plan would merely provide a framework to provide appropriate care to the trees for the long-term preservation of the grove; traffic increases are not expected as a result of implementation of the plan. 2. As noted above, implementation of the maintenance plan is not expected to increase tree maintenance truck traffic above existing levels, since routine maintenance is part of the baseline conditions. Pruned materials are currently chipped on site and distributed within the City limits. This would continue under implementation of the maintenance plan. Therefore, mitigation to restrict maintenance-related trips from using State Route 118 in the Somis area during morning and afternoon peak traffic periods is not needed. February 22, 2007 Letter from Terry Roberts, Director, State Clearinghouse This letter indicates that no state agencies submitted comments to the State Clearinghouse by February 21, 2007. No response is needed. 000163 11 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKING FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING THE CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) mandates that a lead agency, prior to approving a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared, certify that 1) the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; 2) the Final EIR has been presented to the decision-making body of the lead agency and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR; and 3) the Final EIR reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act also requires that the lead agency make written findings for each of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Moorpark is the decision-making body of the lead agency under CEQA for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan project, attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study for this project, completed by the City on May 1, 2006, indicated the need to prepare an EIR, and a Notice of Preparation of an EIR was distributed; and WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared for this project and was circulated for written comments from January 9, 2007 to February 23, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to accept oral comments on the Draft EIR on February 13, 2007; and WHEREAS, a draft response to the written comment received on the Draft EIR was prepared with a copy sent to the commentator on April 17, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan project (SCH No. 2006051024) consists of the Draft EIR, comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, organizations, and public CC ATTACHMENT 4 000104 Resolution No. 2007- Page 2 agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, and responses of the City of Moorpark to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and WHEREAS, public notices of preparation, completion, and responses to comments of the Draft EIR were prepared, noticed, and distributed in compliance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to approve the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. CERTIFICATION OF FINAL EIR—The City Council, as lead agency under CEQA for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan project, certifies that: a. The Final EIR for the project (SCH No. 2006051024), incorporated herein by reference and on file with the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department, has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City CEQA Procedures. b. The Final EIR was presented to the City Council of the City of Moorpark, and the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the project. C. The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Moorpark. SECTION 2. CEQA FINDINGS — a. The Findings required by Section 21081 of CEQA and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, attached as Exhibit B, are hereby adopted by the City Council. b. These Findings are based on and supported by substantial evidence in the record as required by Section 21081.5 of CEQA and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 3. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM — a. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, required by Section 21081.6 of CEQA and 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, and included in the Findings (Exhibit B), is hereby adopted by the City Council. b. The City Council hereby designates the Office of the City Clerk as the custodian of the records constituting the record of proceedings upon which its decision has been based. (300105 Resolution No. 2007- Page 3 SECTION 4. PROJECT APPROVAL — The City Council hereby approves the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A. SECTION 5. 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 2nd day of May, 2007. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A— California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan Exhibit B — CEQA Findings of Fact 000140 Resolution No. 2007- Page 4 EXHIBIT A CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN (Provided under Separate Cover for May 2, 2007 Agenda and on File with the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department. The Final Resolution will include a copy of the plan) t3l��s.t;i' Resolution No. 2007- Page 5 EXHIBIT B CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FINDINGS OF FACT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CALIFORNIA PEPPER TREES MAINTENANCE PLAN SCH No. 2006051024 City of Moorpark Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2007- May 2, 2007 000108 Resolution No. 2007- Page 6 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) A. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines), Section 15090(a), require that: "Prior to approving a project the lead agency shall certify that: (1) The final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; (2) The final EIR was presented to the decisionmaking body of the lead agency and that the decisionmaking body reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to approving the project; and (3) The final EIR reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis." B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS Draft Environmental Impact Report — Due to potential environmental impacts identified in an Initial Study prepared for the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan (Project), the City of Moorpark prepared a Draft EIR for this project. The Draft EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2006051024, identified certain potentially significant effects that could occur as a result of the implementation of the proposed Project and, in response thereto, identified mitigation measures that would reduce or otherwise eliminate said significant impacts. Consistent with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the Draft EIR also identified and analyzed alternatives to the Proposed Project. The Draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment beginning on January 9, 2007 and ending on February 23, 2007. In addition, an opportunity to provide oral comments on the Draft EIR was provided at a public hearing of the Planning Commission on February 13, 2007. The City received one (1) comment letter concerning the Draft EIR during the public review period, and no speakers appeared before the Planning Commission at the public hearing. Final Environmental Impact Report — A Final EIR was prepared, consisting of the Draft EIR, a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR, and the City's responses to the comments received. The one commentator was sent a copy of the written proposed response at least fourteen (14) days prior to the May 2, 2007 City Council consideration of certification of the Final EIR. The Final EIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's environmental procedures. 0©11169 Resolution No. 2007- Page 7 C. CERTIFICATION FINDINGS The City Council, after having been presented with, reviewed, and considered the information contained in the Final EIR hereby determines that the Final EIR is complete and adequate and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Moorpark as lead agency. The City Council further finds and determines that the Final EIR provides adequate, good faith, and reasoned responses to all comments raising significant environmental issues. The City Council further finds and determines that the Final EIR is adequate and complete for purposes of adoption of the approvals of the Project accompanying these Findings and for making the Findings set forth below. 00011 o Resolution No. 2007- Page 8 FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS A. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, provides that: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur: (a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. (2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report." (b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment." CEQA Section 21081.5 provides that: "In making the findings required by paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081, the public agency shall base its findings on substantial evidence in the record." CEQA Section 21081.6 (a) provides that: "When making the findings required by paragraph 1 of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply: (1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The 000111 Resolution No. 2007- Page 9 reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a responsible agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead agency or a responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. (2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. The Findings set forth herein are the findings of the City Council adopted in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines in support of this City Council's decision to approve this project. B. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS The California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan record of proceedings is specified below. The custodian of the record is the Office of the City Clerk, City of Moorpark, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021. The Office of the City Clerk shall maintain the original City Council resolution along with all other records as listed below for the legal retention period. The contact person for the City Clerk is Deborah S. Traffenstedt, telephone (805) 517-6213, or dtraffenstedt a-ci.moorpark.ca.us. The record includes, but is not limited to, the following: (1) The Final EIR for California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan (SCH No. 2006051024), and all documents cited, incorporated by reference or relied on in the Final EIR; (2) The California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan; (3) All staff reports, technical studies, maps, letters, and other Project documents, including all attachments, related documents, and all documents cited, incorporated by reference or relied on in those materials, relating to the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan and the Final EIR; (4) Copies of any minutes and transcripts of all public meetings and hearings held by the City's Planning Commission and City Council relating to the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan and Final EIR. A Public Hearing on the Draft EIR was held by the Planning Commission on February 13, 2007. The City Council considered the Final EIR and Maintenance Plan on May 2, 2007. (5) All notices issued by the City to comply with CEQA, the state CEQA Guidelines, or any other law governing the processing and approval of the Project or the Final EIR; Resolution No. 2007- Page 10 (6) Matters of common knowledge to the City, which include, but are not limited to, the City's General Plan and all applicable municipal code provisions; (7) The decision Resolution made by the City Council, relating to the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan and Final EIR; (8) Any other written materials relevant to the City's compliance with CEQA, and its decision on the merits of the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan and Final EIR, including d )cuments that have been released for public review, and copies of reports, studies or other documents relied on in all environmental documentation F repared for the Maintenance Plan and either made available to the public during the public review period, or included in the City's files on the Maintenance Plan. Having considered the foregoing information, the City Council hereby makes findings pursuant to CEQA, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, and the CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15091 and 15092. C. SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS Summary — This section sets forth the City's findings with respect to each of the significant impacts, the facts in support of those findings, and those changes and alterations that have been made to the Project to reduce or eliminate potentially significant effects to less than significant levels. The City Council finds that with incorporation of the mitigation measures identified below and incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Thresholds of Significance — The City Council finds that the determination of the thresholds of significance is a judgment decision within the discretion of the City; the thresholds of significance used in the Final EIR are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the expert opinion of the Final EIR preparers and City staff; and the thresholds of significance used in the Final EIR provide reasonable and appropriate means of assessing the significance of the adverse environmental effects of the Project. Incorporation of Final EIR — These Findings provide a summary description of each impact, describe the applicable mitigation identified in the Final EIR, and state the City Council's findings on the significance of each impact after mitigation. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the Final EIR. These Findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in the Final EIR supporting the determinations regarding the Project's impacts and mitigation to address those impacts. In making these Findings, the City ratifies, adopts, and incorporates in these Findings, the determinations and conclusions of the Final EIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures. Resolution No. 2007- Page 11 Aesthetics Significant Impact Unless Mitigated: Impact 4.1.1 — Alteration of Visual Character or Quality of the Site and its Surroundings Through implementation of the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan, the existing character of the pepper trees will be altered through pruning and other maintenance activities. Findin Consistent with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been avoided or mitigated to a level that is less than significant by adoption of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures 4.1.1.a All pruning and maintenance applied to the California pepper trees, as described in the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, shall be done under the supervision of a certified arborist. 4.1.1 b All maintenance tasks, procedures, and triggers shall be carried out accordingly as described within the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. Significant Impact Unless Mitigated: Impact 4.1.2 —Alteration of Scenic Vistas Through implementation of the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan, scenic vistas from adjoining areas will be altered through the reduction of foliage. Findin Consistent with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment as identified in the Final EIR. 000114 Resolution No. 2007- Page 12 Facts in Support of Findin_g The significant effect has been avoided or mitigated to a level that is less than significant by adoption of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures 4.1.1.a All pruning and maintenance applied to the California pepper trees, as described in the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, shall be done under the supervision of a certified arborist. 4.1.1 b All maintenance tasks, procedures, and triggers shall be carried out accordingly as described within the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. Significant Impact Unless Mitigated: Impact 4.1.3—Alteration of Scenic Resources Through pruning and maintenance activities under the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, the project may substantially alter scenic resources in that the California pepper trees create a positive image for the community, preserve the historical significance of the community and promote community identity. Findin Consistent with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been avoided or mitigated to a level that is less than significant by adoption of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures 4.1.1.a All pruning and maintenance applied to the California pepper trees, as described in the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, shall be done under the supervision of a certified arborist. 4.1.1 b All maintenance tasks, procedures, and triggers shall be carried out accordingly as described within the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. 0001: .5 Resolution No. 2007- Page 13 Biological Resources Significant Impact Unless Mitigated: Impact 4.2.1 — Conflict with Local Policies Protecting Biological Resources The California pepper trees, while not a native biological resource, are collectively significant as an identified historical biological resource due to the grove's original planting by Robert Poindexter, a city founder, in 1901. The California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan implementation involves the removal of certain specified unhealthy trees and substantial pruning of others. Findin Consistent with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been avoided or mitigated to a level that is less than significant by adoption of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measure 4.2.1.a Subsequent to the removal of any tree within the California pepper tree stand on High Street, the City-designated contractor responsible for tree maintenance shall replace the removed specimen in kind with a California pepper tree (Schinus molle) as called for in the maintenance plan. Significant Impact Unless Mitigated: Impact 4.2.2 — Disturbance of Active Nests The project site has the potential to support both raptor and songbird nests due to the presence of the trees. Maintenance activities may result in the disturbance of nesting birds, a violation of the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Findin Consistent with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment as identified in the Final EIR. 000:116 Resolution No. 2007- Page 14 Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been avoided or mitigated to a level that is less than significant by adoption of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measure 4.2.2.a Protective measures shall be required to ensure compliance with the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800. Prior to tree maintenance activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting survey consisting of two (2) surveys conducted on separate days, within 72 hours immediately preceding tree maintenance activities, e.g., trimming branches or tree removal. 4.2.2.b If pre-maintenance nesting surveys result in the location of active nests, no tree maintenance procedures shall take place in the tree with the active nest until such time the young have fledged and become independent of the nest. A qualified biologist shall determine if a buffer area should be established around the tree with the active nest. Cultural Resources Significant Impact Unless Mitigated: Impact 4.3.1 — Alteration of Locally Recognized Historical Resource The stand of California pepper trees on High Street have been recognized as a Historic Landmark by the County of Ventura prior to Moorpark's incorporation. Through implementation of the California Pepper Tree Maintenance Plan, the pepper trees will be pruned and some will be removed. Findin Consistent with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been avoided or mitigated to a level that is less than significant by adoption of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measure 4.3.1.a Subsequent to the removal of any tree within the California pepper tree stand on High Street, the City-designated contractor responsible for 0 x:.1'; Resolution No. 2007- Page 15 tree maintenance shall replace the removed specimen in kind with a California pepper tree (Schinus molle) as called for in the maintenance plan. D. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The City Council adopts the Mitigation Measures identified in these Findings as comprehensively set forth in the following Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to reduce or avoid the significant impacts of the Project. Mitigation Measure 4.1.1.a All pruning and maintenance applied to the California pepper trees, as described in the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan, shall be done under the supervision of a certified arborist. Monitoring/Reporting 1. Incorporation of measure into specifications for Method maintenance contract 2. Field observation of maintenance Responsibility Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Timing 1. Prior to approval of maintenance contract 2. During maintenance activities Mitigation Measure 4.1.1.b All maintenance tasks, procedures, and triggers shall be carried out accordingly as described within the California Pepper Trees Maintenance Plan. Monitoring/Reporting 1. Incorporation of measure into specifications for Method maintenance contract 2. Field observation of maintenance Responsibility Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Timing 1. Prior to approval of maintenance contract 2. During maintenance activities Resolution No. 2007- Page 16 Mitigation Measures 4.2.1.a and 4.3.1.a Subsequent to the removal of any tree within the California pepper tree stand on High Street, the City-designated contractor responsible for tree maintenance shall replace the removed specimen in kind with a California pepper tree (Schinus molle) as called for in the maintenance plan. Monitoring/Reporting 1. Incorporation of measure into specifications for Method maintenance contract 2. Field observation to verify replacement tree planted Responsibility Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Timing 1. Prior to approval of maintenance contract 2. 60 days after tree removal Mitigation Measure 4.2.2.a Protective measures shall be required to ensure compliance with the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800. Prior to tree maintenance activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting survey consisting of two (2) surveys conducted on separate days, within 72 hours immediately preceding tree maintenance activities, e.g., trimming branches or tree removal. Monitoring/Reporting 1. Incorporation of measure into specifications for Method maintenance contract 2. Review of Biologist's survey report 3. Field observation of maintenance Responsibility Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Timing 1. Prior to approval of maintenance contract 2. Prior to initiation of maintenance activities 3. During maintenance activities 0001-16.19 Resolution No. 2007- Page 17 Mitigation Measure 4.2.2.b If pre-maintenance nesting surveys result in the location of active nests, no tree maintenance procedures shall take place in the tree with the active nest until such time the young have fledged and become independent of the nest. A qualified biologist shall determine if a buffer area should be established around the tree with the active nest. Monitoring/Reporting 1. Incorporation of measure into specifications for Method maintenance contract 2. Review of Biologist's survey report 3. Field observation of maintenance Responsibility Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Timing 1. Prior to approval of maintenance contract 2. Prior to initiation of maintenance activities 3. During maintenance activities - END - 000120