Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2007 0606 CC REG ITEM 09D rrEM 1•� . SCI-Y OF MOORPARK,CAUFORW-- City Council Meeting of L-�-A001 ACTION:_QQa v=-sG.C�7�,.�,.y.a., t✓_����_ MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL BY- ' AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director Prepared By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager V� DATE: May 30, 2007 (CC Meeting of 6/6/2007) SUBJECT: Consider the Second Supplement to the Moorpark College Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report BACKGROUND On May 9, 2007, the Ventura County Community College District released a second supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Moorpark College Campus Master Plan. An electronic copy of this second supplement was forwarded to Councilmembers on May 11, 2007. Comments on this second supplement are due on June 8, 2007. DISCUSSION The Draft EIR on the Campus Master Plan was originally released for public review from June 24, 2005 to August 8, 2005. This Draft EIR relied on the traffic mitigation proposed by North Park Village for the Collins/Campus Park/SR-118 interchange and intersection and found no additional traffic mitigation needed. The City submitted comments that North Park was only proposed and not approved, and that the City did not have plans or funding committed to the traffic improvements without the North Park project. On November 16, 2005, in response to the City's comments, the College District recirculated a first supplement to the Draft EIR which identified the traffic impacts of the future growth of Moorpark College as significant, that traffic improvements identified for the Collins/Campus Park/SR-118 interchange, and intersections would mitigate traffic impacts from future growth at Moorpark College, but the mitigation would not be implemented because it was 1) under another agency's jurisdiction (Caltrans), 2) speculative that Caltrans would construct the improvements even if the College District provided funds, and 3) infeasible due to insufficient funding. The City commented once again, this time indicating that the supplement did not provide evidence why the mitigation was infeasible. On March 14, 2006, the College District certified the EIR with the first supplement. The City filed a legal challenge to this S:\Community DevelopmenAAGENCIESWIOORPARK COLLEGE\070606 cc report.doc 0 , ra y Honorable City Council June 6, 2007 Page 2 EIR certification as the findings were not substantiated by the evidence in the record. In response, on October 10, 2006, the College District de-certified the EIR and set aside the approval of the master plan. The second supplement focuses on traffic impacts, and includes a new Chapter 4.6 (Transportation/Circulation). New enrollment projections are provided based on current trends that show Moorpark College having 18,500 students by 2025, rather than 19,000 students by 2015. According to the Second Supplement, the resulting impact of the Master Plan traffic is a cumulatively significant impact to the Collins Drive/Campus Park Drive intersection, as well as the unsignalized Collins Drive/SR-118 EB ramps intersection under the 2025 buildout scenario. The EIR indicates that these impacts can be mitigated through restriping the Collins Drive/Campus Park Drive intersection (which will be completed anyway as part of the Campus Plaza shopping center) and signalizing the Collins Drive/SR-118 EB ramps intersection. However, as before, the EIR concludes that the signalization mitigation is infeasible as potential funding sources are not available for off-site road improvements. As support for this conclusion, the second supplement identifies several funding sources and discusses why each source could not be used for the signalization. Traffic mitigation should be provided as an integral part of the expansion of the Moorpark College to accommodate student growth, regardless of where it needs to be provided. The Draft EIR second supplement, while indicating that 37% of the Collins Drive/SR-118 EB ramps intersection traffic is related to the Master Plan implementation, dismisses signalization as infeasible primarily because it is not immediately adjacent to the college. Staff is finalizing a letter to express the position to the Ventura County Community College District that the Master Plan should not be implemented without this mitigation, along with technical comments on the second supplement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to send comment letter to the Ventura County Community College District. Attachment: Draft EIR Second Supplement (transmitted under separate cover)