HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES CC 2017 3647 2017 1206 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-3647
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2015-02
FOR A CHANGE OF LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM
GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) TO VERY HIGH
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY (VH), ON APPROXIMATELY 8.3
ACRES AT 4875 SPRING ROAD AND 384 LOS ANGELES
AVENUE, ON THE APPLICATION OF SPRING ROAD LLC
(MIKE ASHLEY, DON DUNCAN)
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2015, applications for General Plan Amendment
No. 2015-02, Zone Change No. 2015-03, Residential Planned Development Permit No.
2015-02, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5972, and Development Agreement No.
2015-01 were filed by Spring Road LLC (Mike Ashley, Don Duncan) for a proposed
development of 95 townhouse condominiums and a recreation facility on approximately
8.3 acres at 4875 Spring Road and 384 Los Angeles Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2017, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. PC-2017-624, recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2015-02, to amend
the General Plan land-use designation from General Commercial (C-2) to Very High
Residential Density (VH), on approximately 8.3 acres at 4875 Spring Road and 384 Los
Angeles Avenue, on the application of Spring Road LLC (Mike Ashley, Don Duncan);
and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on December 6, 2017, the City
Council considered the agenda report for General Plan Amendment No. 2015-02 and
any supplements thereto and written public comments; opened the public hearing and
took and considered public testimony both for and against the proposal and reached a
decision on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with
any comments received during the public review process and determined that, with the
incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially
significant impacts with respect to biology, hydrology, and noise issues, there is no
substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect
on the environment and a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared
for this project.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: The City Council finds and declares
as follows:
A. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared for the
project are complete and have been prepared in compliance with CEQA, and City
CEQA Procedures.
B. The Mitigation Measures have been incorporated into the project
conditions of the accompanying Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Residential Planned
Development.
C. With the incorporation of the Mitigation Measures into the project
conditions, the City Council finds on the basis of the whole record before it that there is
no substantial evidence that the proposed development of 95 townhouse condominiums
and a recreation facility on approximately 8.3 acres at 4875 Spring Road and 384 Los
Angeles Avenue, which includes General Plan Amendment No. 2015-02; Zone Change
No. 2015-03; Residential Planned Development No. 2015-02, Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 5972; and Development Agreement No. 2015-01, will have a significant effect
on the environment.
D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of
the City Council.
SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The Mitigated Negative
Declaration prepared for the proposed development of 95 townhouse condominiums
and a recreation facility on approximately 8.3 acres at 4875 Spring Road and 384 Los
Angeles Avenue, which includes General Plan Amendment No. 2015-02; Zone Change
No. 2015-03; Residential Planned Development No. 2015-02, Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 5972; and Development Agreement No. 2015-01, along with the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, all attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein,
is hereby adopted.
SECTION 3. APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: General Plan
Amendment 2015-02 is approved, amending the General Plan Land Use Map as
proposed in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION 4. The effective date of General Plan Amendment No. 2015-02 shall
be concurrent with the effective date of the Ordinance for Zone Change No. 2015-03
and the Ordinance for Development Agreement No. 2015-01, whichever occurs last.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 3
SECTION 5. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: 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.
SECTION 6. 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 6th day of December, 2017.
Janice S. Parvin, Mayor
,l'111 :•*
ATTEST: ;y��� 0 /I'.:<
/4111 .
Maureen Benson, City Clerk V �'"�
•
rep
Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program
Exhibit B: General Plan Amendment Map
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 4
EXHIBIT A
• CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY
0A r 799 MOORPARK AVENUE
YES MOORPARK, CA 93021
(805) 517-6200
Project Title: Spring Road LLC Case No.: RPD 2015-02, GPA 2015-02,
ZC 2015-03, VTTM 5972,
DA 2015-01
Contact Person and Phone No.: Mike Ashley(818) 888-1257 mike@ashleyconstructioninc.com
Name of Applicant: Spring Road LLC (Mike Ashley, Don Duncan)
Address and Phone No.: 5300 Whitman Road
Hidden Hills, CA 91302
Project Location: 4875 Spring Road and 343 Los Angeles Avenue
General Plan General Commercial (C-2) Zoning: Commercial Planned
Designation: Development(CPD)
Project Description: A request to develop ninety-five (95) townhouse condominium dwellings and a
recreation facility on 8.25 acres, located, south of Los Angeles Avenue (Hwy
118) and west of Spring Road. The application consists of a Residential Planned
Development (RPD), a tentative tract map to subdivide five parcels into one lot
for condominium purposes, a General Plan Amendment (from General
Commercial to Residential Very High Density and Floodway) and a Zone Change
(CPD to Residential Planned Development[RPD] and Open Space [OS]).
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
North: Shopping Center, Los Angeles Avenue,Single Family Residential
South: Arroyo Simi,Single Family Residential
East: Spring Road,Shopping Center
West: High Density Residential
Responsible and Trustee Agencies: Ventura County, California Dept. of Trans.
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.
Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry Resources Air Quality
X Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials X Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources X Noise
Population/Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 5
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that although the proposed project could
have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this
case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project
proponent. Mitigation measures described on the attached Exhibit 1 have been added
to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Prepared by: Joseph Fiss, Planning Manager
Date: October 2, 2017
Reviewed by: David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director
Date: October 2, 2017
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 6
INITIAL STUDY EXHIBIT 1:
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATION MEASURES AND
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
1. NOISE. A sound wall, at least eight(8) feet in height, shall be constructed along the Los Angeles
Avenue and Spring Road Frontages, and adjacent to the commercially zoned property.
Units in the first rows of homes by Los Angeles Avenue on both sides of the proposed driveway will
require upgraded windows, as follows:
a. For all first row units, first floor windows will require STC rating greater than or
equal to 26.
b. For all other first row units facing Los Angeles Avynue, second floor windows will
require STC rating greater than or equal to 32.
c. For all 3-story second row units facing Los Angeles, third floor windows will require
STC rating greater than or equal to 32.
d. For all 3-story third row units facing Los Angeles, third floor windows will require
STC rating greater than or equal to 30.
The mechanical ventilation system shall be capable of providing two (2) air changes per hour in habitable
rooms with a minimum of 15 cubic feet per minute of outside air, per occupant. The fresh air inlet duct
shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of a minimum of ten (10) feet of straight or
curved duct or six (6) feet plus one (1) sharp 90 degree bend. Attic vents facing adjacent roadways, if
app|ioob|e, should include an acoustical bofUe, or the attic floor (including the access panel) should be
fully insulated to prevent vehicle noise intrusion.
Monitoring Plan Check and Physical Inspection
Action:
Timing: Prior to issuance of Building Permit and Prior to Occupancy of Units
Responsibility: Community Development Department
2. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. The applicant shall replace the 40 trees on the site in an amount
equal to the appraised value (including the economic value of on-site wildlife and wildlife use of the
trees) of the removed trees, and with native trees, as identified in the Tree Report dated December
2016. Landscaping shall include a riparian buffer with plantings consisting of like-kind plant
assemblages, listed in the Tree Report. Should there not be sufficient space to replace the
required trees, or sh |d appropriate trees not be ovai|ahka, the applicant shall pay to the City of
Moorpark's tree replacement fund an amount equal to the difference between the appraised
amount and the value of the trees planted on site. Any funds collected from this project shall be
used within areas preserved as wildland open space or for enhancement of a mitigation parcel.
Monitoring Community Development Director to review pre-construction landscape and
Action: irrigation plan.
Tim' Alandscape and irrigation plan nlustbesubmi�edand approved phorto
- issuance of a Zoning Clearance for grading.
Responsibility: Applicant and Community Development Department.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 7
At least 30 days prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for tree removal, nesting bird surveys shall be
conducted as described in the nesting birds survey protocols and guidelines located at
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols. An ornithologist familiar with local avian
species shall conduct the surveys. The survey shall include adequate protection measures to prevent
impacts to nesting birds during construction. Nesting birds have the potential to be impacted directly, or
indirectly, by construction noise, dust, or vibration. These measures shall be incorporated into the project.
Monitoring Community Development Director to review pre-construction nesting bird
Action: survey.
Timing: At least thirty days prior to issuance of zoning clearance for tree removal.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
If the project requires any activity which will substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow, or change the
bed, channel, or bank (which may include associated riparian resources) of a river or stream or use
material from a streambed, the Project applicant shall provide written notification to CDFW pursuant to
Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code prior to undertaking such activity. The applicant shall obtain
any permit as required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Monitoring Community Development Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director to
Action: review grading and construction plans
Timing: At least thirty days prior to issuance of zoning clearance for grading permit
Responsibility: Community Development Department and Public Works Department
3. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
The project shall comply with Chapter 15.24 (Floodplain Management) of the Moorpark Municipal Code.
The applicant shall make necessary improvements to the site and/or the Arroyo Simi channel so that the
site will no longer be a flood hazard. Drainage and flood control devices shall be provided in compliance
with City and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. The applicant
shall apply for and receive a CLOMR (Conditional Letter of Map Revision)from FEMA prior to any grading
activity in the 100'year floodplain. The applicant shall comply with all of the requirements of the CLOMR.
In accordance with District Ordinance WP-2, it is the Ventura County Watershed Protection District's
standard that a Project can not impair, divert, impede or alter the characteristics of the flow of water
running in any jurisdictional redline channel or facility. To the extent that development,impacts District
channels and facilities, compliance with District criteria is required. In such cases engineering studies
should verify compliance with District hydrology data and flood studies. In addressing peak attenuation,
stormwater runoff after development must be mitigated so as not to exceed the peak flow under existing
conditions for any frequency of storm event(10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year).
The Project Proponent is required to submit to the Ventura County Watershed Protection District for its
review and approval a drainage report documenting how the Project complies with District requirements
for mitigation for both the Arroyo Simi. The drainage report documenting how mitigation will be provided
shall follow the VCWPD GUIDE FOR HYDROLOGiC AND HYDRAULIC STUDY REPORTS. The
District's methods for calculating the design hydrology for the Project are contained in the 2010 Design
Hydrology Manual.
Monitoring Inspect drainage and flood control improvements to the Arroyo Simi and/or the
Action: site as recommended by the hydrology study and for compliance with NPDES.
Timing: During grading and prior to dwelling construction.
Responsibility: Public Works Department, Community Development Department, Federal
Emergency Management Agency
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 8
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.
ml. ,
':47 • 7c f *ate
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 9
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
A. AESTHETICS—Would the project:
1)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but x
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
3) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or x
quality of the site and its surroundings?
4)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which x
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Response: The Site is not located within an identified scenic corridor and there are no scenic resources
on site. Normal street lighting and residential light sources will not have a significant impact
on vistas and will be evaluated and be consistent with the City's lighting ordinance.
If approved, the buildings will be three stories, with an overall height of approximately 37 feet.
Third story windows will extend to a height of approximately 29 feet. The applicant is
proposing to align the buildings on the west side with an east-west driveway alignment, the
same as the adjacent Ivy Lane homes. This creates a situation where the 3 story homes are
immediately adjacent to 2 story homes of approximately 28 feet in height. This has the
potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings.
Architecture, window sizes and locations, and landscaping will be evaluated for consistency
with City standards. Units adjacent to existing residential property have been designed to
have clerestory windows at least six feet above the finished floor level on the elevations
adjacent to existing residential property.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), General Plan Land Use Element(1992).
Mitigation: None required.
B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation
and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
1)Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,or Farmland x
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 agricultural use, or a X
Williamson Act contract?
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
3) Involve other changes in the existing environment X
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use?
Response: This is an infill project, is in an urban setting and does not affect agricultural resources.
Historically, this site was used for commercial and storage purposes. The Ventura County
Important Farmland Map classifies the site as"Urban and Built-Up land.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), California Dep't of Conservation: Ventura County
Important Farmland Map(2000)
Mitigation: None required.
C. AIR QUALITY — Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
1)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X
air quality plan?
2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of X
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 pollutant X
concentrations?
5)Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X
of people? —
Response: The project is estimated to result in approximately 6.15 tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) per
year and 4.93 tons of Reactive Organic Gases in its first year, mostly from vehicle trip
emissions. The level for NOx exceeds suggested thresholds of the Ventura County Air
Pollution Control District of 25 lbs. per day. A Standard Condition of Approval has been
added as part of the project for the developer to pay a contribution to the City's Air Quality
fund, reducing this impact to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation is needed.
The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District provided comments and recommendations
to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project's significant, or
potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on air quality(attached).
Sources: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Ventura County Air Quality Assessment
Guidelines(2003).
Mitigation: None Required.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 11
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or x
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 Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
2)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat x
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
3) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected x
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 any native x
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 ordinances protecting x
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat x
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Response: Due to the highly disturbed urban setting of the site, there are minimal adverse effects to
biological resources. This project does propose the removal of mature trees, both native and
non-native from the site, requiring mitigation in accordance with the Chapter 12.12 of the
Moorpark Municipal Code.
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife provided comments and recommendations to
assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project's significant, or
potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources
(attached). Mitigation Measures have been amended to incorporate these recommendations.
Sources: Horticultural Tree Report/Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), California Department
of Fish and Game: Natural Diversity Data Base-Moorpark and Simi Valley Quad Sheets
(1993).
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 12
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Mitigation: The applicant shall replace the 40 trees on the site in an amount equal to the appraised
value (including the economic value of on-site wildlife and wildlife use of the trees) of the
removed trees, and with native trees, as identified in the Tree Report dated December 2015.
Landscaping shall incorporate an onsite riparian buffer with plantings consisting of like-kind
plant assemblages, listed in the Tree Report The buffer shall be within the common area
landscaping adjacent to Parcel X. Should there not be sufficient space to replace the
required trees, or should appropriate trees not be avai|ab|e, the applicant shall pay to the City
of Moorpark's tree replacement fund an amount equal to the difference between the
appraised amount and the value of the trees planted on site. Any funds collected from this
project shall be used within areas preserved as wildland open space or for enhancement of a
mitigation parcel.
At least 30 days prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for tree nemVva|, nesting bird
surveys shall be conducted as described in the nesting birds survey protocols and guidelines
located at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols. An ornithologist
familiar with local avian species shall conduct the surveys. The survey shall include adequate
protection measures to prevent impacts to nesting birds during construction. Nesting birds
have the potential to be impacted directly, or |ndinoot|y, by construction no|se, dust, or
vibration. These measures shall be incorporated into the pject.
If the pjactnyquineaonymotivdvwhichxi|| eubotanUa||ydivertorobstnuntUlensduna|floxvor
change the bed, nhanno|, or bank (which may include associated riparian resources) of a
river or stream or use material from a streambed, the Project applicant shall pnov|dexvhtton
notification to CDFW pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code prior to
undertaking such activity. The applicant shall obtain any permit as required by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the pject:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance X
of a historic resource as defined in§15064.5?
2)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X
an archaeological resource pursuant to§15064.5?
3) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological �
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
4) Disturb any human remoins, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? �
Response: Due to the highly disturbed urban setting of the site, there are minimal adverse effects to
cultural resources. There are no known or expected cultural resources on the pject site.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits(11/17/15)
Mitigation: None required.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 13
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
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:
i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the X
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 unstable, or X
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 Table 18-1-B X
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of X
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
Response: This project will be built subject to compliance with building codes and compliance with all
project conditions of approval. All plans will be subject to the review and approval of the City
prior to issuance of building permits. The site is not located in an earthquake fault zone. The
site is, however, located in a liquefaction hazard zone; therefore, geotechnical measures will
be incorporated into the project design as required by the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map (Simi
Valley West, 1999), Seismic Hazard Zone Map (Simi Valley, 1997) General Plan Safety
Element(2001).
Mitigation: None required.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 14
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
G. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS—Would the project:
1) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or X
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Response: The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District has not yet adopted any approach to setting
a threshold of significance for land use development projects in the area of project
greenhouse gas emission. The project will generate less than significant impacts.to regional
and local air quality and the project will be subject to a conditions approval to ensure that all
project construction and operations shall be conducted in compliance with all APCD Rules
and Regulation. Furthermore, the amount of greenhouse gases anticipated from the project
will be a small fraction of the levels being considered by the APCD for greenhouse gas
significant thresholds and far below those adopted to date by any air district in the state.
Therefore, the project specific and cumulative impacts to greenhouse gases are less than
significant.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), Ventura County Air Pollution Control District:
Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines(2003).
Mitigation: None Required.
H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project:
1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
X
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
X
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
3)Emit hazardous emission or handle hazardous or acutely x
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 list of x
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 use plan or, x
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?
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 15
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
6)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would x
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
7) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an x
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
8) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, x
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Response: There are no known hazards on the project site, nor will new hazards be created as a result
of the project.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), General Plan Safety Element(2001)
Mitigation: None required.
I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project:
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge x
requirements?
2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere x
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 pattern of the site x
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 pattern of the site x
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 would exceed the x
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
6)Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? x
7) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as x
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 structures x
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 16
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, x
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
10)Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow?
Response: The site is partially within a within a FEMA identified 100-year flood hazard area. On site
grading and improvements may affect existing drainage patterns.
The Project Site is located immediately north and adjacent to the Arroyo Simi which is a
Ventura County Watershed Protection District (District)jurisdictional redline channel which is
regulated under Watershed Protection District Ordinance WP-2 enacted October 13, 2013.
The proposed development will generate a significant amount of impervious surface area as
well as drainage connections to the Arroyo Simi.
The Ventura County Watershed Protection District (Groundwater Resources and Watershed
Planning and Permits Divisions) provided comments and recommendations to assist the City
in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project's significant, or potentially significant,
direct and indirect impacts on hydrology and water quality(attached).
Sources: Grade Drainage Study/Preliminary Geologic and Geotechnical Engineering Study/Project
Application (3/14/03), Ventura County Watershed Protection District, General Plan Safety
Element(2001), Moorpark Municipal Code.
Mitigation: The project shall comply with Chapter 15.24 (Floodplain Management) of the Moorpark
Municipal Code. The applicant shall make necessary improvements to the site and/or the
Arroyo Simi channel so that the site will no longer be a flood hazard. Drainage and flood
control devices shall be provided in compliance with City and National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. The applicant shall apply for and receive a
CLOMR (Conditional Letter of Map Revision) from FEMA prior to any grading activity in the
100 year floodplain. The applicant shall comply with all of the requirements of the CLOMR.
In accordance with District Ordinance WP-2, it is the Ventura County Watershed Protection
District's standard that a Project cannot impair, divert, impede or alter the characteristics of
the flow of water running in any jurisdictional redline channel or facility. To the extent that
development impacts District channels and facilities, compliance with District criteria is
required. In such cases engineering studies should verify compliance with District hydrology
data and flood studies. In addressing peak attenuation, stormwater runoff after development
must be mitigated so as not to exceed the peak flow under existing conditions for any
frequency of storm event(10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year).
The Project Proponent is required to submit to the Ventura County Watershed Protection
District for its review and approval a drainage report documenting how the Project complies
with District requirements for mitigation for the Arroyo Simi. The drainage report documenting
how mitigation will be provided shall follow the VCWPD GUIDE FOR HYDROLOGIC AND
HYDRAULIC STUDY REPORTS. The District's methods for calculating the design hydrology
for the Project are contained in the 2010 Design Hydrology Manual.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 17
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
J. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project:
1)Physically divide an established community? X
2) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or X
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 conservation plan or X
natural community conservation plan?
Response: The Tentative Tract Map and Residential Planned Development Application were filed
concurrently with a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The applications and plans
are internally consistent and, if approved, will not conflict with any other plans. The project is
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), General Plan Land Use Element(1992)
Mitigation: None required.
K. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project:
1) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X
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-important X
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
plan,specific plan or other land use plan?
Response: There are no known mineral resources on site.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and
Recreation Element(1986)
Mitigation: None required.
L. NOISE—Would the project result in:
1) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X
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 excessive
X
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
3)A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 18
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
4) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient x
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, x
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 airstrip,would x
the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
Response: There will be a temporary increase in noise during grading and construction. Noise
generators will be required to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance and allowed hours of
construction. Future residents on site may be subject to excessive noise levels from traffic
on Los Angeles Avenue and Spring Road.
Sources: Noise Study/Project Application and exhibits(11/17/15), General Plan Noise Element(1998)
Mitigation: A sound wall, at least eight (8) feet in height on the project side, shall be constructed along
the Los Angeles Avenue and Spring Road Frontages, and adjacent to the commercially
zoned property.
Units in the first rows of homes by Los Angeles Avenue on both sides of the proposed
driveway will require upgraded windows, as follows:
A. For all first row units, first floor windows will require STC rating greater than or equal
to 26.
B. For all other first row units facing Los Angeles Avenue, second floor windows will
require STC rating greater than or equal to 32.
C. For all 3-story second row units facing Los Angeles, third floor windows will require
STC rating greater than or equal to 32.
D. For all 3-story third row units facing Los Angeles, third floor windows will require STC
rating greater than or equal to 30.
The mechanical ventilation system shall be capable of providing two (2) air changes per hour
in habitable rooms with a minimum of 15 cubic feet per minute of outside air, per occupant.
The fresh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of a
minimum of ten (10) feet of straight or curved duct or six (6) feet plus one (1) sharp 90
degree bend. Attic vents facing adjacent roadways, if applicable, should include an
acoustical baffle, or the attic floor (including the access panel) should be fully insulated to
prevent vehicle noise intrusion.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 19
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
M. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project:
1) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X
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 housing, X
necessitating the construction of replacement housing -
-
elsewhere?
3)Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? -
Response: This project will have a beneficial impact of helping to achieve housing goals in support of the
Housing Element of the General Plan. There will be no negative impacts related to
population growth or housing.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits(11/17/15)
Mitigation: None required.
N. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered govemmental 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:
Fire protection? X
Police protection? X
Schools? X
Parks?
X
Other public facilities? X
Response: While some incremental impact on public services is to be expected, the impacts are not
significant. Development fees and increased property taxes will be paid to fund required
public services.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), General Plan Safety Element (2001), General
Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element(1986)
Mitigation: None required.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 20
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
O. RECREATION
1) Would the project increase the use of existing X
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
2) Does the project include recreational facilities or require X
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Response: On site recreational facilities are proposed. Park and recreation fees will be paid.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and
Recreation Element(1986)
Mitigation: None required.
P. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC—Would the project:
1) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy X
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance
of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways
and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
2) Conflict with an applicable congestion management X
program, including, but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency
for designated roads or highways?
3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
•
4) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X
(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 programs X
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 21
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Response: The proposed project will not reduce the level of service (LOS) of intersections in the area.
Access to the site will be provided from the Los Angeles Avenue and Spring Road.
Adequate parking will be provided on site, including within garages, driveways and on public
and private streets.
The Project will pay Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fees in effect at the time to
fund core improvements to the Los Angeles Avenue corridor. The Project will pay a Citywide
Traffic Mitigation Fee of Twelve Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($12,500.00) per residential
unit, adjusted annually commencing January 1, 2019 in order to fund street improvements to
mitigate its cumulative contribution to traffic throughout Moorpark. In addition, project will be
subject to the County Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Agreement.
The County of Ventura Public Works Agency Transportation Department provided comments
and recommendations to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the
Project's significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on transportation
and traffic(attached).
The California Department of Transportation provided comments and recommendations to
assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project's significant, or
potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on transportation and traffic(attached).
Sources: Project Application and exhibits(11/17/15), General Plan Circulation Element(1992)
Mitigation: None
Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project:
1) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the x
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
2) Require or result in the construction of new water or x
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 storm water x
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the - -
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
4) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the x
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new
or expanded entitlements needed?
5) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment x
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 permitted capacity x
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 22
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
7) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and x
regulations related to solid waste?
Response: Utilities and service systems within the area are adequate to serve the project. Development
• fees will be paid to fund required utilities and service systems, or they will be provided by the
developer.
Sources: Project Application and exhibits (11/17/15), Ventura County Watershed Protection District:
Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures(2002).
Mitigation: None required.
R. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality x
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 individually x
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable"means that the incremental effect 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 which will x
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either -
directly or indirectly?
Response: This is an infill project on a substantially disturbed site within an urban setting.
Sources: See below.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 23
Earlier Environmental Documents Used in the Preparation of this Initial Study
None
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 11/17/15.
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. 2004-2224.
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, October 31, 2003.
Attachments:
Correspondence from Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
Correspondence from California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Correspondence from Ventura County Watershed Protection District—Groundwater Resources
Correspondence from Ventura County Watershed Protection District—Watershed Planning and Permits
Correspondence from County of Ventura Public Works Agency Transportation Department
Correspondence from California Department of Transportation
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 24
VENTURA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
Memorandum
TO: Joseph Fiss,Economic Development and Planning Manager,City of
Moorpark
DATE: November 2,2017
FROM: Alicia Stratton
SUBJECT: Request for Review of Mitigated Negative Declaration for Development
Agreement 2015-01,City of Moorpark(RMA Reference No. 17-022)
Air Pollution Control District staff has reviewed the subject Mitigated Negative
Declaration(MND),which is a proposal for a 95-unit condominium project on 8.25
acres.
The project location is the south side of Los Angeles Avenue,West of Spring Road and
north of Arroyo Simi in the city of Moorpark.
Page 3 of the MND addresses air quality issues. This discussion indicates that air quality
impacts from the project would be greater than the 25 lbs/day threshold of NOx and that
a standard condition of approval has been added to the project for the developer to pay a
contribution to the City's Air Quality fund,thereby reducing this impact to a less than
significant level. The discussion also indicates that the project is estimated to result in
approximately 6.15 tons of NOx per year and 4.93 tons per year of ROG. We are aware
that the City of Moorpark assesses annual air pollution impacts,not daily emissions.
Please note that Ventura County Air Pollution Control District's air thresholds for
significance of development projects is 25 pounds per day for reactive organic
compounds(ROG)and oxides of nitrogen(NOx)as described in the Ventura County Air
Quality Assessment Guidelines;according to this measurement,the project as described
would not exceed this daily threshold for these pollutants. And although the discussion
also indicates that no additional mitigation is needed,the District recommends the
following conditions be placed on the project to help minimize fugitive dust,particulate
matter and creation of ozone precursor emissions that may result from the project:
1. The area disturbed by clearing,grading,earth moving,or excavation operations
shall be minimized to prevent excessive amounts of dust;
2. Pre-grading/excavation activities shall include watering the area to be graded
or excavated before commencement of grading or excavation operations.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 25
Application of water should penetrate sufficiently to minimize fugitive dust
during grading activities;
3. Signs shall be posted onsite limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less.
4. All clearing,grading,earth moving,or excavation activities shall cease during
periods of high winds(i.e.,wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact
adjacent properties). During periods of high winds,all clearing,grading,earth
moving,and excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary to
prevent fugitive dust created by onsite activities and operations from being a
nuisance or hazard,either offsite or onsite.
5. Personnel involved in grading operations,including contractors and
subcontractors,should be advised to wear respiratory protection in accordance
with California Division of Occupational Safety and Health regulations;and,
6. Signs displaying the APCD Complaint Line Telephone number for public
complaints shall be posted in a prominent location visible to the public off the
site:(805)645-1400 during business hours and(805)654-2797 after hours.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions,please
call me at(805)645-1426 or email alicia@vcapcd.org.
1
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 26
State of California—Natural R'-'4ources Agency EC 1ND G.BROWN JR.,Governor y°"��
DEPARTMENT OF FISH A eb WILDLIFE G RLTON H.BONHAM,Director f
IIIF
South Coast Region
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego,CA 92123
(858)467-4201
www.wildlife.ca.ciov
October 31,2017
Mr.Joseph Fiss
Economic Development and Planning Manager
City of Moorpark-Community Development Department
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark,CA 93021
jfiss@moorpark.gov
Subject: General Plan Amendment No.2015-02,Zone Change No.2015-03,
Residential:Planned Development No.2015-02,Vesting.Tentative Tract
Map No.5972,and Development Agreement No.2015-01,a 95-Unit Townhouse
Condominium Project on 8.25 acres(Project)SCH:No.2017101005
Dear Mr. Fiss:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife(CORN)received a Notice of Intent to Adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration(MND)circulated by the City of Moorpark(Lead Agency).The
Lead Agency's MND is for General Plan Amendment No.2015-02,Zone Change No.2015-03,
Residential Planned Development No.2015-02,Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.5972,and
Development Agreement No.2015-01,a 95-Unit Townhouse Condominium Project on 8.25
acres(Project),pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and CEQA
Guidelines.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those
activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife.Likewise,we
appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that
CDFW,by law,may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own
regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.
CDFW ROLE
CORN is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources,and holds those resources
in trust by statute for all the people of the state. (Fish&G.Code,§§711.7,subd. (a)&1802;
Pub.Resources Code,§21070;CEQA Guidelines§15386,subd.(a)).CDFW,in its trustee
capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection,and management of fish,wildlife,
native plants,and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species
(Id.,§1802). Similarly,for purposes of CEQA,the law charges CDFW to provide as available,
biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts,focusing specifically on
projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife
resources.
CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible.Agency under CEQA, (Pub.Resources
Code,§21069;CEQA Guidelines,§15381).CDFW expects that it may need to exercise
regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code.As proposed,for example,the
Project may be subject to CDFW's lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority,(Fish&
Conserving California's Wilcllfe Since 1870
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 27
Mr.:)oseph Fiss
City of Moorpark
October 31,2017
Page 3 of 6
Specific impact:The loss of 40 trees on-site and the associated benefit that on-site trees
provide to local avian species for nesting habitat be considered a permanent impact. The Lead
Agency methodology for determining the appraised value,nor the appraised value of the 40
trees is disclosed in the MND.The Lead Agency's MND also indicates that if the Project cannot
incorporate trees equal to the appraised value,the City of Moorpark is to receive compensation
for the loss of the appraised value of the trees.
Why impact would.occur:Trees identified in a 2015 Tree Report for removal to develop the
Project as proposed.
Evidence impact would be significant The proposed Project site is currently a semi-
disturbed Open Space with several trees and shrubs,and several small and infrequently used
structures.The Lead Agency's MND states that the applicant shall remove 40 trees on the site.
If sufficient space does,not exist to mitigate theremoval of the trees the applicant shall pay to
the City of Moorpark an amount equal to the difference between the appraised amount and the
value of the trees planted on site.The transference of monies between the applicant and the
Lead Agency does not mitigate the significance of the impacts,as this would be considered
deferred mitigation,which does not avoid,minimize, or fully offset Project-related impacts.
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure#1:To minimize significant impacts:The Project site is just north of the
Arroyo Simi;a perennial stream with a large riparian area,which provides a significant habitat
resource to locally occurring aquatic and,terrestrial species.CDFW recommends trees be
replaced with native species local to the area. In addition,if sufficient space does not exists on-
site,the remaining trees should be planted acijacent to the Project,or off-site to enhance the
riparian buffer between the Project site and the Arroyo Simi.Trees could also be placed within
areas preserved as wildland Open Space,or the Lead Agency could propose acquisition and
enhancement of a mitigation parcel of sufficient size to incorporate the remaining number of
replacement trees.
Mitigation Measure#2:To minimize significant impacts: CDFW recommends the Lead
Agency include the economic value of on-site wildlife and wildlife use of the trees when
determining the appraisal values of the trees.
II.Environmental Setting and Related Impact Shortcoming
Issue#1:There does not appear to have been any nesting bird surveys conducted,or
proposed nesting bird surveys, prior to the removal of the 40 trees on the Project site.
Additionally,the'MND does not state when the removal of these trees will occur.
Specific impact:The loss of the 40 trees,if not replaced on-site,would be a permanent
significant impact to locally occurring native nesting birds.
Why impact would occur: Trees have been identified in a 2015 Tree Report for removal to
develop the Project as proposed.
Evidence impact would be significant:The Riparian area of the Arroyo Simi is a probable
location for many species of native aquatic and terrestrial species,especially nesting birds.In
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 28
Mr. Joseph Fiss
City of Moorpark
October 31,2017
Page 4 of 6
the absence of any surveys conducted by the applicant, it is unknown if locally occurring bird
species using the Arroyo Simi riparian area are also using trees on the adjacent,proposed
Project site as nesting habitat.
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure#1:To minimize significant impacts:CDFW recommends mitigation of
impacts to the 40 trees include establishing a buffer of herbaceous plants and shrubs between
the Project site and adjacent the Arroyo Simi Riparian area and Arroyo Simi Floodplain.These
plantings should consist of like-kind plant assemblages,listed in the MND 2015 Tree Report.
Establishment of the buffer would minimize edge effects and the movement of non-native weeds
and Argentine ants into the adjacent open space and riparian area of the Arroyo Simi(Holway,
Suarez,and Case,2002; Porensky,and Truman 2013;Simberloff,et al.,2013).
Mitigation Measure#2:To minimize significant impacts:CDFW recommends nesting bird
surveys be conducted as described in the nesting birds survey protocols and guidelines located
at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols.An ornithologist familiar with local
avian species should conduct the surveys. Survey findings should be disclosed to decision-
makers prior to adoption of the MND,as the results may influence the need for additional
avoidance,minimization,and mitigation measures.Additional nesting bird surveys should be
conducted prior to any ground disturbing or vegetation removal activities.
Mitigation Measure#3:To minimize significant impacts:CDFW recommends the Lead
Agency's MND include adequate protection measures to prevent impacts to nesting birds during
construction.Nesting birds have the potential to be impacted directly,or indirectly,by
construction noise,dust,or vibration.Nests missed during pre-project surveys could lead to nest
abandonment during Project implementation.
CDFW recommends avoiding the nesting bird season,which generally runs from February 1st
through September 1st(as early as January 1st for some raptors),for all Project-related
activities,to avoid take of birds or their eggs.Migratory nongame native bird species are
protected by international treaty under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA)of 1918
(Title 50,§10.13,Code of Federal Regulations). Additionally,Sections 3503,3503.5,and 3513
of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit take of all birds and their active nests including
raptors and other migratory non-game birds(as listed under the Federal MBTA).
If avoidance of the avian breeding season is not feasible,CDFW recommends the Lead Agency
develop a nesting bird's management plan,submitted to CDFW for review,prior to ground
disturbing or vegetation removal. All Project personnel,including contractors working on-site,
should be provided a copy of the nesting bird's management plan,and instructed how to avoid
nests and nest buffer areas. Reductions in the nest buffer distance may be appropriate
depending on the avian species involved,ambient levels of human activity,screening
vegetation,or possibly other factors.
Issue#2:The Arroyo Simi,a perennial stream adjacent to the Project site,has the potential to
support a wide variety of state-listed,state species of special concern,and native aquatic and
terrestrial species.Project modifications may affect the hydrology of the Arroyo Simi stream,as
well as its functions and values;consequently,it may become uninhabitable for local fish and
wildlife species.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 29
•
Mr.'Joseph Fiss
City of Moorpark
October 31,2017
Page 5 of 6
Specific impact:Without a hydrology report,it is not possible for CDFW to assess potential
impacts from runoff of impervious surfaces from the Project site that empty into the Arroyo Simi.
Why impact would occur:The Project would create 8.25 acres of newly constructed
impervious surfaces.
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure#1:To minimize significant impacts:CDFW acknowledges that the Lead
• Agency will transfer through deed title those portions north of the Project site known as the.
Arroyo Simi Floodplain,Arroyo Simi Riparian Corridor,and Arroyo Simi Stream,to a
• conservation entity to manage and preserve in perpetuity(Arroyo Simi Open Space)for wildlife
resources.CDFW reoommends that the Lead Agency require the Project applicant to provide an
endowment,sufficient to manage this area within the Arroyo Simi Open Space,for a 50-year
management period.The endowment should be used by the conservation entity for fencing(if
necessary),weed management(a weed management plan should be contracted between the
Lead Agency and conservation entity),trash removal,and miscellaneous person hours required
to properly manage this area within the Arroyo Simi Open Space for the highest habitat value
possible for aquatic and terrestrial species.
Mitigation Measure#2:To minimize significant impacts:CDFW has regulatory authority
with regard to activities occurring in streams and/or lakes that could adversely affect any fish or
wildlife resource.For any activity that will substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow,or
change the bed,channel,or bank(which may include associated riparian resources)of a river
or stream or use material from a stream bed,the Project applicant must provide written
notification to CDFW pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code.Based on this
notification and other information CDFW then determines whether a Lake and Streambed
Alteration(LSA)Agreement is required.CDR/V's issuance of an LSA Agreement is a project
subject to CEQA.To facilitate issuance of a LSA Agreerrient,if necessary,the environmental
document should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake,stream or riparian resources and
provide adequate avoidance,mitigation,monitoring and reporting commitments for issuance of
the LSA Agreement.Early consultation is recommended,since modification of the proposed
project may be required to avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources.Again,the
failure to include thisanalysis in the Project's environmental document could preclude CDFW
from relying on the Lead Agency's analysis to issue a LSA Agreement without CDFW first
conducting its own,separate Lead Agency subsequent or supplemental analysis for the Project.
Information on submitting a Notification for a LSA Agreement,the current fee schedule,and
timelines required in obtaining an Agreement and found using the following URL:
https://www.wildlife.ca.crov/Conservation/LSA.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative
declarations be incorporated into a database,which may be used to make subsequent or
supplemental environmental determinations(Pub.Resources Code,§21003,subd(e)).
Accordingly, please report any special status species and natural communities detected during
Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database(CNDDB).The CNNDB field survey
form located at the following link:http://www.dfg.ca.govibiogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/CNDDB_
FieldSurveyForm.pdf.The completed form mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 30
poteCtid Ventura County
Watershed Protection District
Groundwater Resources
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 31,2017 DUE DATE: 11-2-17
TO: Anthony Ciuffetelli,RMA/Planning IEDR Coordinator
FROM: David J.Panaro,P.G,Water Resources Specialist 14.`
or
VIA: Kimball R. Loeb,PG,CEG,CHG,Groundwater Manage !
SUBJECT: RMA Ref.#17-022,RPD No.2015-02,City of Moorpark
The Ventura County Watershed Protection District(VCWPD) Groundwater Resources Section
completed a preliminary review of a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration to
effect a General Plan Amendment (No. 2015-02), Zone Change(No. 2015-03), Residential
Planned Development (No. 2015-02), Vesting Negative Tract Map (Map No. 5972), and
Development Agreement(No.2015-01),for a proposed 95-unit townhouse condominium project
on 8:25 acres within the City of Moorpark. In accordance with the County of Ventura Initial Site
Assessment Guidelines(ISAG)we are providing the following comments:
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project will be located between Los Angeles Avenue on the north,Spring Road on
the east, and the southern edge of Arroyo Simi to the south.Single family home lots abut the
project's eastern boundary. Two current legal parcels (506-0-020-570 and 506-0-020-640 at
1.430 and 6.816 acres respectively)will be combined to make up the 8.25 gross acre project.site.
A good portion of the project is unbuildable where the County holds a permanent water course
easement (Right-of-Way 10004.023E)through which the Arroyo Simi channel presently flows.
Additional land area will likely be taken up by construction of a Stormwater Retention Basin along
the northern boundary of the County easement as a typical mitigation necessary to control site
runoff, loss of land surface permeability(groundwater recharge),and to mitigate any additional
increases to the existing design channel maximum flow volume capacity.
GROUNDWATER ISSUES
The County of Ventura does not have any records indicating the presence of water wells on the
proposed site. As identified in the Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
potential impacts and mitigations checklist,the proposed development will generate a significant
amount of impervious surface runoff, This impedes infiltration of precipitation and groundwater
recharge and can be cumulatively significant.The District recommends the finding for Section I.
Hydrology and Water Quality, Impact Item 2 be changed from "No Impact' to "Less-than-
Significant".
CC:K:1Programs\Groundwater\Project Reviews\RMA 17-022 City of Moorpark 95-Unit Townhouses
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 31
VENTURA COUNTY WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT
WATERSHED PLANNING AND PERMITS DIVISION
800 South Victoria Avenue,Ventura, California 93009
Sergio Vargas, Deputy Director—(805)650-4077
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 31,2017
TO: Anthony Ciuffetelli, RMA Planning/EDR Coordinator
FROM: Sergio Vargas, Deputy Director
SUBJECT: RMA Ref#17-022 NOP to Adopt MND, Spring Rd. LLC
TTM 5972 APN: 506002064,506002057
Zone 3
Watershed Protection District Project Number:WC2017-0070
INCOMPLETE
Pursuant to your request for comments of Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration,dated October 5,2017,this office appreciates the opportunity to review and
comment on the submitted materials and provides the following comments.
PROJECT LOCATION:
South side of Los Angeles Avenue(SR-118), west of Spring Road and north of Arroyo
Simi(4875 Spring Road and 384 Los Angeles Avenue)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A request to develop ninety-five(95)townhouse condominium dwellings and a recreation
facility on 8.25 acres, located, south of Los Angeles Avenue (Hwy118) and west of
Spring Road. The application-consists of a Residential Planned Development(RPD), a
tentative tract map to subdivide five parcels into one lot for condominium purposes, a
General Plan Amendment (from General Commercial to Residential Very High Density
and Floodway)•and a Zone Change (CPD to Residential Planned Development [RPD]
and Open Space[OS]).
APPLICATION COMPLETENESS:
INCOMPLETE-from our area of concern.
WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT COMMENTS:
Comments from Advanced Planning Section:
1. The project proposes a 48" RCP storm drain connection into the Arroyo Simi
channel and District facility approximately 400 feet west of Spring Road. Please
indicate who will be responsible for the proposed storm drain connection. The
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 32
Page 2 of 4
October 31,2017
RMA Ref#17-022 NOP to Adopt MND,Spring Rd.LLC
proposed connection will require an encroachment permit from the Watershed
Protection District in accordance with WP-2 Ordinance. The design of the
proposed storm drain connection shall comply with Ventura County Watershed
Protection Standards of Design.
2. In the submitted October 26,2015 Drainage Report for TTM 5972 at 4875 Spring
Road by Delane Engineering,the H&H calculations are mostly focused on internal
drainage issues. There is an absence of a detailed discussion of the effects of
external flood control impacts in the drainage report. Based on the information
provided in the report,there are several impacts the project has yet to adequately
address as result of the proposed fill in the floodplain and they are as follows:The
channel flood flow and velocity are being increased,the FEMA Regulatory
Floodway is being encroached on by development and the storage volume
in the floodplain is being decreased.
Per District Ordinance WP-2,Section 202,
"No person shall do or commit or cause to be done or committed any of the
following described acts without first obtaining a written permit from the
District:
"....(c)Alter the surface of land by construction, excavation, embankment
or otherwise, so as to alter the capacity of a watercourse or the
characteristics of the flow of water therein...."
The proposed development is altering the characteristics of flow in the channel by
the proposed fill in areas of existing floodplain and floodway,therefore,the project
shall include mitigation measures to address impacts to existing channel as result
of the proposed fill in accordance with WP-2 Ordinance.
For instance,after full development,the Arroyo Simi flood control system will lose
flood storage during a 1%flood event. The increased volume in the channel will
increase flow velocity, increase erosion, potentially increasing channel
maintenance costs. Please analyze and create a mitigation plan for handling
potential impacts of loss in flood storage volume,increase in velocity and erosion.
3. The study shall identify and quantify the natural flood storage being impacted by
the project. Please submit a revised drainage report and submit to District for
review and approval, including proposed mitigation measures. Please be aware
that the natural floodplain plays an important role in flood control and flood
attenuation and is an integral part of the system hydrology. Developments within
floodplains diminish the storm water storage functions of floodplains and may have
negative hydrologic impacts.The hydrologic impacts of an individual development
may be small relative to the size of the hydrologic system, but the cumulative
impacts can be significant.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 33
Page 3 of 4
October 31,2017
RMA Ref#17-022 NOP to Adopt MND,Spring Rd.LLC
4. The project shall dedicate in fee of Parcel X at recordation of the Final Map of
TTM5972 consistent with District resolution dated November 4, 1997 for right of
way reservation along the Arroyo Simi recorded February 4, 1998. Please
review proposed development limits adjacent to the Arroyo for consistency with
right of way reservation.
A. Detailed Comments
1. Page 7 of the Drainage Report does not provide substantiated basis for
asserting the proposed fill which has no impact on FEMA's Based flood
Elevation and/or adjacent properties. In addition,the project proposes to fill
within the existing FEMA regulatory Floodway which means that the Arroyo Simi
will experience an elevation rise greater than one foot transferring impacts to the
Arroyo Simi,a District jurisdictional channel as result of the proposed
development without appropriate mitigation.The project shall consider the
improvement of the Arroyo Simi as means of compensatory volume mitigation.
2. Please show in the report existing and proposed floodplains and floodways in the
site plan exhibit to better understand the impacts.
3. The Permittee shall obtain a Watercourse Permit from the Ventura County
Watershed Protection District (District) to ensure that development is compliant
with the Ventura County Watershed Protection District Ordinance WP-2. The
purpose of the permit is to mitigate potential hydraulic impacts to neighboring
properties, prevent altering the characteristics of the flow of water except as
allowed under the Watercourse'Permit within the Arroyo Simi which is a District
jurisdictional channel, and to prevent potential downstream migration of
• improperly constructed on-site structures and other improvements. The permit
application shall include the following:
a. Construction plans prepared,signed,and stamped by a California licensed
civil engineer including but not limited to,a site plan depicting general •
drainage trends,existing and proposed topography and elevations,
proposed improvements in both plan and profile, and construction details
that meet the standards of the City of Simi Valley and the Ventura County
Watershed Protection District;
b. Site specific hydrology for existing and proposed conditions that conforms
to the Ventura County Watershed Protection District's Hydrology Manual,
latest edition, and that continues to demonstrate compliance with the
District's requirement that runoff after development not exceed the runoff
under existing conditions for any frequency of event;
c. Hydraulics using a methodology and/or computer model applicable to the
proposed improvements and acceptable to the Ventura County Watershed
Protection District. Such models include HECRAS and WSPG, latest
editions. Models must incorporate all project aspects, including
landscaping and vegetative mitigation and be performed on a sufficient
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 34
Page 4 of 4
October 31,2017
RMA Ref#17-022 NOP to Adopt MND,Spring Rd.LLC
channel length to show all project impacts.The floodway of the Arroyo Simi
should be delineated on all applicable project plans to demonstrate that
capacity is available to pass the flood flow. The City of Moorpark is the
floodplain administrator and we anticipate that the City's requirements will
preclude any fill or other construction within the floodway limits and
prescribe restrictions for any loss of storage or increase in water surface
elevation for the 1-percent chance flood peak discharge within Arroyo Simi;
d. A California licensed civil engineer shall perform a sediment transport study
and a detailed scour analysis for the proposed improvements, or provide
an analysis and recommendations as to why such studies may not be
needed in this case;
e. Provide a detailed geotechnical study demonstrating adequate support for
the proposed improvements•prepared by a California licensed geotechnical
(soils engineering)consultant;
f. Provide structural calculations and details prepared, signed, and stamped
' by a California licensed structural or civil engineer as necessary to
demonstrate that the proposed improvements will be stable under the
project loading conditions expected including hydraulic impactloading;
END OF TEXT
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 35
County of Ventura
.a PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
u TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
t Traffic,Advance Planning&Permits Division
@` ®)� MEMORANDUM
DATE: 10/31/2017
TO: RMA Planning Division
Attention:Anthony Ciuffetelli
FROM: Anitha Balan,Engineering Manager II
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DOCUMENT 17-022 EIR
Project:City of Moorpark 95-Unit Condo Development
Lead Agency:City of Moorpark
Develop ninety-five(95)townhouse condominium dwellings and a
recreational facility on 8.25 acres.Located at 4875 Spring Road,Moorpark.
Pursuant to your request, the Public Works Agency - Transportation Department has
reviewed the EIR for the City of Moorpark 95-Unit Condo Development.
The proposed project consists of ninety-five (95) townhouse condominium dwellings and
recreation facility on 8.25 acres, located south of Los Angeles Avenue (Highway 118) and
west of Spring Road.
The City of Moorpark has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the following
project General Plan Amendment No. 2015-02, Zone Change No. 2015-03, Residential
Planned Development No. 2015-02, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5972 and
Development Agreement No.2015-01,a 95 unit townhouse condominium.
• We offer the following comment(s):
1. We generally concur with the comments in the MND for those areas under the
purview of the Transportation Department. No project specific impacts on County
roadways were identified in the MND.
2. The cumulative impacts of the development of this project, when considered with
the cumulative impact of all other approved (or anticipated) development
projects in the County, will be potentially significant. To address the
cumulative adverse impacts of traffic on the County of Ventura Regional Road
Network, the appropriate Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee (TIMF) should be paid to
the County when the development occurs . Based on the information provided
in the MND for the 95-unit townhouse condominium project and the reciprocal
1
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 36
agreement between the City of Moorpark and the County of Ventura, the fee due
to the County is:
$16,245=95 DU x$171.00 per DU
The above estimate is based on information provided in the Transportation/Traffic
Discussion in the MND/IS dated October 2,2017.
This project is located in Traffic District#4.
The above estimated fee may be subject to adjustment at the time of deposit, due
to provisions in the .TIMF Ordinance allowing the fee to be adjusted for inflation
based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index.
Our review is limited to the impacts this project may have on the County's Regional Road
Network.
•
2
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 37
Application of water should penetrate sufficiently to minimize fugitive dust
during grading activities;
3. Signs shall be posted onsite limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less.
4. All clearing,grading,earth moving,or excavation activities shall cease during
periods of high winds(i.e.,wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact
adjacent properties). During periods of high winds,all clearing,grading,earth
moving,and excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary to
prevent fugitive dust created by onsite activities and operations from being a
nuisance or hazard,either offsite or onsite.
5. Personnel involved in grading operations,including contractors and
subcontractors,should be advised to wear respiratory protection in accordance
with California Division of Occupational Safety and Health regulations;and,
6. Signs displaying the APCD Complaint Line Telephone number for public
complaints shall be posted in a prominent location visible to the public off the
site:(805)645-1400 during business hours and(805)654-2797 after hours.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions,please
call me at(805)645-1426 or email alicia@vcapcd.org.
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 38
$TATE OF CALIFORNIA—CALIFORNIA STATE TRA',r,-a-RTATION AGENCY EDMUND G.BROWN Jr..Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION c416'.
DISTRICT 7-OFFICE OF REGIONAL PLANNING
100 S.MAIN STREET,SUITE 100 :"!
LOS ANGELES,CA 90012
PHONE(213)897-6536 Serious Drought.
Making Conservation
FAX (213)897-1337
TTY 71] a California Way of Life.
www.dotca.gov
October 31,2017
Mr.Joseph Fiss
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark,CA 93021
RE: Spring Road LLC
SCH#2017101005
GTS#07-VEN-2017-00088ME-MND
Dear Mr.Fiss:
Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the
environmental review process for the above referenced project. The pwuposed Project would
develop 95 townhouse condo units and a recreation facility on 8.25 acres, located south of Los
Angeles Avenue(Hwy 118)and west of Spring Road.
After reviewing the Mitigated Negative Declaration,Caltrans does not expect project approval.to
result in a direct adverse impact to the existing State transportation facilities.
In the spirit of mutual cooperation,Caltrans staff is available to work with your planners and traffic
engineers for this project,if needed.If you have any questions regarding these comments,please
contact project coordinator Ms.Miya Edmonson,at(213)897-6536 and refer to GTS#VEN-2017-
00088ME
Sinc
J/
A
O, ON
IGR/cc! Acting Branch Chief
cc:Scott Morgan,State Clearinghouse
"Provide a safe,sustainable,integrated and efficient transportation system
to enhance California's economy and livability"
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 39
EXHIBIT B
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT MAP
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2015-02
1 —
Iiii
I i ifill Pi - - 1 \ ,
E. LOS ANGELES- .4,.`:'E
C--2
iJP;V;:!
. fl.. .�<s. ::
51 - ..41.......YUNriV.A.R.:,/', :'
' ..., -
` � 4.
Y
AopizoWir.,m442AWASW47,:4*
Jr li
__ :,
3 9b -
i 1 FLOOD WAYM PROJECT = RFD-16,5
_ C-2 = GENERAL COMMERCIAL
1 L = LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (IDU/AC)
M = MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4DU/AC)
ML = MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2DU/AC) ',
a _ VH = VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (1SDU/AC)
p mil SP92—i = CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
x`'`~'-•
! PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
D E LA N E FOR
RPD—6.5
ENGINEERING
2812 SAWA HDN7C6 8L/D,sum 276 sr/u: r-eno' I6RK m. krtb Mt
a MME 31'O9s64971.;-RfM.Dk1 BIKER L.Cam °.401.NNd PR617SL EYRI64 ROW '
5 IR`-,.MAMIE U1-:CC. I
Resolution No. 2017-3647
Page 40
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss.
CITY OF MOORPARK )
I, Maureen Benson, City Clerk of the City of Moorpark, California, do hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 2017-3647 was
adopted by the City Council of the City of Moorpark at a regular meeting held on the 6th
day of December, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Mikos, Pollock, Simons, Van Dam, and Mayor Parvin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of said City this 20th day of December,
2017.
Maureen Benson, City Clerk
(seal)