HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1995 0301 CC REG ITEM 11FITC i'\A / /.F.
722,. 12(12)
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF MOORPARK
TO: The Honorable City Council,
FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Wo S-
DATE: February 17, 1995 (Council. Meeting 3 -1 -95)
SUBJECT: Consider FY 1995/96 NPDES Assessment s
OVERVIEW
The Federal Clean Water Act was amended in 1987 to require the
Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish
regulations for the issuance of permits for storm water discharge.
These regulations established the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) which sets forth policies, regulations
and procedures for the issuance of storm water discharge permits.
The NPDES program applies to both private organizations and public
agencies. This report summarizes the efforts necessary for the
City to comply with the requirements of the Federal NPDES
Stormwater Discharge Permit requirements and requests that the City
Council consider the levy of an NPDES assessment (through the
Ventura County Flood Control District [VCFCD] ) to fund all or a
portion of the costs of those efforts.
This matter was considered by the Budget and Finance Committee
(Mayor Lawrason and Councilmember Montgomery) at their meeting of
February 13, 1995. Subsequent to reviewing the NPDES program
implementation requirements and the cost for same, it was the
recommendation of the Committee that the City Council set the date
of a public hearing to consider the levy of an NPDES assessment to
recover all or a portion of those costs.
BACKGROUND
A. NPDES Permit
1. In January and March of 1994 the City Council took actions to
approve the submittal (by VCFCD on behalf of the City) of the
Countywide NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit Application to
the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
( LARWQCB).
2. The LARWQCB has subsequently issued an NPDES Stormwater
Discharge Permit to VCFCD as the Permittee, and to the County
of Ventura and all of the Cities in Ventura County as Co-
Permittees.
rpt \npdes25 00125
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 2
3. This report sets forth a summary of the tasks and efforts
which the City has and will be undertaking to comply with
requirements of that permit
B. VCFCD NPDES Assessment
1. The Ventura County Flood Control District ( VCFCD) administers
a Benefit Assessment District to fund flood control and
related programs. This assessment district is used by the
VCFCD to fund the District's NPDES program.
2. Pursuant to the provisions of the Countywide NPDES
Implementation Agreement, all of the Cities in Ventura
County, except Moorpark, use this Assessment District to levy
an additional "City assessment" to fund all or a portion of
their NPDES program.
3. Each year for the past three years, the City Council has
considered a report from staff pertaining to the use of this
revenue source to fund a portion of the NPDES program. In
each instance the City Counc °J1 decided not to levy an NPDES
assessment.
4. This report lists and summarizes the anticipated cost to
undertake and complete the various programs and tasks
required by the permit.
DISCUSSION
A. NPDES Program Description
Attached as Exhibit 'A' is a summary of background information
pertaining to the establishment of the federally mandated
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
B. Implementation Requirements
The chart attached as Exhibit 'B' summarizes the various tasks
and efforts to be undertaken by the City over the next few years
in order to comply with the requirements of the NPDES Stormwater
Discharge Permit. Included in that chart is an estimate of the
amount of resources anticipated to be required to complete these
tasks.
Note: Exhibit 'B' makes reference to certain other documents
related to NPDES Permit implementation which are
attached hereto and listed as follows:
Exhibit 'C': General Plan Analysis
Exhibit 'D': Legal Authority
rpt \npdes25
.00126
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 3
C. Fiscal Impact
As set forth in Exhibit 'B', City costs for NPDES compliance
efforts over the next few years is summarized as follows:
Funding Source FY 1994/95 FY 1995/96 FY 1996/97
General Fund 95,400 189,000 153,000
Gas Tax Fund 82,500 76,500 68,100
Total 177,900 265,500 221,100
1. Conservative Estimate: Admittedly, it is very difficult to
estimate the amount of staff time which will be required to
accomplish all of the tasks described in Exhibit 'B'. The
number of manhours indicated for each task is a conservative
estimate. The amount of manhours required could be less.
2. Direct and Indirect Costs: The composite hourly rate which
was applied to the estimated total number of manhours
anticipated to be necessary, includes both direct and
indirect (overhead) costs.
3. Cost Recovery: One of the tasks described in Exhibit 'B' is
the preparation and enactment of additional ordinances
designed to provide the City with the police powers required
to fully implement the requirements of the permit. It is
anticipated that many of those ordinance will include
provisions related to the payment of inspection and /or permit
fees. The full scope of those efforts, as well as the amount
of the revenues anticipated to be generated, are not yet
known. No provision for those possible future revenues have
been made in this report.
4. Resources: As discussed elsewhere in this report, City staff
is working closely with a number of Sub - Committees of the
Stormwater Quality Management Team, on the development of a
broad range of resources which will be made available to each
of the Cities (Co- Permittees). When ever possible, staff
will attempt to minimize costs by using these resources.
D. VCFCD Benefit Assessment Program
One benefit of being a Co- Permittee of the County -wide Joint
NPDES Permit is the ability to participate in the VCFCD's
Benefit Assessment Program to recover program costs. Under this
program, flood control costs are spread to benefiting properties
on the basis of the number of Benefit Assessment Units (BAU)
assigned to each property. BAUs are assigned to each property
based on a formula which includes a number of factors, the most
important of which is land use. That formula assigns ONE BA U to
a typical single family lot. Developed commercial and
industrial properties receive �, high number of BAUs.
rpt \npdes25
00 1 i 2-7.
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 4
E. City NPDES Assessment
The estimated amount of revenue to
the City of Moorpark which
would be
generated by a number
of alternative
City NPDES
assessment
amounts is summarized as
follows:
Amount of
Estimated
Amount of
Estimated
Assessment
Annual
Assessment
Annual
Per BAU
Revenue
Per BAU
Revenue
1.00
9,351
16.00
149,616
2.00
18,702
17.00
158,967
3.00
28,053
18.00
168,318
4.00
37,404
19.00
177,669
5.00
46,755
20.00
187,020
6.00
56,106
21.00
196,371
7.00
65,457
22.00
205,722
8.00
74,808
23.00
215,073
9.00
84,159
24.00
224,424
10.00
93,510
25.00
233,775
11.00
102,861
26.00
243,126
12.00
112,212
27.00
252,477
13.00
121,563
28.00
261,828
14.00
130,914
29.00
271,179
15.00
140,265
30.00
280,530
It would require a NPDES assessment of $28.00 per BAU (single -
family residential lot) to generate revenues sufficient to fully
fund the anticipated City NPDES costs for FY 1995/96 which are
summarized above and described in Exhibit 'B'.
F. VCFCD Zone 3 NPDES Assessment
In addition to any NPDES assessment which the City Council may
consider approving, the City Council is advised that it is the
intent of the Ventura County Flood Control District (VCFCD) to
levy an additional NPDES assessment upon all of the properties
within VCFCD Zone 3, including all of the properties within the
City of Moorpark. The amount assessed last year by VCFCD for
this purpose was $1.50 per BAU. Although the amount of the
VCFCD assessment for FY 1995/96 is not yet known, it is
estimated to be approximately the same as last year's
assessment.
rpt \npdes25
001.28
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 5
G. FY 1994/905 NPDES Assessments
As mentioned above, all of the other cities in Ventura County
have levied NPDES assessments in prior years. The following is
a list of the NPDES assessment Levied for FY 1994/95:
Annual Assessment ($)
Agency I_ BAUs per BAU Total
City of Camarillo (Z -2)
City of Camarillo (Z -3)
City of Simi Valley
City of T. O. (Z -3)
City of T. O. (Z -4)
City of Santa Paula
City of Fillmore
City of Ventura (Z -1)
City of Ventura (Z -2)
City of Ojai
City of Oxnard
City of Port Hueneme
County Unincorporated
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
Zone 4
City of Moorpark
By City
By VCFCD (FY 1994/95)
" " (FY 1993/94)
VCFCD
246
6.50
1,598
23,420
6.50
152,259
38,445
1.50
57,717
41,386
4.65
192,455
6,823
4.94
33,712
8,928
7.15
63,838
3,749
4.65
17,439
14,874
7.40
73,070
8,576
7.40
211,481
4,081
12.07
49,262
42,227
10.28
434,127
4,844
3.17
153,351
14,313
6.65
95,187
28,980
1.50
41,800
)2,842
1.50
34,269
6,935
3.50
22,565
9,351
0
0
9,351
1.50
14,027
9,351
1.93
18,047
Camarillo (Z -2)
246
6.80
1,671
it it (Z -3)
�3,420
4.43
103,748
Simi Valley
38,445
4.43
170,306
Thousand Oaks (Z -3)
41,386
4.43
183,345
if if (Z -4)
6,823
4.63
31,591
Santa Paula
8,928
6.80
60,708
Fillmore
:3,749
6.80
25,496
Ventura (Z -1)
9,874
7.10
70,114
Ventura (Z -2)
:38,576
6.80
194,314
Ojai
4,081
7.10
28,980
Oxnard
42,227
6.80
287,138
Port Hueneme
4,844
6.80
32,933
County Unincorporated
Zone 1
14,313
7.10
101,632
Zone 2
7,863
6.80
189,470
Zone 3
24,842
4.43
101,192
Zone 4
6,9350
4.63
29,842
Moorpark
9,351
4.43
41,425
Total 3,182,106
rpt \npdes25 00129
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 6
H. City of Moorpark Assessments
As indicated in the above list of assessments, the properties
within the City of Moorpark receive two assessments. One
assessment is levied by the VCFCD for NPDES costs they incur
within Zone 3. The other assessment is levied by the VCFCD on
behalf of the City for Co- Permittee costs. This latter
assessment includes not only any assessment requested by the
City, it also includes an amount for Co- Permittee costs incurred
by the VCFCD. The amount of the above assessments to the
properties within the City of Moorpark are restated as follows:
VCFCD NPDES assessment $4.43
City of Moorpark NPDES Assessment
Requested by City 0
by VCFCD for FY 94/95 costs $1.50
by VCFCD for FY 93/94 costs $1.93
Total $7.86
The total amount of the NPDES assessment by the VCFCD upon
properties within the City of Moorpark for FY 1995/96 is not yet
known. It is anticipated, however, that the total amount of
those assessments will be approximately $4.00 to $5.00. Any
City assessment would be added to that amount.
I. VCFCD Requirements
The following is a summary of the steps to be followed when
requesting VCFCD to levy an NPDES assessment:
1. VCFCD Public Hearing: The levy of an annual Flood Control
Assessment will be considered at a public hearing before the
Ventura County Board Supervisors (Board of Directors for the
Ventura County Flood Control District) in June.
2. City Public Hearing: In addition to the public hearing
before the VCFCD, the Implementation Agreement requires any
Co- permittee wishing to levy an NPDES assessment via the
VCFCD's Benefit Assessment District to conduct a public
hearing on the matter. Notification for said hearing may be
restricted to publishing in a local newspaper. Notice need
not be mailed to each property owner. Consistent with past
practices of the City Council on such matters, the City
Council may wish to schedule a formal public hearing on this
matter prior to taking action. Again, the notice of such a
formal public hearing need not be mailed to every resident.
rpt \npdes25 00130
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 7
3. Schedule for Setting Assessments: The following schedule
lists certain deadlines required to be met in order to
participate in the VCFCD's Benefits Assessment District.
Date
Action
March 1.
City Council sets the date of a Public
Hearing to consider a City NPDES
assessment
March 20
Public Hearing Notice (Exhibit E)
delivered to newspaper for publication
(Notice to include the amount of the
City NPDES assessment being considered).
March 23
City Public Hearing Notice publication
date.
March 30
Last date to advise the VCFCD of the
preliminary amount of the City NPDES
assessment being requested. It is the
intent of staff to advise the VCFCD of
the amount set forth in the City's
Public Heating Notice.
April 5
Public Hearing before the City Council
to consider the levy of an NPDES
assessment for FY 1995/96.
April 6
City submits request (with final amount)
for a City NPDES assessment, to the
VCFCD.
April 19
VCFCD staff report due to the Board.
April 25
VCFCD Board sets the date of their
Public Hearing to consider NPDES
assessment{:,
May 6
First publication date.
May 27
Third publication date.
June 28
Public Hearing before VCFCD Board to
consider- setting assessments for FY
1995/96
4. Final Decision: A decision to hold the required public
hearing before the City Council on April 5, 1995, does not
obligate the City to levy this assessment. In addition,
subsequent to such a hearing a decision to request the VCFCD
to levy the assessment is not final. Such a request could be
withdrawn any time before action is taken by the VCFCD Board
of Directors.
rpt \npdes25 00131
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 8
I. Budget and Finance Committee Review
As stated above, this matter was considered by the Budget and
Finance Committee at their meeting of February 13, 1995. In
light of the anticipated costs of this program, and in
particular the anticipated cost to the General Fund next year of
approximately $189,000, it was the recommendation of the
Committee that the City Council proceed with the scheduling of
a public hearing to consider the levy of an annual NPDES
assessment to fund all or a portion of these costs.
J. Preliminary Assessment Amount
As stated above, it will be necessary for the City Council to
set the preliminary amount of the City NPDES assessment for FY
1995/96. This amount will be included in the Public Hearing
Notice (Exhibit 6) and will. be forwarded to the VCFCD to be
included in their draft staff report to the Board.
K. Questions
It is anticipated that a number of questions will be raised in
efforts to understand the full scope of work necessary to
implement the requirements of the City's NPDES permit. Listed
below are answers to certain questions raised by the Budget and
Fiance Committee at their last meeting:
Question Answer:
1. Does the program cost information in No. One or more of the tasks described in Exhibit 'B'
Exhibit 'B' take into account any discusses the adoption of new ordinances which are
revenues received from fees deemed necessary in order to provide adequate authority
collected for the inspection and for the proper enforcement of permit requirements. It
permitting services to be provided? is anticipated that many of those new ordinances could
include provisions for cost recovery (permit and
inspection fees). The scope of that effort and the
anticipated revenue from those sources are not known at
this time.
2. Isn't the Illicit Discharge The County Environmental Health Department responds to
Inspection Program a duplication of problems involving hazardous material. The purpose of
services already provided by the the NPDES Illicit Discharge Program is to investigate,
County Environmental Health locate and advise property owners within a "targeted
Department? area" of sources of groundwater pollution on their
property. The initial focus of the program will be
advisory and educational efforts to assist property
owners in developing and utilizing applicable Best
Management Practices (BKP) in the performance of their
business.
rpt \npdes25 00132
NPDES Assessment
March 1995
Page 9
4uestion Answer:
3. Aren't the on -site inspections
required by the Illicit Discharge
Inspection Program a violation of
property rights?
• .i.O. JOIN UW.% ki Irol,
The area targeted for the initial Illicit Discharge
Inspections is the industrial area near Los Angeles
Avenue and Gabbert Road. Initial efforts will be
limited to voluntary participation by the property
owner. The purpose of those initial contacts will be
to assist property and business owners in efforts to
revise, where practicable, their business operation to
eliminate practices which generate water pollution
during storm events. If necessary, future NPDES
enforcement efforts could require an amendment to Title
8: Health & Safety of the Moorpark Municipal Code to
specifically cite the enforcement of NPDES regulations
as those public health matters enforceable under that
Chapter. Be advised that Section 8.04.010 of the
Municipal Code provides for the right of entry upon
private property to conduct health and safety
inspection.
Staff and the Budget and Finance Committee recommend that the City
Council take the following actions:
1. Set April 5, 1995, as the date of a public hearing to formally
consider the levy of an NPDES assessment for FY 1995/96
2. Determine the preliminary amount of the City NPDES assessment
for FY 1995/96, to be set forth in the public Hearing Notice
(Exhibit E) for said hearing.
rpt \npdes25 00133
Exhibit 'A': NPDES Background Information
Page 1
A. Establishment of the Program
1. NPDES: The Federal Clean Water Act was amended in 1987 to
require the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
establish regulations for the issuance of permits for storm
water discharge. These regulations established the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) which sets
forth policies, regulations and procedures for the issuance
of storm water discharge permits. The administration of this
Federal program has been delegated to the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board ( CRWQCB). The NPDES program
applies to both private organizations and public agencies.
2. Joint Permit: The NPDES requires every public agency in the
country to obtain a permit. The CRWQCB requires payment of
a $50,000 fee for each NPDES permit issued. In order to
reduce costs and streamline the administrative process, it is
common for agencies to coordinate their efforts and apply for
a Joint Permit.
3. Implementation Agreement: In April of 1992, the City Council
approved an Agreement between the City of Moorpark, all of
the other cities in the County, the County of Ventura and the
Ventura County Flood Control District. This Agreement set
forth policies and guidelines to be followed by all of the
co- permittees in pursuing the joint efforts required to apply
for the County -wide NPDES permit and to implement the
requirements of the Permit.
4. Ventura County Storm Water Task Force: Over the past three
years, representatives from all of the cities in Ventura
County have been meeting regularly as the Ventura County
Storm Water Task Force and working on efforts required to
prepare the County -wide Permit Application. The City of
Moorpark representative on this Task Force has been the
Director of Public Works.
5. Ventura County Flood Control District ( VCFCD): The
Implementation Agreement designated VCFCD as the Lead Agency
in coordinating the permit application process. As such,
VCFCD chaired the Task Force. VCFCD retained the services of
a consultant, Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM) , to assist in
the preparation of the permit: application.
B. City Efforts
1. Consultant: Certain element
Application must be provided b y
to meet these obligations, the
services of Hawks & Associates
information. The two elements
s of the County -wide Permit
each Co- Permittee. In order
City of Moorpark retained the
to compile and prepare certain
of work developed by Hawks &
rp! \npdes25 00134
Exhibit 'A': NPDES Background Information
Page 2
Associates to meet these obligations are a Master Drainage
Study and the development of a Storm Water Management
Program.
2. Master Drainage Study: One of the documents required to be
included in the NPDES permit application is a Storm Drain
Atlas of the entire City. This atlas is one of the elements
of the Master Drainage Study. This study also includes
information pertaining to topography, watershed basins,
hydrology, existing storm drain alignments and sizes and
projected future storm drain needs for the entire City. This
document will serve as a useful resource for both the
management of existing storm drain facilities and for the
future development of vacant properties. It is anticipated
that this document will be presented to the City Council for
approval in the Spring of 1995.
3. Storm Water Management Program: The City's consultant
developed much of the background information pertaining to
the City of Moorpark which was included in Sections 1, 2 & 3
of the permit application.
4. Implementation Efforts: Each local agency is also required
to undertake and administer a number of programs as required
by the permit.
5. Compliance Reports: One of the requirements of the program
is the submittal by each Co- Permittee of an annual compliance
report documenting each agencies progress in implementing the
requirements of the permit,
C. VCFCD Efforts
1. Storm Water Monitoring: On behalf of all of the Co-
Permittees, VCFCD has installed and is managing a number of
storm water monitoring stations a key locations throughout
the County. These stations automatically take water samples
during storm events. The samples are later analyzed to
determine the components and constituents of the storm water
runoff. The locations of the monitoring stations were
selected to provide statistics which will be considered to be
representative of quality of storm water County -wide.
2. Permit Application: The VCFCD managed the Consultant (CDM)
retained to compile data and prepare the information included
in the Permit Application.
D. Storm Water Task Force Efforts
1. Permit Application: The primary mission of the Storm Water
Task Force was to direct the efforts of the consultant (CDM)
retained by VCFCD to develop the Storm Water Permit
Application. The focus of that effort was to develop an
rpt. \npdes25 001-35
Exhibit W: NPDES Background Information
Page 3
application which adequately meets the requirements of the
NPDES program, but to do so in a manner which kept costs
under control. It is the view of staff that this end was
accomplished.
2. Management Committee: The Management Committee is comprised
of one or more individuals from each local agency and the
VCFCD. This Committee is responsible for coordinating the
various efforts required to manage the program.
3. Best Management Practices (BMP): The approved NPDES permit
recognizes that the most. cost effective way of improving
storm water quality is not through extensive analysis,
testing and treatment, but through the development and
implementation different ways of doing things. These
improved methods cover a broad spectrum of activities
including planning, construction, maintenance and operations.
These "improved ways of doing" things are generally referred
to as Best Management Practices or BMPs. The Management
Committee, through its Sub - Committees has and will continue
to develop all necessary BMPs.
4. Sub - Committees: A number of sub - Committees have been formed
to develop and implement specific program requirements in
specific areas. A list of those sub - committees, along with
a brief descriptions of duties, is as follows:
• Public Outreach: Development of Public Information
resources.
• Construction: Development of standards and requirements
for construction sites to prevent siltation and related
stormwater quality problems.
• Planning & Land Development: Review and revise General
Plans, zoning requirements, municipal ordinances and
development standards necessary to provide adequate
municipal police powers to require land development
projects to meet program objectives.
• Public Infrastructure: Development of a number of Best
Management Practices (BMP) pertaining to the maintenance
and management of streets, storm drains and public
facilities.
• Business Outreach / Illicit Discharge Program:
Development of a number of programs "targeted" toward
specific businesses (gas stations, restaurants, etc.).
Also development of the parameters of an inspection
program aimed at preventing illicit discharge of
pollutants into storm drains, etc.
rpt \npdes25 00 1,16
O
C
W
NPDES Programs Implementation
Exhibit B (1 of 5 )
Program Program Requirements Task Description
PUBLIC OUTREACH EFFORTS
Public Education
Storm Drain Inlet
Stenciling
Landscape
Maintenance
Vehicle
Maintenance
Refuse Disposal
rpt \npdes25
Improve public awareness of the problem
and the efforts to reduce same, through a
variety of educational programs,
including: display board, stencils,
door-hangers, video presentations, etc.
Stencil "DON'T DUMP -- DRAINS TO ARROYO"
on all 500+ storm drain inlets in the
City.
Implement educational programs and, if
necessary, establish additional controls
to prevent or reduce pollution caused by
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizer, etc.
Implement educational programs and, if
necessary, establish additional controls
pertaining to home vehicle maintenance
(e. g. mechanical repairs, oil /fluid
changing, washing, etc.)
Revise existing and /or develop new public
educational materials dealing with the
impacts of recycling, household hazardous
waste controls, composting, clean -up
days, etc. on preventing pollution of
water courses.
Estimated Number of Manhours per Year
FY 1994/95 FY 1995/94 FY 19%/97
Public Outreach Sub- Committee: The Public 3 15
Works Management Analyst has and will be
attending monthly meetings (on an every
other month basis) of this sub - committee to
assist in the development of public
education resources.
Display Board: Deploy Ventura Countywide
Stormwater Quality Program Display Board at
various City events
Door Hangers, Etc.: Use door hangers,
newsletter articles and other informational
materials to disseminate information to the
public.
Volunteer Project: The stenciling of the
Countywide "logo" at all stormdrain inlets
on residential streets in is being performed
by a number of Boy Scout Troops as an Eagle
Scout project for the Scout coordinating
these efforts. Overall supervision is being
provided by the Public Works Management
Analyst. The stenciling of inlets on
arterial streets will be done by Public
works personnel.
Develop a public education program.
Disseminate information to landscape
contractors and City maintenance personnel.
Develop public education programs
Initial Implementation: The City of Ventura
is taking the lead in this effort. It is
recommended that the City's Solid Waste
Management Analyst review those efforts and
apply appropriate and relevant changes to
the methods and techniques used by the City.
15 15
3 20 20 20
3 260
20 40 80
20 40 80
40 40
** 1= Code Enf; 2= Planning; 3= P. W.
NPDES Programs Implementation
Exhibit B (2 of 5)
Program Program Recadrements Task Description
COMMERCIAL / INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS
Business Outreach Develop "clean business" profiles for the
Automotive Services Industry and for
Restaurants. Training materials and
seminars will be made available to
educate these business owners regarding
products, materials, storage methods,
recycling, oil recycling, spill control,
etc. "Clean Business" awards be granted
to business which follow acceptable
practices.
Hazardous Enhance existing City programs dealing
Materials Control with hazardous waste to specifically
address storm drain and water course
pollution.
LAID DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
Estimated Nudber of Manhours per Year
FY 1994/95 FY 1995/% FT 19%/97
Automobile Service Stations: The Cities of 1 160
Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks is taking the
Lead on this effort. It is recommended that
the Solid Waste Management Analyst review
those efforts and incorporate appropriate
and relevant outreach efforts into future
City's motor oil recycling efforts and other
appropriate outreach efforts.
Restaurants: It is recommended that Code 1 120
Enforcement or the Building Inspector review
the program developed by Thousand Oaks and
adapt and apply appropriate and relevant
outreach efforts to the restaurants in
Moorpark (e.g. inspection of grease traps).
Develop new, or modify existing outreach 3 130
efforts. Provide additional training to
field personnel on how to deal with haz-mat
incidents.
Land Developer Develop informational packages and Countywide Efforts: VCFCD has and will host
outreach conduct workshops designed to educate the seminars to educate developers on the
development community regarding illegal requirements of the NPDES program.
connections and spill control.
City Efforts: it is recommended that the 2 80
Planning staff compile information prepared
by VCFCD for this purpose and incorporate
relevant and appropriate information and /or
requirements into the materials used by
Planning staff and /or disseminated to the
public.
Lard Use Review the Moorpark General Plan for the Consultant Analysis: Camp. Dresser & McKee,
purpose of determining whether or not the consultant retained by VCFCD to prepare
revisions are necessary to support any the permit application, has prepared an
Zoning and /or Development Standards analysis of the Moorpark General Plan (see
Q required by the program. Exhibit Q. No revisions are recommended.
O
W
QD
rpt \npdes25
80
80
130
40
s J
NPDEB Programs Implementation
Exhibit B (3 of 5)
Program Program Requirements Task Description
Zoning
Regulations
Development
Standards /
Conditions
Perri is /
Inspections
Review the City's Zoning Ordinances and
develop the necessary amendments and /or
additional provisions required in order
to better provide for the control of
storm water pollution (e. g. illegal
connections, material storage, fueling
area, chemical handling, waste handling,
spill prevention, etc.).
Same as above.
Review and revise permit requirements and
inspection procedures as required to
better provide for the control of storm
water pollution (e. g. illegal
connections, material storage, fueling
area, chemical handling, waste handling,
spill prevention, etc.).
CONSTRl1CTION SITE CONTROLS
Construction Site
Outreach
rpt \npdes25
Prepare a model Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be used by the
construction industry to better prevent
water pollution through improved
construction techniques (e. g.
dewatering, material storage, materials
handling / disposal, vehicle
fueling /repair, construction methods and
materials, etc.).
Sub - Committee: The Planning & Land
Development Sub - Committee is developing
model ordinances, development standards and
conditions of approval designed to reduce or
prevent stormwater pollution. It is
recommended that City planners attend future
Sub-Committee meetings, review Committee
recommendations and develop recommended
amendments.
See above.
Legal Authority: Attached as Exhibit 'D' is
an excerpt from the NPDES Permit summarizing
the status of the City's legal authority to
enforce the provisions of the permit and
making certain recommendations regarding the
adoption of new or revised regulations
relating thereto. It is recommended that
City planning and public works staff develop
a number of ordinances to implement the
recommended changes.
Sub - Committee: The Public Works Analyst has
and will continue to attend the Construction
Sub - Committee meetings. This group is
developing a standard SWPPP for each City to
use as a guide in imposing erosion control
requirements. The Committee will also be
hosting workshops for contractors on this
topic. It is recommended that the public
works staff revise the City's "boilerplate"
specifications for public works contracts to
include adequate SWPPP requirements.
Estimated Number of Nonhaurs per Year
FY 1994/95 FY 1995/% FY 1996/97
1040
1,040
1040
100
520
1040
80
O
O
rP
V
NPDEB Programs Implementation
Exhibit B (4 of 5)
Program Program Requirements
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE PROGNWS
Public Employee Evaluate and improve infrastructure
Education maintenance procedures including catch
basin and storm drain cleaning, channel /
creek maintenance, street sweeping, sewer
collection system exfiltration, illicit
discharge identification, refuse
disposal, etc. Train public employees
and contract service providers in these
improved methods. Develop improved
methods for documenting the effectiveness
of these efforts.
rpt \npdes25
Task Description
Street Sweeping Volume: Establish a program 3
Tor reporting and recording volume and /or
tonnage of debris removed from the street.
This data will be compiled and maintained by
the Public Works Management Analyst.
Street Sweeping Effectiveness: The City has
establish parking prohibitions which improve
the effectiveness of this program.
Sub-Committee: The Public Works Analyst has
and will continue to attend Sub- Committee
meetings.
Storm Drain System Maintenance: Establish,
and implement an annual program to inspect
and clean all 500+ storm drain inlets.
Inspect storm drain lines as required.
Estimated Nuaber of Nwtmx is per Year
FY 1996/95 FY 1995/% FY 19%/97
40
3
3 20
3
Landscape Maintenance: Develop and 1
implement controls over the use of
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, etc. by
City forces and City contractors used in
during landscape maintenance.
Sewer System Maintenance: Work with Ventura 3
County Waterworks District #1 as required to
assure that all NPDES regulation pertaining
to sanitary sewer collection and treatment
are being met.
Training: Provide additional training to 3
field personnel regarding confined spaces
(storm drain inlets), Corporate Yard
maintenance activities, erosion control,
clean work site practices, etc.
510
40 40
20 20
510 510
120
120
10
80
40
240
160
80
O
O
NPDES Programs Implementation
Exhibit B (5 of 5)
Program Program Reoiuirements
ILLICIT DISCHARGE PROGRAM
Site Develop and implement an Illicit
Investigations Discharge Control Program. In lieu of
performing dry weather inspections of all
of the watercourses in the City, the
City's permit identifies the industrial
park northeast of Los Angeles Avenue and
Gabbert Road as the target area for on-
site illicit discharge inspections.
ADMINISTRATION
Co=ittee Attendance of the Management Committee
Meetings and the various Sub - Committees.
Task Description
Program: A pilot program is being developed
by the Business Outreach Sub - committee with
significant input from the City of Simi
Valley. The permit requires every Co-
permittee to perform an illicit discharge
inspection of their "targeted" area this
year. It will be necessary to train public
works or Code Enforcement staff to perform
these inspections.
Sub-Committee: The Public Works Management
Analyst has and will continue to attend bi-
monthly meetings.
Attended by the Director of Public Works.
Management & General Program Administration; including staff time by the Director, Management
Reporting implementation effectiveness reporting. Analyst and Departmental Secretary.
rpt \npdes25
Total Manhours per year
Total Number of Man Years
Total Manhour Recap
1. Code Enforcement
2. Planning
3. Public Works
Composite hourly rate
(including direct costs)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
Estimated number of Manhours Per Year
FY 19941% FY 1995/94 FY 19%/97
e
1 510 510 510
3 20 20 20
3 40
40
40
3 200
100
100
2,965
4,425
3,685
1.48
2.20
1.83
550
990
950
1,040
2,160
1,600
1,375
1.275
1.135
2,965
4,425
3,685
x $60
x $60
x $60
,177 nnn nn
i4c cnn nn
»i inn no
COSTS DISTRIBUTION: Department
Funding Source
$
$
$
1.
Code Enforcement
General Fund
33,000
59,400
57,000
2.
Planning
General Fund
62.400
129,600
96.000
95,400
189,000
153,000
3.
Public Works
Gas Tax Fund
82,500
76.500
68,100
Total
177,900
265,500
221,100
FROM :MGTG
TO 80r-- S29 8270 1995.02 -08 04:38PM #241 P.06/10
C1
General Plan Worksheet
Please copy or paraphrase sections of your Ckneral Plan that address the following topics to help
determine the impact of development policies on storm water quality:
M Water quality protection (e.g., inurdelpal water quality protection policies)
PPurpose: to directly link development policies with water quality protection]
;.;OA -T, 14r Establish land uses and development intensities
which are compatible with scanic and natural
resources and which encourage environmental
preservation.
Policy 14.1: New development shall be located and designed to
minimize adverse visual and /or environmental
impacts to the community.
W -1ACwt
ZMap of land Use Plan, with density of each land use category (platu-ting horizon �)
(Purpose: future land use is needed to compute future storm water pollutant loads)
5e*— -TAWC. 3 ba7faQQ ek
Development policies (e.g., growth control practices, infill controls, cluster development)
(Purpose: controlling the rate /intensity of development controls pollutant load 'increases)
Policy 1.1: New development and redevelopment shall be orderly
with respect to location, timing, and density/
intensity; consistent with the provision of local
public services and facilities; and compatible with
the overall suburban rural community character.
Policy 5.41 clustering of residential dwelling units may be
allowed, if it can be shown that the common area
created by the clustering is designed to protect a
public interest or provide a public benefit such ao
the following: protects environmentally sensitive
habitat or agricultural land; promotes land
conservation as well as visual relief; provides a
substantial xecrsation l opportunity or an
affordable housing benefit.
Policy 6.1: Specific Plans shall be utilised as a tool for
implementation of General Plan policies and
priorities for larger land areas. The intent of
each Specific Plan is to achieve a long -term
cohesive development program which is responsive to
the physical and economic opportunities and
constraints of each individual Specific Plan area.
Policy 6.2: The ultimate land uses, r design guidelines,
development standards, infrastructure and phasing
requirements adopted for any given - Specific Plan
shall be consistent with the General Plan text
discussion (see section 5.2) of the type, location
and intensity of use determined approPriate for
each Specific Plan area.
00142
FEB 8 '95 16:39 CDM CARLSBAD PAGE.006
FROM :MGTG
TO 80� S29 8270
19SS,02 -08 04:38PM #241
P.07/10
projects to minimize land use conflicts and privacy
b I.ocational guidelines
(e.g., under what circumstances are
land uses al)owed /prohibited)
such as screen walls, landscaping and setbacks, and
[Purpose: nearby pollutants are more likely to enter receiving waters]
oona..-
2""'t7pen space policies (e.g., parks, buffer areas, greenbelts, landscaping requirements)
tPurpoge: treatment 13MPs may be integrated into open space witldn development projects)
Policy 5.3:
Landscaped and /or natural vegetation buffer areas
shall be provided around and within residential
projects to minimize land use conflicts and privacy
Policy 10.2s
_impacts.
industrial uses shall incorporate design features,
such as screen walls, landscaping and setbacks, and
include height and lighting restrictions, so as to
minimize adverse impacts on adjacent uses and
enhance the visual characteristics of the area,
policy 11.2=
When new residential development is adjacent to
agricultural uses, a 200 -foot minimum
existing
width setback shall be provided to minimize
compatibility conflicts.
policy 12.46
New residential development shall include adequate
and recreational uses
public and private open space
neighborhoods.
to serve residential
Policy 12.5s The City's currant standard of five acres Of
parkland per 1,000 persons, or such higher maximum
standard allowed by State law, shall be maintained
consistent with the City's Open Space and
Recreation Element to ensure that adequate passive/
active parkland is provided in conjunction with
future infil.l, redevelopment, and new development
projects.
Policy 17.5s New development should incorporate a variety of
landscape architecture themes and techniques to
help organize and delineate land uses and to
enhance the overall visual tpality of the City.
Policy 17.6: Enhanced landscaping shall be used around
residential, commercial and industrial buildings
and parking areas as well as along easements of
flood control channels, roadways, railroad right of
ways, and other public and private areas, to soften
the urban environment and enhance views from
roadways and surrounding uses.'
00143
FEB 8 '95 16:39 CDM CARLSBAD PAGE.007
FROM :MGTG TO 80E S29+ 8270 1995.02 -08 04:38PM #241 P.08/10
Q Preservation of natural features (e.g., hillsides, riparian corridors, wetlands) C
[Purpose: Some pollutants ill ninoff may harinlcsAy biodegrade in natural areas]
Policy 14.2: Now development shall respect, integrate with, and
complement the natural features of the land.
0 Integration with natural features (e.g., minimize cut and fill, native plant requirements)
[Purpose: minimizing hydrologic changes minimizes pollutant load increases]
Policy 145.2: Hillside development standards shall be adopted
which restrict grading on slopes greater than 20
percent and which encourage the preservation of
visual horizon lines and significant hilts ides as
prominent visual features. (Conceptual Horizon
Lines are shown on Exhibit 51 located at the back
of this document.)
LAND USE CATEGORIES
HL Rura . 'dent (1 dwelling unit per 5 -acre maximtztn)
This designation is intended to allow limited development of
residential estate lots on minimum five -acre lots or using
clustering techniques for areas characterized by significant site
constraints, (rugged topography, steep slopes$ lack of services,
limited access, etc.), or areas of important visual and natural
resources.
HU _- Rural Hich nesidential (1 dwelling unit per 1 -acre maximum)
This designation is intended for residential development in areas
containing some development constraint features such as, rugged
topography, significant natural or visual resources, limited
access, etc. Residential uses are characterised by rural large
estate lots or clustered single family homes, with significant
Permanent open space area, consistent with the constraints of the
land.
Q Water conservation policies (e.g., aquifer recharge, irrigation control, xeriscaping)
[Purpose: reducing weQdry weather runoff reduces pollutant loading]
policy 15.9: New development projects shall be required to use
xeriscaps landscaping techniques which include
drought - tolerant plant species, reduction of turf
area, irrigation designed to most plant needs, and
grouping plants according to their watering needs.
00144
FEB 8 '95 16:39 CDM CARLSBAD PAGE.008
FROM :MGTG TO
80E
S29 8270 1995,02 -08 04:39PM #241 P.09/10
c 1
Table 3
LAND USE PLAN - STATISTXGAL SUMMARY
City
Uni,noorporated
Total Planning
Land Use DesW=lo
&a
Area
6rea Combined
RL
RURAL LOW
1,668 ac
334 du - -
1,868 ac 834du
(1 du/5 acres maximum)
RH
RURAL HIGH
208 ac
208 du -- --
208 at 208 du
(1 du/acre maximum)
L
LOW DXXSITY
168 ac
168 du • --
168 ac 168 du
(1 dulaae miu imum)
ML
MEDIUM LOW DENSITY
568 ac
1,136 du -- --
568 ac 1,138du
(2 did=e ma:dmtun)
M
MEDIUM DENSITY
1,174 ac
4,896 du - -
1;174 ac 066 du
(4 du/acre nm3dinum)
Ii
IIIGH DENSI'T'Y
843 ac
2,401 du - --
848 ac A401 du
(7 du/acre maximum)
VII
VERY HIGH DENSITY
161 ae
2,416 du - -
181 ac 2,416 du
(16 dulnarc maximurn)
SP
SPECIFIC PLAN'
SP 1 LEVY
282 ae
415 du •- •-
282 se 415 du
SP 2 JUIL
488 ac
475 du •-
438 ac 475 du
Si' 9 MUSD
2504
80 du -- ..
25 ac So du
S? 10 BCIu,EVE
71 ne
154 du -- -
71 ac 154 du
SP 8 MESSENGER
4,200 at 2,400 du
4,200 ac 2,400 du
G1
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL a ac
- ,. ..
0 Re -
(.25 FAR)
C-2
GENERAL COMMERCIAL
181 Re
- -- --
184 ac .-
(.25 FAR)
GI
COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL
18 ac
- - -
13 ac •-
(.88 FAR)
I -1
LIGHT INDUSTFLiAL
268 ac
2U ac w
(.38 FAR)
I -2
MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL
285 ac
-- --
286 ac »
08 FAR)
AG1
AGMCULTt= 1
45 ac
1 du -- ..
45 ne 1 du
(I du/1040 acres)
00145
FEB 8 '95 16:39 CDM CARLSBAD PAGE.009
FROM :MOTO TO 80" S2E+ 8270 199S.02 -08 04:39PM #241 P.10/10
C' S
Land
Use Desionation
AG2
AGIUCUI.'MIM 2
197 ne - --
U du140 acres)
081
OPEN SPACE 1
16 ac .- -. -
0L du/10.40 acres)
OS2
OPEN SPACE 2
(1 du140 acres)
s
SCHOOL
P
PARK
U
Uriz ms
PUB
PUBLIC/
lNf.r1'1TU770NAT.
FRWY FREEWAY
RM
RIGHT -OF -WAY
City Unincorporated
Area Area
16 ac 1 du — -
Total Plannin6
-AMCkobined
16 ac 1 du
1,081 ac 27 du — --
1,084 ac 27 du
$67 ac - - -
357 ac
197 ne - --
197 ac
47 ne -- -- ..
47 ac
16 ac .- -. -
1$ ae
297 ac -- .. 297 ac
TOTAL DWLLLING UNM*q' 12,511 du 2,400 du 14,911 du
(At Huildout - Year 2010)
TOTAL POPULATION••• 54,290 6,576 40,856
(At Bulldout - Year 2010)
TOTAL CITY AREA ACRES (Approamate) 7,916 ac
TOTAL UNINCORPORATED AREA ACRES (Approsj=te) 4,200 ec
TOTAL PLANNING AREA COMBINED (Approximate) 12,116 ao
` Acreage for open space, schools, park$, commercial, highway right -of-wn y, and any other
appropriate land uses will be determined at tune of specific plan approval.
•• Residential DetwiLy oalculations for specific plan areas are based on the ma4mu m density.
Section 5.2 of ow Laud Use Elemoat allows the City Council to approve a density
emeeding the waXimum density, up to an Identified density limit, if public improvements,
public cervices, oud/or llnm xW contributions are provided that the City Connell
determines to be of substantial public banoiit to the conuunity. If the density limit is
approved for SP's 1, 2, 9, 10, and 8, the total dwelling units would increase from 14,911
to 16NI and the total popuktion would increase bom 40,856 to 44,687 (these density
limit estimate: were used as the basis for doLertnining Uw signifkance of impacts in the
Final EnvirorunenW Impact Report and the Findings required by S"ou 15091 of CLQA).
••r Hasod oft 2.74 persons per dwelling unit.
00146
FEB 8 '95 16:40 CDM CARLSBAD PAGE.010
O
O
1` 5
TABLE 4
ASSESSMENT OF LEGAL AUTHORITY
MOORPARK
_
Code _ 0115
Category/AahCJri on
Recommendations
No Revisions
ROblons
Recommended
Recommended
(A) Control through ordinance, permit, contract, order or
Adopt specific prohibitions on unauthorized discharges to storm
similar means, the contribution of pollutants to the
drains from industrial activities.
municipal storm sewer by storm water discharges associated
X
with industrial activity and the quality of storm water
discharged from sites of industrial activity .
(B) Prohibit through ordinance, order or similar means,
Adopt ordinances to control nuisances involving nonpoint sources
illicit discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer.
X
of pollution, flood protection/ prevention, and hillside erosion.
(C) Control through ordinance, order or similar means the
Adopt ordinances addressing the regulation of flood hazards and
discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer of spills,
hazardous substances, and the ability to order corrective actions.
dumping or disposal of materials other than storm water.
X
(D) Control through interagency agreements among
No revisions recommended.
coapplicants the contribution of pollutants from one portion
of the municipal system to another portion of the municipal
X
system.
(E) Require compliance with conditions in ordinances,
Adopt ordinances specifying the city's legal authority for
permits, contracts or orders.
X
enforcement cost recovery.
(F) Carry out all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring
Enact ordinances detailing the city's right to enter upon property to
procedures necessary to determine compliance and
inspect for violations of permits or local laws.
noncompliance with permit conditions including the
x
prohibition of illicit discharges to the municipal separate
storm sewer.
J
L
MOORPARK'S LEGAL AUTHORITY
The legal authority for this city is found primarily in the Moorpark Ordinance Code. The
following code sections describe Moorpark's legal authority to control storm. water
discharges.
(A) Controls on storm water discharges associated with industrial activity:
Ventura County Waste Water District
Rule 12 -A. Authority to promulgate rules and regulations regarding wastewater
discharges.
Rule 12 -B -2. Authority to issue industrial wastewater permits.
Rule 12 -C -3 Specific discharge limitations for industrial users.
Rule 12 -D -1 Pretreatment regulatory actions.
Rule 12 -D -2 Pretreatment facilities and operation.
Moorpark Municipal Code
Title 15. Building and Construction
Sec. 15.08.010. Adopts Uniform Building Code.
Sec. 15.08.050. Grading enforcement by City Engineer.
Sec. 15.14.050. Adopts Uniform Plumbing Code.
Chapter 16. Adopts Uniform Fire Hazard Zone Requirements (although fire services
and hazardous materials services are provided by the Ventura County Fire Protection _
District.)
Uniform Building Code
Sec. 902. Construction, height, and allowable area_
Sec. 7012. Drainage and terracing.
Sec. 7013. Erosion control.
Uniform Plumbing Code
Sec. 612. Chemical wastes; pretreatment.
RECONMMNDATIONS: Moorpark should adopt specific prohibitions on unauthorized
discharges to the ground or to storm drains from industrial activities.
(B) Prohibitions on illicit discharges:
Moorpark Municipal Code
Title 8. Health and Safetv. Chanter 8.04. Nuisances
Sec. 8.04.010. Sewage Discharges.
Sec. 8.04.070 Abatement of a Nuisance Notice.
Sec. 8.04.080 Abatement by City.
Chapter 8.08. Garbage and Fly Control
Sec. 8.08.020. Prohibitions.
Sec. 8.08.030. Storage restrictions.
00'48-
>s
Sec. 8.08.040. Unauthorized dumping.
Chaster 8.36. Solid Waste
Sec. 8.36.030. Solid waste accumulation
Sec. 8.36.110. Solid waste disposal.
Title 12, Chapter 12.04, Art. 1. Encroachments
Sec. 12.04.230. Permits required to install storm drains.
Title 15, Chapter 58. Building and Construction
Sec. 5804. Swimming Pool drainage and disposal.
Chapter 2. Subdivisions
Art. 16. Environmental impact and grading control
Uniform Plumbing Code
Sec. 304. Damage to drainage system or public sewer.
Sec. 710. Minimum requirements for auto wash rack.
Sec. 1102. Damage to public sewer or private sewage disposal system.
Ventura County Waste Water District
Rule 12 -C -1. Prohibits discharge of domestic or industrial wastewater to the ground
or to storm drains.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Moorpark's legal authority would be considerably stronger in this
area if the city would adopt ordinances dealing with flood protection/prevention, hillside
erosion.
(C) Controls on spills, dumping or disposal of materials other than storm water.
Moorpark Municipal Code
Title 8. Health and Safety
Sec. 8.04.060 Sewage discharges.
Sec. 8.08.040. Garbage disposal requirements
Chapter 8.36. Solid Waste
Sec. 8.36.110. Dumping of waste prohibited except at designated disposal sites.
Ventura County Water Works District #1 Rules and Regulations
Rule 12 -D -3. Protection from accidental discharge.
RECOMMENDATIONS: In order to demonstrate adequate legal authority, Moorpark needs
to adopt ordinances regulating flood hazards and hazardous substances. In addition,
Moorpark should adopt some type of regulatory authority to abate nuisances and order
corrective actions to be taken.
2 00 144
(D) Interagency agreements to control pollution from one .storm sewer to another:
Moorpark has the authority to enter into any interagency agreements that do not conflict with
State law. Moorpark has approved the NPDES Implementation Agree ment with VCFCD,
which seeks to implement a single NPDES permit for all discharge from municipal separate
storm sewers in urban portions of Ventura County.
(E) Requirements for compliance with local laws:
Mooroark Municipal Code
Title 1. General Provisions Cha ter 1.12. Enforcement and Penalties
Sec. 1.12.110. Arrest without a warrant for penalties in officer's presence.
Sec. 1.12.010. Violations - Misdemeanor.
Sec. 1.12.020. Aiding and abetting.
Sec. 1.12.030. Prosecution of misdemeanor or infraction.
Sec. 1.12.040. Penalty for violation.
Sec. 1.12.050. Fines - Imprisonment pending payment.
Sec. 1.12.060. Fines - Failure to pay.
Sec. 1.12.070. Nuisance - abatement.
Sec. 1.12.090. Violation of administrative provisions.
Sec. 1.12.110. Citation - Issuance.
Sec. 1.12.120. Imprisonment - place.
Title 8 Health and Safe
Sec. 8.12.010. Enforcement - Arrest authority.
Ventura Coimlty Water Works District #1 Rules and Re ulations
Rule 12 -F -2. Industrial Waste Discharge Permits.
Rule 12 -H -1. Declaration of a public nuisance.
Rule 12 -H -2. Enforcement provisions.
RECOMMENDATIONS: It is highly recommended that Moorpark adopt ordinances
specifying the city's legal authority for enforcement cost recovery.
(F) Inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures to determine compliance with
Permit conditions:
Ventura County Waste Water District
Rules and Regulations for Sewers a Dis osal
Rule 12 -13-3. Authority to inspect for rules compliance.
Rule 12 -F -1. Industrial wastewater records and monitoring.
Mooroark Municipal Code
Title 8 Health and Safet
Sec. 8.04.010. Inspection of premises.
00151)
3
Exhibit E
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of
the City of Moorpark on April 5, 1995, beginning at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers in the City Hall of said City. Located at 799 Moorpark Avenue,
California, 93021, for the purpose of considering the subject item.
Subject: Consider the Levy of an Assessment to Fund Stormwater Quality Management
Efforts Mandated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES)
Federally Mandated Program: The United States Environmental Protection Agency has
mandated that local agencies are to undertake Stormwater Management Efforts designed
to improve the quality of stormwater runoff into the rivers and streams of the nation.
It is anticipated that this will be an on -going effort, consisting of a number of
programs designed to identify and remove sources of pollution from these waterways.
THE COST TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE EFFORTS IS A REQUIREMENT
OF FEDERAL LAW.
VCFCD Assessment District: Several years ago the Ventura County Flood Control
District ( VCFCD) established a Benefit Assessment District to fund flood control
activities. Annually, VCFCD levies an assessment on the properties within certain
zones to fund these expenses. The City Council of the City of Moorpark is considering
requesting that the VCFCD include in their NPDES assessment for Fiscal Year 1995/96
an additional amount deemed necessary to fund City costs necessary to implement the
requirements of the federal NPDES program.
Amount of Assessment: The amount of the additional City NPDES assessment which the
city Council will be considering at the subject public hearing is $ per Benefit
Assessment Unit (BAU). Be advised that a single family residential dwelling unit is
assigned one (1) BAU, with other land uses assigned BAUs on a relative basis.
NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE
If you are unable to attend this meeting or have any questions regarding the public
hearing you may call (805) 529 -6864, Extension 256. You may also submit any comments
you may have regarding this matter, in writing, to the Public Works Department, at
the City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021.
Si tiene preguntas acerca de este proyecto, favor de llamar a Baldemar Troche,
Telefono 529 -6864.
Date: March 1, 1995
by:
Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works
Publish Date: March 23, 1995
Inv.# Moorpark News Mirror
00 5?