HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 0501 CC REG ITEM 10FAGENDA REPORT
CITY OF MOORPARK
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Senior Planner SST
DATE: April 24, 1996 (CC Meeting of 5 -1 -96)
ITC
SUBJECT: CONSIDER DRAFT COMMENTS ON SECOND REVISED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) FOR TRANSIT MIXED CONCRETE COMPANY AGGREGATE MINN,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) NO. 4633
BACKGROUND
The proposed Transit Mixed Concrete Project, Ventura County Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) No. 4633, is for continued operation and expansion of an existing
aggregate mining operation at a site located approximately four miles north of
the City of Moorpark, but within the City's Area of Interest. The proposed
permit area encompasses 533 acres located at the terminus of Happy Camp Road,
about 1.5 miles north of Broadway (Highway 23), as shown on the attached maps
(Attachment 1).
The Transit Mixed Concrete Project site has been mined since 1948. In 1961, the
County issued CUP -1328 for the mine. In 1975, operations at the mine were
ceased. In 1976, Blue Star Ready Mix, Inc., purchased the property and acquired
a renewal of CUP -1328 (consisting of a Major Modification of the original CUP).
In 1986, Blue Star Ready Mix, Inc., filed an application for a new permit, and
CUP -1328 expired. In 1988, the County deemed the CUP application complete, and
work on a Draft EIR was initiated. The first Draft EIR was released for public
review in 1991 and a Revised Draft EIR was released for public review in 1992.
In October 1993, the mining operations and property were acquired by Transit
Mixed Concrete (TMC) Company, which proposes to operate the mine and related
operations in accordance with the CUP application filed by Blue Star Ready Mix,
Inc., in 1986. In March 1994, a Revised Draft EIR was circulated for public
review. In October 1994, following public hearings, the County's Environmental
Report Review Committee directed that the Preliminary Final EIR be prepared and
that additional studies be conducted to address outstanding issues on traffic and
noise. These studies were completed and, at TMC's request, a Second Revised
Draft EIR is now under public review.
TMC mining operations have been permitted by the County to continue, pursuant to
a Compliance Agreement, while the County processes TMC's CUP -4633 application and
completes the associated California Environmental Quality Act environmental
review. A Compliance Agreement is an enforcement tool permitted by County Code
and is used to achieve zoning compliance. Although CUP -1328 has expired (except
for its Reclamation Plan), its provisions have, in effect, been reinstated in
accordance with the provisions of the Compliance Agreement. Under the terms of
the Compliance Agreement, TMC is permitted to conduct mining operations within
the previously approved Grading and Reclamation Plan and subject to the
Conditions of Approval for CUP -1328.
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 2
CUP -1328 encompassed 284 acres, of which 175 acres were approved for mining.
Under proposed CUP -4633, the applicant proposes to expand the previous CUP
boundary to include an estimated 533 acres, with the mining area encompassing
about 217 acres. Of the proposed mining area, 146 acres are currently
undisturbed. The new applicant is still requesting a 50 -year CUP with mining to
occur in three phases. Phase I includes approximately 65 acres, to be completed
within 5 -10 years. Phase 2 includes a 50 -acre area that would be mined within
10 -20 years. Phase 3 includes about 102 acres and would be mined over a 30 -40
year period. A new asphalt production plant and a recycling operation are also
proposed. For the recycling operation, a portable base plant would be used to
periodically crush old concrete brought to the site by returning haul trucks.
The proposed maximum annual mine production rate is 3,400,000 tons (in
comparison, the 1986 annual mine production rate was 1,210,400 tons and the 1992
rate was 954,000 tons). The production rate was reduced in 1990 and in
subsequent years due to the recession. The proposed production rate would result
in an estimated 1,718 daily trips (in comparison, the 1986 level of operations
at the project site resulted in a daily average of 810 one -way, heavy truck
trips).
The Summary Tables from the Second Revised Draft EIR are attached (Attachment 2).
The TMC Project will result in significant, unmitigable, impacts to biological
resources, visual resources, air quality, and noise. Following in the Discussion
Section are recommended comments on the current Second Revised Draft EIR that are
proposed to be included in a comment letter to the County of Ventura.
DISCUSSION
SECOND REVISED DRAFT EIR COMMENTS
Compatibility with Adjacent Land Uses
1. Page 4 -14, Section 4.1.10, COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT LAND USES,
Viewpoint No. 2: The Mine Is Not Compatible with Adjacent Land Uses - The
City concurs with Viewpoint No. 2, based on significant traffic, noise,
visual, and air quality impacts resulting from the proposed three - phase,
50 -year mining operations.
2. Page 4 -19, Section 4.1.12, GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY - The City does not
concur with the conclusion regarding no significant truck traffic, noise,
and odor impacts. See following comments.
Groundwater
3. Pages 4 -44 and 4 -45, GROUNDWATER, GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY - The goals
referenced are not from the current Moorpark General Plan Land Use
Element.
Biological Resources
4. Pages 4 -49 through 4 -77, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Discussion should be
revised to reflect more current biological resource information based on
an updated survey of the project site. The discussion on Page 4 -49
identifies that the last survey of the site was in 1991. The quality of
the on -site habitat, and the inventory of sensitive plant and animal
species potentially occurring in the Moorpark area, may have changed since
1991. For example, in 1996, four California gnatcatchers (two nesting
pairs) were sighted in Coastal sage scrub habitat within the northern area
of the City. The California gnatcatcher is a Federally threatened species
and is considered a species of special concern by the California
Department of Fish and Game. Based on the Draft EIR discussion, the City's
understanding is that the proposed mining operations would impact a total
of 80 acres of Coastal sage scrub habitat.
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 3
5. Pages 4 -68, 4 -70, 4 -76, and 4 -77 - The City concurs with the conclusions
that both the loss of Coastal sage scrub habitat and the loss of nesting
and /or breeding habit for sensitive species are significant, unmitigable
(Class 1) impacts.
6. Page 4 -74, Section 4.5.4 -1, Consistency with the General Plan of the City
of Moorpark, Natural Resources - The Goal identified is not from the City's
current General Plan and the stated conclusion is not consistent with the
identified Class 1 loss of habitat impact. Suggestion is that Land Use
Element Goal 15 and related Policies 15.1 and 15.2 and Open Space,
Conservation and Recreation (OSCAR) Element Goal 4 be addressed (see
Attachment 3).
visual Resources
7. Page 4 -82, Section 4.6.2 -1, Recommended Condition, Nighttime Lighting -
The City concurs with the nighttime lighting restrictions; however, we
disagree with automatically allowing 60 days per year of nighttime
processing. As requested in previous comment letters, the City is again
requesting that the proposed automatic 60 days of nighttime processing
should not be permitted, because such operations would be very difficult
to monitor or enforce. Suggestion is that a temporary or emergency use
permit be required for nighttime operations and that the City receive
notification upon issuance.
8. Pages 4 -80, 4 -81, and 4 -84 - The text on the referenced pages gives the
impression that there are few viewers of the existing Phase 1 and future
Phases 2 and 3 cut slopes. One example is the reference on Page 4 -80:
"The existing mine is not visible to most of Moorpark due to intervening
topography. However, there are scattered views along Tierra Rejada Road."
A more correct representation would be that the existing mine's cut slopes
are viewed from many areas in Moorpark, including the residential
neighborhoods located south of the Arroyo Simi, and from roadways such as
Spring Road and Los Angeles Avenue /New Low Angeles Avenue. Spring Road in
1994 had ADT volumes ranging from 5,000 to 8,000. Los Angeles Avenue /New
Los Angeles Avenue in 1994 had ADT volumes ranging from 21,000 to 33,000.
The ADT volumes are projected to increase in future years. Phases 2 and
3 grading would also increase the number of viewers. To conclude, the
City disagrees that Phase 1 excavation would only be visible from Happy
Camp Canyon Regional Park. City residents do view the existing cut
slopes. We concur that Phases 2 and 3 excavations would result in
significant, unmitigable visual impacts.
9. Page 4 -83, Section 4.6.4 -1, Consistency with General Plan of City of
Moorpark, Goals listed are not from the City's current Land Use Element.
Suggestion is that Land Use Element Goal 14 and Policies 14.1, 14.2, Land
Use Element Goal 16 and Policy 16.2, and OSCAR Element Goal 1 and Policy
1.1 be addressed (see Attachment 3).
Air Ouality
10. Pages 4 -101, 4 -102, and 4 -106, Odors from Asphalt Plant and Asphalt Haul
Trucks - Conclusion in Second Revised Draft EIR is that residents along
streets in Moorpark, where the asphalt delivery trucks (120 -144 weekly)
would travel, may experience asphalt odors and find them objectionable.
Next conclusion is that this impact is an insignificant adverse impact.
No evidence is given to support conclusion of insignificance. The prior
Draft EIR identified the impact as Class 1. The City concurs with the
original assessment.
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 4
(For the City Council's information, the EIR identifies that the primary
sources of odors from the project are the proposed hot -mix asphalt plant
and haul trucks that would transport the asphalt along Happy Camp Road and
streets within Moorpark. According to the EIR, emissions from the asphalt
plant will be relatively small, and unlikely to be detected off -site;
however, the EIR also states that there is no accepted methodology to
assess the potential for odors from asphalt haul trucks to be detected and
found objectionable by residents along streets where the haul trucks would
travel. The conclusion is that "Given the amount of daily asphalt truck
traffic, it is likely that certain residences may experience asphalt odors
and find them objectionable. ")
Noise
11. Page 4 -128, Recommended Conditions, Third -Party 24 -Hour Telephone Service
- The City concurs with the proposed condition requiring a third -party 24-
hour telephone service to receive and log noise, night - lighting, dust
traffic speeding trucks, unsafe truck operations, use of "fake brakes"
and /or other complaints. We are requesting that the City of Moorpark be
given notification of any complaint received from a Moorpark resident.
12. Pages 4 -131 -132, Section 4.8.5, MITIGATION MEASURES - Three noise
mitigation measures have been proposed (see Attachment 4) that the City
generally concurs with.
Traffic
13. Pages 140 -141, Section 4.9.2 -3, Proposed Project Intersection Impact
Analvsis, Tables 36 and 37 - The levels of service described in the
referenced tables for the AM and PM peak hours are no longer entirely
accurate. Updated traffic counts were completed in early 1996 for the
City's Specific Plan No. 2 Project (see Attachment 5). The attached
Existing ICU Comparison Summary has been provided, because the 1993
traffic count information used in the Second Revised Draft EIR
understates the LOS at several intersections. For example, Los Angeles
Avenue /Moorpark Avenue is shown in the EIR at LOS "A" for the AM peak and
at LOS "B" for the PM peak; however, the actual LOS is "C" for the AM peak
and LOS "D" for the PM peak.
14. Page 4 -138, Section 4.9.2, PROJECT IMPACTS, City of Moorpark - The City
Council should be aware that the following criteria are identified under
the City of Moorpark heading for identifying project- specific impacts at
the study intersections within the City of Moorpark:
At an intersection that is operating at LOS D (with project
traffic), a significant impact is attributable to the project
if the project traffic results in a V/C ratio change greater
than or equal to 0.02.
At an intersection that is operating at LOS E or LOS F (with
project traffic), a significant impact is attributable to the
project if the project traffic results in a V/C ratio change
of 0.01 or greater.
The above listed criteria have recently been used in two traffic studies
prepared for City projects (Moorpark Country Club Estates and Specific
Plan No. 8); however, the Council has not formally adopted the above
criteria and they are not included in the current City Traffic Study
Guidelines. A more conservative approach would be to use the V/C ratio
change greater than or equal to 0.01 as a significant impact for all
intersections operating at LOS D, E, or F; however, a more strict
V �Jsw
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 5
criterion would also affect City projects that will be impacting the same
roadways. Staff recommends that this issue be discussed at the May 1
meeting. The City Traffic Engineer is currently reviewing the Traffic
Study and will attend the May 1 meeting.
15. Page 4 -143, Section 4.9.2 -4, Safety Impacts, Recommended Condition - The
proposed condition requiring an engineering evaluation of the Grimes
Canyon Road /SR -118 intersection to determine how many of the trees should
be removed will not mitigate the problems at that intersection. The
City's, recently approved, Moorpark Country Club Estates Project (which,
for the Year 2000 model conditions, was projected to add approximately 20
AM and 30 PM peak hour trips in each direction to the existing traffic on
Grimes Canyon Road between "C" Street and Los Angeles Avenue) has been
conditioned as follows:
Prior to issuance of the first zone clearance for
occupancy for any phase within the approved tentative
tract, the intersection of Grimes Canyon Road and
Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue) shall be modified to
provide a southbound left turn pocket on Grimes Canyon
Road and westbound right turn lane on Los Angeles
Avenue. Modifications shall also be made at the
railroad crossing adjacent to this intersection to
improve the safety of this location, as approved by the
City Engineer. In addition, a median acceleration lane
shall be provided for southbound traffic turning
eastbound along State Route 118. Plans for modification
of the Los Angeles Avenue(State Route 118) /Grimes Canyon
Road intersection shall be reviewed and approved by the
City and Caltrans. Plans for modification of the
railroad crossing shall be reviewed and approved by the
Southern Pacific Railroad, County of Ventura and the
City. A sight distance study shall also be conducted
as part of the intersection and railroad crossing
modifications.
The TMC Project should be similarly conditioned to participate in the
required improvements.
16. Pages 4 -147 and 4 -148, Sections 4.9.3 -2 and 4.9.3 -3, Year 2000 and Year
2015 Analysis, Participation in Reciprocal Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee
Agreement - The City concurs with the proposed language of the condition,
which requires the permittee to participate in any reciprocal traffic
mitigation fee agreement between the City of Moorpark and the County of
Ventura that is designed to reduce the cumulative traffic impacts.
Participation is proposed to be based on the permittee's pro rata
contribution to the impacting traffic and shall be limited to the
incremental addition to traffic (i.e., in addition to the "existing
setting" of 1,050 one -way vehicle trips per day, of which 810 involve one -
way truck trips). The City questions whether the proposed condition
should also be imposed as a mitigation measure. We are concerned that the
Year 2015 analysis of traffic impacts did not adequately disclose the
impact on Moorpark Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue /New Los Angeles Avenue if
the SR -118 and SR -23 bypass arterials are not constructed.
The City does not concur with the conclusions for the Year 2015 traffic
analysis. The City's 2010 Traffic Model is based on projected General Plan
buildout and has been used for the TMC Project 2015 analysis. The City's
2010 model assumes that in conjunction with buildout, completion of the
required circulation system will also be achieved, including SR -118 and
SR -23 bypass arterials. Construction of the SR -23 and SR -118 bypass
arterials, however, is dependent upon fees to be collected from new
0+x'3333
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 6
development, including development outside the City limits, which would
otherwise contribute to significant cumulative traffic impacts within the
City of Moorpark. Those future bypass roadways will only be constructed
if both the County and the City collectively condition projects to pay a
mitigation fee to fund them. The County's traffic fee mitigation program
does not provide funding for any roadway improvements within the City
limits. The City, therefore, considers the proposed project's cumulative
traffic impact as significant.
The discussion on Page 4 -148 references that the scenario presented in
this analysis is based on the traffic volumes and circulation system as
contained in the transportation and circulation section in the EIR for the
City's Hidden Creek Ranch Project. What is not made clear, however, is
that the Traffic Study for that project also states that even with
intersection improvements along Los Angeles Avenue, only approximately 20
percent of projected General Plan buildout between the Year 2000 and the
Year 2010 can be accommodated. Key intersections along Los Angeles
Avenue will operate at the LOS F range for the General Plan buildout if
the SR -118 bypass arterial is not constructed, which would not be an
acceptable level of service as defined by the Ventura County Congestion
Management Plan.
17. Page 4 -151, Section 4.9.4, GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY - Consistency with the
City's General Plan is not addressed. Suggestion is that consistency with
the City's Circulation Element Goal 2 and related Policies 2.1 through 2.4
should be analyzed.
18. Page 4 -151, Section 4.9.5, MITIGATION MEASURES - See prior comment
regarding the need for intersection improvements at Grimes Canyon Road.
In addition, the City recommends that the Noise mitigation measure No. N -2
be included for cumulative traffic impacts, but should be modified to also
include reference to the funding of the proposed SR -118 bypass extension,
based on the trip distribution percentages.
Project Alternatives
19. Pages 5 -10 and 5 -11, Section 5.7.2, STATE ROUTE 23 NORTH -SOUTH BYPASS -
The City requests that the discussion for this alternative also recognize
that the City is also considering an alternative circulation system for
the Specific Plan No. 2 project that would create an arterial roadway
connecting Walnut Canyon Road to Spring Road, that could serve as an
interim SR -23 bypass arterial. For the Alternative Access Routes
mitigation measure addressed on Page 5 -11, we repeat our prior comment for
traffic impacts that the mitigation measure should be revised to also
include reference to the funding of the proposed SR -118 bypass extension.
20. Page 5 -12, Section 5.7.3, EASTERLY EXTENSION OF BROADWAY, Alternative
Access, Easterly Extension of Broadway - We concur with the proposed
condition requiring the permittee to participate in any assessment
district or other financing technique, including the payment of traffic
mitigation fees, which the County of Ventura may adopt to fund or
partially fund the proposed easterly extension of Broadway to connect with
State Route 118. Participation is proposed to be based on the permittee's
pro rata contribution to the impacting traffic and shall be limited to the
incremental addition to traffic (i.e., in addition to the "existing
setting" of 1,050 one -way vehicle trips per day, of which 810 involve one -
way truck trips). Again, we recommend that this requirement should be a
mitigation measure as well as a condition of approval.
21. Section 6.7, Second Environmentally Superior Alternative - (This
alternative has been modified and for the City's Council's review is
included as Attachment 6. This alternative does not allow the asphalt
plant.)
acv V a.�1J_X
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 7
The City is requesting two modifications to the Second Environmentally
Superior Alternative:
We note that the Environmentally Superior Alternative in the prior Revised
Draft EIR required a Major Modification to conduct Phase 2 mining for no
more than 10 years and a new CUP to complete Phase 3 mining. The new
language allows issuance of a permit for Phases 1 and 2 for a duration of
no more than 20 years, with a requirement that a permit modification be
approved in order to continue Phase 2 mining beyond that time. A
subsequent permit modification to the CUP would be required in order to
initiate Phase 3 mining.
Given that Phase 1 mining has been occurring since 1986, the City does not
object to the revision of the Environmentally Superior Alternative to
include approval of Phases 1 and 2. We do, however, strongly object to
the new language that could allow Phase 3 mining to be approved with a
Minor Modification, without a public hearing. We are, therefore,
requesting that the Second Environmentally Superior Alternative be revised
to require a new CUP to allow Phase 3 mining.
The City's second comment is in regard to the limitation on average daily
traffic to that of the "Existing Setting." We note that payment of the
County's traffic mitigation fee would not mitigate the cumulative traffic
impacts of the project within the City limits. We are, therefore,
requesting that the language of the Environmentally Superior Alternative
be revised to read as follows:
The applicant either limits average daily traffic to that of the
"Existing Setting (i.e., 810 one -way, heavy truck trips and 240
employee /other one -way trips), or the applicant would pay the
Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee described in Section 4.9.3 -1 for all
additional trips, and a bypass roadway has been constructed which
Also, as previously requested, the Environmentally Superior Alternative
should include a provision that would require the applicant to obtain a
temporary or emergency use permit from the County if any truck deliveries
or returns are proposed before 6:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday. The proposal of the applicant that they can operate at
night about 60 days per year is too open ended, and could not be
effectively monitored or controlled by the County. The City also requests
notification, prior to County approval, of any proposal by TMC to operate
at night or on a Sunday.
PROJECT CONIIERNTS
Staff proposes that the City of Moorpark would recommend that the County select
the Second Environmentally Superior Alternative, with certain modifications, as
discussed above. An asphalt plant is not allowed by the Second Environmentally
Superior Alternative. The City's comment letter should also recommend that the
County require the mine operator to submit any future application for a new CUP
a minimum of two years prior to permit expiration, to ensure that the mine does
not continue to operate without a valid permit as has occurred since 1986. It
is staff's opinion that approval of the requested CUP for a 50 -year period (and
three mining phases) is not justified based on the following:
Honorable City Council
April 24, 1996
Page 8
1. A 50 -year CUP is beyond the time period covered by both the County and
City General Plans.
2. Estimating impacts for a 50 -year period is beyond the capabilities of both
the County and the City of Moorpark. (Neither the County nor the City has
adopted land use projections beyond the year 2020, and traffic modeling
capabilities are similarly limited. Since land use and traffic
projections are used as the basis for calculating air quality and noise
impacts, the future impacts of the project cannot be accurately
estimated.)
3. The proposed project will result in significant noise, visual, air
quality, odor, and traffic impacts to City of Moorpark residents.
4. Planned excavation in Phases 2 and 3 will result in significant visual
impacts to existing and future residents and open space /recreation area
users. Requiring a new CUP approval for Phase 3 would allow additional
opportunities to address the significance of visual impacts to City
Specific Plan Areas Nos. 2 and 8, based on approved specific plans.
5. Requiring a new CUP for Phase 3, will allow the City and the public
additional opportunities to comment on the project impacts, compliance
with conditions of approval, and access issues. This approval restriction
would also allow the County the opportunity to impose additional
conditions of approval on the new CUP for Phase 3, if required to minimize
project impacts.
In addition to the preceding comments on the Revised Draft EIR and the project,
staff intends to again request that a copy of the annual status report on
mitigation compliance be provided to the City.
STAFF RECONKENDATION
Direct staff to prepare a letter to the County, which addresses City Council and
staff comments on the Revised Draft EIR.
Attachments:
1. Location Maps
2. Second Draft EIR Summary Tables
3. Moorpark General Plan Goals and Policies Excerpts
4. Proposed Noise Mitigation Measures
5. Existing ICU Comparison Summary (prepared for Specific Plan No. 2)
6. Second Environmentally Superior Alternative Discussion
0103916
� .— � _ _.. �. '1 j!� 1• ■ :\ /� .-- ''t"`) (7�(`IYOPr "\�� -Z�, .L I _� i 7� \ r �' /�-!!t \\`iJi�' -� 4--. �. \i .. o?' ,\G),y \��� \ �i. l�).,fl � \` _-
.�
�x l� /
CO ,� O _.i a �,' A-
00 0
��!� ��4 :.." Cj� ,6;.,��.r �� i11 � (D�) / ))���r �• \/ )�_,; ��VlOV (II yt( . M, "`/ / I o �j., � .'.:
G! � ![ �� . f i� /,,,�• D -7 r )�� � ' 'il �� � O. Y � \� � \ �.. � � 6 c� ��:
) i _ 2_' /Tpp„ � I
y �I ill N 3 Vt ; A ate'. r� 0� i 9��5) ao ;� �''� ` i'Ir.. 4 Vv �� �.�, rly AAA! (r �r yCi �r �b ✓; [ * mil, i
��� � C-5
` l
(7) C N, Buena ' ,$t(Bei
_,V/sta
O V
it
C-1 fl
Ni rpo 7iD ur 'a.� 11 l- s" / - �.. [ O%��'/ i! •VT ,j c% r `
ul
- 0 I.. \�' .. � '' \_ � r'j �0O / rt' � �a `�" 5 Y� i -Z'° �1\ 1 .. \ .�, e -'•"' .°y /,.f%
.'!,j
cD \-'i Py r C ,f J >\ � -��d)� ,
COMP
(D 0 /i .� ..\ •I Hap 1 rl�\\ ., / r :< r -�t � �.� r \ /J /�r:� t \\ �� `11 Ir �f �i,�l it, , l,\_1 ct �..
Opp
L oo
Pm
CL w � v f � r ! t � !1t vA.- Lr �A 1• ter- Q.
ll 1 _ _
i.
'oo �l I, /= l �l � l i \ � � � f17 ��> -'�1 ✓, rj / '\�� -2 L /'(�, / r'�ff i�� �' S1 (!1 I � ,�,\\\ � �\ `�l _) ,
Ul O T) \ \� ~�[ / % iW a t �t �J r 1` l i r }�r f I o; l�(L 1 I ; �•\�, \?
M rn
t� 'n N - - Oppr . `tai S -- S,�• «� /, . _��: �1. - /`�� �� '�l i% D �'� � �� ��Z���,,vl)1 rr'�al,� (�(1 It��\ -�� � � ^�
ef► C v, � (�L.. \� /..� . \r�C� -- �1 � -i- -. /1 :C.1� 1. \1 /( :..,r*rr1.,��� ?� >/' f�rcr� J /;(. ?> 11!¢f�4,,.,\ \' \\ - .1\, ^. �:' - r�� � `r�
"mil v �„{ �t -. 1��, _ �, . \l�l ,. r \�t � \�r 9° ( ,11`x\ � .Q \``T 3.: � � J \_ �_ � ll• (;f -� Or � / r', �,� ` / � ��-
3
� � m _ f `� .11� - >�'��r u \ \•�� �,� / �i.�`� \� 1� l� .� r. o i�� /� Ji � lL�i f -,f .I.r�' �1 11i�;!f�/ _ l �,F� ,�'�` v^ I �1
y
ic
�r��\\ �� r � � �% ��. 'L\t �,. r1 , l' y?•" i�_. � /� I (/ l ?gip o��Q II ; /' n // p
g y � ','la � . � ( U�r \ I,t : t ' ! \ r\ ��t l r lcr � � r oo.� 1)� �� ✓,
, r 7
'
-a m a m im m a a a a a a a a A a A a A
% J
�r�) t
A
` Il
I t
1��� "� �1 \.� \ S��Ifn r C
r1 ��
,
��� -
i l 1 l• l I )
l.�J 1t`j � =�f ? ��. `;,1� �, �� : -'>>• � �r� ' i ' ; t'l ,% oil
j C \y \..r \\l.,' •-,^ y ', )�� t -ixie E L j�"•/i� Jig !:S�G C_I _* j
�. i-^ .-.�� ' � ti. - �-. J (�. f � � � t`�: �. ��i't O � ` n•''- � - - � O � 11 tb / ) � s S " { - ; {��.I
' i x ', i? rt ` l ( �r• .�.. / � `� x��r� �� -1�n1 t� a_ :I{� �p�.�� 'r.,�,, T o fit' �i � � Sl * � � �.- '¢ � .� •, � , �,,i
D1�\ Ln F.l
+'� L ''j� �� �� lh ^�'•�'� r �i� ��� _ ,o��;. - {� .1 � \:f _ �I e5 �/ ` I� �r - _ ( �.jFJ. �' w ��,,.`.r
�� � ��.� � ���• � / � � � �` lJ� t i z _. �- � (r. � +�� ; jiLL, �Llh- c-1,f % I f` -�1' }A %���� ��,- � ���% ���) .`, � !`-'� ���,t�Ul {'� � � I II �� �%
J
t � ��..1. �i_ i� '1 %y.��' .MAO �'�)
rd '411
4. , I �i� d �� rQ,,, / -v +' s,• c{uO���: ,Ir� %1 ii �;i11. �' tl'�rr,
rtu
o
{r,l�t - ,r r , ;I (� l ` l� �c •� f S� f \ j/ n (( .. '.` S /'� 11 'j�....
„ I�uIS qqA rusnB
6, �LSw �'� l 4) C� (rll L08
P60HOtoAJIM.4 I L R 5 <S ) 1 r Q
)
I �� �l •, l 7E''t' � � '��1 � � `t x U ' � ���' � t 1 �it � � ���_� 1 ��
CL
'��i� I'� SN i I i.I' C rj °G2 °'��. i S� _ _ # �- 1 `.'i : -�•- 1." ) l- '� m EU
I `) J 1 1 y r �-! ,
L"
FIGURE IS
�'rr Ir�f �'' \�l {tiy�1, t r•����/ I } !� .IT�'
r,t_• 5.� f >l�)�., p•^ �F((t� y. , :} q r''. r va. _ { _ 1�5 r /, PROXIMITY TO
I, -i -.\ .'?., 11, I d ', i�'� L,.'� •III ' )) �,. h 11.E ' lam.\ I �O / `'l, ^ne ,. ,�' " \, t
�I,% •s \ j d } ( m Pen' Z MOORPARK
I�l�.l•�! ,.r�.,�,� n`,� �.} �✓,Ie{'r• � � f _i� , �I`� ,I � I £l. ` /f9(,..,.opJ�e,lo l�•::.
kall Dam" i Mom*
gL
■
r
N
r
r
r
r
r
ATTACHMENT 2
TABLE S -1
Summary of Significant, Unmitigable Impacts (Class I)
Issue
Area
Description of Impact
Recommended Mitigation Measure
Residual
Impacts
----------------- --- - -------
-----------------
Incremental disturbance of about
B -1 Revegetation Plan ---------------
- Revegetation using local native seeds
146 acres of native vegetation,
- Topsoil management
including coastal sage scrub,
- Procedures to control invasive species
alluvial scrub, chamise chaparral,
- Contingency for supplemental irrigation
and other habitat.
- Reclamation Plan per SMARA
Loss of 80 acres of coastal sage
requirements
- Oak woodland and alluvial scrub
Signi ficant
scrub habitat and 7 acres of alluvial
replacement
scrub habitat which are both
considered "very threatened" by the
B -2 Avoidance Measures
California Department of Fish and
Revise the Phase 3 limits of mining to
Game.
avoid oak trees in the large grove on the
BIOLOGICAL
east side of the project site.
RESOURCES
B -3 Habitat Management and Com nsation
E10
Loss of nesting and/or breeding
habitat for coast horned lizard,
Potential enhancements shall include, but
coast patch -nosed snake, and
not be limited to: 1) purchase and
loggerhead shrike, and possibly for
installation of wildlife guzzlers; 2)
several raptor species that may use
purchase and installation of fencing of
Significant
the project site for roosting and
sensitive areas; 3) purchase of an open
foraging, including the golden
space easement on adjoining lands that
eagle, Cooper's hawk, and black-
have habitat value; 4) fund revegetation
shouldered kite.
efforts in disturbed areas of the mine site,
particularly areas disturbed prior to 1976;
and 5) dedication of land in fee.
Phase 2 and 3 excavations would
be visible to many communities
south of the mine, as well as
Significant
recreationalists in middle and
V -1 Visual Elements of Reclamation Plan
upper Happy Camp Canyon
- Use gradual and smoothed slopes
VISUAL
Regional Park.
- Create a smooth transition with the
RESOURCES
adjacent, undisturbed slopes
Near -term, Phase 1 excavation
would be visible to recreationalists
- Revegetate with native plants
using the hiking trails in upper
Significant
Happy Camp Canyon Regional
Park.
A -1 Air Emissions Miti�tion Plan
NO, and PM,, exceedances of both
- Equipment/engines prosperly
the state and federal air quality
maintained tuned
Significant
standards for O; and PM,,.
- Dust control on mined slopes, on -site
roads, and stockpiles with water or
AIR QUALITY
chemical agents
ROC emissions in excess of the
- Temporary grass cover on inactive slopes
prescribed threshold criteria for
- Water spray or cover delivery trucks
Significant
regional air quality.
- Cease mining in high winds
- Limit haul truck speeds
C:\CUP\4633\EIR\2RDE1R 2-3
0_:.
TABLE S -1 (continued)
Summary of Significant, Unmitigable Impacts (Class I)
Issue
a
Residual
Significant,
Description of Impact
Recommended Mitigation Measure
N -2. Alternative Access Routes
Area
acts
f'�
C:\CUP\4633\E1R\2RDE1R 2 -4
Significant,
N -2. Alternative Access Routes
assumes the
Requires permittee pro -rata share
circulation
participation in any assessment district or
improvements
other financing technique adopted to fund
are not
or partially fund the proposed S.R. 23 by-
implemented
pass extension.
by the City of
Moorpark
NOISE
Contributes incrementally to
cumulative noise along Walnut
N -3. Noise Monitoring Program for Walnut
Canyon Road/Moorpark Avenue
Canyon Road.
Requires reciprocal agrrment and
Significant,
permittee pro -rata share participation in a
City of Moorpark sponsored traffic noise
assumes recirpocal
monitoring program to develop, fund, and
agreement
aggreement is
implement a traffic noise monitoring and
not acheived.
enforcement program designed to reduce
traffic noise impacts on Walnut Canyon
Road/Moorpark Avenue.
f'�
C:\CUP\4633\E1R\2RDE1R 2 -4
I
i
F
r
J
I
A
TABLE S -2
Summary of Significant, Mitigable Impacts (Class II)
Issue
Description of Impact
Recommended Mitigation Measure
Residual
Residual
Area
Damage to equipment and
i i n
Recommendations for mitigation of slope
Less than
CACUP\463AEIR12RDEIR 2 -5 ppaad�
--- - - - - --
GG-1 Sloes Stability Analysis and
Damage to equipment and
i i n
Recommendations for mitigation of slope
Less than
buildings as a result of ground
failure hazards such as slope
significant
ng'
configuration, safe excavation procedures,
and use of standard engineering practices
including buttressing, cut and fill
Slope stability problems, including
excavation, and control of drainage on any
GEOLOGY
the potential instability of
temporary cut slopes during mining
newly exposed landslides.
Less than
AND
GEOHAZARDS
operations and the instability of
P
GG -2 Reclamation Plan
significant
permanent cut slopes after final
Plan revision that: 1) incorporates the
reclamation of the site.
results of the 1993 and 1994 revegetation
test plots; and 2) meet all applicable
Instability of permanent slope cuts
SMARA requirements, including but not
after the reclamation of the site
limited to revegetation, topsoil
Less than
include the instability of, and
management, protection of wildlife values,
significant
damage to, offsite property.
and any newly adopted standards for
reclamation.
Loss of up to 50 oak trees, mostly
located in a large grove in Phase 3
area, (significant, mitigable impact,
B -2 Avoidance Measures
Class I1). The number of oak trees
Revise the Phase 3 limits of mining to
than
BIOLOGICAL
lost will depend upon the degree to
avoid oak trees in the large grove on the
significant
RESOURCES
which trees can be avoided by: 1)
east side of the project site.
minor changes in the limits of
mining, and 2) the number of trees
replaced on -site pursuant to the
Tree Protection Regulations.
V -1 Visual Elements of Reclamation Plan
- Use gradual and smoothed slopes
Long -term, the Phase 1 excavation
- Create a smooth transition with the
would eventually be ameliorated
adjacent, undisturbed slopes
through reclamation once the
- Revegetate with native plants
VISUAL
RESOURCES
reclaimed slopes have been
restored to gentle contours and
Refer to the following condition of approval
Less than
significant
revegetated with sufficient
described below in Table S -3 (VISUAL
vegetative cover to blend in with
RESOURCES):
natural slopes.
Windrow Planting
CACUP\463AEIR12RDEIR 2 -5 ppaad�
TABLE S -2 (continued)
Summary of Significant, N itigable Impacts (Class II)
Issue
a
Residual
Description of Impact
Recommended Mitigation Measure
Trucks are prohibited from using "jake
Area
a loud intrusive sound that is likely
acts
C: \CUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2 -6
N -1. Prohibit Jake Brakes
The use of "jake" brakes results in
Trucks are prohibited from using "jake
a loud intrusive sound that is likely
brakes" along Happy Camp Road and
Less than
to exceed 70 dB.
Walnut Canyon Road or within the City of
significant
Moorpark, except under emergency
operating conditions.
Less than
N -2. Alternative Access Routes
significant,
Requires permittee pro -rata share
assumes the
participation in any assessment district or
City of
NOISE
other financing technique adopted to fund
Moorpark
or partially fund the proposed S.R. 23 by-
implements
pass extension.
the circulation
improvements
Contributes incrementally to
cumulative noise along Walnut
N -3. Noise Monitoring Program for Walnut
Canyon Road.
Canyon Road/Moomark Avenue
Requires reciprocal agrrment and
Less than
permittee pro -rata share participation in a
significant,
City of Moorpark sponsored traffic noise
assumes
monitoring program to develop, fund, and
recirpocal
implement a traffic noise monitoring and
agreement is
enforcement program designed to reduce
acheived.
traffic noise impacts on Walnut Canyon
Road/Moorpark Avenue.
T -1. Roadbed Maintenance and Repairs
Extraordinary road maintenance
Eund
Requires permittee to pay an $10,737 per
Less than
and repair of Happy Camp Road
and Grimes Canyon Road.
year into a revolving fund to be used on
significant
Happy Camp Road and Grimes Canyon
Road for as- needed road repairs.
T -2 Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee
Pursuant to the Traffic Impact Mitigation
TRAFFIC
Fee Ordinance (Ordinance #4071),
requires the permittee to pay a traffic
impact mitigation fee of $74,695.76.
Cumulative impacts to the
Less than
Regional Road Network.
Refer to the following condition of approval
significant
described below in Table S -3 (TRAFFIC):
Participation in Reciprocal Traffic
Impact Mitigation Fee Agreement
C: \CUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2 -6
TABLE S -3
Summary of Insignificant, Adverse Impacts (Class III)
Issue
Area
Description of Impact
Recommended Conditions
o Approval
Residual
Im acts
GEOLOGY AND
C: \CUP14633\EIK\2RDEIR 2 -7
000-110.1
Damage to equipment and
Refer to the following mitigation measures
described above in Table S -1:
GEOLOGY AND
buildings as a result of fault
rupture, subsidence, and /or
Insignificant
GEOHAZARDS
liquefaction.
GG -1 Slone Stability Analysis and
Mitigation
GG -2 Reclamation Plan
Groundwater QualiU - Standing Water
Requires removal of fine soil and debris
to reduce the retention time of water in
mining pits and sediment detention
Slight increases in TDS and
basins.
other dissolved constituents
Insignificant
that could potentially affect
Also requires that rainwater collected in
groundwater quality.
the large unlined sediment detention basin
located in the southeast portion of the site
be pumped into the two waste water ponds
for use in the mining operations.
Groundwater Quality - Spill Prevention
Specifies procedures for the storage,
handling, and disposal of potentially
Accidental spill of fuels, oils,
hazardous materials.
GROUND
paints and solvents that could
P
Insignificant
WATER
potentially affect groundwater
Requires Environmental Health Division
quality.
permit for the installation, use and
operation of underground hazardous
materials storage tanks.
Groundwater Duality Protection - Recycling
Ponds and &12tic Systems
Requires quarterly water quality samples
Infiltration of contaminants
and if water quality samples exceed the
into the groundwater aquifer
maximum contamination level(s) set by
Insignificant
due to leakage from the onsite
local, state or federal agencies, the
septic system.
permittee is to immediately consult with the
County and other agencies, to identify and
implement the changes needed to comply
with water quality standards.
C: \CUP14633\EIK\2RDEIR 2 -7
000-110.1
TABLE S -3 (continued)
Summary of Insignificant, Adverse Impacts (Class III)
Issue
Recommended Conditions
Residual
Area
Description of Impact
of Approval t
Im acts
CACVP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2 -8 000404
Sediment Detention Basin Decien
Specifies capacity and structural
integrity of the existing sediment
retention ponds (i.e., must adequately
contain the sediments resulting from a
100 -year event with a 75% scarified
watershed). Monitored via annual
Potential for increased
SMARA -compliance inspection.
EROSION AND
ENTATION
sediment loading of Happy
Clearig Sediment Plan
Clearing
Insignificant
Camp Canyon Regional Park.
Requires the removal of sediment when
the capacity of any sediment detention
basin on site is reduced by more that
10 %. Each year, sediments must be
cleared prior to 1 November to ensure
there is adequate basin capacity prior to
the winter season. Monitored via annual
SMARA- compliance inspection.
Potential loss of a sensitive
Botanical Su rye vs
Requires field surveys, prior to mining
plant species (i.e., Nevin's
activities in Phase 3, to determine the
brickellia) that potentially
presence of any sensitive plant species
Insignificant
occurs within the proposed
identified in the EIR. If found requires
mining area.
sensitive seed collection and/or
transplanting.
Potential dust, nighttime
Refer to the following mitigation measures
lighting and impairment of
described above in Table S -1:
wildlife movement on and
Insignificant
through the proposed project
V -1 Visual Elements of Reclamation Plan
A -1 Air Emissions Midga ion Plan
area.
Avoidance /Protection 12fF4hemeral
D ainaQes
BIOLOGICAL
Requires amended Mining Plan so the
RESOURCES
limits of mining avoid encroachment into
the ephemeral drainage at the west side of
the project site, north of CUP -4158 mine.
Removal of the central
Requires grading and excavation within the
drainage and potential
vicinity of the ephemeral drainage at the
disturbance of the western
west side of the project site be completed in
Insignificant
drainage.
a manner that ensures drainage from all
disturbed areas will}low towards the mine.
Requires construction of 3 to 4-feet high
earthen berms along the excavated side of
the drainage to prevent erosion into the
drainage to the east. These berms are to be
seeded with annual grasses to ensure their
integrity.
CACVP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2 -8 000404
r
y
I
TABLE S -3 (continued)
Summary of Insignificant, Adverse Impacts (Class III)
Issue
Recommended Conditions
Residual
I
Area
Description of Impact
of Approval
Im acts
C: \CUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2-9 00040 1 54
Refer to the following mitigation measures
described above in Table S -1:
V_1 Visual F]ements of Reclamation Plan
Also, the following condition of approval is
Long -term, the Phase 1
excavation would eventually
be ameliorated through
recommended:
reclamation once the reclaimed
slopes have been restored to
Windrow Plantine
Insignificant
gentle contours and
The permittee shall plant and establish a
revegetated with sufficient
windrow of large native trees near the
vegetative cover to blend in
lower debris basin (i.e., at the mouth of
with natural slopes.
the canyon between TMC and Happy
Camp Canyon Regional Park) in order
to screen the mine from users in the low
lying areas of the Happy Camp Canyon
Regional Park.
VISUAL
Nighttime Lightins
Requires shielding and direct lighting to
RESOURCES
minimize off -site glare, particularly to the
south and east.
Requires reasonable effort be made to
avoid nighttime processing on those nights
when the Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy conducts scheduled star-
gazing hikes in Happy Camp Canyon
Minor nighttime lighting.
Regional Park.
Insignificant
Limits nighttime processing to a maximum
of 60 days per year, unless otherwise
authorized in advance by the Planning
Director.
Refer to the following condition of approval
described below in Table S -3 (NOISE):
Third -Party 24 -Hour Telephone Service
SO, and CO emissions.
Insignificant
Refer to the following mitigation measures
Asphalt plant and asphalt haul
described above in Table S -1:
trucks odors that may be
Insignificant
AIR QUALITY
objectionable to residents
A -1 Air Emissions Mitigation Plan
along the haul route.
Refer to the following condition of approval
Haul truck exhaust odors that
may be objectionable to
described below in Table S -3 (NOISE):
Insignificant
residents along the haul route.
This -Party 24 -Hour Telephone Service
Fugitive dust.
Insignificant
C: \CUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2-9 00040 1 54
TABLE S -3 (continued)
Summary of Insignificant, Adverse Impacts (Class III)
Issue
Recommended Conditions
Residual
Area
Description of Impact
of Approval
I Im acts
24 -hour Contact Person
Requires the Planning Director be
provided with the current name and/or
position title, address, and phone number
of the permittee's field agent and other
representatives who shall receive all orders
and notices as well as all communications
regarding matters of condition and code
compliance at the permit site.
Operation noise, off -site. Acrd -Party 24 -Hour Telephone Service Insignificant
Requires a third -party 24 -hour telephone
service to receive and log complaints. In
operating this service, requires:
- adjacent residents be provided number
- post service number at entrance and on
all permittee owned trucks
- service to log complaints and transfer
call to 24 -hour contact person
- written response within 3 days to each
NOISE vehicle safety complaint, indicating the
corrective action(s) taken
- log maintained describing timing and
method of complaint disposition
- Planning Director may at any time
review the complaint log, method of
complaint disposition, and all related
correspondence to determine if there is
a need to modify this requirement
Noise Monitoring
Truck traffic noise. Planning Director may direct, at Insignificant
permittee expense, noise monitoring to
determine if the project exceeds County
noise standards.
If a noise exceedance is found to exist,
requires immediately steps to either
cease the operations creating the noise
exceedance, Qr implement noise control
measures that effectively reduce noise
levels to within County noise standards.
C: \CUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 2 -10
2.3 CONSISTENCY WITH RA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The Ventura County General Plan designation for the majority of the proposed project area is
Open Space (O -S). This land use designation includes areas managed for the production of
resources, "including areas containing major mineral deposits... ". Approximately 40 acres in the
northwest corner of the proposed CUP area has a General Plan designation of Agricultural. Mining
activities are not being proposed on these 40 acres.
The Ventura County General Plan designates certain areas as Mineral Resource Areas on the
Resource Protection Maps. These areas are subject to the requirements of the Mineral Resource
Protection Overlay Zone (Zoning Ordinance Designation), described below. Most of the proposed
CUP area, and all of the proposed mining area, occur within areas so designated and these lands
correspond with the Mineral Resource Zone Category 2 (MRZ -2) designation used by the State
Division of Mines and Geology. MRZ-2 lands are defined as areas of statewide or regional
significance where adequate information exists to indicate significant mineral resources are present.
The State Division of Mines and Geology developed Mineral Resources Management Goals and
Policies which state that MRZ -2 lands should be protected from preclusive and incompatible land uses
so that the mineral resources are available when needed.
In response to the DMG goals and policies, the County developed several General Plan goals,
policies and programs to limit or preclude development within an MRP overlay zone if the proposed
use would hamper or preclude access to, or the extraction of, the mineral resource.
2.4 CONSISTENCY WITH THE VENTURA COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
Most of the proposed permit area and all of the area proposed for mining is zoned either "O -S-
160AC MRP" (Open Space, 160 acre minimum, Mineral Resource Protection Overlay Zone) or "A -E
MRP" (Agricultural Exclusive, Mineral Resource Protection Overlay Zone). The purpose of the "O-
S" zone is to provide for the conservation of renewable and nonrenewable resources. Approximately
80 acres in the northwest corner of the CUP area is zoned "A -E" (Agricultural Exclusive). Both the
9 CACUP463AEIR\2RDEIR 2-11 OW 407
Average daily traffic increased
Insignificant
by 668 one -way vehicle trips
Participation in Reciprocal Tra "_W_=
Mitigation Fee Agreement
Requires permittee participation in any
reciprocal traffic impact mitigation fee
agreement between the City of Moorpark
and the County of Ventura that is
designed to reduce cumulative traffic
per day.
Insignificant
Peak hour traffic volumes
increase by 41 trips (A.M.)
and 34 (P.M.) trips.
Contributes to Year 2000 and
TRAFFIC
impacts.
Insignificant
Year 2015 traffic volumes.
Warning Sign Sight Distance Evaluation
Vehicle accident rates are
excepted to remain high, with
or without the presence of
truck traffic.
Insignificant
Requires the permittee to conduct an
engineering evaluation of the Grimes
Canyon Road IS.R. 118 intersection to
determine how many of the trees should
be removed.
2.3 CONSISTENCY WITH RA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The Ventura County General Plan designation for the majority of the proposed project area is
Open Space (O -S). This land use designation includes areas managed for the production of
resources, "including areas containing major mineral deposits... ". Approximately 40 acres in the
northwest corner of the proposed CUP area has a General Plan designation of Agricultural. Mining
activities are not being proposed on these 40 acres.
The Ventura County General Plan designates certain areas as Mineral Resource Areas on the
Resource Protection Maps. These areas are subject to the requirements of the Mineral Resource
Protection Overlay Zone (Zoning Ordinance Designation), described below. Most of the proposed
CUP area, and all of the proposed mining area, occur within areas so designated and these lands
correspond with the Mineral Resource Zone Category 2 (MRZ -2) designation used by the State
Division of Mines and Geology. MRZ-2 lands are defined as areas of statewide or regional
significance where adequate information exists to indicate significant mineral resources are present.
The State Division of Mines and Geology developed Mineral Resources Management Goals and
Policies which state that MRZ -2 lands should be protected from preclusive and incompatible land uses
so that the mineral resources are available when needed.
In response to the DMG goals and policies, the County developed several General Plan goals,
policies and programs to limit or preclude development within an MRP overlay zone if the proposed
use would hamper or preclude access to, or the extraction of, the mineral resource.
2.4 CONSISTENCY WITH THE VENTURA COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
Most of the proposed permit area and all of the area proposed for mining is zoned either "O -S-
160AC MRP" (Open Space, 160 acre minimum, Mineral Resource Protection Overlay Zone) or "A -E
MRP" (Agricultural Exclusive, Mineral Resource Protection Overlay Zone). The purpose of the "O-
S" zone is to provide for the conservation of renewable and nonrenewable resources. Approximately
80 acres in the northwest corner of the CUP area is zoned "A -E" (Agricultural Exclusive). Both the
9 CACUP463AEIR\2RDEIR 2-11 OW 407
ATTACHMENT 3
LPMD USE ELEMEMT
Policy 12.8: Any proposed project shall be required to
contribute its fair share of the cost of providing
adequate public services and facilities.
Policy 12.9: Where :ietermined feasible, future development shall
incluc e infrastructure improvements to allow use of
tertic rry treated water.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Ii D EMPLOYMENT
GOAL 13:
Achieve a well- balanced and diversified economy
within the City which provides a variety of
economic and employment opportunities.
Policy 13.1:
A balanced job /housing ratio should be encouraged.
Policy 13.2:
New commercial and industrial uses which will
generate long -term employment opportunities and
diversify the community's employment base shall be
encouraged.
Policy 13.3:
The City shall encourage the coordinated
revitalization of obsolete or declining commercial
areas, particularly focusing on the downtown area.
Policy 13.4:
The City shall work with the business community in'
a cooperative manner to encourage desired
businesses to locate and to
remain in the City.
Policy 13.5:
The City shall work with the business and
development community to encourage an increase in
sales
tax capture.
Policy 13.6:
The City shall establish and implement a business
attraction, promotion, and retention plan.
PRESERVATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
GOAL 14: Establish land uses and development intensities
which are compatible with scenic 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.
Policy 14.2: New development shall respect, integrate with, and
complement the natural features of the land.
IU
00040h
d'
k:.\. iS. L, SLXJ .wo-r:SLts.`wi�rkt�rkYt2.i�:::: f•Y'•.S•.. ::..: ,..n:. ..: >••• .,•na taf .:n•
w..�d./. s'%:::•: 3c�'•.'::'.: v�... c....,..: i�.l i]. izu .t:.::a.:::��//./d/L:� »`a.,. '' a:' 6: id5ad7.' i:.` k�a'' ai:$:•: �$: b: da:.' r:::•: :::::::•:iui:.w,,:;`.:i6fzv3;: r:::;:°:t,:",:i:.'..:•:•.':u:
Policy 14.3:
New development shall not contribute to or cause
hazardous conditions of any kind.
Policy 14.4:
The flood control easement area adjacent to the
Arroyo Simi floodway shall be preserved and
enhanced as an important natural and scenic feature
of the community.
Policy 14.5:
Compatible open space /recreational uses of the
Arroyo Simi floodway should be encouraged which are
consistent with the provisions of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for floodway uses.
Policy 14.6:
Areas identified as significant aquifer recharge
areas shall be protected and preserved.
GOAL 15:
Maintain a high quality environment that
contributes to and enhances the quality of life and
protects public health, safety and welfare.
Policy 15.1:
Public & private projects shall be designed so that
significant vegetation shall be maintained and
protected, including riparian and oak woodland
vegetation and mature trees (as defined in the City
Code).
Policy 15.2:
Ecologically sensitive habitats shall be protected
and preserved or replaced with no net loss of
habitat so long as there is substantial public
benefit to any relocation program.
Policy 15.3:
Natural and cultural resources having significant
educational, scientific, scenic, recreational or
social value shall be protected and preserved.
Policy 15.4:
Development which will not result in a negative
impact on air quality shall be encouraged in order
to maintain and enhance air quality for the health
and well -being of City residents.
Policy 15.5:
The City shall require developers to maintain
wildlife corridors to allow for the passage of
animals between designated open space or recreation
areas.
Policy 15.6: Commercial, industrial and manufacturing uses shall
be required to implement reuse, reduction, and
recycling programs consistent with the City's
Source Reduction and Recycling Element.
19
COQ('.
:• •: ..... .n.. ....:U >::' >�:fi:i:;� >'::;4v �Y.j.:v "i:; :.; .. >:jjt {;iG . ?v: n}•:.•:: nv�; . { :::: ..: .....:: v:4i:{:::::: :.. v:.�:. �: :::. .:.. ..
:1i
Policy 15.7: Efficient /effective siting, operation and
maintenance of sanitation facilities shall be
encouraged to minimize offensive odors and
discharges from the sanitation plant.
Policy 15.8: Development in significant hazard areas, which
cannot be mitigated without resulting in
significant adverse environmental impacts, shall be
prohibited.
Policy 15.9: New development projects shall be required to use
xeriscape landscaping techniques which include
drought- tolerant plant species, reduction of turf
area, irrigation designed to meet plant needs, and
grouping plants according to their watering needs.
Policy 15.10: The City shall encourage the introduction of water
conservation fixtures, which exceed Building Code
requirements, into new development projects.
COMMUNITY APPEARANCE
GOAL 16: Enhance and maintain the suburban /rural identity of
the community.
Policy 16.1: For each existing neighborhood the overall theme(s)
and character shall be maintained or enhanced.
Redevelopment and /or infill projects shall be
consistent with the theme and character of the
area.
Policy 16.2: 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 hillsides as
prominent visual features. (Conceptual Horizon
Lines are shown on Exhibit 5, located at the back
of this document.)
Policy 16.3: The overall density and intensity of development
should decrease as the slope increases.
Policy 16.4: New residential development should complement the
overall community character of the City, establish
a sense of place, and ensure compatibility with
important existing local community identities.
20
21
OiootLl - T .
GOAL 17:
Enhance the physical and visual image of the
community.
Policy 17.1:
New development shall be compatible with the scale
and visual character of the surrounding
neighborhood.
Policy 17.2:
Identifiable entryways for the overall community,
and unique or principal business /commercial
districts of the City (i.e., City core and
transportation corridors) should be encouraged.
Policy 17.3:
Design standards should be established for City
entryways on the south (SR -23 and Tierra Rejada
Road), east (SR -118 freeway at Los Angeles Avenue,
and New Los Angeles Avenue), north (Walnut Canyon
Road and future SR -23 extension), and west (Los
Angeles Avenue), which encourage landscape
setbacks, sign monumentation and other special
design treatments to enhance gateways to the City.
Policy 17.4:
Design concepts should be established for the
overall community and for special treatment areas,
such as the downtown district, which may include
guidelines for architecture, landscape
architecture, signage, streetscape, and
infrastructure.
Policy 17.5:
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 quality 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.
Policy 17.7:
Design features which provide visual relief and
separation shall be required between land uses of
conflicting character.
Policy 17.8:
Undergrounding of utilities shall be required in
conjunction with development projects whenever
feasible.
21
OiootLl - T .
` OSCAR E1.ErnEAJT
VI. GOALS AND POLICIES
Goals and policies result from the needs, issues and constraints identified in the
previous chapters. They are based on an assessment of these existing conditions as
they impact community values.
--- - - -- s Gr•e!s -fly . broad statements identifying major aspirations of the City.
They describe desired results in ways that are general and unmeasurable.
• Policies are specific statements committing the City to courses of action.
GOAL 1
Preserve and enhance the unique aesthetic and visual qualities of Moorpark as a city
with scenic topographic features and elements that promote the quality of life that
Moorpark citizens pursue.
Policy 1.1 - Protect the scenic viewsheds both to and from the City of Moorpark.
(1109' This shall include those views extending north to the Santa Susana Mountains and
south to Tierra Rejada Valley. This will extend to any new development and to any
future renovations and additions that may potentially obscure a viewshed.
Policy 1.2 - Study, monitor and link the existing Greenbelt Agreement Area to
include landscaped arterial roadways as entrance ways to the City, bikeways,
equestrian paths and hiking trails, to create a network of aesthetically pleasing links
into and around the City.
Policy 1.3 - Develop an architectural and landscape architectural design theme
throughout the City that will serve as a guideline and a functional expression to
promote the unique aesthetic and visual qualities through future developments.
Policy 1.4 - Develop a hillside conservation, preservation and management program
that functions to discourage ridgeline development-md /or alteration.
Policy 1.5 - Explore with SCE and local utilities the potential to underground existing
• above - ground lines.
' A.
V( -1
f
GOAL 3
Ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the public through designating land
uses that will minimize the risk of danger to the public.
Policy 3.1 - In areas designated for flood control purposes, promote the use of the
area for passive recreation activities, (e.g., hiking, fishing, bike riding) and reserve in
open space use until the land can be used for a purpose.
Policy 3.2 - Where the Safety Element of the General Plan defines an area where
building or development should be limited, promote the use of the property for
recreation uses that do not require infrastructure (e.g., hiking, fishing, bike riding)
and reserve the area in an open space category.
GOAL 4
Preserve and maintain the physical and biological environment from future growth-
related degradation. In those areas where degradation is inevitable, ensure the
restoration of affected areas.
Policy 4.1 - Cooperate and participate in regional air quality management plans,
programs, enforcement measures and mitigation measures designed to reduce and /or
minimize the amount of primary and secondary air pollutants.
Policy 4.2 - Conserve and protect water quality supplies through cooperative efforts
with the Ventura County Water Conservation Plan and any future regional water
quality and water supply plans and programs that may be instrumental in reducing
water quality- related problems.
Policy 4.3 - Conserve, preserve and enhance the quality of biological and physical
environments throughout the City of Moorpark. Require restoration of those areas
unsatisfactorily maintained or subsequently degraded.
Policy 4.4 - Protect agricultural areas from future development. This policy applies
to those that are agriculturally productive and /or have beneficial qualities for
designated use as open space corridors, existing viewsheds or open space.
Vl -3 1
'(ti 1.
ATTACHMENT 4
b. LegIH of 50dB(A) or ambient noise level plus 3dB(A), whichever is
greater, during any hour from 7 P.M. to 10 P.M..
c. Le41 H of 45dB(A) or ambient noise level plus 3dB(A), whichever is
greater, during any hour from 10 P.M. to 6 A.M.
Policy 2.16.2 -4
Discretionary development which would be impacted by noise or generate noise
which cannot be reduced to meet the standards prescribed in Policy 2.162 -1,
shall be prohibited. This policy does not apply to noise generated during the
construction phase of a project if overriding considerations are adopted by the
decision - making body.
The proposed project is con_ s stem with this goal and policy because it would not increase noise
levels more than 3dB above ambient noise levels. Noise increases are expected to result in
insignificant adverse impacts (Class III) for residences along truck haul roads.
4.8.5 MITIGATION MEASURES
With the exception of "jake brake" use, the proposed project is expected to result in an
insignificant adverse noise impact (Class III). The use of "jake brakes" was identified as a significant,
mitigable impact (Class II). To mitigate this impact to a less than significant level, the following
mitigation measure is recommended.
' • 6_ C
The permittee shall prohibit all TMC owned trucks, and those trucks contracted by TMC, from
using "jake brakes" along Happy Camp Road and Walnut Canyon Road or within the City of
Moorpark, except under emergency operating conditions. Independent truckers are to be held
to the same prohibition and, if found to be repeatedly using "Jake brakes" along the described
route, shall be prohibited by the permittee from future use of the permitted facilities.
Implementation Responsibility: Permittee or successor in interest. The permittee must also
acquire formal agreement from independent truck contractors to conform to the mitigation.
Monitoring Frequency: Prior to the issuance of the zoning clearance for Phase 1, the permittee
must provide evidence that all TMC truck operators have been informed of the restriction, and
that formal agreements have been made with independent truckers (e.g., agreements that are part
of the hauling contract, other binding agreement). If the County receives a complaint about the
use of "Jake brakes" by any trucks enroute to or from the CUP -4633 project site, the Planning '
Division may require the permittee to fund an independent monitoring effort to detect the
violators.
Monitoring Work Program/Monitoring Agencies: The Planning Division.
Standards of Success: Absence of complaints.
C\CUP4633\EIR\2RDEIR 4 -131
000 71 i
r
N -2. Alternative Access Routes
Due to the increased truck traffic and cumulative noise along the streets of the City of Moorpark,
particularly Walnut Canyon Road, and the need for various improvements to mitigate future
traffic on these streets, as described in the City of Moorpark's Circulation Element, the permittee
shall participate in any assessment district or other financing technique, including the payment
of traffic mitigation fees, which the County of Ventura may adopt to fund or partially fund the
proposed S.R. 23 by -pass extension. If such a district or other mechanism is created, the
permittee shall be required to pay only its pro -rata share of any assessment or other charges.
Implementation Responsibility: Permittee or successor in interest.
Monitoring Frequency: As needed, when a program is developed by the County.
Monitoring Work Program/Monitoring Agencies: The Planning Division, in consultation
with the Public Works Agency, shall be the monitoring agency.
Standards of Success: Acquisition of funds from the permittee.
N -3. Noise Monitoring Program for Walnut Canyon Road/Moorpark Avenue
Due to the increased trick traffic and cumulative noise along the streets of the City of Moorpark,
particularly Walnut Canyon Road, the permittee shall contribute on a pro -rata basis to a City of
Moorpark sponsored traffic noise monitoring program on Walnut Canyon Road/Moorpark
Avenue if a reciprocal agreement is implemented between the County of Ventura and the City
of Moorpark during the life of the permit. This reciprocal agreement shall be between the
County of Ventura and the City of Moorpark to develop, fund, and implement a traffic noise
monitoring and enforcement program designed to reduce traffic noise impacts on Walnut Canyon
Road/Moorpark Avenue. If such an agreement is developed, the permittee shall be required to
pay only its pro -rata share of any assessment or other charges.
Implementation Responsibility: Permittee or successor in interest.
Monitoring Frequency: As needed, when a program is developed by the County.
Monitoring Work Program/Monitoring Agencies: The Planning Division, in consultation
with the City of Moorpark, shall be the monitoring agency.
Standards of Success: Acquisition of funds from the permittee.
4.8.6 RESIDUAL IMPACTS
After implementation of the above recommended conditions of approval, the proposed project
is expected to generate the following residual impacts:
• Without implementation of the City of Moorpark's circulation improvements, noise related
to the proposed project is expected to contribute incrementally to the existing significant,
cumulative unmitigable impacts (Class I) along Walnut Canyon Road;
CACUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 4 -132 000415.
ATTACHMENT 5
T�kbk 1
F- XISUNQ ICU COMPARISON SUMMARY
' Exc=& Ievei Of service "C
Lad of servicc motet: .00 - .60 A
.61 - .70 B
.71 - .8o C
.81 - .90 D
.91 -1.00 E
Above LOO F
TOTAL P.03
APR 23 196 00:0? PAGE.03
1993194
1996
utT
&TpcmgY.
AM
PM
AM
_PM
1.
Moocpmt & High
37
SO
A4
.48
2-
Spring & IAA
32
A4
33
AS
5.
LAlPcince= & SR•119 WB
.48
3$
S7
A3
6.
LARArroeton & SR -118 EB
.45
.62
.46
.64
9.
Moorpark & Po{adater/FLmt
S2
.60
.46
.59
10.
Tkm RcjmWGabbc0 & LA
.65
.74
.73
.83 '
11.
Moocpwt & LA.
.63
.65
.68
.79
.82 '
12.
13.
Spftg & LA
Sckwe & LA
.66
SS
.74
AS
.76
S8
.62
37.
Walnut Coyan & C wey
30
34
36
-43
' Exc=& Ievei Of service "C
Lad of servicc motet: .00 - .60 A
.61 - .70 B
.71 - .8o C
.81 - .90 D
.91 -1.00 E
Above LOO F
TOTAL P.03
APR 23 196 00:0? PAGE.03
9 ATTACHMENT 6
address some of the environmental issues, and still achieve some of the applicant's project objectives
(refer to Section 5.9).
5.9 SECOND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Based upon the analysis of the proposed project and the alternatives described above, a second
environmentally superior alternative (ESA) was developed. This was done pursuant to Section
15126(d)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, which notes, if the No Project Alternative is the ESA, then
the EIR must also identify a second ESA from among the other alternatives. (Refer to Section 5.3
for a discussion of the No Action Alternative.)
Under this alternative it is possible to reduce and possibly avoid significant environmental
impacts while allowing the applicant to partially achieve the stated project objectives. The Second
ESA includes the following elements:
• All of the mitigation measures and recommended conditions of approval described in the EIR
apply, including the Alternative Access - Easterly Extension of Broadwav described above in
Section 5.7.
• Issuance of a permit for Phases 1 and 2 for a duration of no more than 20 years, with a
requirement that a permit modification be approved in order to continue Phase 2 mining beyond
that time. Phase 3 would be included within the CUP boundary only for plant operations and
stockpiling. However, a subsequent permit modification to the CUP would be required in order
to initiate Phase 3 mining. If Phase 3 mining is not approved, the applicant would reclaim the
site using the design and approach described in the reclamation plan approved for the project.
The reclamation plan would be modified to describe Phase 1 and 2 post - mining conditions and
the activity needed to achieve the required 2 to 1 slope along Phase 1 and 2 boundaries with
Phase 3.
• No asphalt plant.
• The applicant either limits average daily traffic to that of the "Existing Setting" (i.e., 810 one-
way heavy truck trips and 240 employee /other one -way trips), or the applicant would pay the
Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee described in Section 4.9.3 -1 for all additional trips.
• In limiting the number of heavy truck trips, the permittee will be required to maintain monthly
records of truck trips. The total actual monthly truck trips would be divided by the number of
authorized work days to compute an average daily truck trips for the month. Each monthly total
would be summed and average daily truck trips calculated for the previous twelve (12) months.
Average daily truck trips for the previous twelve (12) months in excess of the permitted limit
would be considered a violation of the truck trip limit. In this manner, the permittee would
develop a "rolling average" reflective of seasonal market variations while at the same time
ensuring the facility operates within the overall truck trip limit.
• All truck traffic would be limited to between the hours of 6:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M., except for
up to 36 ready mix trucks which would be permitted to return between the hours of 6:00 P.M.
and 7:00 P.M. The restricted hours would reduce the noise impact to residents early in the
C.- \CUP\4633\EIR\2RDEIR 5 -16 000417
morning and in the evening when workers are at home. Exceptions may be granted on a case -
by -case basis by the Planning Director.
• Based upon the information provided in Section 4.8.2 -3 (i.e., the supplemental noise study
regarding Retrofitting Acoustically Upgraded Windows to Noise Impacted Residences), the
following condition of approval is recommended if a project is approved that permits more than
an average daily limit of 810 heavy truck trips:
Acoustically Upgraded Windows
The permittee shall participate in any reciprocal agreement between the City of
Moorpark and the County of Ventura that is designed to reduce cumulative traffic
noise along Walnut Canyon Road, within the northerly portion of the City of
Moorpark. Said agreement should identify homes that would benefit from the
installation of acoustically upgraded windows and. among those, homes that would
benefit from the installation of an air conditioning unit. Participation shall be
based on the permittee's pro rata contribution to the traffic.
• Based upon the information provided in Section 4.8.2 -3 (i.e., the supplemental noise study
regarding Roadside Noise Barriers), the following condition of approval is recommended if a
project is approved that permits more than an average daily limit of 810 heavy truck trips:
Roadside Noise Barriers
The permittee shall participate in any reciprocal agreement between the City of
Moorpark and the County of Ventura that is designed to reduce cumulative
traffic noise impacts for those residences identified in the Section 4.8.2 -3 as
possibly benefitting from the installation of a noise barrier wall. Participation
shall be based on the permittee's pro rata contribution to the traffic.
The Second ESA would not result in new significant impacts, except for those associated with
the easterly extension of Broadway. However, the Broadway extension has been proposed as part
of the proposed Hidden Creek Ranch/Specific Plan No. 8 within the City of Moorpark, not as an
access route for TMC's CUP request. The EIR being prepared for that proposal describes significant
impacts (Class 1) to the biological, visual, and air resources, some of which may be attributable to
the Broadway extension.
Under this alternative, changes in operating hours and the setting of a limit on heavy truck trips
could reduce the magnitude of: 1) the truck noise impacts along Happy Camp Road and Walnut
Canyon Road; 2) air quality impacts because of lower emissions; and 3) the amount of truck traffic
along Happy Camp Road and Walnut Canyon Road. However, such changes would not reduce
impacts to visual and biological resources. Elimination of the asphalt plant will serve to concentrate
trucking on the core aggregate business and will eliminate asphalt related odors that may be found
objectionable by those along the haul route. Since the daily mining activities under the Second ESA
would be substantially similar to those of the proposed project, near term significant impacts to the
visual resources and air quality would continue, albeit for a shorter time period, and significant
impacts to the biological and visual resources would occur over a lesser area. Deferring Phase 3
CACUPW633\EIR\2RDEIR 5-17 00041,8
d
mining would effectively preclude mining on those lands, save for the activity needed to achieve the
required 2 to 1 slope along its boundary with Phases 1 and 2, until a subsequent CUP and
environmental review has occurred.
This alternative has several benefits because it would allow the County to re- evaluate the project
site and "existing setting" at various points in time via subsequent environmental and public reviews.
The ability to revise and/or add conditions and/or mitigation measures to the project is important for
the following reasons: 1) conditions applied to Phase 1, and/or subsequently to Phase 2, of the
project may be found ineffective in addressing previously identified or new issues; 2) the
environmental conditions at and near the project site may change over time, raising environmental
issues not previously identified; 3) new technology may become available that can better address
environmental issues; 4) subsequent environmental review may identify a need to revise the mining
and /or reclamation plans; and 5) an alternative access road may be developed that would be
preferable to the existing access road, the use of which could be evaluated and perhaps required of
the applicant upon permit modification. In addition, because mine operations have resulted in such
issues as project traffic and noise, the ability to periodically review these operations through a public
environmental review process appears warranted.
Id However, approval of a lesser project would likely result in another application(s) for a mining
project(s) in order to meet the demand for aggregate material within the market area of the proposed
project. Such a project(s) would result in its own impacts that, depending upon location, could
significantly impact biological and other resources, and would likely result in additional traffic, noise
and air quality impacts.
dThis alternative was not rejected because it is possible for Ventura County decision makers to
approve a lesser project (i.e., similar to current operations), for a shorter period of time, with the
Idabove described changes to address some of the environmental issues, and still partially achieve the
applicant's project objectives.
d5.10 IMPACTS FROM ALTERNATIVES
CEQA (Section 15126(d)(3) states that, if an alternative would cause one or more significant
effects in addition to those that would be caused by the proposed project, the significant effects of
the alternative shall be discussed but in less detail than the significant effects of the proposed project.
This has been done for each of the alternatives described above. For those alternatives involving
alternative locations, this determination and the related discussion is necessarily qualitative rather
than quantitative due to the absence of site specific analyses for those locations.
rBased on the available information, the following summarizes the new and potentially
significant impacts described above for each of the alternatives:
No Project Alternative -none.
Alternative Site - Use of New Site Alternative - biological (e.g., loss of habitat and direct
impacts to threatened and endangered species), increased air emissions (i.e., due to a potentially
d .
C:1CUP14633\E1R\2RDE/R 5 -18