Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1998 0107 CC REG ITEM 08AAGENDA REPORT CITY OF MOORPARK ITEM 6*A CITY OF M001tPAM CALIFORMA City Council Meeting of Januarm 199 ACTION: %1 n r. eat LID I -'11 -98 BY: of. P TO: Honorable City Council %� /% FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community Developmeiht/tapk-1 Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Principal Planner �5--�- DATE: December 18, 1997 (CC Meeting of 1/7/98) SUBJECT: CONSIDER HIDDEN CREEK RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT (SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 8 /SPECIFIC PLAN NO. SP -93 -1, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GPA -93 -1, AND ZONE CHANGE NO. ZC- 93 -3), APPLICANT: HIDDEN CREEK RANCH PARTNERS (PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED ON DECEMBER 3, 1997) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The January 7, 1998, City Council meeting will be the seventh Council meeting held to discuss the proposed Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project. The Council closed the public hearing on December 3, 1997. At the December 10 meeting, the Council continued the meeting to January 7, 1998, and requested that staff provide additional information on Valley Fever and potential lighting and glare mitigation measures. Also included in the staff report is a response to issues raised by the public pertaining to potential health hazard risks. The City Council has held five open public hearings for the Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project on October 1, 8, and 22, November 12, and December 3, 1997. The public hearing was closed on December 3, 1997, and a continued meeting was held on December 10, 1997. At the December 10 meeting, there was City Council discussion regarding the significant impacts of the project that were not fully mitigated, and the City Council requested further information from staff on Valley Fever and potential lighting and glare mitigation measures to minimize impacts on the Moorpark College Observatory. The Discussion section of this report identifies the information requested by the City Council at the December 10 meeting and also includes the staff responses. Also included with this staff report is a response from Leighton and Associates to information submitted to the City Council from Mr. Art Lenox on potential health risks that is dated November 27, 1997. DST c: \1- m \sp- 8 \cc- sp8rpt.7 000001 Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project To: Honorable City Council December 18, 1997 Page 2 DISCUSSION The information requested by the City Council at the December 10 meeting is identified by bold type, below, and the staff responses follow. Also addressed in this section is further information received from Leighton and Associates on potential health hazard risks and the time frame for an Environmental Impact Report certification decision. Valley Fever 1. Explain to what extent Valley Fever is a threat from large -scale mass grading as compared to every day agricultural operations. Response: Additional information on Valley Fever has been distributed to the City Council under separate cover as attachments to a memorandum from the Director of Community Development dated December 19, 1997. To summarize this information, Valley Fever is caused by the fungus Coccidioides immitis, which grows in soils in areas of low rainfall, high summer temperatures, and moderate winter temperatures. These fungal spores become airborne when the soil is disturbed by winds, construction, farming and other activities. The upper ±11.8 inches (30 centimeters) of soil is the primary area where Coccidioidomycosis (Valley Fever) spores are typically found. The spores are most typically associated with arid or semiarid climate, hot summers, few winter freezes, low altitude, and alkaline soils. It is a natural part of the desert microflora and spores can be inhaled anywhere they exist. People working in certain occupations, such as construction, agricultural work, work involving disturbance of desert soils, and archaeology, have an increased risk of exposure and disease. The fungal spores of Coccidioides immitis are often found in abundance in the soil around rodent burrows, Indian ruins and burial grounds. In these settings, infections are more likely to be severe because of intensive exposure to a large number of spores. (Primary Sources: Arizona Department of Health Services and the University of Arizona /Arizona Research Laboratories) Symptoms usually begin about two weeks after a susceptible person (one who is not immune to the disease) inhales the spores. Symptoms can be very mild. The person may develop what amounts to a slight cold which quickly subsides. Approximately 60 percent of all cases of Valley Fever are in the "mild" category. The remaining 40 percent of infected persons can develop a spectrum of illnesses ranging from mild to moderate flu -like symptoms to pneumonia. The DST c: \1- m \sp- 8 \cc- sp8rpt.7 V VLitI�� Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project To: Honorable City Council December 18, 1997 Page 3 most common symptoms for persons seeking medical attention are fatigue, cough, chest pain, fever, rash, headache, and joint aches. Approximately 0.5 percent of cases are persons developing disseminating disease where the infection spreads to other areas of the body; the most serious manifestation of disseminated Valley Fever is meningitis. The prevailing medical opinion is that, upon recovery, individuals are immune from contracting Valley Fever again. Valley Fever is not a communicable disease, meaning that it does not spread from one person to another. (Primary sources: Centers for Disease Control, University of Arizona, Arizona Research Laboratories, Valley Fever Center for Excellence) 2. Provide further information on grading for agricultural operations, including how much earth movement typically occurs. Response: Cultivation for field crops would have an average depth of 18 inches (source: Ventura County AgricultureoCommission Office). As previously stated, the upper ±11.8 inches (30 centimeters) of soil is the primary area where Valley Fever spores are typically found. 3. Provide clarification regarding square miles of impact for the 203 cases of Valley Fever reported following the Northridge Earthquake. Response: The referenced Valley Fever cases in 1994 were identified through Ventura County physician reports to the Ventura County Health Department by searching hospital infection control and medical records, and by collecting coccidioidomycosis serologic test results from hospital -based and reference laboratory specimens from Ventura County residents. (Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, March 1997) The Valley Fever cases were heavily concentrated in Simi Valley rather than in the San Fernando Valley where the earthquake was centered. Both the timing and location of the Valley Fever cases following the Northridge Earthquake were believed to be a result of the dust generated by landslides caused by the earthquake and the prevailing winds during and after the earthquake that blew from the northeast to the southwest, which carried the dust from the canyons into Simi Valley and beyond. (Source: USGS Response to an Urban Earthquake -- Northridge `94.) 4. Provide information on Valley Fever cases resulting from construction of the State Routes 23 and 118 Direct Connector. DST c: \1- m \sp- 8 \cc- sp8rpt.7 00000a Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project To: Honorable City Council December 18, 1997 Page 4 Response: Staff contacted the County of Ventura Department of Health Services Department, and was informed that the only reported cases of Valley Fever in Moorpark, since incorporation, were eight cases reported in 1994 following the Northridge Earthquake. Those cases were reported as a result of an investigation by the Ventura County Public Health Department, California Department of Health Services, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), on the upsurge in reported cases in Ventura County that occurred since the Northridge Earthquake. The Valley Fever outbreak following the January 1994 earthquake was the subject of an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association dated March 19, 1997 (the referenced article is included with the Valley Fever information that was distributed as attachments to a memorandum from the Director of Community Development dated December 19, 1997). The CDC investigation identified that during the decade preceding the Northridge Earthquake, less than 10 cases were reported annually in Ventura County. Since 1994, the Ventura County Public Health Department has no reported cases of Valley Fever in Moorpark. Lighting and Glare 5. Provide further information on mitigation measures for the Moorpark College Observatory impacts and whether standards versus relocation are the only available options. Response: The Moorpark College President has not requested relocation of the observatory; therefore, relocation is probably not an available option. The attached letter from the applicant (Attachment 1) addresses the summary of the Tucson and Pima County Arizona Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinances that was received from the Ventura County Astronomical Society (Attachment 2). The applicant's letter identifies that astronomers typically suggest the use of low pressure sodium lights; however, many communities that have attempted to require the use of low pressure sodium lights have found the color distortion to be unacceptable. Another identified preference of astronomers is to have adjacent outdoor light fixtures in close proximity to an observatory turned off by 11:00 P.M. Staff's opinion is that some level of safety and security lighting would still be required, although a mandatory closing time for a commercial center could be imposed in combination with a requirement for a reduction in commercial center lighting after 11:00 p.m. Lighting controls for single- family residential neighborhoods would be harder to regulate. DST c: \1- m \sp- 8 \cc- sp8rpt.7 �i'i�im Hidden Creek Ranch Specific To: Honorable City Council December 18, 1997 Page 5 Plan Project The intent of outdoor lighting control standards should be to regulate the types, construction, installation, and uses of outdoor electrically powered illuminating devices, lighting practices, and systems to conserve energy and minimize lighting glare and spill- over effects, without decreasing safety, utility, security, and productivity. 6. Provide specific clarification regarding what portions of the Pima County Ordinance would be applicable. Response: Attachments 1 and 2 should be referenced regarding applicable lighting control requirements. Health Risks Attachment 3 is a letter from Leighton and Associates dated December 10, 1997, that provides a response to information dated November 27, 1997, that was received from Mr. Art Lenox pertaining to potential health hazard risks. The conclusion in the December 10 letter from Leighton and Associates is that mitigation measures recommended by Leighton and incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report are adequate to address soil and ground water contamination, including all issues presented by Mr. Lenox in the subject document. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certification The provisions of Chapter 4.5 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, Section 65920 et sea., are inapplicable for the requested General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Specific Plan, including but not limited to processing time limits, because the Project requires legislative, rather than adjudicatory actions by the City. The City and the applicant did agree on a time limit for an EIR certification decision; however, that date was extended due to late payment by the applicant for EIR related costs, which resulted in EIR processing suspensions. Consistent with the Agreement between the City and the applicant, the City Council will need to reach an EIR certification decision on or before January 23, 1998. RECOMMENDATION 1. Continue this meeting to a special meeting on January meeting of January 21, 1998. DST c: \1- m \sp- 8 \cc- sp8rpt.7 date certain, either an adjourned or 14, 1998, or the regular City Council 00600a Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan Project To: Honorable City Council December 18, 1997 Page 6 2. Direct staff to prepare a draft resolution for EIR certification for City Council consideration. Attachments: 1. Letter from Messenger Investment Company dated 12 -18 -97 2. Information Sheet on the Revised Tucson and Pima County Arizona Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinances 3. Letter from Leighton and Associates dated 12 -10 -97 DST c: \1- m \sp- 8 \cc- sp8rpt.7 V'V600(; Oec -18 -97 10:19A messenger investmentco. 714 546 -1050 P.02 j/MESSENGER i N V F S r M E N T C O M P A N Y December 18, 1997 Mr. Nelson Miller Director of Community Development CITY OF MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 RE: Concerns about Moorpark College's Charles Temple Observatory Dear Nelson: Members of the Ventura County Astronomical Society have voiced their concerns about the problem of light pollution adversely impacting the usefulness of Moorpark College's Charles Temple Observatory. Subsequently Mayor Hunter and other Council members requested additional information and recommendations from City staff. Hidden Creek Ranch Partners (HCR) has reviewed the information submitted by Jim Cassou on behalf of the Ventura County Astronomical Society. In addition, we have contacted representatives from a number of educational organizations with observatories in the Greater Los Angeles Metropolitan Area to request their opinions regarding the consequences of and best methods of dealing with urban light pollution. And since the college has no desire to relocate the observatory, we are also in the process of meeting with Moorpark College faculty that utilize the observatory to see what other mitigation measures might be employed to reduce light pollution impacts. In our conversations with other astronomers who teach the subject in the southern California area, we repeatedly heard that shielded, low pressure sodium lights are the least polluting illuminators in close proximity to an observatory. However they noted that most communities do not like this form of lighting and are reluctant to require their exclusive use. There also seemed to be a clear preference to have adjacent, outdoor light fixtures in close proximity to an observatory turned off by 11 p.m. if possible. HCR has also reviewed the "Tucson and Pima County Arizona Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinances" summary included in Mr. Cassou's handout. Our comments and observations are as follows: - We concur with the conditions contained in Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4, with the exception of Sections 4.4 and 4.5. These two sections define impact areas with 25 and 35 mile radii. The size of these areas appears to be impractical and unenforceable, given the topography and other governing entities (e.g. the County and Simi Valley). 959 SOUTH COAST DRIV F, COSTA MESA, CALIFORP 000007 (714) 546 -13OU / FAX J714 ATTACHMENT 1 Dec -18 -97 10:19A messenger investmentco. 714 546 -1050 P.03 December 18, 1997 Mr. Nelson Miller Director of Community Development CITY OF MOORPARK Page 2 - Section 5 defines the shielding requirements of various illuminators. We do not concur that high pressure sodium, metal halide and quartz illuminators should be prohibited. Rather, they should be allowed but appropriately shielded. - Concur with Sections 7 and 8. We do not concur with the blanket prohibitions listed in Section 9. The process described in Section 8 should allow staff to make appropriate decisions with regard to proposed lighting fixtures. - Concur with Sections 10 through 16 except for the arbitrary prohibitions in Section 12.1. In summary, we believe that City staff should be granted reasonable flexibility with regard to the type of lighting allowed, while at the same time creating conditions that will reduce unnecessary light pollution in proximity to the observatory. Sincerely, HIDDEN CREEK RANCH PARTNERS, L.P. Gary Austin Vice President MESSENGER OM10 8 Revised Tucson and Pima County Arizona Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinances Information Sheet 91, April 1994 J.Pla, International Dark -Sky Association, 3545 N. Stewart Ave., Tucson, AZ 85716 U.S.A. E -mail: SaveOurShCwuoLcom WWW: http: / /www.darksky.org Ordinance No. 8210. Tucson/Pima County Outdoor Lighting Code, 1994 Edition (This is the City of Tucson version, with a few notes of differences to the County Code.) Passed by the Mayor and Council of the City of Tucson, Arizona, 21 March 1994 Section 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this Code is to provide standards for outdoor lighting so that its use does not unreasonably interfere with astronomical observations. It is the intent of this Code to encourage, through the regulation of the types, kinds, construction, installation, and uses of outdoor electrically powered illuminating devices, lighting practices and systems to conserve energy without decreasing safety, utility, security, and productivity while enhancing nighttime enjoyment of property within the jurisdiction. Section 2. Conformance with Applicable Codes. All outdoor electrically powered illuminating devices shall be installed in conformance with the provisions of this Code, the Building Code, the Electrical Code, and the Sign Code of the jurisdiction as applicable and under appropriate permit and inspection. Section 3. Approved Materials and Methods of Construction or Installation/Operation. The provisions of this Code are not intended to prevent the use of any design, material, or method of installation or operation not specifically prescribed by this Code, provided any such alternate has been approved. The building official may approve any such proposed alternate providing he finds that it: a. provides at least approximate equivalence to that applicable specific requirements of this Code b. is otherwise satisfactory and complies with the intent of this Code; or c. has been designed or approved by a registered professional engineer and content and function promotes the intent of this Code. Section 4. Definitions. As used in this Code, unless the context clearly indicates, certain word and phrases used in this chapter shall mean the following: Sec. 4.1. "Person" means any individual, tenant, lessee, owner, or any commercial entity including but not limited to firm, business, partnership, joint venture or corporation. +06005 1 of ATTACHMENT 2 10/1597 5:01 Ph Sec. 4.2. "Installed" means the attachment, or assembly fixed in place, whether or not connected to a power source, of any outdoor light fixture. Sec. 4.3. "Outdoor light fixture" means outdoor electrically powered illuminating devices, outdoor lighting or reflective surfaces, lamps and similar devices, permanently installed or portable, used for illumination or advertisement. Such devices shall include, but are not limited to search, spot, and flood lights for: 1. buildings and structures; 2. recreational areas; 3. parking lot lighting; 4. landscape lighting; 5. billboards and other signs (advertising or other); 6. street lighting; 7. product display area lighting; 8. building overhangs and open canopies. Sec. 4.4. "Area A" means the circular area, thirty -five miles in radius, the center of which is the center of the Kitt Peak National Observatory; the circular area, twenty -five miles in radius, the center of which is the center of Mount Hopkins Observatory; while the boundary lines for Area A around Mt. Lemmon are defined as: The Pinal County line on the north, along the center line of the Santa Cruz River, to the center line of the Rillito Creek, to the center line of Tanque Verde Creek with the junction to the northern border of the Saguaro National Monument, then along that border until it ends on the east side and bends east to the County line. Sec 4.5. "Area B" means all area outside Area A and outside the territorial limits of every Indian reservation lying wholly or partially within Pima County. Section 5. Shielding. All nonexempt outdoor lighting fixtures shall have shielding as required by Table 5 of this Code. Sec. 5.1. "Fully shielded" means outdoor light fixtures shielded or constructed so that no light rays are emitted by the installed fixture at angles above the horizontal plane as certified by a photometric test report. Sec. 5.2. "Partially shielded" means outdoor light fixtures shielded or constructed so that no more than ten percent of the light rays are emitted by the installed fixture at angles above the horizontal plane as certified by a photometric test report. Table 5 Shielding Requirements Area A Fixture Lamp Type Shielded Low pressure sodiuml High pressure sodium Partially Prohibited except fully shielded on arterial streets Area B --------------- - Shielded --------------- - Partially Fully 006010 2 of 8 _ 3O __1 10/15r97 5:01 PM and collector streets of 100 ft or more in right of way width. Metal halide Prohibited 7 Fully 2,6 Fluorescent Fully 3,5 Fully 3,5 Quartz4 Prohibited Fully Incandescent greater Fully Fully than 160 watt Incandescent 160 watt None None or less Any light source of None None 50 watt or less Glass tubes filled with None None neon, argon, krypton Other sources As approved by the Building Official Footnotes: 1. This is the preferred light source to minimize undesirable light emission into the night sky affecting astronomical observations. Fully shielded fixtures are preferred but not required. 2. Metal halide lighting, used primarily for display purposes, shall not be used for security lighting after 11:00 pm or after closing hours if before 11:00 pm. Metal halide lamps shall be installed only in enclosed luminaries. I Outdoor advertising signs of the type constructed of translucent materials and wholly illuminated from within do not require shielding. Dark backgrounds with light lettering or symbols are preferred, to minimize detrimental effects. Unless conforming to the above dark background preference, total lamp wattage per property shall be less than 41 watts in Area A. 4. For the purposes of this Code, quartz lamps shall not be considered an incandescent light source. 5. Warm white and natural lamps are preferred to minimize detrimental effects. 6. For filtering requirements for metal halide fixture lamp types see Section 6. 7. Fully shielded and installed metal halide fixtures shall be allowed for applications where the designing engineer deems that color rendering is critical. Section 6. Filtration. Metal halide fixture lamps types shall be filtered. "Filtered" means any outdoor light fixture which has a glass, acrylic, or translucent enclosure of the light source (quartz glass does not meeting this requirement). Section 7. Outdoor Advertising Signs. Sec 7.1. Top Mounted Fixtures Required. Lighting fixtures used to illuminate an outdoor 00G011 3 of 8 � 31— 10/15197 5:02 PM advertising sign shall be mounted on the top of the sign structure. All such fixtures shall comply with the shielding requirements of Section 5 and the time controls of minor Section 9.5. (The County has made an exception for some of the largest signs, but tight restrictions are given for lighting performance.) Sec. 7.2. (City only.) Prohibitions. See Section 9.5 for prohibitions. Sec. 7.2. (County only.) Compliance Limit. Existing outdoor advertising structures shall be brought into conformance with this Code within three years from the date of adoption of this provision. Sec. 7.3. (County only.) Prohibitions. Electrical illumination of outdoor advertising off -site signs is prohibited in Area A. Electrical illumination of outdoor advertising off -site signs between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and sunrise is prohibited in Area A. Section 8. Submission of Plans and Evidence of Compliance with Code- Subdivision Plats. Sec 8.1. Submission Contents. The applicant for any permit required by any provision of the laws of this jurisdiction in connection with proposed work involving outdoor lighting fixtures shall submit (as part of the application for permit) evidence that the proposed work will comply with this Code. The submission shall contain but shall not necessarily be limited to the following, all or part of which may be part or in addition to the information required elsewhere in the laws of this jurisdiction upon application for the required permit: 1. plans indicating the location on the premises, and the type of illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, reflectors, and other devices; 2. description of the illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, reflectors, and other devices and the description may include, but is not limited to, catalog cuts by manufacturers and drawings (including sections where required); 3. photometric data, such as that furnished by manufacturers, or similar showing the angle of cut off or light emissions. Sec 8.2. Additional Submission. The above required plans, descriptions and data shall be sufficiently complete to enable the plans examiner to readily determine whether compliance with the requirements of this Code will be secured. If such plans, descriptions and data cannot enable this ready determination, by reason of the nature or configuration of the devices, fixtures, or lamps proposed, the applicant shall additionally submit as evidence of compliance to enable such determination such certified reports of tests as will do so provided that these tests shall have been performed and certified by a recognized testing laboratory. Sec. 8.3. Subdivision Plat Certification. If any subdivision proposes to have installed street or other common or public area outdoor lighting, the final plat shall contain a statement certifying that the applicable provisions of the Tucson/Pima County Outdoor Lighting Code will be adhered to. Sec 8.4. Lamp or Fixture Substitution. Should any outdoor light fixture or the type of light source therein be changed after the permit has been issued, a change request must be submitted to the building official for his approval, together with adequate information to assure compliance with this code, which must be received prior to substitution. 00GOU - 32 - 4 of 8 10/15i97 5:02 PM Section 9. Prohibitions. Sec 9.1. Mercury Vapor Lamps Fixtures and Lamps. The installation, sale, offer for sale, lease or purchase of any mercury vapor fixture or lamp for use as outdoor lighting is prohibited. Sec 9.2. Certain Other Fixtures and Lamps. The installation, sale, offering for sale, lease or purchase of any low pressure sodium, high pressure sodium, metal halide, fluorescent, quartz or incandescent outdoor lighting fixture or lamp the use of which is not allowed by Table 5 is prohibited. Sec 9.3. Laser Source Light. Except as provided in minor Section 9.4, the use of laser source light or any similar high intensity light for outdoor advertising or entertainment, when projected above the horizontal is prohibited. Sec 9.4. Searchlights. The operation of searchlights for advertising purposes is prohibited in Area A and is prohibited in unincorporated Pima County. In the territorial limits of the City of Tucson, the operation of searchlights for advertising purposes is prohibited in Area A and is prohibited in Area B between 10:00 p.m. and sunrise the following morning. Sec. 9.5. (City only.) Outdoor Advertising Off -Site Signs. Electrical illumination of outdoor advertising off -site signs is prohibited in Area A. Electrical illumination of outdoor advertising off -site signs between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and sunrise is prohibited in Area B. Section 10. Special Uses. Sec 10.1. Recreational Facilities. Any light source permitted by this Code may be used for lighting of outdoor recreational facilities (public or private), such as, but not limited to, football fields, soccer fields, baseball fields, softball fields, tennis courts, auto race tracks, horse race tracks or show areas, provided all of the following conditions are met: a. Lighting for parking lots and other areas surrounding the playing field, court, or track shall comply with this Code for lighting in the specific Area as defined in Section 4.4 and 4.5 of this Code. b. All fixtures used for event lighting shall be fully shielded as defined in Section 5 of this Code, or be designed or provided with sharp cut -off capability, so as to minimize up -light, spill-light, and glare. c. All events shall be scheduled so as to complete all activity before or as near to 10:30 p.m. as practical, but under no circumstances shall any illumination of the playing field, court, or track be permitted after 11:00 p.m. except to conclude a scheduled event that was in progress before 11:00 p.m. and circumstances prevented concluding before 11:00 p.m. Exception: (City only.) Any portion of a recreational facility located within 300 feet of a road or street designated as a scenic route shall be lighted using only fixtures approved for use under this Code for the Area, as defined in Section 4.4 and 4.5 of this Code, in which said recreational facility is located. 33 000013 5 of a 10/15/97 5:02 PM Exception: (County only.) Recreational facilities located along roads and streets designated as scenic routes shall be lighted using only fixtures approved for the Area in which they are located. Sec. 10.2. Outdoor Display Lots. Any light source permitted by this Code may be used for lighting of outdoor display lots such as, but not limited to, automobile sales or rental, recreational vehicle sales, or building material sales, provided all of the following conditions are met: a. Lighting for parking lots and other areas surrounding the display lot shall comply with this Code for lighting in the specific area as defined in Section 4.4 and 4.5 of this Code. b. All fixtures used for display lighting shall be fully shielded as defined in Section 5 of this Code, or be designed or provided with sharp cut -off capability, so as to minimize up- light, spill- light, or glare. c. Display lot lighting shall be turned off within thirty minutes after closing of the business. Under no circumstances shall the full illumination of the lot be permitted after 11:00 p.m. Any lighting used after 11:00 p.m. shall be used as security lighting. Section 11. Temporary Exemption Sec 11.1. Request; Renewal; Information Required. Any person may submit a written request, on a form prepared by the jurisdiction, to the building official for a temporary exemption request. A temporary exemption shall contain the following information: 1. specific exemption or exemptions requested; 2. type and use of outdoor light fixture involved; 3. duration of time requested exemption; 4. type of lamp and calculated lumens; 5. total wattage of lamp or lamps; 6. proposed location on premises of the outdoor light fixture(s); 7. previous temporary exemptions, if any, and addresses of premises thereunder; 8. physical size of outdoor light fixture(s) and type of shielding provided; 9. such other data and information as may be required by the building official. Sec. 11.2. Approval; Duration. The building official shall have five business days from the date of submission of the request for temporary exemption to act, in writing, on the request. If approved, the exemption shall be valid for not more than thirty days from the date of issuance of the approval. The approval shall be renewable at the discretion of the building official upon a consideration of all the circumstances. Each such renewed exemption shall be valid for not more than thirty days. Sec 11.3. Disapproval; Appeal. If the request for temporary exemption is disapproved, the person making the request will have the appeal rights provided in Section 13. Section 12. Other Exemptions. Sec 12.1. Nonconformance 1. Mercury vapor lamps in use for outdoor lighting on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall not be so used. - 3y - 006014 6 of 8 10/15197 5:02 PN 7of8 2. (City.) Bottom - mounted outdoor advertising sign lighting shall not be used. 2. (County) Bottom - mounted outdoor advertising sign lighting shall not be used, except as provided in Section 7. 3. All other outdoor light fixtures lawfully installed prior to and operable on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter are exempt from all requirements of this Code except those regulated in Section 7 and in minor Sections 9.3 and 9.4 and in Section 10. There shall be no change in use or lamp type, or any replacement or structural alteration made, without conforming to all applicable requirements of this Code. Sec. 12.2. Fossil Fuel Light. All outdoor light fixtures producing light directly by the combustion of natural gas or other fossil fuels are exempt from all requirements of this Code. Sec 12.3. State and Federal Facilities. Outdoor light fixtures installed on, and in connection with those facilities and land owned or operated by the federal government or the state of Arizona, or any department, division, agency or instrumentality thereof, are exempt from all requirements of this Code. Voluntary compliance with the intent of this Code at those facilities is encouraged. Section 13. Appeals. Any person substantially aggrieved by any decision of the building official made in administration of the Code has the right and responsibilities of appeal to the Advisory/Appeals Board of this jurisdiction. Section 14. Law Governing Conflicts. Where any provision of federal, state, county, or city statutes, codes, or laws conflicts with any provision of this code, the most restrictive shall govern unless otherwise regulated by law. Section 15. Violation. It shall be a civil infraction for any person to violate any of the provisions of this Code. Each and every day during which the violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Section 16. Enforcement and Penalty. Sec 16.1. [City only] Pursuant to Section 28 -12 of the Tucson Code: 1. When a violation of this Code is determined, the following penalty shall be imposed: a. A fine of not-less than fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars per violation. The imposition of a fine under this Code shall not be suspended. b. Any other order deemed necessary in the discretion of the hearing officer, including correction or abatement of the violation. 2. Failure of a defendant to comply with any order contained in a judgment under this. Code shall result in an additional fine of not less than fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars for each 10/15/97 5:02 PM day the defendant fails to comply. Sec. 16.1. [County only] A violation of this Code is considered a civil infraction. Civil infractions shall be enforced through the hearing officer procedure provided by A.R.S. Section 11 -808 and Sections 18.95.030, 18.95.040, and 18.101.60 of this Code [The numbering scheme of the Sections is different in the County Code]. A fine shall be imposed of not less than fifty dollars nor more than seven hundred dollars for any individual or ten thousand dollars for any corporation, association, or other legal entity for each offense. The imposition of a fine under this Code shall not be suspended. This material is copyrighted (®) by the IDA, or others as noted. It may be reproduced for non - commercial usage provided that credit is given to IDA. Go back to the IS list Go back to the IDA homeyage 00001t; 8 of 8 — 3G : 10/15/97 5:02 PM LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC. G.ot.dmkd and Envinm ---' "nminy Comuitwft RECEIVF0 DEC 18 1997 December 10, 1997 laity of MoorQark Project No. 881198 -011 To: BonTerra Consulting 20321 Birch Street, Suite 201 Newport Beach, California 92660 Attention: Dana C. Privitt Subject: Response to Comments, Hidden Creek Specific Plan and the Health Hazard Risks prepared by Art Lenox, dated November 27, 1997 BonTerra Consulting (BonTerra) retained Leighton and Associates, Inc. (L&A) to review and respond to the subject document in support of the EIR. L&A also provided recommendations, as appropriate. We appreciate the opportunity to continue to serve the needs of BonTerra Consulting and the City of Moorpark. If you have any questions or continents, please call me at your convenience. QA/QC cc: Debbie Traffenstedt Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Gnvgory L Milliken, RG 4708 Project Manager ATTACHMENT 3 31344 VIA COLINAS, SUITE 102, WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91362 000017 (818) 707 -8320 • (800) 273 -5552 FAX (818) 707 -7280 [*U1~.=IIIF REPORT REVEEW AND CONDAENT Hidden Creek Specific Plan and the Health Hazard Risks, dated November 27, 1997, prepared by Art Lenox General Comments The purpose of the document is stated by the author as follows: "... to identify two significant issues related to the proposed Hidden Creek Development Project that may have significant negative impacts on health and well being of the community if the project is approved." The two issues are: • Potential contamination in soil and groundwater from 40 years of oil extraction activities that will not be mitigated if the current plan is approved; and • "the risk ...from Valley Fever." Leighton's response (this document) only addresses issue 1 (soil and ground -water contamination), as the issue of Valley Fever is outside our expertise and should be addressed by others, if necessary. Leighton further notes that the proposed development area contains only one active oil well (Oak Park #8). Oak Park #8 is located near the entrance to the proposed development and will be abandoned as a component of the development. Oak Park #12 no longer produces oil and has been converted into an injection well. This injection well will also be abandoned, subject to approval by Nuevo Energy. Leighton's review responds to the issues itemized in Table 1 of the subject document and addresses each stated concern in sequence. Issue 1— Crude Oil on Sprayed on Roads in the Oak Park Oil Field We agree with Art Lenox that potential hazardous materials/carcinogens in some crude oils (see MSDS Sheet, Lenox Attachment 2) may include hydrogen sulfide and/or benzene. Data from the crude oil extracted from the Oak Park Oil Field does not include any mention of hydrogen sulfide or any sulfur content. To support this contention, we have included the map and data sheet from the California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (CDOGGR) Publication TR12, dated 1991 which details the properties of the reservoir fluids found in the Oak Park Oil Field. We agree that some crude oils contain benzene and that benzene may have been present in the crude oils which were used to oil the roads. Of note, benzene and hydrogen sulfide are both highly volatile compounds and would have volatilized within a short period (hours to weeks) following the application. The historic practice of oiling roads for controlling dust was discontinued in accordance with the Ventura County APCD regulations. MM L- 2 WOUIS LEM=AMAssocaW, W. 881198 -011 Leighton specified mitigation measures for crude oil- impacted soil which may be encountered during grading. Additionally, the grading contractor's health and safety plan will specify adequate protection measures for construction workers, as appropriate. Issue 2 — Debris We agree with Art Lenox that potential hazardous materials/carcinogens may have been present in the containers found on the development site. The stated mitigation measure addresses the containers and other suspect materials. Other suspect materials are not limited to batteries, transformers, drums or other containers but also includes impacted media (e.g. soil beneath the drums), which shall also be identified at the time of removal, characterized, profiled and legally disposed/recycled. Issue 3 — Groundwater /Suring Contamination We agree with Art Lenox that solvents were reported as used in 1972 to backflush Oak Park #7. This is a commonly performed method used to stimulate production in oil wells. The solvent is pumped into the steel cased well and the chemical flows into the rock formations in the depth interval opposite the perforated portion of the casing. In the case of Oak Park #7, the top of perforated interval is 700 vertical feet BELOW the base of fresh water and is between 1,100 and 1,500 feet below the ground surface. Some solvents are a type of Dense Non - Aqueous Phase Liquid ( DNAPL). DNAPL compounds are denser than water and therefore sink relative to water or salt water. This physical property would prevent their returning back to the surface and therefore the subject solvents do not threaten fresh groundwater or springs on or near the proposed development. Furthermore the formation waters into which the solvent was introduced are salt waters which will never be used for potable water. Issue 4 — Contaminated Soil near Oil Wells Outside the Development Area We agree with Art Lenox that oil field materials, including some chemicals, were used in the Oak Park Oil field and some of those substances continue to be used. Several of the stated materials including Barite, Ben -X, XC- polymer, Cypan, Class G Cement with perlite, Gilsonite, etc. are not necessarily hazardous substances or hazardous wastes. MSDS Sheets for these materials are readily available from the manufacturer and would be the basis for eliminating those materials from Mr. Lenox's list of potentially threatening chemicals. Our letter, dated November 5, 1997 was selectively quoted on the issue of mitigation measures for contamination outside the development area. We specifically stated that mitigation measures may extend, if necessary, along the proposed trail network in designated open space. We also stated that mitigation measures may be required to protect human health and the environment in areas of existing and future well sites in public open space, depending on the environmental and/or physical risks. We provided examples of mitigation measures including engineering controls. We did not propose that security fences were intended to prevent migration of contaminants. We clearly stated that excavation and legal disposal of impacted soil was a potential mitigation method. 3 Ei 0 000 ( . Cl LE18"NOASSO arcs, IW. 881198 -011 It is not possible for the developer to mitigate those properties that are not owned by or in the control of the developer. Mitigation of offsite contamination, if any is present, is the responsibility of the generator of the contamination. Issue S — Oil SD111/Massive release from the Tank Farm We agree with Art Lenox that the oil -field infrastrucure could be damaged by an earthquake or by normal aging. The CDOGGR has specific containment regulations for tank farms and the operator complies with these regulations as a component of the permit to operate the field. Clearly, in the event of a release to the surface or to the subsurface in the case of ruptured below- ground piping, the leak detection sensors and flow - meters would detect the discharge and abatement activities would commence immediately. Chronic exposures (i.e. multiple, long -term) would be necessary in order to generate significant toxicity. Clearly any exposures to the public caused by earthquakes would be rapidly mitigated and therefore these potential exposure pathways present limited threat to human health and the environment. Mr Lenox refers to a "fuel farm" and to "fuel lines" in Column 3 of Table 1. To our knowledge, no fuel is stored at this facility. The tank farm contains natural gas separators, above - ground storage tanks (AGST) for crude oil and for salt water. To our knowledge, no fuel AGST are present at the site. To our knowledge, no "fuel [crude oil] lines" are present in any area proposed for residential development. Mr. Lenox states that large volumes of crude oil are pumped from the wells to the "fuel farm ". The highest production from the Oak Park Oil Field occurred in 1971. During that year, a total of 101,211 barrels of crude oil were produced, as a direct result of enhanced recovery. Enhanced recovery was discontinued in 1978 and our recent discussion with the Torch site supervisor indicated that some of the wells only produce 2 barrels per day. A catastrophic release to the environment cannot occur unless sufficient volume is present. Conclusions Mitigation measures, recommended by Leighton and incorporated into the EIR, are adequate to address soil and ground water contamination, including all issues presented by Mr. Lenox in the subject document. 4 �UO(� ®2 1� Y LR6NraN1 AM ASSWM TES, IW.