camarillo academy high school + performing arts … · initial study camarillo academy high school...

I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CAMARILLO ACADEMY HIGH SCHOOL + PERFORMING ARTS CENTER

OXNARD UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

June 2012

I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CAMARILLO ACADEMY HIGH SCHOOL + PERFORMING ARTS CENTER

OXNARD UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

Submitted to:

Oxnard Union High School District Business Services, Facilities

309 S. K Street Oxnard, California 93030

Prepared by:

LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614-4731

(949) 553-0666

LSA Project No. OSD1102

June 2012

P:\OSD1102\NOP-IS\Initial Study.doc «06/13/12»

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .............................................................. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 1 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ............................................................................................... 10 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: ........................................... 10 DETERMINATION: (to be Completed by the Lead Agency) .................................................. 10 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................. 11 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: ........................................................................................ 12 I. AESTHETICS ........................................................................................................................ 12 II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ........................................................... 13 III. AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................... 15 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 16 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................. 18 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................... 19 VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS .................................................................................. 21 VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................................ 22 IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ........................................................................ 24 X. LAND USE AND PLANNING ............................................................................................ 26 XI. MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................... 27 XII. NOISE ................................................................................................................................ 28 XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING ..................................................................................... 30 XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES ........................................................................................................ 31 XV. RECREATION .................................................................................................................. 32 XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC ..................................................................................... 33 XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ........................................................................ 35 XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ....................................................... 37

FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location ..................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Project Site – Aerial Photograph ............................................................................................ 3 Figure 3: Conceptual Site Plan............................................................................................................... 6

L S A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . I N I T I A L S T U D Y J U N E 2 0 1 2 C A M A R I L L O A C A D E M Y H I G H S C H O O L + P E R F O R M I N G A R T S C E N T E R O X N A R D U N I O N H I G H S C H O O L D I S T R I C T


1

INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

Project Title: Camarillo Academy High School + Performing Arts Center

Lead Agency Contact: Oxnard Union High School District (District)

Business Services, Facilities 309 S. K Street Oxnard, California 93030

Project Location: The project site is generally located in the

southern central portion of the County of Ventura northeast of Antonio Drive and Mar Vista Drive. The project site consists of approximately 28 acres of farmland within unincorporated Ventura County. See Figure 1, Project Location, and Figure 2, Aerial Photograph.

General Plan Designations: Agriculture Zoning: Agricultural Exclusive (A-E) Zone PROJECT DESCRIPTION Location The project site is located in the southern central portion of the County of Ventura (County) and immediately adjacent to the City of Camarillo (City) (Figure 1). The project site consists of approximately 28 acres (ac) of farmland within unincorporated County boundaries on a 77.3 ac parcel. An easement exists on the Saris Regis Detention Basin, which is maintained by the City (approximately 7 ac on the western portion of the parcel). The site is not within the City limits or within the City’s sphere of influence. Surrounding land uses include multifamily residential and a City library to the south, religious institutions to the south and southwest, and agriculture uses to the northwest, north, east, and southeast (Figure 2).

LAS POSAS ROAD

LEWIS

ROAD

LEGENDProject Location - APN 1560180345

SOURCE: County of Ventura (2009); USGS 7.5' Quad., Camarillo, CA (1967)I:\OSD1102\GIS\Proj_USGS.mxd (6/13/2012)

FIGURE 1

Camarillo Academy High School + Performing Arts CenterProject Location Map

0 375 750FEET

VenturaCounty

LosAngelesCounty

£¤101

ÃÃ232

ÃÃ34

ÃÃ150

ÃÃ23

ÃÃ118

ÃÃ1

ÃÃ126Project

Location

Project Vicinity

SOURCE: Bing (c. 2008); County of Ventura (2009)I:\OSD1102\GIS\Proj_Aerial.mxd (5/8/2012)

FIGURE 2

Camarillo Academy High School + Performing Arts CenterAerial Map

0 375 750FEET

LEGENDProject Location - APN 1560180345



4

Project Background The District has identified the need for a new high school in the Camarillo area in order to serve students from Camarillo and Somis, generally defined as those living within zip codes 93010, 93012, and 93066. Currently, the majority of students that reside in Camarillo and Somis attend Adolfo Camarillo High School and Rio Mesa High School, while some choose to attend public and private schools outside of the District. The District wishes to provide sufficient high school capacity within the City to accommodate all students residing in Camarillo and Somis. In addition, the proposed new high school would reduce the student population at Adolfo Camarillo High School and would allow more students from Oxnard to attend Rio Mesa High School, reducing the student population at Pacifica High School and Oxnard High School. Intra-District transfers for students outside of those zip codes will be available only if there are open seats available after accommodating all of the children residing within the three specified zip codes. The Camarillo Academy High School would support an initial enrollment of 700 students and a maximum future enrollment of 1,000 students (see below for a detailed description of proposed facilities). A Performing Arts Center (PAC) was also identified as a need. This facility would serve the music and theatrical needs of this new school as well as Adolfo Camarillo High School, which currently lacks an adequately sized performance arts venue. The PAC would also be available to serve theatrical and other performance needs of the community. Attendance at performances offered at the proposed 700-seat main theater and a separate 99-seat black box theater are expected to be drawn predominantly from the Camarillo and Somis communities; however, attendance from neighboring communities is very likely. Project Characteristics The Camarillo Academy High School plus Performing Arts Center (CAHS+PAC) would provide educational facilities for grades 9–12 with a maximum enrollment of 1,000 students. An estimated 50 teachers, aides, administrators, and other personnel would staff the high school at maximum capacity. Approximately 35 teachers, aides, administrators, and other personnel would be required to staff the initial enrollment of 700 students. The District estimates that the high school’s instruction hours would be from approximately 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Extracurricular activities would take place from approximately 3:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. The PAC would operate both as an educational facility during school hours and between 3:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. for rehearsals and performances. It would also be used during the weekends and over the summer months. The proposed project would provide approximately 108,000 square feet (sf) of floor area in a number of separate buildings, as shown in Table A. The proposed buildings include permanent classroom facilities, administrative offices, media centers, and the PAC. Recreational fields and facilities are also proposed. As a “small” high school, the site will provide access to dance, band, exercise, and physical educational programs using the on-site fields. Students will be able to participate in interscholastic athletics through a multischool agreement with their neighborhood school. A parking area for school buses would be included on the project site, contiguous to staff and student parking areas within the easternmost portion of the school site. Initially, it is anticipated that five buses would use this parking area. Capacity would be provided for eight buses for special events or future busing needs. Buses routinely parked on this site would be those that currently serve the Camarillo area, delivering students to Adolfo Camarillo High School and Frontier High School.



5

Table A: Project Components

Use Approximate Area Performing Arts Center Theaters and Classrooms 33,500 sfAdministration 6,750 sfClassrooms 48,500 sfMedia Centers 3,000 sfFood Services and Multipurpose Dining 10,000 sfExercise room, lockers and support functions 6,600 sfRecreational fields 10 acParking Lot 500 parking spaces,

or approximately 190,000 sf in 3 lots

Bus Parking 5–8 bus spaces, or approximately 10,000 sf

ac = acres sf = square feet Bus service for students attending the proposed new school is not anticipated. Buses would leave and enter the site via the same proposed access roads as would be used for student, staff, and public access to the campus. The school site would encompass approximately 28 ac. Access to the project site would include an extension of Mar Vista Drive from Fieldgate Drive to Camino Alvarez. Camino Alvarez would be extended north of Las Posas Road to intersect with the extension of Mar Vista Drive. The existing western driveway at the Church of Latter Day Saints would be closed, and the church would be provided a new access point on the extension of Camino Alvarez. The conceptual site plan for the project is shown in Figure 3. Appropriate agricultural buffer zones will be included in the site design. The recreational fields, PAC, and other school buildings would be available for community use after school hours, weekends, and holidays. Security lighting of the building complex and parking areas is planned. Night lighting of the recreational fields is not planned. Site Preparation The project would require removal and replacement of contaminated soil to meet the requirements for school use by the California Department of Education (CDE); the extent of the remediation would be determined by the hazardous materials study being conducted as part of the environmental review. Additionally, the site would require grading of the existing agricultural land to create new surfaces to ensure adequate drainage and conveyance of the off-site flows, and a portion of the on-site flow equal to or less than the 10-year storm runoff on the undeveloped site around and across the property would continue to connect to the adjacent detention basin and from there into the City’s storm drain system. Grading of the site will require the import of fill to create the site gradients to ensure adequate drainage. Onsite detention would be provided to reduce developed flow rates. All onsite and offsite storm water flows from the proposed development would be treated consistent with the Ventura County Municipal Stormwater Permit Board Order 2010-0108, or other permit requirements, as



7

applicable. If feasible, soil will be imported from the adjacent agricultural land, as shown on Figure 3, in order to minimize export and import of soil. Grading and construction of the site will comply with the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) requirements for minimizing dust and exhaust emissions. Infrastructure The project site would also require connection to off-site infrastructure systems for the provision of electrical, gas, data, and cable service. Additionally, a connection would be required to the Camarillo Sanitary District for treatment of project wastewater. The project would also require the placement of fire hydrants to ensure adequate fire protection. Fire and police services to the project site would be provided by the County of Ventura Fire and Sheriff’s Departments. The City’s water rights for buildout of the City’s General Plan have already been allocated; therefore, the District will be required to demonstrate that it has secured an adequate supply of water to support the project. The City will be the water purveyor for the project and will receive additional water allocations from the Fox Canyon Ground Water Management Agency as part of the transfer of the property from Agricultural use to Municipal and Industrial use. To demonstrate that there is sufficient water to meet the needs of the school, the District will either reduce the amount or type of landscaping in order to reduce the demand, explore the option of purchasing additional historic water allocations that can be transferred to the City, or participate in one of the local water projects that is anticipated to generate additional sources of water. This issue will be resolved during preparation of the DEIR. The existing groundwater irrigation well that is located in the proposed school site portion of the property would be relocated to the remaining agricultural land on the property. Roadway additions and improvements would be conducted consistent with applicable City standards. Discretionary Actions The project site is not within the City’s limits or sphere of influence. The project site is also outside of the boundaries of the Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park District and the Camarillo Sanitary District. In addition, the project site parcel would be subdivided at the boundary of the proposed school site and the agricultural land. The school site would be annexed to the City of Camarillo, and the agricultural land would remain within unincorporated County of Ventura. Therefore, several discretionary actions are required, as shown in the table below.



8

Decision-Making Body Role Action Required Oxnard Union High School District (OUHSD)

Lead Agency 1. Certify Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 2. Approve Project

Camarillo City Council Responsible Agency 1. Amend the Camarillo Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB); grant the exception to Save Our Agricultural Resources (SOAR)

2. General Plan Amendment 3. Pre-Zoning 4. Amendment filing to Local Agency Formation

Commission (LAFCO) to expand the City of Camarillo sphere of influence, Camarillo Sanitary District sphere of influence, and Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park District sphere of influence

5. Initiate reorganization proceedings to annex the site to the City of Camarillo, Camarillo Sanitary District, and Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park District

Ventura LAFCO Responsible Agency 1. Amendment to City of Camarillo sphere of influence, Camarillo Sanitary District sphere of influence, and Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park District sphere of influence

2. Annexation to City of Camarillo 3. Amendment to Camarillo Sanitary District sphere

of influence 4. Annexation to Camarillo Sanitary District 5. Annexation to Pleasant Valley Recreation District 6. Reorganization: Detachment from Ventura County

Resource Conservation District; Detachment from County Service Area (CSA) 32; Detachment from CSA 33.

County of Ventura Responsible Agency Approve subdivision of APN 1560180345 Division of the State Architect Responsible Agency Approval of Construction Plans State Department of Education, School Facilities Planning Division

Responsible Agency 1. Approve Project 2. Allocate Construction Funding

State Department of Toxic Substances Control

Responsible Agency Approval of Preliminary Endangerment Assessment

References The documents listed below are incorporated into this document by reference • County of Ventura, General Plan, 2005 (available at

http://www.ventura.org/rma/planning/general_plan/general_plan.html and the County of Ventura Planning Division)

• City of Camarillo, General Plan, 2004 (available at http://www.ci.camarillo.ca.us/i3.aspx?p=899 and the City of Camarillo Community Development Department)

• City of Camarillo, Municipal Code (available at http://www.ci.camarillo.ca.us/i3.aspx?p=962 and the City of Camarillo Community Development Department)



9

Report Preparer The following consulting firm assisted the District in the preparation of this Initial Study: LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614



11

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers, except “No Impact” answers that are adequately

supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factor as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis.)

2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, a DEIR is required.

4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).

5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program DEIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier DEIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b) Impacts Adequately Evaluated. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were evaluated by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should formally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9) The explanation of each issue should identify:

a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.



12

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: I. AESTHETICS Potentially

Significant Impact

Less Than Significant with

Mitigation Incorporated

Less Than Significant

Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

c) Substantially degrade the existing visual surroundings?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: I (a). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located on a relatively flat area with agriculture and undeveloped hillsides to the north. Construction of the proposed project may impact views of the hillsides to the north of the project site. Impacts to scenic vistas will be evaluated in the DEIR. I(b). No Impact. The existing project site is not designated as a scenic resource area in the County’s General Plan Resource Element, nor is it located along a State Scenic Highway. Additionally, there are no rock outcroppings or buildings on the project site that could be considered visual or historic resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not impact any designated scenic resources within a state scenic highway. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. I(c). Potentially Significant Impact. The County’s General Plan Resource Element does not designate the project site as located within a scenic resource area. The project site consists of existing agriculture land and is adjacent to residential, library, hospital, and church uses. Development of the proposed project has the potential to degrade the existing visual surroundings. Therefore, impacts to the existing visual surrounding will be evaluated in the DEIR. I(d). Less Than Significant. The proposed project would result in development of existing agriculture land, which would create an additional source of light or glare. Project implementation would create additional lighting sources on the project site associated with buildings, parking lots, recreational facilities, and for security purposes. Project Design Features (PDFs) will be included as part of the project to reduce the impacts of lighting and glare. The DEIR will describe project lighting and will identify lighting controls to reduce lighting impacts.



13

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

In determining whether impact to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provide in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use?

e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?



14

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: II (a). Potentially Significant Impact. According to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency (2008) 1, 80 percent of the project site is designated as Prime Farmland and 20 percent of the project site is designated Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, project impacts to Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance will be evaluated in the DEIR. II (b). Potentially Significant Impact. According to the Resource Management Agency of Ventura County (2009) 2, the project site is not located within Williamson Act contract lands. Therefore, development of the project would not conflict with a Williamson Act contract. However, the project site is zoned Agriculture-Exclusive (A-E) by the County. The project site is subject to the requirements of the Save Our Agricultural Resources (SOAR) County ordinance and is outside of the City’s Camarillo Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB). However, as detailed in the City of Camarillo General Plan, the provisions of the Camarillo SOAR ordinance do not apply to construction of public schools. In addition, the parcel is not subject to a Greenbelt Agreement to protect open space and agricultural lands. Implementation of the proposed project would require a zone change. Therefore impacts related to a zone change will be evaluated in the DEIR. II (c) and (d). No Impact. As shown in Figure 2, the project site is not currently used for forest land or timber land and the project site is currently zoned Agriculture-Exclusive (A-E). There is no forest land or timber land on the project site. Therefore, no impacts to forestland or timberland would occur. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. II (e). Potentially Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. Therefore, impacts to farmland and agricultural uses will be evaluated in the DEIR.

1 Website: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Index.aspx (accessed February 6, 2012). 2 Website: http://www.ventura.org/vcrma/rma.htm (accessed February 6, 2012).



15

III. AIR QUALITY Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation?

c) Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: III(a), (b), (c), and (d). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project site is located in the South Central Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is a nonattainment area for the federal 8-hour ozone and State ozone standards, particulate matter less than 10 microns in size (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) standards. Air quality conditions in the Basin are under the jurisdiction of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD), which prepares and adopts an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) that identifies strategies intended to bring the Basin into compliance with federal air quality rules. The assumptions in the AQMP reflect future land use build out according to adopted General Plans in the region. The proposed project has the potential to result in significant short-term construction-related air quality impacts associated with demolition, grading activity, and long-term air quality impacts related to vehicular traffic in particular. A comprehensive air quality analysis will be completed as part of the DEIR, analyzing both the short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) impacts of the project. The DEIR will also identify appropriate and feasible mitigation measures, should there be significant impacts. Because the project is in a nonattainment basin, it may not be possible to reduce overall air quality impacts to below a level of significance. III(e). Less Than Significant Impact. School facilities do not typically generate objectionable odors that affect adjacent uses. Development of any odors would be limited by the scheduled removal of waste receptacles on a weekly basis. Therefore, potential odor impacts are considered less than significant.



16

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game of US Fish and Wildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: IV (a). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is currently agricultural land adjacent to undeveloped hillsides. There is the potential for sensitive plant species to occur on site. A biological assessment, including presence/absence surveys conducted during the appropriate season, will be conducted as part of the DEIR. If any sensitive species are found within the project limits, the biological assessment report will include appropriate mitigation that will be included in the DEIR.



17

IV (b). Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).The biological assessment report will include appropriate mitigation that will be included in the DEIR. IV (c). Potentially Significant Impact. A jurisdictional delineation will be conducted as part of the DEIR to determine if the proposed project would impact federally protected wetlands. If it is determined that the project would result in impacts to federally protected wetlands, the DEIR will incorporate appropriate mitigation. IV (d). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is currently used for agricultural purposes and located within an agricultural area. It is possible that migratory wildlife utilize the project site. All project construction activities will comply with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). The MBTA governs the taking and killing of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, and prohibits the take of any migratory bird, its eggs, parts, and nests. The potential for other migratory wildlife to be impacted by the project will be evaluated in the biological assessment report and the DEIR. IV(e). Potentially Significant Impact. Any project impacts that conflict with a local policy or ordinance regarding impacts to biological resources will be fully evaluated in the biological assessment report and in the DEIR and, if necessary, will incorporate appropriate mitigation. IV (f). No Impact. The project site is not covered under an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) or Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any impacts to an HCP or NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



18

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resources as defined in §15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources pursuant to §15064.5?

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site of unique geologic feature?

d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: V (a). Potentially Significant Impact. As the project site is undeveloped, it is unlikely that any historical resources would be located on site; however, the project site will be evaluated for presence of historical resources as part of the DEIR. V(b). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is not located within the County’s General Plan Archaeological Sensitivity areas as an area known for containing archaeological resources. The cultural resources assessment report for the project will evaluate the potential for presence of archaeological resources, and mitigation will be included to protect any previously unknown resources. V(c). Potentially Significant Impact. Although the County’s General Plan Resources Element does not identify any paleontological resources on the project site, the potential to encounter unknown resources during grading exists. The paleontological resources report will evaluate the potential for presence of paleontological resources and precautionary mitigation measures will be included in the DEIR to protect unknown resources, as needed. V(d). Potentially Significant Impact. There are no known human remains interred on the project site. Precautionary mitigation will be included in the DEIR to address any potential impacts related to unknown remains that might be uncovered during grading activities.



19

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: VI(a)(i). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located in a seismically active region (Southern California) and therefore has the potential to expose people or structures to potentially substantial adverse effects of fault rupture or ground shaking. According to the County’s General Plan Hazards Element, the project site is not located on an area identified as an Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone. A preliminary geotechnical investigation addressing potential project-related impacts resulting from known earthquake faults will be conducted as part of the DEIR. If necessary, mitigation measures will be included to reduce potential impacts.



20

VI(a)(ii). Potentially Significant Impact. According to the County’s General Plan Hazards Element, even though the historic record indicates that no strong earthquakes or surface displacement have occurred along the faults within the south half of the county, the likelihood of the occurrence of one or more of such events within the next 50 to 100 years is not remote. Mitigation of the potential ground-shaking hazard is generally achieved by compliance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC) in the design and construction of structures. The preliminary geotechnical investigation will evaluate the potential project-related impacts resulting from strong seismic ground shaking. If necessary, project-specific mitigation measures will be included in the DEIR to reduce potential impacts. VI(a)(iii). Potentially Significant Impact. According to Figure 2.4b of the County’s General Plan Hazards Element, the project site is located near a Liquefaction Area. Therefore, the preliminary geotechnical investigation will evaluate potential project-related impacts resulting from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. If necessary, mitigation measures will be included in the DEIR to reduce potential impacts. VI(a)(iv). Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located within a Potential Landslide Hazard Area as indicated on Figure 2.7.2 of the County’s General Plan Hazards Element. Therefore, impacts associated with landslides are considered less than significant. VI(b). Potentially Significant Impact. There is the potential for project development to cause soil erosion during grading and construction. However, since the project site is relatively flat, soil erosion can be controlled via implementation of standard erosion control practices. The proposed project would require the removal and stockpile of topsoil from the school site portion due to pesticide residues. The topsoil in the temporary construction and staging area would be removed and stockpiled and deeper soils would be removed for use on the school site. It is planned that the removed topsoil from both portions would be returned to the agricultural land. Potential impacts due to soil erosion and loss of topsoil will be evaluated in the DEIR, and mitigation measures will be identified, if required. VI(c). Potentially Significant Impact. Potential impacts related to unstable soil, on- or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse will be evaluated in the preliminary geotechnical investigation and the DEIR and if necessary, mitigation measures will be included to reduce the project’s impacts. VI(d). Potentially Significant Impact. Potential impacts related to expansive soil creating substantial risks to life or property will be evaluated in the preliminary geotechnical investigation and the DEIR and if necessary, mitigation measures will be included to reduce the project’s impacts. VI(e). No Impact. The project site is currently undeveloped and is not connected to an existing sewer. Upon approval of annexation to the City and the Camarillo Sanitary District by LAFCO, the project would be permitted to connect to the Camarillo Sanitary District sewer system. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



21

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS


Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: VII(a). Potentially Significant Impact. During construction of the project, equipment and vehicles would be used that would generate greenhouse gases (GHG) in small amounts. In addition, the project’s use of energy during long-term operations would contribute to the emission of GHGs. There currently are no adopted numeric thresholds for GHG emissions. However, analysis of GHG emissions associated with both the short-term construction and long term operational impacts of the proposed project would be analyzed in the DEIR, and appropriate mitigation measures will be included. VII(b). Potentially Significant Impact. There currently are no adopted numeric thresholds for GHG emissions. However, the proposed project will be evaluated in the DEIR to determine whether or not it would conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs and appropriate reduction measures will be incorporated.



22

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS


Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 67962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury of death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?



23

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: VIII(a), (b), and (c). Potentially Significant Impact. Cornerstone Christian School and Dos Caminos Elementary School are the closest schools to the project site (1.5 miles and 2.5 miles from the project site, respectively). Due to the past and current agricultural use at the site, the project site may contain elevated pesticide levels. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment will be conducted as part of the DEIR to determine potential impacts from existing hazardous waste on the project site or in the vicinity. After construction, potentially hazardous substances contained in typical household products such as cleaners, solvents, paints, and pool supplies may be used on site. Compliance with existing standards will minimize potential impacts associated with these products to the extent feasible. The DEIR will include a discussion of potential hazards related to the proposed project and will include mitigation measures as necessary. VIII(d). Potentially Significant Impact. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment will determine the hazardous substance concerns at the site and will provide recommendations for mitigation. The DEIR will include a discussion of potential hazards caused by the proposed project (including hazards related to grading of the site) and will include mitigation measures as necessary. VIII(e) and (f). No Impact. The proposed project is not located within 2 mi of a public airport or within the vicinity of a private airstrip, or within an airport land use plan. The nearest airport facility, Camarillo Airport, is located approximately 6 miles southwest of the project site. There is no heliport at St. John’s Pleasant Valley Hospital, which is adjacent to the western end of the parcel. Therefore, no hazard impacts related to the site’s proximity to the airport facility and any airport land use plan would occur. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. VIII(g). No Impact. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, evacuation routes in Camarillo are dependent upon the event and need for evacuation. In the event of a breach of the Bard Reservoir, located west of the project site, the evacuation route would be to the west to higher ground and then north to State Route 101 (SR-101). In the event of a major chemical spill or other significant disaster, the evacuation routes would be SR-101 to the east or west and Lewis Road to the north or south. The project site is located on undeveloped land with unimproved access and is adjacent to undeveloped foothills; therefore, there is no current emergency access or evacuation route through the site. As development of the project site would not interfere with either evacuation routes, the project would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. VIII(h). Less Than Significant Impact. According to the County’s General Plan Hazards Element, the project site is located within a moderate fire hazard area and could be at risk. Project development would be required to meet the requirements of the Fire Code for uses within the Moderate fire risk zone. Compliance with the fire code would ensure that potential wildland fire risks are less than significant. This topic will be further analyzed in the DEIR.



24

IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY


Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?

d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?

e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?

h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?

i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?



25

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: IX(a), (e), and (f). Potentially Significant Impact. Construction of the project would cause soil disturbance and implementation of the project would increase impervious area; therefore, the project has the potential to violate standards or otherwise degrade water quality. A water quality assessment and preliminary drainage study describing the existing and proposed drainage areas, design storm flows, water quality treatments, surface drainage calculations, and erosion issues will be prepared and summarized in the DEIR. Mitigation measures will be included as necessary. This topic will be evaluated further in the DEIR. IX(b). Potentially Significant Impact. Because the City has already allocated all of its water rights to development identified in the existing General Plan, the project will be required to provide its own source of water. The City will be the water purveyor and will receive additional water allocations as part of the transfer of the property from Agricultural to Municipal and Industrial use. Additional sources of water may be required and will be explored further during preparation of the DEIR. Mitigation measures will be included as necessary. This topic will be evaluated further in the DEIR. IX(c) and (d). Potentially Significant Impact. Although there are no streams or rivers onsite, the proposed project would increase impervious surfaces creating an increase in runoff. The runoff would be directed to onsite detention and retention areas to prevent downstream flooding. The preliminary drainage study will evaluate drainage impacts and will identify any needed mitigation measures. This topic will be evaluated further in the DEIR. IX(g). No Impact. As stated in the project description, the proposed project does not include housing. Therefore, no impacts would occur as implementation of the proposed project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area. IX(h), and (i). Potentially Significant Impact. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has mapped portions of the project site within the 100-year Floodplain [Federal Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06111C0932E, January 20, 2010]. The project site is also located within a dam inundation area as indicated on the Dam Inundation Areas Map of the County’s General Plan Hazards Element.1 Therefore, impacts related to structures within the 100-year flood hazard area and exposure of people or structures due to injury or death involving flooding will be evaluated in the DEIR. IX(j). No Impact. According to the County’s General Plan Hazards Element, the actual threat of seiche within the County is small, the project site is not located within a tsunami inundation hazard area,1 or located within a mapped landslide area1 or potential earthquake induced landslide area. Therefore, potential hazards from inundation from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow will not be evaluated in the DEIR.

1 County of Ventura General Plan, Hazards Element, Figure 2.11.2, Dam Inundation Areas Map.



26

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community?

b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: X (a). No Impact. The project site consists of agriculture land surrounded by agricultural and open space to the north and east and residential and institutional uses to the south and southwest (Figure 2). The proposed project would include an annexation of the project site into the City and development of a high school. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide the established surrounding community. Consequently, this topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. X(b). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project includes annexation of the project site from the County of Ventura to the City and a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. Impacts related to land use planning will be analyzed further in the DEIR. X(c). No Impact. As stated previously in Response IV(f), the project site and project area are not covered under an adopted HCP or NCCP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any impacts to an HCP or NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



27

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XI(a) and (b). No Impact. According to the County’s General Plan Resources Element and Resources Appendix, the project site is located within an aggregate resources (sand, gravel, and crushed rock) Mineral Resources Zone 3 (MRZ-3) area, which is an area containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data. As discussed in the General Plan Resources Appendix, areas classified as MRZ-3 and MRZ-3(a) are not considered available aggregate supplies because of the highly speculative nature of viable aggregate deposits. The project site is not located within a petroleum resource area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in an impact to the availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and State. Consequently, this topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



28

XII. NOISE Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XII (a) and (c). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located within a residential and institutional area surrounded by agriculture land and currently experiences noise associated with vehicles traveling along Antonio Avenue and Fieldgate Drive. The nearest sensitive land uses to the project site are the residential uses located directly south of the project site (Figure 2). Operation of the proposed high school has the potential to increase noise and/or alter the pattern of noise within the project site. A noise impact analysis will be conducted as part of the DEIR and mitigation measures will be included as necessary. This topic will be analyzed further in the DEIR. XII (b) and (d). Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the project has the potential to result in elevated groundborne vibration or ambient or groundborne noise levels; however the project would implement standard control measures and construction would be restricted to the specified hours in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 10.34.120. For these reasons, temporary, construction-related noise levels are not anticipated to be significant. Groundborne vibration or noise is not anticipated after construction of the project. This topic will be analyzed further in the DEIR.



29

XII(e) and (f). No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 mi of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip. There is no helipad at St. John’s Pleasant Valley Hospital, which is adjacent to the western end of the parcel. Therefore, no impacts relating to airport noise would occur. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



30

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING


Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XIII(a). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project is not a residential development and would therefore not result in direct growth-inducing effects. The proposed project includes the construction of a high school responding to the current growth needs and is intended to serve the existing and projected population within the enrollment area. This topic will be analyzed further in the DEIR. XIII(b) and (c). No Impact. The proposed project would not displace existing housing or people because it involves construction of a high school and PAC on existing agricultural land. The project site is located within an existing residential, institutional, and agricultural area and is expected to serve the existing and projected population within the enrollment area. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



31

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XIV(a). Potentially Significant Impact. Fire protection services are provided to the City and County of Ventura by the Ventura County Fire Department. The development of agricultural land would increase the demand for fire protection services. Impacts related to public services, including fire protection and emergency medical services, will be evaluated in the DEIR. XIV(b). Potentially Significant Impact. Police protection services are provided to the City by the Ventura County Sheriff’s Department. The development of agricultural land would increase the demand for police protection services. Impacts related to public services including police protection will be evaluated in the DEIR. XIV(c). No Impact. Because the project would provide a new high school, it would not increase the demand for a school and no impact would occur. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. XIV(d). No Impact. The proposed project would include recreation facilities associated with a high school such as athletic fields. The project would not generate a need for additional park space and no impact would occur. This topic will not be evaluated further in the DEIR. XIV(e). Potentially Significant Impact. Library. The proposed project would include media centers to serve the school population. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to increase demand on public libraries. Library impacts will be evaluated in the DEIR. Public Transportation. Residents within the City have three public transit bus services available, including the fixed route Camarillo Area Transit (CAT), CAT Dial-A-Ride, and the Ventura Intercity Service Transit Authority (VISTA) service operated by Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC). Project implementation has the potential to increase the need for public transportation; therefore, impacts to public transportation will be evaluated in the DEIR.



32

XV. RECREATION Potentially Significant

Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XV(a). No Impact. The proposed project would include recreation facilities associated with a high school such as athletic fields and an aqua center to serve the students; therefore, there would not be an increase in use of public recreational facilities and no impact would occur. This topic will not be evaluated further in the DEIR. XV(b). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project is construction of a high school which includes recreational sports fields typical of educational facilities. Therefore, potential impacts to the physical environment will be evaluated in the appropriate topics in the DEIR, and mitigation will be incorporated, as necessary.



33

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Potentially Significant

Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?

b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XVI(a) and (b). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would cause an increase in daily vehicle trips when compared to the existing uses on site. The increase attributable to the project may cause congestion at intersections in the vicinity. A traffic impact analysis addressing impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed project will be conducted as part of the DEIR. The DEIR will incorporate the analysis, findings, and any mitigation measures formulated in the traffic study. XVI(c). No Impact. The project site is not within 2 mi of an airport and does not include tall structures of sensitive uses that would necessitate changes in air traffic patterns. No impact would occur. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR.



34

XVI(d). No Impact. Design of the proposed project and internal circulation is undetermined at this time. However, because the project involves construction of a high school, project-related sharp curves that could result in safety hazards would not be included in the project design. No incompatible uses that would pose traffic safety hazards are proposed on the project site. This topic will not be analyzed further in the DEIR. XVI(e). Less Than Significant. The proposed project would be designed with adequate emergency access and will be subject to Ventura County Fire Department approval. The DEIR will incorporate the analysis, findings, and recommendations provided in the traffic study. XVI(f). Less Than Significant. The Camarillo Area Transit (CAT) provides public transit near the project site, with bus stops servicing two routes at the adjacent Camarillo Library and St John’s Pleasant Valley Hospital. A Class III Bike Route is located within the City along Antonio Avenue, adjacent to the project site and a Class II Bike Lane is located along Las Posas Road and Ponderosa Drive within the project area. The design of the proposed project is not anticipated to affect existing transit facilities or bikeways. This topic will be evaluated in the DEIR.



35

XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS


Impact




Impact

No Impact

Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XVII(a). No Impact. The proposed project does not include any industrial uses that would be subject to an individual permit with specific treatment requirements from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Sewage will be discharged to the Camarillo Sanitary District for treatment. No impact would occur and this topic will not be evaluated further in the DEIR. XVII(b) and (d). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project includes annexation of the project site into the City. However, the water rights for build-out of the City’s General Plan have already been allocated; therefore, the proposed high school would be required to provide additional sources of water for the project. The primary source will be additional groundwater allocations that will be transferred to the City to provide municipal water service to the site. Additional sources are



36

being explored, including the purchase of historical allocations and participation in local water projects. This topic will be analyzed further in the DEIR. The existing water well on the project site that is used for crop irrigation will be relocated to another area of the parcel so that irrigation water will be available for the remaining agricultural land as well as other properties that utilize water in this well. This will be analyzed further in the DEIR. The proposed project would be required to extend existing wastewater facilities to serve the project site. The DEIR will include a discussion of any potential impacts caused by the proposed project including the extension of wastewater services to the project site. XVII(c). Less Than Significant. The proposed project would require the construction of storm water drainage facilities on site. The DEIR will address impacts related to storm water drainage and will identify project features to reduce runoff. XVII(e). Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located outside of the Camarillo Sanitary District service area and would need to be included in the sphere of influence and annexed to this service area. Wastewater services are not currently provided to the project site, but are provided within the immediate area. The proposed project would be required to connect to the local sewer facilities and would increase the demand on the Camarillo Sanitary District. The DEIR will include a discussion of the potential impacts the project would have on the Camarillo Sanitary District and identify any necessary mitigation. XVII(f). Potentially Significant Impact. The Ventura Regional Sanitation District operates the Toland Road Landfill within the County. The Toland Road Landfill accepts municipal solid waste from residents and commercial loads throughout the county. The proposed project would increase the amount of solid waste disposal to the Ventura Regional Sanitation District and Toland Road Landfill; therefore, the DEIR will address impacts to landfill facilities. XVII(g). Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be required to comply with City-initiated recycling programs pursuant to Chapter 9.06 of the City’s Municipal Code. Compliance with City programs will ensure that potential impacts to the City’s waste diversion goals are less than significant.



37

XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE


Impact




Impact

No Impact

a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?

c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Explanation of Checklist Judgments: XVIII(a). Potentially Significant Impact. Based on the discussion in Responses IV(a–f), Biological Resources, and V(a–d), Cultural Resources, the proposed project could have a potentially significant impact on biological resources and unknown cultural resources. Therefore, the DEIR will assess impacts to Biological and Cultural Resources resulting from project implementation, and mitigation will be incorporated as necessary. XVIII(b). Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project, when considered in conjunction with other approved or pending projects within the City and County, could potentially result in cumulatively considerable agriculture, air quality, biological resource, cultural resource, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards, water quality, land use and planning, noise, public services, recreation, traffic, utilities and service systems environmental impacts. The DEIR will assess the potential for the proposed project to contribute to cumulative impacts, and mitigation will be incorporated as necessary.



38

XVIII(c). Potentially Significant Impact. The potential for the proposed project to have substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, will be evaluated in the DEIR. Relevant topics include aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, public services and utilities, and transportation and traffic. Mitigation measures will be incorporated where possible to reduce potential environmentally adverse impacts to humans.

camarillo academy high school + performing arts … · initial study camarillo academy high school...

Documents