PC RES 2002-017P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFY A SUPPLEMENT TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT NO 27, ADOPT THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM,
MAKE CERTAIN FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS AS
REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
("CEQA"), AND ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 195, REVISION "A" AND GRADING
PERMIT NO. 1903, REVISION "A', ALLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO AN
APPROVED 122 UNIT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 5701 CRESTRIDGE ROAD
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOW
Section 1: In 1988, an application was filed by Marriott Corporation
requesting the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Grading Permit to permit
a retirement community consisting of a 250 -unit independent living facility, a 100 -bed health
care facility and a community center on a 33 97 acre parcel located at the northwest corner
of Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Boulevard On January 31, 1989, the Planning
Commission certified that Final Environmental Impact Report No 27 (FEIR No 27) for this
project was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The
City's certification of FEIR No 27 was upheld by the Superior Court in the case of Segreto,
et al. v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No SWC 107173
Although the related Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Grading Permit for the project
were approved in 1989, those entitlements expired in 1995
Section 2: On September 23, 1996, Marriott Senior Living Services, with
the consent of the property owner (Host Marriott, Inc ), submitted an application for
Conditional Use Permit No 195, Grading Permit No 1903, Tentative Parcel Map No
24655, and Sign Permit No 842, to allow the construction of a three story, 122 unit, 73,606
square foot assisted living facility, including, 68,660 cubic yards of cut and 68,660 cubic
yards of fill (with all grading balanced on site), the subdivision of the existing 33 97 acre lot
into two lots (a 4 57 acre subject lot and a 29 40 acre remaining parcel), landscaping and
various site improvements, and a new sign on the existing vacant lot located at the
northwest corner of Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Boulevard The independent care
facility is proposed to be located on the 4 57 acre parcel These entitlements were
approved on February 2, 1999, survived legal challenge, and have been subsequently
extended through February 2, 2003
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 1 of 27
Section 3: On September 6, 2001, the applicant (BelmontCorp), with
approval from property owner (Marriott), submitted applications to modify Conditional Use
Permit No 195 and Grading Permit No 1903, which allows the construction of a new
assisted living facility for senior citizens on a 4 57 -acre lot located within the City's
Institutional (1) zoning district. The proposed modifications consist of an increase in the
structure's floor area from 74,774 square feet to 94,000 square feet; a reduction in the total
length of the building along Crestridge Road by 17 feet; an increase in the total depth of the
building by 18 feet; and, an increase in the amount of grading from 160,000 cubic yards to
163,060 cubic yards The modified earth movement is not a balanced operation, as
previously approved for the Marriott Brighton Gardens project, as it consists of 89,500 cubic
yards of cut, 73,560 cubic yards of fill and 15,940 cubic yards of export. The application
was deemed complete on October 5, 2001 Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163,
a Supplement to FEIR No 27 ("Supplement") was prepared for the proposed project and
circulated for public and agency comment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087
Section 4: In response to the circulation of the Supplement to the FEIR, the
City received written and oral comments regarding the adequacy of the Supplement. The
City has prepared written responses to all comments that were received during the
comment period, which raised significant environmental issues The City has incorporated
the comments and the City's responses into the Final Supplement and returned responses
to commenting agencies at least ten (10) days prior to the Certification of the Supplement,
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092 5
Section 5: A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning
Commission on July 23, 2002 At the hearing, all persons both in favor of and in opposition
to the Project were permitted to be heard The findings adopted herein are based upon
substantial evidence in the record of those hearings
Section 6: The Final EIR ("FEIR") for the proposed project is now comprised
of certified FEIR No 27, the Supplement, including any revisions thereto and appendices,
the list of persons, organizations and public agencies which commented on certified FEIR
No 27 and the Supplement; the comments which were received by the City regarding FEIR
No 27 and the Supplement and the City's written responses to significant environmental
points raised in the public review and comment process No re -certification or
reconsideration of certified FEIR No 27 is required by this action or has been undertaken
by the City The actions taken herein are based in part upon the previously certified
adequacy of FEIR No 27, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163
Section 7: The findings made in this Resolution are based upon the
information and evidence set forth in the FEIR, as defined in Section 6, and upon other
substantial evidence, which has been presented in the record of this proceeding The
documents, staff reports, technical studies, appendices, plans, specifications, and other
materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution is based and
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 2 of 27
the FEIR for the Project are on file and available for public examination during normal
business hours in the Office of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement of
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard, Rancho Palos Verdes,
California 90274. The custodian of said records is the Director of Planning, Building and
Code Enforcement of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Section 8: The Planning Commission finds that the public and government
agencies have been afforded ample notice and opportunity to comment on the FEIR and
the Supplement.
Section 9: The Planning Commission finds, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15084(e), that certified FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement have been independently
reviewed and analyzed by the City and its Staff, and that said documents represent the
independent judgment of the City as lead agency with respect to the Project The City
Council further finds that the additional information provided in the staff reports
accompanying the Project descriptions, certified FEIR No. 27, and the Supplement, the
corrections and modifications to the Draft EIR and Supplement made in response to
comments, and the evidence presented in written and oral testimony presented at the
above -referenced hearings do not represent significant new information so as to require re-
circulation of any portion of the EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.1.
Section 10: The Planning Commission finds that the comments regarding
the Supplement and the responses to those comments have been received by the City, that
the Planning Commission has received public testimony regarding the adequacy of the
certified FEIR No 27 and the Supplement; and that the City Council, as the final decision-
making body for the lead agency, will review and consider all such documents and
testimony prior to acting on the Project. The Planning Commission therefore recommends
that the City Council certify that the Final Supplement to certified FEIR No 27 has been
completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
Section 11: The Supplement and the record of these proceedings indicates
that the Project is smaller in scale and a less intensive use of land than the previously
approved project analyzed in certified FEIR No. 27 The previously approved project
included in excess of 280,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, the export of 250,000 cubic yards
of graded material, and development of a much larger facility on a larger parcel than the
4.57 acres currently proposed. By comparison, the current project proposes a significant
reduction in project grading and the development of a facility slightly more than one-third
the size of the original proposal The Planning Commission finds that the expected impacts
of the Project will be less intense than those identified in certified FEIR No 27 and, except
as provided in herein and in the Supplement, were therefore adequately addressed in
certified FEIR No 27
MOST134103171
P.0 Resolution No 2002-17
Page 3 of 27
FEIR No 27, the Supplement, public and agency comments and the record of these
proceedings, the Planning Commission finds that the changes in the Project not previously
analyzed in certified FEIR No 27, but analyzed in the Supplement, will not cause significant
environmental impacts in the areas of Land Use and Planning, Population and Housing,
Water; non -construction Air Quality; long-term Transportation and Circulation, Energy and
Mineral Resources, Hazards, Public Services, Utilities and Service Systems, Cultural
Resources, and Recreation Explanations for why the foregoing impacts were found to be
insignificant are contained in Section 3 0, Table 3 1 of the Supplement. In some cases,
less -than -significant impacts identified above and in Section 3 0 of the Supplement were
also discussed in detail in the relevant sections of certified FEIR No 27
Section 13: With respect to the potential significant environmental effects
identified in the Final Supplement to FEIR No 27, the Planning Commission finds as
follows
1 Certified FEIR No 27 identified as a potential significant environmental impact
the effect of grading in areas of high and extreme slopes. Changes or alterations have
been incorporated into the Project that will avoid or substantially lessen this impact. An
independent engineering study evaluating geotechnical, soils and other stability factors
including seismic considerations, and giving special attention to the areas of extreme and
high slopes was required prior to issuance of building permits, and compliance with specific
mitigation measures of the City's geotechnical consultant are required FEIR No 27
concluded that it was not possible to entirely eliminate this impact, however, and the
previous project was approved subject to a Statement of Overriding Considerations
A second independent engineering study was conducted as part of the
Supplement. Mitigation measures A-1 through A-11, inclusive, described in Appendix F of
the Supplement and the applicable sections of the Supplement and FEIR No 27 have been
incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval The Supplement and the
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation set forth in Appendix B of the Supplement indicate
that as a result of these measures, impacts associated with fault rupture, seismic ground
shaking and failure, and other potential geologic impacts can be mitigated Although the
significant adverse environmental impacts of the previously proposed project associated
with grading in areas of high and extreme slopes remains a significant adverse
environmental impact of the Project, the impact will be somewhat less significant than those
associated with the originally proposed project and about the same as the current approved
project.
No additional potentially significant grading/geology impacts of the Project,
other than those previously addressed in certified FEIR No 27, were identified in the
Supplement.
2 Certified FEIR No 27 identified as a potential significant impact the short term
air quality impacts from emissions of fugitive dust and nitrogen oxides, which would be
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 4 of 27
generated during grading and construction activities, and long-term emissions from the use
of electricity and natural gas by the facility and fossil fuels in automobiles. Changes or
alterations were required or incorporated into the originally approved project, which will
avoid or substantially lessen these impacts Such changes have been incorporated as
conditions of approval of the Project through the imposition of mitigation measures D-1, as
set forth in Appendix F of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27.
Although fugitive dust impacts will be reduced through a program of on-site watering,
roadway cleaning, and the suspension of grading in high winds, the supplement indicates
that it is not possible to entirely eliminate this impact. However, these impacts are short-
term, and will cease upon conclusion of the construction
No additional potentially significant air quality impacts of the Project, other
than those previously addressed in certified FEIR No. 27, have been identified in the
Supplement
3. Certified FEIR No 27 identified as a potential significant impact the short term
noise resulting from Project construction. Changes or alterations have been required or
incorporated into the Project, which will avoid or substantially lessen these impacts Such
changes are incorporated as conditions of approval of the Project through the imposition of
mitigation measures E-1 through E-6, inclusive, as set forth in Appendix F of the
Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27. Construction noise impacts will be
reduced, but not eliminated, through the on-site storage of properly tuned construction
equipment, reducing the need for construction traffic in adjacent areas. In addition, hours
of construction, deliveries and trash collection will be limited to days and hours when noise -
sensitivity is reduced. The Supplement indicates that it is possible mitigate these
construction -related impacts to below a level of significance with implementation of the
aforementioned mitigation measures.
No additional potentially significant noise impacts of the Project, other than
those previously addressed in certified FEIR No 27, have been identified in the
Supplement.
4 FOR No 27 identified potentially significant environmental impacts related to
traffic and circulation that would result from short-term, construction -related traffic around
the project. Specifically, significant truck traffic would have been required to export 250,000
cubic yards of graded material from the site under the previous proposal. As the current
project has a significant reduced amount of export of graded material from the site, such
impacts will be dramatically reduced. • Mitigation measures C-1 through C-7, inclusive, as
described in Appendix F of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will
be imposed as conditions of approval of the project The FEIR indicates that traffic and
circulation impacts from the project will be reduced to a level of insignificance due to the
reduction in truck traffic resulting from the reduction in grading, and the enhanced safety
and traffic management resulting from the mitigation measures.
P C Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 5 of 27
Section 14: Section 4.0 of the Supplement describes, and the Planning
Commission has fully considered, a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project, which
might fulfill the basic objectives of the Project These alternatives include the "No Project
Alternative;" "Existing Brighton Gardens Project Alternative;" "Reduced Scale Alternative;"
and "Alternate Institutional Use Alternative." The alternatives identified in the Supplement
either would not sufficiently achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only
with unacceptable adverse environmental impacts, as noted below
1 The "No Project" alternative is described in the Supplement as existing
conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published for the proposed
project. At the time the NOP was published, the entire 4 57 -acre parcel was vacant
Therefore, the No Project/No Development Alternative means "no build" (or "no
development"), wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained
2 As explained in the Supplement, the Existing Brighton Gardens Entitlements
Alternative includes development of a 122 -unit (128 -bed) assisted living facility with 70 off-
street parking spaces. Although the Existing Brighton Gardens Entitlements Alternative
represents fewer environmental impacts for all impact categories addressed in the Belmont
Village Supplement to FEIR No. 27, implementation of the Brighton Gardens project as
approved is not feasible to implement. As discussed in the Project Description section of
the Supplement, during the course of BelmontCorp's due diligence, geotechnical
investigations revealed that the entitlements granted by the City for the Brighton Gardens
project could not be constructed due to subsurface rock conditions and grading issues
3 The Reduced Scale Alternative would include a reduction in the amount of
assisted living units, and, therefore, a corresponding reduction in the square footage of the
assisted living facility from that included in the proposed project Under the Reduced Scale
Project Alternative, approximately thirty percent (30%) fewer units would result (for a total
of 85 units), with a corresponding reduction in overall square footage of the project from
94,000 square feet to approximately 66,000 square feet. However, due to existing
subsurface rock conditions on the project site, earth movement would not balance on site,
and export would still be required. Export could be reduced, however, if the pad elevation
is increased. An increase in pad elevation, however, would result in the creation of view
impacts that are not associated with the approved or proposed project
As shown in the Supplement, grading/geology, air quality, transportation/circulation and
noise impacts of the Reduced Scale Project Alternative would be slightly less than those
associated with the proposed project. Since the building footprint would be smaller, there
may be less grading included as part of the Reduced Scale Project Alternative. Further,
the export -related transportation/circulation, air quality and noise impacts of the proposed
project may be less, as there may be less export required
Of the alternatives analyzed in this Supplement, the Reduced Scale Project Alternative
represents the environmentally superior alternative.
P.C. Resolution No 2002-17
Page 6 of 27
According to the applicant, the Reduced Scale Project Alternative is not feasible for several
reasons First, there are economic implications associated with the Reduced Scale Project
Alternative The land costs would be substantially beyond industry costs Operational
costs would remain relatively constant, although there would be fewer assisted living units
These higher costs would result in rental rates that would exceed market rates
4 The Alternate Institutional Use Alternative considers the development of
institutional uses other than an assisted living facility Grading/geology impacts could be
greater, as an alternate use may require more grading in a larger envelope than is required
as part of the proposed project. Construction -related transportation/circulation, air quality
and noise impacts associated with the Alternate Institutional Use Alternative could all be
greater as a result of potential greater quantities of export. Further, operational aspects
associated with some of the alternate institutional uses (e g , educational facilities) could
result in greater operational impacts related to transportation/circulation, air quality and
noise than the proposed project.
None of the project objectives associated with the Belmont Village project would be met
with the implementation of the Alternate Institutional Use Alternative Further, BelmontCorp
is in the business of development, ownership and management of assisting living housing
communities, and does not develop alternate land uses
Accordingly, and for any one of the reasons set forth herein or in the
Supplement, the Planning Commission finds that specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible each of the Project alternatives, including the "No Project"
alternative, identified in the FEIR. None of the alternatives would reduce or avoid a
significant environmental impact of the Project without creating or making more significant
another impact or impacts Each alternative is hereby rejected for those reasons. The
Planning Commission further finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate
alternatives into the preparation of the FEIR, and that all reasonable alternatives were
considered in the review process of the Supplement and the ultimate decision on the
Projects
Section 15: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance the economic, legal,
social, technological or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental
risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project
outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered acceptable
(CEQA Guidelines section 15093(a)) CEQA requires the agency to provide written
findings supporting the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when
significant impacts are unavoidable Such reasons must be based on substantial evidence
in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines section 15093(b))
Those reasons are provided in this Statement of Overriding Considerations
The Planning Commission finds that the economic, social or other benefits of
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 7 of 27
the Project outweigh each and all of the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts
discussed above and any other remaining significant effects found to be unavoidable. In
making this finding, the Planning Commission has balanced the benefits of the Project
against its unavoidable impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those adverse
impacts The Planning Commission finds that each one of the following benefits of the
Project, independent of the other benefits, would warrant approval of the Project
notwithstanding the unavoidable impacts of the Protect
The Project implements the Institutional designation of the site in the General Plan
Page 197 of the General Plan specifically notes that the location where the Project is
proposed is "centrally located on the Peninsula " The General Plan states that the
intent of the General Plan is to locate a "complex" of such institutional uses in the
area of the Project, rather than scattered throughout the City where they might be
incompatible with other uses.
2 The Project will provide a high quality living and care facility for seniors in need of
housing in an area where institutional services are provided.
3 The Project provides a needed service for residents of the Palos Verdes Peninsula
who may have limited care options in the area for elderly parents or family
members.
4 Any institutional development on the site, uses which are conditionally permitted
under the General Plan and Zoning Code, can be expected to generate the same
types of short term, construction -related environmental impacts which will result
from the Project
5 The mass of the structure has been reduced over initial proposals Any building
constructed on the site for institutional purposes can be expected to have some
impact on views of the currently undeveloped site from adjacent residences
Pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Section 17.02.040{a}(14), views
of undeveloped property are not protected views. In addition, although it is possible
to reduce visual impacts by lowering the building pad and thereby further reducing
impacts on views over the site, other significant environmental impacts result from
the grading and export of soil that would be necessary to do so. Moreover,
development of the Project will improve views over the site by eliminating existing
vegetation. Thus, any development of the site with an institutional use that will
provide a needed service to the community will cause some significant
environmental impacts Accordingly, the Planning Commission hereby finds that the
significant environmental impact on views and aesthetics that will be caused by the
Project are outweighed by the benefits to the community from the Project because it
will provide a needed service to senior citizens and their relatives residing in and
around the City
Section 16: As required by CEQA, the Mitigation Monitoring Program
P.C. Resolution No 2002-17
Page 8 of 27
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted.
Section 17: The Planning Commission action on this matter is advisory
only; with the final action on the matter being taken by the City Council at a future duly
noticed public hearing Nonetheless, any interested person aggrieved by this decision or
any portion of this decision may appeal it to the City Council. Pursuant to Sections
17.60.060, 17.76.040(H) and 17.80 070 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any
such appeal must be filed with the City, in writing, and with the appropriate appeal fee, no
later than August 7, 2002
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 9 of 27
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of July 2002, by the following vote:
AYES: Cote, Lyon, Mueller, Tomblin, Chair Cartwright
MOM
".1-SIM71frelm
ABSENT: Duran Reed, Long
'Jon S. Cartwright,
Chairman
I -
Jo Rod s, AICP
Dirctor f Planning, UBUI
ding and Code Enforcement; and,
�O
SecY*Iafy to the Planning Commission
P.C. Resolution No 2002-17
Page 10 of 27
47.17romi
Project: A request to modify Conditional Use Permit No 195 and Grading Permit No
1903, which allows the construction of a new assisted living facility for senior
citizens on a 4.57 -acre lot located within the City's Institutional (1) zoning
district The modifications proposed consist of an increase in the structure's
floor area from 74,774 square feet to 94,000 square feet, a reduction in the
total length of the building along Crestridge Road by 17 feet; an increase in
the total depth of the building by 18 feet; and, an increase in the amount of
grading from 160,000 cubic yards to 163,060 cubic yards The modified
earth movement is not a balanced operation, as previously approved for the
Marriott Brighton Gardens project, as it consists of 89,500 cubic yards of cut,
73,560 cubic yards of fill and 15,940 cubic yards of export
Location: North side of Crestridge Road, west of Crenshaw Boulevard, at 5701
Crestridge Road
Applicant: BelmontCorp
Landowner: Marriott International
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction2
11 Management of the Mitigation Monitoring Program3
Roles and Responsibilities3
Mitigation and Monitoring program Procedures3
Mitigation Monitoring Operations3
III. Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist5
IV Mitigation Monitoring Summary Table6
I. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), which is for the Belmont Village Assisted Living
Facility at 5701 Crestridge Road, in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, responds to Section
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 11 of 27
21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Section 21081.6, which requires a lead or responsible
agency that approves or carries out a project where a Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report has identified significant environmental effects, to adopt a "reporting or monitoring
program for adopted or required changes to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects."
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is acting as lead agency for the project.
An Initial Study and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report were prepared to address the
potential environmental impacts of the project Where appropriate, this environmental
document recommended mitigation measures to mitigate or avoid impacts identified.
Consistent with Section 21080 (2)(c) of the Public Resources Code, a mitigation reporting or
monitoring program is required to ensure that the adopted mitigation measures under the
jurisdiction of the City are implemented The City will adopt this MMP when adopting the
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
This MMP has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq ) and the State
Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines), as amended (California
Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.). This MMP complies with the rules, regulations,
and procedures adopted by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for implementation of CEQA
Lit I ley -011 I NI Z I J, If] k, 1111 to]
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code states: "When making the findings required by
subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when adopting a negative declaration pursuant to paragraph
(2) of subdivision (c) of Section 21081, the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring
program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project
approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment The reporting or
monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For
those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of an
agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency
shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed
reporting or monitoring program."
11. MANAGEMENT OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The MMP for the project will be in place through all phases of the project including final design,
pre -grading, construction, and operation. The City will have the primary enforcement role for
the mitigation measures.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM PROCEDURES
The mitigation monitoring procedures for this MMP consists of, filing requirements, and
P.0 Resolution No 2002-17
Page 12 of 27
compliance verification The Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and procedures for its use are
outlined below
Mitigation Monitorina Program Checklist
The MMP Checklist provides a comprehensive list of the required mitigation measures In
addition, the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist includes: the implementing action when the
mitigation measure will occur; the method of verification of compliance, the timing of verification,
the department or agency responsible for implementing the mitigation measures, and
compliance verification. Section III provides the MMP Checklist.
17-177rtm = �- a =71111M
Files shall be established to document and retain the records of this MMP. The files shall be
established, organized, and retained by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes department of
Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement.
Compliance Verification
The MMP Checklist shall be signed when compliance of the mitigation measure is met
according to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Director of Planning, Building, and Code
Enforcement. The compliance verification section of the MMP Checklist shall be signed, for
mitigation measures requiring ongoing monitoring, and when the monitoring of a mitigation
measure is completed
MITIGATION MONITORING OPERATIONS
The following steps shall be followed for implementation, monitoring, and verification of each
mitigation measure*
1. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement
shall designate a party responsible for monitoring of the mitigation measures
2 The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement
shall provide to the party responsible for the monitoring of a given mitigation measure, a
copy of the MMP Checklist indicating the mitigation measures for which the person is
responsible and other pertinent information.
3. The party responsible for monitoring shall then verify compliance and sign the
Monitoring Milestone column of the MMP Checklist for the appropriate mitigation
measures.
Mitigation measures shall be implemented as specified by the MMP Checklist During any
project phase, unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of
mitigation measures The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and
Code Enforcement with advice from Staff or another City department, is responsible for
P.0 Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 13 of 27
recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if needed. If mitigation measures are
refined, the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement would document the change
and shall notify the appropriate design, construction, or operations personnel about refined
requirements
Ill. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CHECKLIST
INTRODUCTION
This section provides the MMP Checklist for the project as approved by the City Council of the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes on 2002. Mitigation measures are listed in the order
in which they appear in the Initial Study
Monitoring and Reporting Action indicates when the measure should be
monitored and reported.
Party Responsible for Mitigation indicates who is responsible for
implementation.
Enforcement Agency/Monitoring Agency/Monitoring Milestone indicates
what agency is responsible for enforcing the measure, and provides space for
future reference and notation that compliance has been monitored, verified, and
is consistent with these mitigation measures.
P.0 Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 14 of 27
A11111RUN
Mitigation Monitoring Program
(Planning Commission Resolution No. 2002-17)
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure T—Monitoring
and
TMonitoring
Monitoring
#
I Reporting Action
I Milestone
Responsibility
A. GEOTECHNICAL
RESOURCES AND DRAINAGE
1
Prior to approval of grading
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
plans and building plans, the
Plans, Approved
Issuance of
Planning,
recommendations contained in
Building Plans
Grading Permit
Building and
"Addendum Geotechnical
and Prior to
Code
Report, Revised Grading Plan,
Issuance of
Enforcement
Parcel I of Parcel Map No
Building Permit
24655, City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, County of Los
Angeles, California"
(September 21, 2001), shall be
incorporated into the grading
and building plans
2
Prior to approval of grading
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
and building plans,
Plans; Approved
Issuance of
Planning,
recommendations of the City
Building Plans
Grading Permit
Building and
Geologist, as enumerated in
and Prior to
Code
the Zeiser Kling Consultants,
Issuance of
Enforcement
Inc., letter of October 24,
Building Permit
2001, shall be incorporated
into the proposed plans
3
Prior to approval of building
Approved Building
Prior to
Department of
plans, the project plans will be
Plans
Issuance of
Planning,
reviewed to ensure that no
Building Permit
Building and
portion of project habitable
Code
structure(s) infringe upon the
Enforcement
building setback line (refer to
Exhibit 3-2, Building Setback
Line). Further, any future
alterations to habitable
building(s) shall conform to the
requirements of the Building
Setback Line
4
Prior to issuance of grading
Approved Storm
Prior to
Department of
permits, the applicant shall
Drain Improvement
Issuance of
Public Works
submit a hydrology report and
Plans and Hydrology
Grading Permit
storm drain improvement
Report
plans, subject to the review
and approval of the Director of
Public Works, for the proposed
and existing storm drain that
P.C. Resolution No 2002-17
Page 15 of 27
� --\
-� ~/
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
meets the 50 -year storm drain
design requirements
5
Prior to approval of storm drain
Approved Storm
Prior to
Department of
plans, it shall be demonstrated
Drain Improvement
Issuance of
Public Works
that all drainage from hard
Plans
Grading Permit
surfaces shall be carried in
nonerosive devices.
6
Prior to approval of storm drain
Approved Storm
Prior to
Department of
plans and landscape plans, it
Drain Improvement
Issuance of
Planning,
shall be demonstrated that all
Plans; Approved
Grading
Building and
irrigation and drainage on the
Irrigation Plans
Permit; Prior to
Code
north -facing slope shall be
Approval of
Enforcement;
controlled during and after
Landscape
Department of
grading and construction.
and Irrigation
Public Works
Plans
7
Prior to approval of grading
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
plans, it shall be demonstrated
Plan, Submittal of
Issuance of
Planning,
that all pad drainage shall be
Documentation
Grading Permit
Building and
directed away from slopes and
Demonstrating
Code
around structures to approved
Ongoing Compliance
Enforcement
disposal areas All berms
shall be constructed and
compacted as part of fine
grading and shall be
maintained by the owner. The
recommended drainage
patterns shall be established
at the time of fine grading and
maintained throughout the life
of the structure(s).
8
Prior to approval of building
Approved Building
Prior to
Department of
(#)
plans, the project proponent
Plans
Issuance of
Planning,
shall avoid conditions which
Building
Building and
will lead to groundwater
Permits
Code
saturation which may result
Enforcement
from altering site drainage by
constructing retaining walls,
paved walkways, parking
areas and patios.
9
Prior to approval of building
Submittal of
Prior to
Department of
plans, the owner shall ensure
Documentation
Issuance of
Planning,
that all interceptor ditches,
Demonstrating
Building
Building and
drainage terraces, downdrains
Ongoing Compliance
Permits
Code
and any other drainage
Enforcement
P.C. Resolution No. 2002-17
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
devices shall be periodically
cleaned to promote slope
stability
10
Prior to issuance of certificates
Submittal of
Prior to
Department of
of occupancy, the owner shall
Documentation
Issuance of
Planning,
undertake a program for the
Demonstrating
Certificates of
Building and
elimination of burrowing
Ongoing Compliance
Occupancy
Code
animals. This must bean
Enforcement
ongoing program in order to
promote slope stability.
11
Prior to approval of grading
Approved Storm
Prior to
Department of
(#)
plans, the project proponent
Water Pollution
Issuance of
Public Works
shall prepare a Storm Water
Prevention Plan
Grading Permit
Pollution Prevention Plan. The
Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan shall
incorporate by detail or
reference appropriate post-
construction Best
Management Practices
(BMPs). Further, the Storm
Water Pollution Prevention
Plan shall contain
requirements to be adhered to
during project construction.
B. BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
1
Prior to the issuance of
Approved Building
Prior to
Department of
building permits and prior to
Plans; Approved
Issuance of
Planning,
the approval of street
Street Improvement
Building
Building and
improvement plans, lighting
Plans
Permits; Prior
Code
plans shall be submitted for
to Approval of
Enforcement,
review and approval by the
Street
Department of
Department of Planning,
Improvement
Public Works
Building and Code
Plans
Enforcement The lighting
plans shall demonstrate that
exterior residential lighting and
street lighting is of low
intensity and is directed away
from the adjacent off-site
areas and native habitat.
2
Prior to the issuance of
Approved
Prior to
Department of
grading permits, a landscape
Landscape Plans
Issuance of
Planning,
plan will be prepared for the
Grading
Building and
P.0 Resolution No 2002-17
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
proposed project and
Permits
Code
submitted for review and
Enforcement
approval of the Department of
Planning, Building, and Code
Enforcement. The landscape
plan shall include provisions
for the revegetation of graded
areas at the perimeter of the
project site. Said revegetation
shall incorporate native
species to the extent possible
in order to reduce the
dependence on watering and
to provide a natural buffer to
the adjacent off-site areas
3
Prior to commencement of
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
grading or construction, the
Plan, Site Inspection
Issuance of
Planning,
project site areas that are not
Clearance
Grading
Building and
to be graded shall be fenced
Permit,
Code
off to prevent unintended
Ongoing
Enforcement
access or disturbance
During Grading
and
Construction
Prior to commencement of
Site Inspection
On-going
Department of
grading or construction, project
Clearance
During Grading
Planning,
site areas not intended for
and
Building and
access or disturbance shall be
Construction
Code
fenced off
Enforcement
5
Prior to landscape plan
Approved
Prior to
Department of
(#)
approval, the project
Landscape and
Issuance of
Planning,
proponent shall ensure that all
Irrigation Plans
Grading
Building and
landscaping at the periphery of
Permits
Code
the developed area shall
Enforcement
consist of species that provide
food for wildlife to increase
utilization of the plantings by
wildlife
C. TRAFFIC
AND CIRCULATION
1
Prior to issuance of a grading
Approved Street
Prior to
Department of
permit and prior to the
Improvement Plans,
Issuance of
Public Works
approval of street
Approved Grading
Grading
improvement plans, sight
Plans
Permit; Prior to
distance at the entrance to the
Approval of
proposed project shall be
Street
reviewed and approved by the
Im rovement
P.C. Resolution No. 2002-17
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
Department of Public Works,
Plans
in accordance with standard
sight distance requirements of
the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes and the California
Department of Transportation
2
Prior to issuance of a building
Approved Traffic
Prior to
Department of
permit for the project, the
Sign ing/Striping Plan
Issuance of
Public Works
applicant shall submit an
Building
internal traffic signing/striping
Permits
plan for review by the Director
of Public Works. Said plan
shall include provision for stop
sign control by installing a stop
sign, stop bar and stop legend
internal to the project site at its
access with Crestndge Road.
3
During construction,
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
construction activities shall be
Clearance
During Grading
Public Works
limited to the hours of 8*00
and
a m. and 4.00 p.m, Monday
Construction
through Saturday, and shall be
prohibited on legal holidays
and Sundays, in accordance
with the provisions of the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes
Municipal Code Vehicular
stacking for construction
activities prior to 7*00 a m
shall be prohibited Grading
activities shall be limited to the
hours of 8.00 a rn and 4.00
p rn , Monday through
Saturday, and shall be
prohibited on legal holidays
and Sundays.
4
Prior to commencement of
Verification of
Prior to
Department of
construction activities that
Receipt of Permit
Commenceme
Public Works
involve transportation of heavy
nt of
construction equipment and/or
Construction
materials that require the use
Activities
of oversized -transport vehicles
on State highways, a
transportation permit from the
California Department of
P.C. Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 19 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone_
Responsibility
Transportation shall be
obtained
5
Prior to the issuance of
Approved Traffic
Prior to
Department of
grading permits, the project
Phasing and Traffic
Issuance of
Public Works
proponent shall submit a
Control Plan
Haul Route
Construction Phasing and
Permit; Prior to
Traffic Control Plan. This Plan
Issuance of
shall identify haul routes, as
Grading
well as the number of truck
Permits
trips and the resultant period
of time required for soil export
and construction materials
import activities. If determined
necessary by the Director of
Public Works, measures to
minimize potential traffic
conflicts shall be included in
the Construction Phasing and
Traffic Control Plan. These
measures include* utilizing
flagmen, signage, etc., to
assist truck trips and truck
movement on to and off of the
local street system; control of
traffic at project entrance/exit
points; control of queuing of
construction traffic prior to 8 00
a m , scheduling operations
affecting traffic during off-peak
hours, and modifying the soil
ex ortperiod
6
During construction, streets
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
shall be cleaned regularly at
Plans, Site
Issuance of
Public Works
the direction of the Direct of
Inspection
Grading
Public Works.
Clearance
Permits;
Ongoing
During Grading
and
Construction
7
During construction, loads
Approved Grading
Pnor to
Department of
shall be covered to prevent
Plans; Site
Issuance of
Public Works
materials from blowing out of
Inspection
Grading
trucks, thus reducing the
Clearance
Permits;
potential for cracked
Ongoing
windshields.
During Grading
P.C: Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 20 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone_
Responsibility
and
Construction
D. AIR
QUALITY
1
The following measures will be
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
implemented during
Clearance
During Grading
Planning,
construction.
and
Building and
Water site and clean
Construction
Code
equipment morning and
Enforcement
evening to comply with AQMD
Fugitive Dust Measures BCM -
03 and BCM -06.
Wash off trucks leaving the
site to comply with AQMD
Fugitive Dust Measure BCM -
01
Require haul trucks leaving the
site to have a minimum
freeboard distance of 12" or to
cover payloads
Spread soil binders on site,
unpaved roads and parking
areas.
Apply chemical soil stabilizers
according to manufacturer's
specifications to all inactive
construction areas (previously
graded which remain inactive
for 96 hours)
Reestablish ground cover on
construction site through
seeding and watering on
portions of the site that will not
be disturbed for lengthy
periods (two months or more)
Sweep streets if silt is carried
over to adjacent public
thoroughfares
Reduce traffic speeds on all
unpaved road surfaces to 15
miles per hour or less
Suspend grading operations
during first and second stage
smog alerts
Suspend grading operations
when winds eeds as
PC Resolution No 2002-17
Page 21 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
instantaneous gusts) exceed
25 miles per hour)
Maintain construction
equipment engines by keeping
them tuned
Utilize existing power sources
(e g , power poles) or clean
fuel generators rather than
temporary power generators
Provide on-site power sources
during the early stages of the
project
Configure construction parking
to minimize traffic interference
Provide a flagperson to
properly guide traffic and
ensure safety at construction
sites
Schedule operations affecting
traffic for off-peak hours,
where feasible
Develop a traffic plan to
minimize traffic flow
interferences from construction
activities
Schedule goods movement for
off-peak hours
E. NOISE
1
Ongoing during construction,
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
construction activities shall be
Clearance
During Grading
Planning,
limited to the hours of 8.00
and
Building and
am and 4.00 p m , Monday
Construction
Code
through Saturday, and shall be
Enforcement
prohibited on Sundays and
legal holidays
2
Ongoing during construction,
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
trucks used for soil export
Clearance
During Grading
Planning,
activities shall not approach to
and
Building and
or depart from the project site
Construction
Code
before 8 00 a m or after 4.00
Enforcement
m
3
Ongoing during construction,
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
rock breaking activities will be
Clearance
During Grading
Planning,
located at the furthest location
and
Building and
P C Resolution No 2002-17
Page 22 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
from the existing residences
Construction
Code
and from the adjacent
Enforcement
Synagogue, as feasible (the
actual location will be depend
on site conditions, as the size
of some rocks may necessitate
that they be broken where they
are found).
4
During grading and
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
(*}
construction, grading and
Plans; Site
Issuance of
Planning,
construction equipment shall
Inspection
Grading
Building and
be stored on the project site
Clearance
Permit;
Code
during the construction period
Ongoing
Enforcement
During Grading
and
Construction
5
During construction, internal
Approved Grading
Prior to
Department of
{*)
combustion engines on
Plan, Site Inspection
Issuance of
Planning,
construction equipment shall
Clearance
Grading
Building and
be kept in proper tune and
Permit;
Code
shall be fitted with properly
Ongoing
Enforcement
maintained mufflers
During Grading
and
Construction
6
On an on -gang basis, to avoid
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
{#)
nuisance noise on weekdays
Clearance
During
Planning,
and during evening and early
Operations
Building and
morning hours, deliveries and
Code
trash collection services shall
Enforcement
be limited to between the
hours of 7 00 a m and 5 00
m , weekdays
F. VISUAL
RESOURCES
1
On an on-going basis, the
Site Inspection
Ongoing
Department of
(#)
applicant shall maintain
Clearance
During
Planning,
vegetation to ensure that
Operations
Building and
vegetation does not exceed
Code
the ridge height of the project
Enforcement
2
Prior to the issuance of
Approved Building
Prior to
Department of
(#)
building permits, the applicant
Plans
Issuance of
Planning,
shall show on the plans how
Building
Building and
all roof -mounted equipment is
Permits
Code
screened from view. These
Enforcement
plans shall be subject to the
review and approval of the
P.0 Resolution No 2002-17
Page 23 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
I
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
Director of Planning, Building
and Code Enforcement
G. WATER
SERVICE
I
Prior to issuance of building
Approved Water
Prior to
Department of
permits, the project proponent
System
Issuance of
Planning,
shall identify improvements to
Improvement Plans,
Building
Building and
the water distribution system
Including Funding
Permits
Code
that are required to provide
Mechanism;
Enforcement
water service and meet
Approved Fire
minimum fire flow
Protection Plan
requirements These
improvements, which shall be
provided for and funded by the
project proponent, shall be
identified on the project
improvement plans
2
Prior to approval of grading
Approved
Prior to
Department of
and building plans, water
Landscape and
Issuance of
Planning,
conservation measures shall
Irrigation Plans;
Grading
Building and
be provided for These
Approved Building
Permit, Prior to
Code
measures, such as the
Plans
Issuance of
Enforcement
following, shall be included in
Building
the project. use of low -flow
Permits
toilets, water -conserving
laundry facilities and reduction
in water pressure to 50 psi or
less, and provision of
landscape with low water -
using plants (where feasible),
extensive use of mulch and
installation of irrigation
systems that minimize runoff
and evaporation.
H. SANITARY
SEWERS
1
Prior to issuance of building
Approved Sewer
Prior to
Department of
permits, the project proponent
System
Issuance of
Planning,
shall identify improvements to
Improvements
Building
Building and
the sanitary sewer system that
Plans, Including
Permits
Code
are required to accommodate
Funding Mechanism
Enforcement
project -generated wastewater
These improvements, which
shall be provided for and
funded by the project
proponent, shall be identified
on the project improvement
P.0 Resolution No 2002-17
Page 24 of 27
[Mit Text of Mitigation Measure
I
Monitoring and Monitoring Monitoring
#
Reporting Action Milestone Responsibility
plans.
2 Prior of approval of building
Verification of Prior to Department of
plans, the project proponent
Payment of Fees Issuance of Planning,
shall provide verification that
Building Building and
connection fees have been
Permits Code
paid to the County Sanitation
Enforcement
District
I. FIRE AND POLICE PROTECTION
1
Prior to issuance of building
Approved Fire
Prior to
Department of
permits, the project proponent
Protection Plan
Issuance of
Planning,
shall provide fire flow and fire
Building
Building and
hydrant placement in
Permits
Code
accordance with the standards
Enforcement
of the Los Angeles County Fire
Department Any additional
requirements of the Los
Angeles County Fire
Department, as part of its
review of the project, including
provision of Fuel Modification
Plans, shall be incorporated
into the project.
2
Prior to approval of building
Approved Building
Prior to
Department of
plans, the project proponent
(Site) Plans
Issuance of
Planning,
shall contact the Lomita
Building
Building and
Sheriffs Substation, Crime
Permits
Code
Prevention/ Community
Enforcement
Relations Department, for
recommendations to increase
site security
J. ARCHAEOLOGY/PALEONTOLOGY
1
Prior to approval of grading
Approved Protocol,
Prior to
Department of
plans, the project
Site Inspection
Issuance of
Planning,
archaeologist shall submit a
Clearance; Report
Grading
Building and
protocol to the City for
Documenting
Permits,
Code
monitoring and for the
Findings
Ongoing
Enforcement
discovery of archaeological
During Grading
resources A qualified
and
archaeologist shall be present
Construction,
during rough grading
Completion of
operations, as required, to
Grading
further evaluate cultural
resources on the site During
grading, any "finds" shall be
immediately reported to the
P.0 Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 25 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
City All archaeological finds
shall be first offered to the City
for preservation. If the City
does not accept the
archaeological finds, they shall
be offered to an institution with
an educational and/or
research interest in the
materials At the completion of
grading, the project proponent
shall submit a report detailing
findings, if any.
2
Prior to approval of grading
Approved Protocol,
Prior to
Department of
plans, the project
Site Inspection
Issuance of
Planning,
paleontologist shall submit a
Clearance, Report
Grading
Building and
protocol to the City for
Documenting
Permits,
Code
monitoring and for the
Findings
Ongoing
Enforcement
discovery of paleontological
During Grading
resources, A qualified
and
paleontologist shall be present
Construction;
during rough grading
Completion of
operations, as required, to
Grading
further evaluate cultural
resources on the site During
grading, any "finds" shall be
immediately reported to the
City All paleontological finds
shall be first offered to the City
for preservation If the City
does not accept the
paleontological finds, they
shall be offered to an
institution with an educational
and/or research interest in the
materials At the completion of
grading, the project proponent
shall submit a report detailing
findings, if any.
K. EQUESTRIAN,
PEDESTRIAN AND
BICYCLE ACCESS
1
Prior to issuance of building
Approved
Prior to
Department of
permits, the project proponent
Improvement Plans
Issuance of
Planning,
shall submit plans that
Building
Building and
document how walkways for
Permits
Code
pedestrians (sidewalks) along
Enforcement;
Crestridge Road have been
Department of
P.C. Resolution No. 2002-17
Page 26 of 27
Mit
Text of Mitigation Measure
Monitoring and
Monitoring
Monitoring
#
Reporting Action
Milestone
Responsibility
incorporated into the project
Public Works
design
Notes 1 "" Indicates mitigation measures from certified Final Environmental Impact Report No 27 that remain
applicable to this Supplement to the FEIR (said mitigation measures have been modified/updated as
appropriate)
"W Indicates mitigation measures from the Supplement to certified Final Environmental Impact Report No
27 for the approved assisted living facility that remain applicable to this Supplement to the FEIR (said
mitigation measures have been modified/updated as appropriate)
Mitigation measure numbers without —" or V" represent mitigation measures that have been added to
the certified FEIR No 27 by this Supplement to the FEIR
P.C. Resolution No 2002-17
Page 27 of 27