Loading...
CC RES 2008-055 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR CASE NO.ZON2008-001611 AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 17.11 (AFFORDABLE HOUSING), CHAPTER 17.96 (DEFINITIONS) AND CHAPTER 15.20 (MORATORIUM ON LAND USE PERMITS) OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO CONFORM TO STATE DENSITY BONUS LAWS,TO IMPLEMENT CITY COUNCIL POLICY PERTAINING TO THE LOCATION OF FUTURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE SECTION PERTAINING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIRMENTS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, AND TO PERMIT SECOND DWELLING UNITS IN THE LANDSLIDE MORATORIUM AREA. WHEREAS, Chapter 17.11 of Title 17 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code") sets forth various procedures and regulations regarding provision of affordable housing within the City, and, WHEREAS,certain provisions of Government Code Section 65915 have been revised by the state legislature that pertain to density bonuses,incentives,and concessions provided to developers for the production of affordable housing; and, WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65915(a) stipulates that "All cities . . . shall adopt an ordinance that specifies how compliance with [state density bonus requirements]will be implemented;" and, WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' existing density bonus provisions set forth in Chapter 17.11 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code and certain definitions as set forth in Chapter 17.96 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code to bring those provisions into conformity with state law; and, WHEREAS, at their July 17, 2007 meeting, the Council provided policy direction to Staff pertaining to the location of future affordable housing units, and directed Staff to make changes to Chapter 17.11 to implement said policy; and, . WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"),the State's CEQA Guidelines,California Code of Regulation,Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.,the City's Local CEQA Guidelines,and Government Code Section 65962.5(f)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement),the City of Rancho Palos Verdes prepared an Initial Study and determined that there is no substantial evidence that the approval of ZON2008-00161 would result in a significant adverse effect upon the environment and, therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and notice of same was given in the manner required by law; and, WHEREAS, the Initial Study was prepared on February 22, 2008 and distributed for circulation and review from February 25, 2008 through March 28, 2008; and, WHEREAS, on February 28, 2008, notice of a Planning Commission public hearing on the proposed amendments to Chapters 17.11 and 17.96 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and, WHEREAS,on April 8,2008,the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution Nos.2008- 14 and 2008-15,recommending that the City Council certify a Negative Declaration for the proposed project and adopt an Ordinance implementing the proposed changes to the Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS,copies of the draft Negative Declaration were distributed to the City Council,and prior to taking action on the proposed Municipal Code Amendments,the City Council independently reviewed and considered the information and findings contained in the Negative Declaration and determined that the document was prepared in compliance with the requirements of CEQA and local guidelines, with respect thereto; and, WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on June 17, 2008,at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: That ZON2008-00161, an Amendment to the City's Municipal Code, is necessary to comply with State law, to implement Council policy pertaining to the location of affordable housing units, and to make changes to the Section pertaining to affordable housing requirements for non-residential developments,and said Amendment is consistent with the General Plan. Section 2: The proposed project is an amendment to the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. Specifically, it amends the density bonus provisions set forth in Chapter 17.11 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code and certain definitions as set forth in Chapter 17.96 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code to bring those provisions into conformity with State Law. Additionally, the amendment implements Council policy pertaining to the location of future affordable housing units, and changes to the Section pertaining to affordable housing requirements for non-residential developments. Furthermore, it amends Chapter 15.20 thereby allowing second dwelling units to be located within the City's Landslide Moratorium area, as required by State Law. The proposed amendment will not create or result in any significant impacts to the General Plan,Zoning Code,nor be in conflict with any applicable environmental plans or policies, be incompatible with existing land uses, affect agricultural resources, or disrupt the physical arrangement of the established community. Therefore,there will be no significant land use or planning impacts associated with this project. Section 3: The proposed project does not include any physical modifications or alterations of the existing land or structures. Any physical modifications or alterations to existing land and/or structures as a result of the project objectives will be addressed through separate environmental analysis consistent with CEQA. As such, there will be no significant exposure to geological risks, nor any significant impacts to water resources,air quality,transportation/circulation, biological resources,energy and mineral resources, no significant hazardous conditions created, no significant noise impacts, no significant impacts to public services, no significant impacts to utilities and service systems, no significant aesthetic impacts, and no significant impacts to cultural and recreational resources, as a result of the proposed project. Section 4: For reasons discussed in the Initial Study, which is incorporated herein by reference and attached as Exhibit A,the project would not have any potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals,nor would the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Section 5: The proposed project does not include any physical modifications or alterations of the existing land or structures. Any physical modifications or alterations to existing land and/or structures as a result of the project objectives will be addressed through separate Resolution No. 2008-55 Page 2of3 environmental analysis consistent with CEQA. As such, the project does not 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. Further,for this reason,the proposed project does not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable, nor have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. Section 6: For the foregoing reasons and based on its independent review and evaluation of the information and findings contained in the Initial Study(attached Exhibit A), Staff Reports, minutes, and records of the proceedings,the City Council has determined that the project will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, the City Council certifies the Negative Declaration making certain environmental findings in association with Case No. ZON2008-00161. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 17th da f Ju 2008. M or Atte t: City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUN'rY OF LOS ANGELES )ss CITY OF'RANCHO PALOS VERDES ) I, Carla Morreale, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2008-55 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on June 17, 2008. r` City Clerk Resolution No. 2008-55 Page 3of3 City of Rancho Palos Verdes ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I.. Project tMe: Municipal Code Amendment to Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing)and Chapter 17.96 (Definitions). 2. Lead agency name/address: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Department of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 3. Contact person and phone number: Gregory Pfost, AICP, Deputy Planning Director City of Rancho Palos Verdes (310)544-5228 4. Project location: Not Applicable—Project affects all properties Citywide 5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Department of Planning, Building & Code Enibrcement 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 6, General plan designation: Not Applicable—Project affects all properties Citywide 7. Coastal plan designation: Not Applicable—Project affects all properties Citywide 8. Zoning: Not Applicable—Project affects all properties Citywide 9. Description of project: The proposed project is to amend Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing)and Chapter 17.96 (Definitions)of Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code to conform with the state legislature's revisions to certain provisions of Government Code Section 65915 that pertain to density bonuses, incentives, and concessions provided to developers for the production of affordable housing. Additionally, the proposed project 'Includes an amendment to Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing)of Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code to implement the following Council policies: 1) Provide a stronger message to developers that affordable housing units be constructed on the project site as opposed to off-site; 2)That the City has the discretion to approve or disapprove the location of any proposed off-site affordable housing units required through Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 1 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008. Page 2 of 17 the inclusionary program based upon specific criteria, including but not limited to a `not to exceed"maximum percentage of affordable units per existing development;3)Establish a procedure wherein the City will determine if a developer, which proposes to provide affordable housing units off-site as part of their inclusionary housing obligation: may be permitted to convert existing market rate housing units to affordable units or shall be required to construct new units; and, 4) Establish a standard that any proposal to convert existing market rate housing units to affordable units be applied to all types (single-family detached, condominium, townhorne, rental apartments)of available housing. 10. Description of project site (as it currently exists): Not Applicable--Project affects all properties Citywide 11. Surrounding land uses and setting: Not Applicable--Project affects all properties Citywide 10. other public agencies whose approval is required: None Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 2 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008 Page 3 of 17 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, 'Involving at least one impact that is a'Potentially Significant Impact'as indicted by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics 0 Population and Housing Energy/Mineral Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Material Recreation Hydrology and Water Quality Q Noise Agricultural Resources Air Quality Public Services Mandatory Findings of Significance [_] Transportation and Circulation Utilities and Service Systems DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION Will be prepared. [� I find that although the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis as described on attached shoots,if the effect is a $$potentially significant impact"or"potentially significant unless mitigated". An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effect(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards,and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,includin revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed project Includin revisions Signature: Date: A Printed Name: Gmory Pfost For: --City of Rancho Palos Verdes Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 3 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 4 of 17 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or regulation including, but not limited to the general plan, 1,2,3,8 specific plan,local coastal plan,or zoning ordinance? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the pro'ect? c) Be incompatible with existing land use 112 in the vicinity? d) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural 114 community conservation Ian? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community(including a low-income or mino!&communi ? Comments: a) The proposed project,which includes updating the City's existing Density Bonus regulations,may result in minor deviations to site development standards or modification of zoning requirements or architectural design requirements which exceed minimum standards, Including modification of setback, parking or lot -size requirements. It should be noted that the current Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing)of Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code currently includes incentives that allow slight deviations for developers to construct affordable housing units as part of a density bonus. The proposed changes to the density bonus section will not result in any changes to the types of incentives that are already offered. Further,each development application will be evaluated on its own merit in accordance with CEQA. As such,there will be a less than significant impact associated with this project. b) The City of Rancho Palos Verdes participates in the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act(NCCP)which is a state program adopted by the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S.of Fish and wildlife Service that helps identify and provide for the area-wide protection of natural wildlife while allowing for compatible and appropriate focal uses. Given that a site-specific environmental analysis will be required prior to any housing unit construction to ensure no adverse impact will occur on NCCP areas;any housing unit increase resulting from the proposed amendment will be in compliance with the NCCP. As such,there is no Impact. c)The proposed amendment to Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing)of Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code applies to all residential properties which are permitted land uses of the City's General Pian and Zoning. Therefore,the proposed amendment would cause no impact. d) The proposed amendment may result in an increase of housing units. If a property has sensitive species as identified In the Habitat Conservation Plan and/or Natural Community Conservation Plan within its boundaries,a specific environmental analysis would be required and evaluated for its consistency with the Habitat Conservation Plan and/or Natural Community Conservation Plan. As such,the proposed amendment would cause less than significant impact. e) The proposed amendment encourages on-site affordable housing units and provides the City Council-discretion to approve or disapprove the location of affordable housing units. Additionally, the current Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing) of Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code requires that affordable units be similar in exterior appearance, configuration and basic amenities as the market rate units. The proposed amendment will result in incorporating affordable housing units within the market rate units in a proposed project. This will integrate low-income communities Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 4 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 8 of 17 Issues and Supporting information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated within higher income communities. As such,the amendment will not disrupt the physical arrangement of an established comrnuni . Therefore,the pro=d amendment would cause no im act. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING.Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or 9 local Ropulation ro'ections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly(e.g. .� through projects in an undeveloped area or major Infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing,especially affordable housing? d) Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a)The proposed amendment may result in an increase of housing units. The proposed amendment may increase housing units by a maximum of 35%per vacant property. Given that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is nearly built- out,buildable vacant land is scarce. As such,the population increase that may result from the proposed amendment is extremely minimal and would cause lass than significant Impact. b) Given that vacant land is scarce in City of Rancho Palos Verdes, the housing unit increase resulting from the proposed amendment is minimal and will not have substantial Impact to the growth or infrastructure in an area. Therefore,there will be no impact. c)The proposed amendment creates more housing units and promotes the Integration of affordable units within similar marketable units in a proposed project. As such,the proposed amendment will not have an impact. d The ro sed amendment creates more housing units and thus will not have any iMpLact. 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.Would thero sal: a) Expose people or structure 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 6 State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii Strong seismic ground shaking.? 6 III)Seismic-related ground failure, 6 includins liquefaction? iv Landslides? 2,16t 8 b) Remelt in substantial soil erosion or the 8 loss of to soil? c) Be located on a geological 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 lateralspreading, Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 5 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 6of17 Issues and Supporting information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated subsidence liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in the Uniform Building Code, thus creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable or adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems,where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) According to the State of California Department of Conservation website,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is not one of the cities identified as being affected by Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones as of May 111999. The Seismic Zone Map released in March 25,1999 show earthquake induced landslides and liquefaction zones in portions of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. However, it should be noted that applicable site-specific environmental geological analysis would be reviewed prior to any construction on said areas. As such,there will be no impact caused by the proposed amendment. b)The proposed amendment may result in increased housing units.The construction of new Musing may cause run-off due to the increase of impervious surfaces. However,construction involving new residences and structures are required to obtain City approval of a drainage plan. Additionally, applicable site-specific environmental analysis would be reviewed prior to any construction on said areas. Therefore,there would be less than significant impact caused by the proposed amendment. c—e)All new construction is subject to the City Geologist's review and approval of applicable site specific soils/geology reports. Additionally, all construction is required to adhere to the Uniform Building Code requirements to prevent potential adverse impacts. Additionally,applicable site-specific environmental analysis would be reviewed priortao any construction on said areas. As such,there would be less than lLnificant im act caused by the erop2sal. 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any water quality standard or 8 wastewater discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there 8 would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local roundwater? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,in a 10 manner,which would result In substantial erosion or siltation on or off write? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas Including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or 10 substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 6 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008 Page 7 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than leo Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Litigation Incorporated site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water qualb2 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) Expose people or property to A nundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? Ick Have construction impact on storm water runoff? 1) Have post construction activity impact on storm water runoff? Comments: a,b,e,f,k,1)The water needs of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are served by the California Water Service Company (CWSC),which operates within the regulations and standards of the Public Utilities Commission. The sole function of CWSC is to supply the City with sufficient fire safety requirements and adequate amounts of potable drinking water at a pressure consistent with accepted standards. While the proposed amendment may result in an increase in housing units,prior to construction of said units,CWSE will verify if there is an adequate water supply to meet the need of the new housing units. This would be addressed under separate environmental review of each specific project.Therefore, there is no impact with this proposed amendment. There are three large waste water discharge points, all located within 20 miles of the Rancho Palos Verdes coast. Management of land use practices within the City,such as drainage courses aid in reducing waste water discharges so that the ocean's ability to assimilate wastes would not be exceeded. it should be noted that projects resulting from the proposed amendment will have to provide a drainage pian to be reviewed by the Building and Safety Department with consistency with the current standards and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) review,including Best Management Practices. Therefore,there is no impact. c,d)According to the USGS map,there are blue-line streams in some areas within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Although there is no construction allowed over blue-line stream areas,a site-specific environmental analysis will be reviewed prior to any construction near said areas to address potential impacts. Therefore,for this amendment,there would be less than a significant impact. g,h) The properties within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are exempted from Flood Hazard Maps due to its topographic nature. This action was initiated and accomplished by the County of Los Angeles prior to 1984 and this amendment will not affect the exe on. Therefore,there would be no impact. Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 7 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008 Page 8 of 17 F s and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially !Less Than No ces Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless impact !Mitigation Incorporated i,j)There are no darns and levees in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Given that there are no rivers, there is no potential exposure to seiche. Additionally, all available buildable areas are located significantly above sea level, preventing exposure to tsunamis. As evidenced In the City's zoning map,areas with potential susceptibility to mudflow, such as Open S ace hazard zones do not rmit new residential construction. As such,there will be no impact 5. AIR QUALITY. !would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected 8 air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? c) Result in a 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 that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone recursors)? d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? e) Conflict with or obstruct the implementation of any applicable air quality plan? Comments: a e)The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is located within a five-county region in southern California that is designated as the South Coast Air Basin(SCAB). Air quality management for the SCAB Is administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQIUIP)to address federal and state air quality standards. Although high level of air quality is prevalent in Rancho Palos Verdes since the ocean is the primary air recharge area region,a site-specific environmental analysis would be reviewed prior to any construction resulting from the proposed amendment to regulate any emission sources. Therefore,there will be no im act. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the osal: a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? b) Exceed either individually or cumulatively,a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in inadequate emergency access or inadequate access to nearby uses? d) Result in insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e) Result In a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safe risks? f) Conflicts with adopted policies,plans, or programs suR22rting alternative Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 8 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 8 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless impact Mitigation Inco rated transportation(e.g.bus turnouts, bi cle Lacks)? g) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g.sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.farm ui men t? Comments: a)Given that buildable vacant land is scarce in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes,the site specific housing unit increase will be minimal. As such,the population increase due to the housing unit increase will not be substantial enough to cause a drastic increase in traffic to adversely affect the existing traffic load or capacity of the street system. Therefore, the proposed amendment would cause less than significant impact. b)The housing unit increase resulting from the proposed amendment is site specific and thus the nominal increase in residents will not be substantial enough to adversely affect the level of service standard for designated roads or highways. Therefore,the proposed amendment would cause no impact to the service standard established by the county congestion management agency. c)The population increase due to the housing increase resulting from the proposed amendment will potentially add to the existing access for emergency and other nearby uses. However,given the minimal population increase,the change in the usage of nearby access will also be nominal and will not be substantial enough to result in inadequate emergency access or other nearby uses. Therefore,there would be no impact caused by the proposed amendment. d)The City's Municipal Code has an on-site parking requirement dependent on the number of units and bedroom count. Therefore,the proposed amendment would have no impact to the parking capacity. e)The City of Rancho Palos Verdes does not border or is in immediate close proximity of any airports to cause any impacts to the air traffic due to the construction of new housing units. Additionally,the Municipal Code limits the height of residential structures. Therefore,there would be no impact caused by the proposed amendment. Q The minimal increase in residents due to the increase in housing units resulting from the proposed amendmentwill not be substantial enough to conflict with any adopted altemative transportation programs,plans,or policies.As such,there would be no impact caused by the proposed amendment. g)As with all construction, any proposed project resulting from the proposed amendment will be reviewed by the Planning Department in regards to design andadequate parking capacity on-site. Additionally,a site-specific traffic analyses will be reviewed prior to any construction on said areas for any potential impacts. Therefore,there would be less than si nificant or no im act. 7, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. would the proposal result in: 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 8 regional plans,policies,or regulations, or by the California Department of fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive 8 natural community identified in local or r- ional plans,p2licies,regulations or Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 9 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 10 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Ince orated by the California Department of Fish and Game or 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, 8 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 8 4 with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local polices or ordinances protecting biological 8 4 resources,such as tree preservation 22licy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan, 8 4 or other approved local, regional,or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: a—f}The City of Rancho Palos Verdes participates in the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act(NCCP)which is a state program adopted by the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S.of Fish and Wildlife Service that helps identify and provide for the area-wide protection of natural wildlife while allowing for compatible and appropriate local uses. There are four types of vegetation communities identified in the Natural Communities Conservation Plan(NCCP)preserve,Significant Ecological Areas and Sensitive Species Areas and the General Plan. Said vegetation communities include Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral and Grasslands. It should be noted that any applicable site-specific environmental analysis would be reviewed prior to any construction on said areas.Therefore, there will be no impact to any species,riparian habitat,sensitive natural community,wetlands,biological resources or to any ado ted habitat conservation plan. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL.RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a 4 wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be 4 of future value to the region and the residents of the State? d) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local 8 4 General Plan,Specific Plan,or other land use plan? Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 10 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 11 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant I Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated Comments; a--d)Given the current situation,the minimal increase in housing units resulting from the proposed amendment is not expected to significantly increase the energy and resource demand. Additionally,all applicable site-specific analysis would be reviewed rior to an construction. Therefore,there will be no im 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. would the proposal_Involve: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous material? 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 and existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site,which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 55962.5 and,as a result,would 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 Rian? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury,or death involving wildiand fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 11 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 12 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially t.ess Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated Comments: a-d)All applicable site-specific environmental analysis would be reviewed prior to any construction to identify potential adverse impacts or conditions. If hazardous material is found,appropriate remediation and mitigation methods would be incorporated to prevent creating any hazardous condition for the public and the environment. Therefore,there is no impact caused by the proposed amendment. at f)There are no airports located within or in close proximity of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Therefore,there is no impact caused by the proposed amendment. g)The increase in housing units resulting from the proposed amendment is site specific and will not be substantial enough to interfere with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. Therefore,there is no impact caused by the proposed amendment. h)Given the nominal housing unit increase resulting from the proposed amendment,there would not be a significant increase in the exposure to people or structures to any adverse risks. Therefore,there would be no impact caused by the proposed amendment. 10. NOISE. would the proMal result in: 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 groundbourne vibration or roundboume noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? 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 a public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the ro'ect 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? Comments: a—d)The minimal increase in housing units may cause temporary noise during the construction phases of a project However, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes limits the construction hours from 7:00am to 7:00pm, Monday through Saturday with no work permitted on Sundays or legal holidays. Trucks and other construction vehicles are not allowed to park, queue and/or idle at the project site or in adjoining public right-of-way before the said permitted hours of construction. Additionally,the Ci ,s Municipal Code Section 17.06.020 Attenuation of Nome and Vibration regulates Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 12 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008 Page 13 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated the noise levels and ratings to prevent permanent adverse noise impacts that may be caused by projects. Therefore, there would be less than significant or no impact caused by the proposed amendment. of 0 The City of Rancho Palos Verdes does not contain, border or is in immediate close proximity of any airports to cause any impacts to cause exposure to noise levels resulting from an airport or a private air strip. Therefore,there would be no iMpAa caused by the proposed amendment. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental 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 following 2ublic services: 11 Fire 2rotection? ii) Police protection? W) Schools? iv) Parks? vJ- Other 2ublic facilities? Comments: a)The minimal 'increase In housing units that may be caused by the proposed amendment will not necessitate a significant change to the current performance in public services. The potential housing unit increase is site specific and all applicable site-specific analysis would be reviewed prior to any construction. Therefore,, there will be less than significant im act., 12. UTIUTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. 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 Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 13 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008 Page 14 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated serves or may serge 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 statures and regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a--g)The General Plan indicates that the water needs of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are served by the California Water Service Company (CwSC), which operates within the regulations and standards of the Public Utilities Commission. The sole function of CWSC is to supply the City with sufficient fire safety requirements and adequate amounts of potable drinking water at a pressure consistent with accepted standards. There are three large waste water discharge points, all located within 20 miles of the Rancho Palos Verdes coast. Management of land use practices within the City,such as drainage courses aid in reducing waste water discharges so that the ocean's ability to assimilate wastes would not be exceeded. It should be noted that .projects resulting from the proposed amendment will have to provide a drainage plan to be reviewed by the Building and Safety Department with consistency with the current standards and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) review,including Beat Management Practices. It should be noted that the housing unit increase caused by the proposed amendment is site specific and therefore would be too minimal to substantially affect utilities and other service systems that would result in any change to existing water/wastewater/drainage facilities,wastewater treatment requirements,,water supply,wastewater treatment demand, wash disposal needs or compliance with any statures/regulations related to solid waste. Therefore,there would be no impact. 13. AESTHETICS. would the ro :al: a) Have a substantial effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited to, trees,rock outcroppings,and historical buildings,within a state scenic hi hwa s? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a--d)The increase in housing units resulting from the proposed amendment would be minimal and would be subject to the requirements set forth in the City's Municipal Code. Given that the housing unit increase is site specific and nominal,it would not substantially impact scenic vista,damage scenic resources,degrade the quality of the existing visual character or cause adverse impacts to day/nighttime views. Therefore,there would be no impact caused by the pro sed amendment. Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 14 of 17 environmental Checklist February 25,2008 Page 15 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Litigation Inco .rated 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical 7 resource as defined in§15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological 7 resource pursuant to§15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or 7 unique geological feature? e) Disturbed any human remains, including those interred outside of 7 formal cemeteries? Comments: The City of rancho Palos Verdes has significant archaeological sites. Should a potential area for development be identified as an archaeological site, all applicable site-specific analysis to address any potential Impacts would be conducted under the ecific environmental review for the ro'ect. 15. RECREA110N. ai) Would the project increase the use of 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? Comments: a--b)The increase in residents due to the housing increase resulting from the proposed amendment may increase the use of recreational areas within the city. However,the increase in residents will be too minimal to cause a substantial impact to cause adverse impacts to the recreational areas or facilities. Regardless,it should also be noted that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has passed an ordinance subjecting developers to a Quimby Fee which pays for park improvements. As such.,there would be no adverse im act caused by the 2roposed amendment. 16.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: 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 Resource Agency,to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a Williamson Act 2 contract? c) Involve other changes in theexisting 2 environment that,due to their location Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 15 of 17 Environmental Checklist February 25, 2008 Page 18 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially LAss Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland to a non-a r*cultural use? Comments: The construction of housing units would only be allowed in residential zoning districts(not agricultural zoning districts). Given that any housing construction would only be allowed in residential districts,and will not occur on any farmland,it will not be in conflict with the Williamson Act and will not result in an impact to any agricultural resources in the City. Therefore,there is no impact. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS of SIGNIFICANCE* a) noes 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 tD 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 rehisto ? 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 the 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? Comments: a)The housing increase resulting from the proposed amendment will be subject to site specific analysis and regulations set forth in the Municipal Code to maintain or add to the existing quality of environment and prevent any adverse impacts. Any proposed construction will also be subject to NCCP regulations if applicable to prevent any undesirable effects to existing wildlife or sensitive species. Therefore, there would be no impact caused by the proposed amendment. b)Given that the minimal housing unit increase is site-specific,it will not cause a substantial enough impact to result in a significant change individually or cumulatively considerable. Regardless,a site specific environmental analysis will be required to identify and prevent any potential adverse impacts. Therefore,there is no impact caused by the proposed amendment. C) Since the housing unit increase is site specific and there are few buildable vacant lands available in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,the proposed amendment will not result in a change that will have an adverse substantial effect on human beings,directly or indirectly. Additionally,the regulations in the Municipal Code would prevent any potential undesirable impacts and any potential of adverse im act identified in site specific analysis would be mitigated prior to Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 16 of 17 Environmental Checklist . February 25, 2008 Page 17 of 17 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated any construction. Therefiare there would be no impact caused by the pro22sed amendment. I8. F.MUER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process,one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the followin items: a Earlier analysis used. Iden' earlier anal ses and state where the are available for review. Comments: Not applicable since there was no earlier analysis. b) Impacts adequately addressed. 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 addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Comments: Not applicable since there was no earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures,which were Incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. Comments: Not applicable since there was no earlier analysis. 19. SOURCE REFERENCES 1 City of Rancho Palos Verdes,Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan,and associated Environmental Impact Report. Rancho Palos Verdes,California as amended through August 2001 2 Ci of Rancho Palos Verdes Zoning.Mia 3 City of Rancho Palos Verdes,Coagtal Specific Phan and associated Environmental Impact Report, Rancho Palos Verdes,California:December 1978 4 City of Rancho Palos Verdes NCCP Phase 1 Ma 5 South Coast Air Quality Management district. GA. - .,Aulty H@ EQ Diamond Bar,California: November 1993. 6 The Seismic Zone Map(3/25/99),Department of Conservation of the State of California,Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone 0/1/901- 7 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Archeology Ma 8 Gi of Rancho Palos Verdes MunicipEl Code 9 State Interim Population Pro'ections by No and Sex:2004-2030, U.S.Census Bureau 10 U.S.Geological Survey Ma Resolution No.2008-55, Exhibit A Page 17 of 17