CC RES 1999-007 RESOLUTION NO. 99-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES CERTIFYING A FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING A MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM, CERTAIN FINDINGS AND FACTS IN
SUPPORT OF FINDINGS AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA"), AND ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN CONNECTION
WITH THE APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 195,
GRADING PERMIT NO. 1903, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24655,
SIGN PERMIT NO. 842
THE CITY COUNCIL 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 Secireto, et al. v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los
Angeles Superior Court Case No. SWC 107 173. 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, the applicant, Marriott Senior
Livin g 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 (collectively, "the Project"). The independent care facility is proposed to be
located on the 4.57 acre parcel. 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. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15153, the City has used the earlier
certified FEIR No. 27 as part of its environmental review of the Project that currently is
proposed, as the circumstances of the projects are essentially the same.
Section 3: 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 which raised
pp Y p rep
significant environmental issues. The City has incorporated the comments and the
9
City's responses into the Final Supplement and returned responses to commenting
Y p . .
agencies at least ten (10) days prior to the Certification of the Supplement, pursuant to
g
Public Resources Code Section 21092.5.
Section 4: A p ublic hearing was duly held by the Planning Commission
on March 24, 1998, an on-site public meeting was held on April 5, 1998, and a public
hearing was held on May 12, 1998 to consider the Final Supplement to FEIR No. 27,
9 Y
Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Grading Permit No. 1903, Tentative Parcel Map No.
24655, and Sig n Permit No. 842, at which time all interested parties were given an
opportunity to be heard and present evidence. Following the public hearings, the
pp Y
Planning Commission certified the Supplement to the EIR and approved the Project. A
timely appeal was filed.
Section 5: A duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council
on August 4, 1998, August 18, 1998 and January 19, 1999. At the hearings, the
g
applicant, the appellant, and persons both in favor of and 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
pp
commented on certified FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement; the comments which were
received by City re the Cit regarding FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement and the City's written
g
responses to significant environmental points raised in the public review and comment
p g
process, and the letter from Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. dated August 7, 1998 (which
clarifies that the analysis and conclusions that were reached in the review of the
grading plan lan for the Project, as set forth in Appendix B to the Supplement, is not altered
by the fact that the Project is to construct a three-story structure, rather than a two-story
Y �
structure as originally indicated in Appendix B), each of which is incorporated herein
and made a part hereof by this reference. No recertification or reconsideration of
certified FEIR No. 27 is required by this action or has been undertaken by the City.
actions taken herein are based in part upon the previously certified adequacy of
The c p
FEIR No. 27, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163.
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 2 of 13
Section 7: The findings made in this Resolution are based upon the
information and evidence set forth in the FEIR, as described 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 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 City Council 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 City Council 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 recirculation of any portion of the EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21092.1.
Section 10: The City Council finds that the comments regarding the
DEIR and the Supplement and the responses to those comments have been received
by the City; that the City Council 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, has reviewed and considered all such
documents and testimony prior to acting on the Project. Pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15090, the City Council therefore certifies that the Final
Supplement to certified FEIR No. 27 has been completed in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The City Council hereby certifies that it
reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Supplement to FEIR
No. 27 prior to approving this project.
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
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 3 of 13
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 no export of graded material from the site, a significant reduction in
project grading and the development of a facility slightly more than one-third the size of
the original proposal. The City Council 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.
Section 12: Based upon the information and analysis contained in
certified FEIR No. 27, the Supplement, public and agency comments and the record of
these proceedings, the City Council 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 4.0, Table 3
of the Supplement. In some cases, less-than-significant impacts identified above and
in Section 4.0 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 City Council 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. A second 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 6.1.1 through 6.1.12, inclusive, described in
Appendix D 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
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 4 of 13
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 previously proposed
project. In response to comments that were made at the public hearing before the City
Council regarding the report set forth as Appendix B to the Supplement, a letter from
Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. dated August 7, 1998 was submitted to the City. That
letter clarifies that the analysis and conclusions that were reached in the review of the
grading plan for the Project, as set forth in Appendix B to the Supplement, is not altered
by the fact that the Project is to construct a three-story structure, rather than a two-story
structure as was originally indicated in Appendix B.
A third independent engineering study was conducted to address
Alternative Configuration One of the Draft Supplement to FEIR No. 27. The third
independent engineering study indicated that the Alternative Configuration One project
as identified within the Draft Supplement to FEIR No. 27, was geotechnically feasible.
However, two additional mitigation measures would need to be added for this
Alternative. This third independent engineering study is included within the Final
Supplement to FEIR No. 27.
A fourth independent engineering study was conducted as part of the
revised project (which differs from the Planning Commission approved project due to
the increased amount of grading activity and minor amounts of off-site grading). The
third independent engineering study indicated that the revised project was
geotechnically feasible, and no additional mitigation measures, other than those
already identified within the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation are necessary. The
fourth independent engineering study is included within the Final Supplement to FEIR
No. 27.
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 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 previously approved
project which will avoid or substantially lessen these impacts. Such changes have
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 5 of 13
been incorporated as conditions of approval of the Project through the imposition of
mitigation measures 6.4.1 through 6.4.4, inclusive, as set forth in Appendix D 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 FEIR indicates that it is not possible to entirely
eliminate this impact. However, the previously proposed project was approved subject
to a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
The previously-identified significant adverse environmental impacts
associated with air quality remains a significant adverse environmental impact of the
Project, although these impacts will be less than those associated with the previously
proposed project as the proposed project has less grading activity, no off-site export of
graded material, and is smaller in size and a less intensive use of the property. Thus,
there will be fewer truck trips and less on-site grading and construction activity to
create air emissions than would have occurred with the previously approved project.
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 6.4.1 through 6.4.4, inclusive, as set
forth in Appendix D 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, a noise barrier will be erected between the
construction sight and nearby noise-sensitive uses, hours of construction, deliveries
and trash collection will be limited to days and hours when noise-sensitivity is reduced.
However, certified FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement indicate that it is not possible to
entirely mitigate these construction-related impacts.
The significant adverse environmental impacts of the previously proposed
project associated with short term noise remain a significant adverse environmental
impact of the Project, although this impact will be less than that associated with the
previously proposed project.
Additionally, potentially significant adverse environmental impacts
associated with the proposed industrial fluid cooler to be installed as ect J
art of the Project
are expected to occur. However implementation of mitigation measures 6.5.6 and 6.5.7
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 6 of 13
identified in Section 4.4 and Appendix D of the Supplement, will reduce this impact
related to noise from the proposed industrial fluid cooler to a level that is less than
significant by ensuring that no sound from the cooler in excess of 65dba is audible
beyond the property line. These measures constitute changes or alterations that are
required or incorporated into the project which will avoid or substantially lessen project-
related noise impacts.
4. FEIR No. 27 identified as a potential significant impact the effect on the
visual resources and views surrounding the Project site. The Supplement re-evaluated
view impacts resulting from the revised proposal.
As with the previously proposed project, the Project will impact views from
properties to the south of Crestridge Road. Although this impact will be less than that
associated with the previously proposed project, since the Project's building footprint is
smaller and not as high as the previously proposed project, visual impacts will still be
significant. Even with implementation of mitigation measures 6.6.1 and 6.6.2 identified
in Section 4.5 and Appendix D of the Supplement, the potentially significant adverse
visual/aesthetics impacts of the Project remain significant. However, changes and
alterations have been incorporated into the Project to reduce or avoid these impacts as
much as possible. Mitigation Measures 6.6.1 and 6.6.2 will reduce, but not eliminate,
visual impacts by screening or eliminating roof-mounted equipment from view and
requiring compliance with City ordinances related to view protection. However, specific
technical and economic factors make infeasible any other mitigation measures that
could be implemented on site to reduce or eliminate view impacts from surrounding
properties. The record of these proceedings indicates that lowering the building pad of
the proposed structure in order to reduce view impacts would create significantly more
grading than would result from the Project, along with additional associated adverse
environmental impacts.
5. FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement analyzed potential environmental
impacts relating to biological resources. In addition to the information and analysis
presented in FEIR No. 27, the Supplement included a survey to determine whether
Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat exists on the project site. Although no significant
biological resources impacts were identified in either FEIR No. 27 or the Supplement,
mitigation measures 6.2.1 through 6.2.4 as set forth in Appendix D and Section 4.3 of
the Supplement will be incorporated as changes to the project that will avoid or
substantially lessen any potential project-related biological resources impact.
6. FEIR No. 27 identified potentially significant environmental impacts
related to traffic and circulation that would result from sort-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
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 7 of 13
proposal. As the current project does not propose any export of graded material from
the site, such impacts will be dramatically reduced. Nonetheless, changes or
alterations to the project will be required that will avoid or substantially lessen any
potential short-term impact related to traffic or circulation. Mitigation measures 6.3.1
through 6.3.6, as described in Appendix D of the Supplement and the applicable
sections of FEIR No. 27 will be imposed as conditions of approval of the 1 ro'ect. The
p
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.
7. FEIR No. 27 identified a potentially significant environmental impact
relating to water service resulting from the project. Specifically, water service will need
to be provided to the site and the project will result in an increased demand for water.
These impacts are expected to be lessened as a result of the reduced intensity of
development currently proposed on the site. Changes or alterations to the project will
be required that will avoid or substantially lessen any potential impacts related to water
service. Mitigation measures 6.7.1 and 6.7.2, as described in Appendix D of the
Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will be imposed as conditions
of approval of the project. Such measures will result in improvements to the water
distribution system that will accommodate needs on-site, and will implement water
conservation measures to reduce water usage. The imposition of such measures will
therefore reduce water service impacts from the project to a level of insignificance.
8. FEIR No. 27 identified a potentially significant environmental impact
relating to sanitary sewers resulting from the project. These impacts are expected to
be lessened as a result of the reduced intensity of development currently proposed on
the site. Nonetheless, changes or alterations to the project will be required that will
avoid or substantially lessen any potential impacts related to sanitary sewers.
Mitigation measures 6.8.1 and 6.8.2, as described in Appendix D of the Supplement
and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will be imposed as conditions of approval of
the project. Such measures will result in improvements to the existing sewer and waste
water system that will accommodate project-generated waste water. The imposition of
such measures will therefore reduce sewer system impacts from the project to a level of
insignificance.
9. FEIR No. 27 identified a potentially significant environmental impact
relating to fire and police protection resulting from the project. These impacts are
expected to be lessened as a result of the reduced intensity of development currently
proposed on the site. Nonetheless, changes or alterations to the project will be
required that will avoid or substantially lessen any potential impacts related to police
and fire protection. Mitigation measures 6.9.1 and 6.9.2, as described in Appendix D of
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 8 of 13
the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will be imposed as
conditions of approval of the project. Measure 6.9.1 will result in the provision of
adequate fire flow, fire hydrant locations and fire safety improvements. Measure 6.9.2
will enhance crime prevention and security through the participation of the Sheriffs
Department. The imposition of such measures will therefore reduce police and fire
service impacts from the project to a level of insignificance.
10. FEIR No. 27 identified a potentially significant environmental impact
relating to archaeology/paleontology resulting from the project. These impacts are
expected to be lessened as a result of the significantly reduced grading currently
proposed on the site. Nonetheless, changes or alterations to the project will be
required that will avoid or substantially lessen any potential impacts related to
archaeology/paleontology. Mitigation measures 6.10.1 and 6.10.2, as described in
Appendix D of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will be
imposed as conditions of approval of the project. Those measures will assure
appropriate investigation and protection of any archaeological or paleontological
resources found in the course of grading and construction. The imposition of such
measures will therefore reduce archaeology/paleontology impacts from the project to a
level of insignificance.
11. FEIR No. 27 identified a potentially significant environmental impact
relating to equestrian, pedestrian and bicycle access resulting from the project.
Changes or alterations to the project will be required that will avoid or substantially
lessen any such potential impacts. Mitigation measure 6.11.1, as described in
Appendix D of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will be
imposed as a condition of approval of the project. This measure will result in the
incorporation of appropriate pedestrian walkways into the project. The imposition of the
measure, therefore, will reduce equestrian, pedestrian and bicycle access impacts from
the project to a level of insignificance.
12. As to each impact identified in FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement that
remains significant after mitigation measures are applied, the City Council finds that
specific legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible any
additional mitigation measures identified in the Supplement or in FEIR No. 27. The
specific bases for each such finding is set forth in the applicable section of the FEIR.
13. Each of the mitigation measures set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto is hereby
required in, or incorporated into, the Project as conditions of approval. These
measures will further reduce those impacts identified in FEIR No. 27 and the Final
Supplement to FEIR No. 27 to a level of insignificance, except as provided herein.
Exhibit "A" sets forth the mitigation measures described above in greater detail.
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 9 of 13
Section 14: Section 5.0 of the Supplement describes, and the City
Council 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;" "FEIR No. 27 Project Alternative;" "Alternate Configuration One
Alternative (lower building pad);" and "Alternate Configuration Two Alternative (other
Project site)." 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
development of the site under existing general plan and zoning provisions. This would
result in a facility approximately one-third (1/3) the size of the Project. Environmental
impacts of this Alternative would be similar to the proposed Project, and no impact
would be significantly reduced or avoided. Such a facility would not, according to the
applicant, produce sufficient revenue to support the fixed costs of building and
operating the facility.
2. As explained in the Supplement, the project proposed in FEIR No. 27
Alternative would not lessen or avoid any environmental impact resulting from the
Project. Instead, the impacts of the FEIR No. 27 project would be more significant than
the proposed project, given the additional grading and export of materials this
alternative would require and the larger size of the facility that was proposed and
analyzed in FEIR No. 27.
3. The Alternate Configuration One Alternative would reduce the view-
related impacts of the proposed Project by lowering the building pad and, accordingly,
the height of the building above grade. However, this alternative would require nearly
double the amount of cut grading proposed by the Project, and would require the export
of 69,000 cubic yards of material, where no export is proposed now. Thus,
grading/geology impacts would be more significant than the Project. Export or graded
materials under this alternative would create other significant, albeit temporary, impacts
in the areas of traffic and construction-related air quality. However, impacts on views
over the site from neighboring properties would be reduced. Thus, while this
alternative would reduce one significant environmental impact, it would create at least
three new or more significant impacts from the Project. Accordingly, other than the No
Project Alternative, which is economically infeasible, this Alternative is the alternative
that is environmentally superior among the alternatives that are discussed in the
Supplement. However, the City Council also finds that due to the significant
environmental impacts that would be caused by this Alternative, this alternative is not
environmentally superior to the Project and, accordingly, is not preferable to the
Project.
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 10 of 13
4. The Alternative Configuration Two Alternative would involve building the
same Project on an alternative site. Under this alternative noise and aesthetic impacts
would be somewhat reduced, since the Project would be located farther from adjacent
residential and institutional uses. However, this alternative would create more
significant biological, air-quality and grading-related impacts. Significantly, the
property on which this alternative would be located is not owned by the applicant and is
under contract to a new landowner, making development of this alternative infeasible.
Accordingly, and for any one of the reasons set forth herein or in the
Supplement, the City Council 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 City Council 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 City Council finds that the economic, social or other benefits of 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 City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against
its unavoidable impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those adverse
impacts. The City Council 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 Project.
1. The Project implements the Institutional designation of the site in the General
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 11 of 13
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 previous 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 reduce 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 City Council
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
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted.
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 12 of 13
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 2nd day of February 1999
71*/41V.
Mayor
A TTES,
Iv /_L(
City Clerk
tate of California )
County of Los Angeles ) SS
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify
that the above Resolution No. 99-07 was duly and regularly passed and adopted
by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on February 2, 1699.
F
�l . L J /
F City Clerk
Resolution No. 99-07
Page 13 of 13
Exhibit A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Project: Environmental Assessment No. 688/Conditional Use Permit No. 195/Grading Permit No.
1903/Tentative Parcel Map No. 24655/Sign Permit No. 842
Location: Northwest corner of Crenshaw Blvd. and Crestridge Road, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
90275
Applicant: Wayne Sant, Marriott Senior Living Services
Landowner: Host Marriott, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction 2
II. Management of the Mitigation Monitoring Program 3
Roles and Responsibilities 3
Mitigation and Monitoring Program Procedures 3
Mitigation Monitoring Operations 3
III. Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist 5
IV. Mitigation Monitoring Summary Table 6
Resolution No. 99-07
Exhibit A-Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), for the construction of a three story, 122 unit, 74,744 square foot
assisted living facility, including; 80,000 cubic yards of cut and 80,000 cubic yards of fill, the subdivision of the
existing lot into two lots, landscaping and various site improvements, and a new sign on an existing vacant lot
located at the northwest corner of Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Boulevard, in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, responds to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Section 21081.6 requires a lead or
responsible agency that approves or carries out a project where a Supplemental EIR has identified sign ficant
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 Final Supplement to FEIR No. 27 was prepared to address the ;.) tential 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 PuCic 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 Final Supplement to
FEIR No. 27.
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.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
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."
Resolution No. 99-07
Exhibit A-Page 2
II. 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 compliance verification.
The Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and procedures for its use are outlined below.
Mitigation Monitoring 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.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Files
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 Compliance Verification
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
Resolution No. 99-07
Exhibit A-Page 3
of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement with advice from Staff or another
City department, is responsible for 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.
Resolution No. 99-07
Exhibit A-Page 4
III. 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 February 2, 1999. Mitigation measures are listed in the order in which they appear in the Initial
Study.
Types of measures are project design, construction, operational, or cumulative.
Time of Implementation indicates when the measure is to be implemented.
Responsible Entity indicates who is responsible for implementation.
Compliance Verification provides space for future reference and notation that compliance has
been monitored, verified, and is consistent with these mitigaticn measures.
N:\GROUP\PLANNING\RESOS\CC\REEA688.MMP
Resolution No. 99-07
Exhibit A-Page 5
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone for Monitoring Compliance Verification
N1
. R
....:...............................
•. . -ecommendations o t e -re iminary A pproved ra•ing an; "nor to ssuance o S epartment o • arming,
Geotechnical Investigation", including Approved Building Plans;Grading Permit; Building and Code
addenda thereto,for the project site shall Site Inspection Prior to Issuance of Enforcement
be incorporated into the grading and Clearance Building Permits;
building plans; additional During Grading/
recommendations of the City Geologist Construction
shall also be incorporated into project
plans.
•. . I it is determined necessary by the A pproved torm Drain Prior to Approval o Department o Public
Director of Public Works,the existing Improvement Plans Final Tract Map or orks
storm drain system shall be enlarged or Issuance of Grading
connected to the Indian Peak system in Permit, Whichever
such a way as to accommodate a 50-year Occurs First
event.
6.1.3 All drainage from hard surfaces must be 'Approved Storm Drain Prior to Approval of Department of Public
carried in nonerosive devices. Improvement Plans Final Tract Map or Works
Issuance of Grading
Permit,Whichever
Occurs First
6.1.4 Irrigation and drainage on the Approved Storm Drain Prior to Approval of Department of Public
north-facing slope shall be controlled Improvement Plans; Final Tract Map or Works; Department of
during and after grading and construction.Approved Irrigation Issuance of Grading Planning, Building and
Plans Permit, Whichever Code Enforcement
Occurs First; Prior
to Approval of
Landscape and
Irrigation Plans
6. .5 •ther t an inci•enta rain a , no water A pprove• torm I rain 'nor to Approva o i epartment o 'u• is
shall be allowed to flow over open slopes.Improvement Plans; Final Tract Map or Works; Department of
Pad gradients shall be designed so that Approved Grading Plan Issuance of Grading Planning, Building and
pad and roof runoff are directed to Permit, Whichever Code Enforcement
approved discharge areas. Occurs First
1 Resol. No. 99-07
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Reporting and Monitoring 1Party Responsible
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Monitoring Action Milestone or Monitoring Compliance Verification
6.1.6 All roof and pad drainage shall be A pproval of Final Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
directed away from slopes and around Grading Plan; Submittal Grading Permit; Building and Code
structures to approved disposal areas. of Documentation Prior to Approval of Enforcsfir.el
All berms shall be constructed and Demonstrating Ongoing Final Tract Map
compacted as part of fine grading and Compliance
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).
6.1.7 The developer shall avoid conditions A pproved Building Plans Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
which will lead to groundwater saturation Building Permits Building and Code
which may result from altering site Enforcement
drainage by constructing retaining walls,
paved walkways and patios.
6.1.8 All interceptor ditches, drainage terraces, Submittal of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
downdrains and any other drainage Documentation Building Permits Building and Code
devices shall be periodically cleaned to Demonstrating Ongoing Enforcement
promote slope stability. Compliance
6.1.9 The owner(s)must undertake a program Submittal of Prior to Approval of Department of Planning,
for the elimination of burrowing animals. Documentation Final Tract Map Building and Code
This must be an ongoing program in Demonstrating Ongoing Enforcement
order to promote slope stability. Compliance
6.1.10 A landscape and irrigation plan shall be A pproved Landscape Prior to Approval of Department of Planning,
prepared. For slope areas, this plan shall -rid Irrigation Plan; Final Tract Map or Building and Code
incorporate planting to achieve Submittal of Issuance of Grading Enforcement
deep-rooted vegetal cover requiring Documentation Permit, Whichever
minimal watering; Slope irrigation Demonstrating Ongoing Occurs First
systems must be maintained to ensure Compliance
avoidance of ground saturation.
6.1.11 A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan A pproved Storm Water Prior to Approval of 1Department of Public
shall be prepared which addresses Pollution Prevention Plan Final Tract Map or Works
construction and post-construction Issuance of Grading
measures and incorporates Best Permit, Whichever
Management Practices. Occurs First
- MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible for
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone Monitoring Compliance Verification
ve• rain • an "nor to ssuance o De artment o ' annung,
•. set•ac ine i � eet sout o t e ppro 9 p 9
worst case failure plane intersection with Grading Permit Building and Code
finished grade shall be identified as it Enforcement
relates to the grading plan. No habitable
structures can be located in the setback
area but parking and non-habitable items
can be located in the geologic setback
zone.
.........................
... .... ........................
............:................
........:................:..
.................... .... ........
......................................
................................... ..
...................................::::.. ...:.
........................
.................
..................
....::.....• ..:............
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.........................:::::::.:::.:.:.:....
........................................ . ......
6. .1 `rhe entire site s`�a a enced r to 160e ction prior bite to bepartment of Pla • •••••••_,..•••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••,...•,...••.•.••••••.•• .••••••.• •.•••
prio nning,
grading and construction activities for Clearance Commencement of Building and Code
security and safety purposes. Grading or Enforcement
Construction
6.2.2 Project site areas not to be graded shall Site Inspection Prior to Department of Planning,
be fenced off to prevent unintented Clearance Commencement of Building and Code
access or disturbance. Grading or Enforcement
Construction
6.2.3 Landscaping at the periphery of the Approved Landscape Prior to Approval of Department of Planning,
developed area should consist of species and Irrigation Plan Final Tract Map or Building and Code
that provide food for wildlife to increase Issuance of Grading Enforcement
utilization of the plantings by wildlife. Permit,Whichever
Occurs First
6.2.4 All exterior institutional and street lighting Approved Street Prior to Approval of Department of Public
should be low intensity and be directed Improvement Plans; Final Tract Map; Works; Department of
downward and away from the adjacent Approved Building Plans Prior to Issuance of Planning, Building and
areas of native habitat. Building Permits Code Enforcement
3 Resol. No. 99-07
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible for
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone Monitoring Compliance Verification
TRAFFIC.AND..:CIRCULATION
'• . ►a p an s....a.... •e prepare. w is Inc u•es FA pprove• ircu ation •nor to ssuance o I epartment o 'u• is
he following requirements for dump truck and Safety Plan Grading Permit orks
activity: driver safety training and
indoctrination, truck inspections,flag man
control of traffic at entrance and exit
points, control of queuing of trucks before
8:00 a.m., designation of truck loadind
schedule and provision of on-site parking
during grading.
.3.2 A Haul Route Plan for import and export A pproved Haul Route Prior to Issuance of Department of Public
of materials to and from the project site Plan Grading Permit orks
shall be prepared. The Haul Route Plan
ill identify roadways which cannot be
utilized for import and export operations.
6.3.3 Grading activities shall be limited to the Shown as part of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
hrough Friday. A pproved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
.3.4 Streets shall be cleaned regularly at the Shown as part of Prior to Issuance of Department of Public
direction of the Director of Public Works. General Notes on Grading Permit; orks
A pproved Grading Plan; During Grading/
Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
.3.5 Loads shall be covered to prevent Shown as part of Prior to Issuance of Department of Public
materials from blowing out of the trucks, General Notes on Grading Permit; orks
thus reducing the potential for cracked A pproved Grading Plan; During Grading/
indshields. Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible for
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone Monitoring Compliance Verification
•. .• e app scant s a pay a proportiona A pprove• ra f is to•y; 'nor to ssuance o epartment o 'us is
share for traffic signal upgrades at Payment of Fair Share Building Permit Works
Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Fees
Boulevard, based on a the findings of a
traffic analysis that shall be prepared.
........ ..
...........
.......:::..
regu ar watering program s al •e own as part o •nor to ssuance o I epartment o ' arming,
implemented to reduce fugitive dust. General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
During grading and at the end of the Approved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
workday,the project site shall be watered Site Inspection Construction
to keep dust down. Clearance
6.4.2 All grading operations shall be suspended Shown as part of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
when wind speeds (as instantaneous General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
gust)exceed 25 miles per hour and Approved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
during second stage smog alerts. Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
6.4.3 Roadways adjacent to the project shall be Shown as part of 'Prior to Issuance of 'Department of Planning,
swept and cleared of any spilled export General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
material at least twice a day to assist in Approved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
minimizing fugitive dust. Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
6.4.4 An on-site shuttle service, to transport Submittal of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
residents to and from off-site facilities, Documentation ProvidingCertificate of Building and Code
shall be provided by the operator. The Evidence that Shuttle will Occupancy Enforcement;
shuttle will provide a transportation be Operated Depart;n.n:of Public
service for those who cannot drive. The Works
schedule of the shuttle will be determined
after the facility starts operation.
....................::....
...................
OI `... . .......... .............
...............
..................
5.5.E raoing and construction equipment shall shown as part of Prior to Issuance of bepartment of anning,
be stored on the project site during the General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
construction period. Approved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
5 RESOL. NO. 99-07
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible for
No. ext of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone Monitoring Compliance Verification
6.5.2 Internal combustion engines on Shown as part of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
construction equipment shall be kept in General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
proper tune and shall be fitted with Approved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
properly maintained mufflers. Site Inspection Construction
Clearance
6.5.3 Grading and construction activities shall Shown as part of 'Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. and General Notes on Grading Permit; Building and Code
4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday (Note: Approved Grading Plan; During Grading/ Enforcement
his mitigation measure is also required Site Inspecton Construction
or traffic/circulation impacts). Clearance
6.5.4 A temporary sound barrier shall be 'Approved Construction Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
erected during grading and construction Sound Barrier Plan; Site Grading Permit; Building and Code
adjacent to the schools and religious Inspection Clearance During Grading/ Enforcement
acilities that border the site. Construction
6.5.5 o avoid nuisance noise on weekdays Submittal of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
and during evening and early morning Documentation ProvidingCertificate of Building and Code
hours, deliveries and trash collection Evidence of Compliance Occupancy Enforcement
services shall be limited to between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.,
eekdays.
6.5.6 he applicant shall construct a block wall Approved Building Plans Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
around the industrial fluid cooler to Building Permit Building and Code
reduce noise impacts of the proposed Enforcement
project.
6.5.7 If the block wall around the industrial fluid Submittal of Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
cooler does not reduce noise levels at the Documentation Providing Certificate of Building and Code
property line to no greater than 65 dBA, Evidence of Compliance Occupancy Enforcement
then the applicant shall modify the
industial fluid cooler to achieve a noise
level of no greater than 65 dBA at the
property line.
6. .1 I oofto structures and chimne s shall be Approved buildin Plans Prior to Issuance of....�be artment-of i tannin
p .y . .
screened or eliminated; no major Building Permit Building and Code
mechanical rooftop equipment is Enforcement
permitted.
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible for
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone Monitoring Compliance Verification
6.6.2 The applicant shaft comply with Approved Landscape Prior to Approval of Department of Planning,
Ordinance No. 319,which requires that Plan Final Tract Map or Building and Code
views from a viewing area of a lot not be Issuance of Grading Enforcement
significantly impaired by permitting foliage Permit, Whichever
to grow either to a height exceeding the Occurs First
ridgeline of the project's primary structure
or to a height exceeding sixteen (16)feet,
whichever is less. Applicant shall
maintain vegetation on a continual basis
to ensure compliance with City
ordinances and project conditions of
approval.
1ATERSERVICE :::::::::::::.::::::::::::: ......................... ........................................................ ...................................................................... ........... ..............................................................................
6.7.1 improvements to the water distribution Approved Water System Prior to Approval of Department of.Public
system required to provide water service Improvement Plans, Final Tract Map Works; Los Angeles
and meet minimum fire flow requirements including Funding County Fire Department
shall be provided for and funded by the Mechanism;Approved
applicant. Fire Protection Plan
6.7.2 Water conservation measures, such as Approved Landscape Prior to Approval of Department of Planning,
the following shall be included in the Plans; Approved Building Final Tract Map or Building and Code
project: use of low-flow toilets, Plans Issuance of Grading Enforcement
water-conserving laundry facilities and Permit, Whichever
reduction in water pressure to 50 psi or Occurs First; Prior
less and landscape with low water-using to Issuance of
plants (where feasible), extensive use of Building Permits
mulch and installation of irrigation
systems that minimize runoff and
evaporation.
....................
......TAf�..... .
6.8.1 Improvements to the existing sewer 'Approved Sewer System Prior to Approval of bepartment of Public
system to accommodate Improvement Plans, Flnal Tract Map Works; Los Angeles
project-generated wastewater shall be including Funding County Sanitation
installed and funded by the applicant. Mechanism District
7 RESOL. NO. 99-07
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITOR.;NG PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible for
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone Monitoring Compliance Verification
6.8.2 Connection fees to the County Sanitation Verification of Payment Prior to Issuance of Department of Public
District system shall be paid. of Fees Building Permit Works; Los Angeles
County Sanitation
District
..........
. ..... .. ..
6.9.1 Fire flow and fire hydrant placement Approved Fire Protection Prior to Approval of Department of public
standards established by the Los Angeles Plan Final Tract Map Works; Department of
County Fire Department shall be met; any Planning, Building and
additional requirements of the Fire Code Enforcement; Los
Department as part of its review of the Angeles County Fire
project plans shall be incorporated into Department
the project.
6.9.2 he app scant s all contact the Lomita Approved Building ite "rior to Issuance o Department o P arming,
Sheriff's Station, Crime Plans Building Permits Building and Code
Prevention/Community Relations Enforcement; Sheriffs
Department,for recommendations to Department
increase site security.
!!!:!:!!::!!!1!::!:!!:!!!!!::!!!:T:q91:!T!:!!E!:!EEgp.::::!1111:: hEvy!!::!!!.!!!!!!!:!!!y1!!.!I!!!!!!:::!.!!v.!!!:!.!!!!!.E!.T!!!2:R.!!!!:,!:!!!!!:!f!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!1!!!!!:!!!.!ill!:ln:,,!jj:!n1!7n2ii:E.!!!!!!!!y9!!,lf!!!!!!!r!!!!!!!!!.!!!.!:!!!!f!!!!!!!f!;!!!!iii!:if!!!!!:!l:Fl!!n.!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.7!!!!!!!!!!!!!:!!!!.!!!!!!.!!.i!!.!!i!!.!.!!!!!!!!i!!!:!!!!!!!!!!i!!!.!!!f:!!!:!!!!,:!!.1!!!!!f!!.,!!j!!!!.!
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::A::.:C:::A....:OLOSWPAL O T`
6.10.1 The project archaeologist shall submit a Approved Protocol; Site Prior to Issuance of Department of Planning,
protocol to the City for monitoring and for Inspection Clearance; Grading Permit; Building and Code
the discovery of archaeological Report Documenting During Grading/ Enforcement
resources. A qualified archaeologist shall Findings Construction;
be present during rough grading Completion of
operations, as required, to further Grading
evaluate cultural resources on the site.
During grading, any"finds"shall be
immediately reported to the 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 archaeologist shall
submit a report detailing findings, if any.
MARRIOTT LIFECARE FACILITY MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring and Monitoring Party Responsible
No. Text of Mitigation Measure Reporting Action Milestone for Monitoring Compliance Determination
•. I. e project pa eonto ogist s a su•mit a Approve• 'rotoco; ite 'rior to ssuance o Department o ' arming,
protocol to the City for monitoring and for Inspection Clearance; Grading Permit; Building and Code
the discovery of paleontological Report Documenting During Grading/ Enforcement
resources. A quaified paleontologist shall Findings Construction;
be present during grading operations to Completion of
further evaluate paleontological Grading
resources on the site. During grading,
any"finds"shall be immediately reported
to the City. 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. All paleontological finds
shall be first offered to the City for
preservation. At the completion of
grading, the project paleontologist shall
submit a report detailing findings, if any.
EQUESTRIAN,PEDESTRIAN AND
............................:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:...................................
..........................
............................
..................................
...................... . ...
..........................::::....
BICYCLE..........:
...........
......................
C ACCESS
......................
.......................
•. . "a ways or pe•estrians si•ewa s A pprove• 'e•estrian 'nor to A pprova o •epartment o 'u• is
along Crestridge Road shall be Circulation Plan Final Tract Map Works
incorporated into the project design.
9 RESOL. NO. 99-07