Loading...
CC RES 1992-115RESOLUTION NO. 92 -115 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING THE ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 36 IN CONNECTION WITH REVISIONS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS NOS, 50666 AND 50667, RE- APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NOS. 20970 AND 23004 AND REVISIONS TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 162 AND 163, COASTAL PERMIT NO. 103, AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 1541 FOR 83 LOT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, AND AN 18 -HOLE GOLF COURSE AND RELATED FACILITIES IN COASTAL SUBREGIONS 7 AND 8 (OCEAN TRAILS). WHEREAS, on June 1, 1992 the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 92 -53 certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 36 in connection with Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667, Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103, and Grading Permit No. 1541 for an 83 lot Residential Planned Development ("RPD"), public open space, and an 18 hole golf course with clubhouse and related facilities on a 258 acre site located in Coastal Subregions 7 and 8; and WHEREAS, within the ten (10) day appeal period, the City's approval of Coastal Permit No. 103 was appealed to the California Coastal Commission by four (4) local residents and by two (2) members of the Coastal Commission; and WHEREAS, on August 12, 19921 after finding substantial issue with the project as approved by the City Council, the California Coastal Commission denied Coastal Permit No. 103 and directed the landowners to redesign the project to address the concerns reaised by the Coastal Commission Staff and remanded the project and Final Environmental Impact Report back to the City for reconsideration; and WHEREAS, on October 19, 1992 the applicants, Palos Verdes Land Holdings and the Zuckerman Building Company submitted a Draft Addendum to Environmental Impact Report ( "AEIR ") No. 36 in conjunction with revised applications. The Draft AEIR evaluates potential significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the revised project that may occur in addition to those impacts discussed in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 36; and WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the City's Development Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 1992 to consider the Draft AEIR and the revised project applications, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and WHEREAS, prior to taking action on the revised project applications, the Planning Commission considered the information, findings, and mitigation measures contained in the Draft Addendum to EIR No. 36 and determined that the document was prepared in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. After considering the information contained in Draft AEIR, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 92 -68 recommending approval of the document to the City Council. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 92 -69 recommending approval of revisions to Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667 to the City Council, re- approving Tentative Parcel Map Nos. 20970 and 23004, and approving revisions to Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103, and Grading Permit No. 1541 with conditions; and WHEREAS, on November 6, 1992 and November 18, 1992, respectively, less than fifteen (15) days from the Planning Commission's action, the applicants, Palos Verdes Land Holdings Company and the Zuckerman Building Company, and Frank Angel representing the Sierra Club, California Native Plant Society, Coastal Conservation Coalition, Save Our Coastline 2000, and Andrew H. Sargent, each submitted an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the City's Development Code, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes held a public hearing on December 7, 1992 to consider Draft Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36, the revisions to the project applications, and the appeals, 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: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Landform, Geology, and Soils resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. However, because the revised plan will result in a 19.8 acre reduction of golf course area and an increase in passive and active open space areas and public access corridors, less grading will be required for the revised project. Therefore, when compared to the previously approved plan examined in Final EIR No. 36, the Ocean Trails plan will create less impacts on Landform, Geology, and Soils resulting from the reduced golf course area. However, implementation of mitigation measures as discussed in Final EIR No. 36 will further reduce these impacts; however, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to Landform resulting from the grading and alteration to existing topography associated with the revised project. Therefore, the statement of overriding considerations as provided in Final EIR No. 36 shall apply. Section 2: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Hydrology and Drainage resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. Although the revised project is not expected to alter drainage patterns or surface runoff beyond what was discussed in Final EIR No. 36, in order to further reduce the effects of runoff contaminants on the ocean environment, mitigation measures requiring the applicant to submit finalized Runoff Management and Water Quality Control Plans which conform to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulations to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission have been included in the Draft AEIR. Section 3: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Biological Resources resulting from the revised Ocean Trails Plan. Because the revised project will increase public open space and coastal access by 27.1 acres, additional impacts to biological resources beyond what was discussed in Final EIR No. 36 are not anticipated. However, to address concerns identified by the California Department of Fish and Game and United States Fish and Wildlife Service with respect to sensitive habitat areas,. mitigation measures requiring submittal of a finalized Ocean Trails Biological Resource Protection /Habitat Enhancement Plan in conjunction with final Grading Plans to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission have been included in the Draft AEIR. While implementation of mitigation measures to enhance habitat areas as discussed above and in Final EIR No. 36 will reduce these impacts, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to Biological Resources resulting from the loss of existing habitat associated with the revised project. Therefore, the statement of overriding considerations as provided in Final EIR No. 36 shall apply. Resolution No, 92 -115 Page 2 of 5 Section 4: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental .impact the effects on Cultural and Scientific Resources, including Archaeological and Paleontological resources resulting from the revised Ocean Trails Plan. However, because the revised project will result in less grading, vegetation removal, and road construction, impacts associated with archaeology and paleontology are expected to be less than those impacts identified in Final EIR no. 36. Section 5: ' The-Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Short -term and Long -term Aesthetics resulting from the revised Ocean Trails Plan. However, because the revised plan involves the enhancement of 27.1 more acres of_open space than the previous plan, both short -term impacts associated with construction and long- term impacts associated with the loss of open space will be reduced. Therefore, impacts associated with Aesthetics will be less than those impacts identified in Final EIR No. 36. While implementation of mitigation measures as discussed in Final EIR No. 36 will further reduce these impacts, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to Long -term aesthetics resulting from the loss of currently undeveloped open space associated with the revised project. Therefore, the statement of overriding considerations as provided in Final EIR No. 36 shall apply. Section 6". The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Land Use and Relevant Planning resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. The revised Ocean Trails plan includes a reduction in the golf course and residential common open space acreage which will result in an increase of 27.1 acres of open space for public trails, coastal bluff access, and active and passive parks. Although acreage for development of the golf course and residential lots will be reduced, there is no proposed change in the zoning designations, and the project will conform with the Coastal Specific Plan, General Plan, and Overlay Control Districts as identified in the City's Development Code. Therefore, impacts associated with Land Use and Relevant Planning are anticipated to be no more significant than and less than those impacts identified in Final EIR No. 36. While implementation of mitigation measures as discussed in Final EIR No. 36 will further reduce these impacts, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to Land Use resulting from the conversion of currently undeveloped land associated with the revised project. Therefore, the statement of overriding considerations as provided in Final EIR No. 36 shall apply. Section 7: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Circulation and Traffic resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. While the reduction in golf course acreage will result in a decrease in traffic levels by approximately 16 percent according to the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Manual, actual traffic levels are not expected to differ from levels discussed in Final EIR No. 36. Therefore, impacts beyond those discussed in Final EIR No. 36 are not anticipated. Section 8: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Air Resources resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. Impacts to Air Quality associated with the Ocean Trails plan will be similar to those impacts previously discussed. Implementation of mitigation measures as discussed in Final EIR No. 36 will reduce these impacts; however, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to Air Quality associated with the revised project. Therefore, the statement of overriding considerations as provided in Final EIR No. 36 shall apply. Section 9: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Noise resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. However, because the revised plan does not propose any additional noise generating uses from the previously approved plans, impacts to Noise beyond those discussed in Final EIR No. 36 are not anticipated. Resolution Noe 92 -115 Page 3 of 5 Section 10: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Public Services and Utilities resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. Because the Ocean Trails plan will not require any additional public services beyond those demands anticipated for the previously approved plans, impacts to Public Services and Utilities resulting from implementation of the revised plan would be similar to those identified in Final EIR No. 36. Additionally, due to the reduction in acreage for development of the golf course, the amount of water required for irrigation would be reduced. However, while implementation of mitigation measures as discussed in Final EIR No. 36 will reduce these impacts, it is not possible to entirely eliminate cumulative impacts to increased water demand associated with the revised project. Therefore, the statement of overriding considerations as provided in Final EIR No. 36 shall apply. Section 11: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Population, Employment, and Housing resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. However, because the revised plan will not increase residential and /or employment generating uses beyond what was proposed with the previously approved plan, impacts to Population, Employment, and Housing would be similar to those identified in Final EIR No. 36. Section 12: The Draft AEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental impact the effects on Fiscal Impacts resulting from the revised Ocean Trails plan. The increase in public open space provided in the revised plan will result in a greater maintenance responsibility for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. However, conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667 require the formation of an assessment district to provide to offset costs for maintenance of open space areas. Therefore, this impact is not considered significant beyond impacts identified in Final EIR No. 36. Section 13: In approving the Draft AEIR, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Draft AEIR document. The Draft AEIR is hereby incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A ". Section 14: In reviewing the Draft AEIR, the City Council hereby incorporates the document entitled "City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Development for Subregion 7, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations" dated November 5, 1992 and attached hereto as Exhibit "B ". Section 15: Unless otherwise modified by the Draft Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 and mitigation measures incorporated therein, all findings, attachments, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Resolution No. 92 -53 as adopted by the City Council on June 1, 1992, are hereby incorporated by reference as Exhibit "C ". Section 16: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings contained in the Staff Report, minutes, and evidence presented at the public hearings the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves the Draft Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 based on the determination that the document was completed in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and Sate and local guidelines with respect thereto. Resolution No. 92 -115 Page 4 of 5 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 7th day of December, 1992 OR ATTEST: CI CLERK ST TE 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. 92 -115 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on December 7, 1992. Jo P 11, ity Clerk r City Rancho Palos Verdes AARESEIR.OT Resolution No. 92 -115 Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT "B" EIR NO. 36 OCEAN TRAILS (SUBREGIONS 7 & 8) FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS I. INTRODUCTION Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15091 of. the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines require that a public agency, prior to approving a project, identify significant impacts of the project and make one or more written findings for each of the significant impacts. The findings reported in the following pages incorporate the facts and discussions of environmental impacts that are found in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 36 for the proposed residential /golf course development in Subregion 7 as fully set forth therein. This Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations document is divided into four major sections. The Introduction provides background information as to the purpose of the document. The Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts presents the impacts associated with the proposed project. The Evaluation of Alternatives provides a brief discussion of the proposed alternatives to the project. Finally, the Statement of Overriding Considerations is provided for those adverse effects that cannot be avoided, even with the proposed mitigation measures. For each of the impacts associated with the project, the following sections are provided: 1) Description of Effects - A specific description of the environmental impact identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). The FEIR consists of the originally - circulated Draft EIR No. 36 (including the technical appendices and reports thereto) (the "Draft EIR "), the Supplement to EIR No. 36 (including the technical appendices and reports thereto) (the "Supplemental EIR "), the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 36 which includes all Comments and Responses to the Draft EIR and Supplemental EIR, the Addendum to Final Environmental Impact Report No. 36 (the "Addendum "), the Mitigation Monitoring Program and these Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. 2) Proposed Mitigation - Identified mitigation measures or actions that are proposed for implementation as part of the project. 3) Findings - Pursuant to Sections 21081 and 21083 of CEQA, the findings are made in two parts. First, a judgment is made regarding the significance of the impact or effect. Second, if the impact is found to be significant, one of three specific findings is made, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. 4) Rationale - A summary of the reasons supporting the finding. 5) Reference - A notation on the specific sections of the FEIR which include the evidence and discussion of the identified impact. Effective January 1, 1989, CEQA was amended to add Section 21081.6, implementing Assembly Bill 3180. This amendment requires public agencies to adopt a monitoring or reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with required mitigation measures during project implementation. This Mitigation Monitoring Program for the proposed development is a separate document for adoption together with the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. This Mitigation Monitoring Program relates directly to those mitigation measures that are identified within the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. H. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS A. LANDFORM, GEOLOGY, AND SOILS LANDFORM AND SOILS 1) Descriution of Effects Due to a reduction in the size of the golf course area (19.8 acres) and an increase in passive and active open space areas and public access corridors, slightly less grading will be required under the Ocean Trails Plan than under the project as previously approved, which required approximately 965,000 C.Y. of cut and 864,300 C.Y. of fill. Grading and earthwork during construction and development will still result in permanent landform alteration, temporary increased erosion on the site, increased sedimentation downstream and dust impacts. The installation of storm drains and energy dissipating structures will result in minor disturbances in areas surrounding the outlets. 2) Proposed Mitigation The potential for impacts from project grading will be mitigated by balancing the cut and fill earthwork within the total project site, with no import or export of materials. Where grading activities may reduce the viability of stream habitat or add loose soil and rocks to the drainageways, an erosion and sediment transport control plan shall be implemented. A Runoff Management Plan shall also be implemented as discussed in Section B. Runoff from landscaping and natural drainage sources shall be collected and directed into the project storm drain system to minimize infiltration into subsoils. Dust impacts shall be mitigated by watering during grading. All grading will be performed pursuant to permit during restricted hours. The risk of over - watering shall be minimized by use of a monitored watering system. 3) Find a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following findings are made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. (X) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B " Page 2 of 27 4) Rationale for Finding Based on the analysis in the FEIR, the implementation of the mitigation measures will substantially reduce most of the potential impacts to less than significant levels. However, the landform. alterations necessary to preserve views from Palos Verdes Drive South and from neighboring property and to grade the golf course will result in significant effects to existing landforms. Furthermore, it is not feasible to substantially reduce grading (a potential mitigation measure) and still achieve the stated goal of preserving existing public and private views. A statement of overriding considerations has been adopted as discussed in Section IV. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential impacts to landform, geology and soils see Section ILA of the Draft EIR, Section III. A of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. A of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 6 (all), 22 -1, 30(all). SEISNIICITY 1) Description of Effects Marginally stable slopes may be subject to landslides caused by seismic shaking. Damage to on -site structures may also occur in the event of major seismic activity in the region. 2) Proposed Mitigation Habitable structures or other essential facilities will be constructed inland of the foundation setback line. The developer shall strictly adhere to all building standards. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 3 of 27 4) Rationale for Finding On -site damage caused by a major seismic event would be similar to damage anticipated throughout the Southern California region. Strict adherence to building standards will reduce the risk of on -site damage from local seismic activity to levels which are acceptable within the region. A statement of overriding considerations has been adopted as discussed in Section IV. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential seismic impacts, see Section ILA of the Draft EIR. See also Response to Comments 2 -2, 6 (all), 22 -1, 22 -8, 30(all), 74 -11. B. HYDROLOGY AND DRAINAGE RUNOFF 1) Description of Effects The proposed project is expected to alter existing onsite drainage patterns and increase surface runoff volume and velocity, resulting in an increased risk of flood hazards and erosion. 2) Proposed Mitigation The impacts resulting from increased runoff shall be mitigated through the implementation of the Runoff Management Plan, the conceptual Plan for which has been reviewed and approved by the City's Director of Public works. As demonstrated in the approved conceptual Plan, implementation of the Plan will mitigate project - induced flood control and erosion impacts to less than significant levels. In connection with the final Grading Plan approval, the final Runoff Management Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. Such final Plan shall only be approved if it mitigates project - induce flood control and erosion impacts to less than significant levels. In addition, as a part of the final Grading Plan approval, the project applicant shall submit a final hydrology study to the City Engineer, detailing any anticipated adverse impacts to existing flood control facilities, and may be required to post a bond for necessary downstream improvements. Storm drain facilities shall be designed to convey the predicted 50 -year peak flow rate with additional factors of safety and energy dissipating structures shall be constructed at the storm drain outlets at the base of the bluffs to reduce flow velocities and subsequent erosion impacts. The California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers will be contacted and appropriate permits obtained prior to the radio or alteration of an grading y of the on -site drainage courses. 3) Fi_ 'ndin,s a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 4 of 27 () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding Based on the analysis in the FEIR, implementation of the Runoff Management Plan and other proposed mitigation measures will reduce the potential flood control and erosion impacts from increased runoff to a less than significant level. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential impacts to hydrology and drainage, see Section II.B of the Draft EIR, Section III.B of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.B of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 2 -1, 15 -21, 18 -8, 21 -3. WATER QUALITY 1) Description of Effects Development of the proposed project will result in an increase of urban pollutants entering into the drainage system from the residential and golf course developments, resulting in potential impacts to the riparian and marine habitats. 2) Proposed Mitigation Water quality impacts shall be mitigated through implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan, the conceptual Plan for which has been reviewed and approved by the City's Director of Public Works. In connection with such approval the Director determined that the conceptual Water Quality Control Plan (and the conceptual Runoff Management Plan referred to under RUNOFF above) complies with the regulations administered by the State Water Resources Control Board under its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Stormwater Runoff Program, including the requirements of the General Construction Permit issued by the SWRCB on August 20, 1992. In connection with the final Grading Plan approval, the final Water Quality Control Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. Such final Plan shall only be approved if it meets NPDES Permit requirements. Further, the developer shall be required to investigate alternative water sources to support the proposed golf course, and all water features associated with the golf course must be lined to prevent percolation of water into the soil, and all such features shall utilize reclaimed water whenever possible. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 5 of 27 b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding Based on the analysis in the FEIR, implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan, the Runoff Management Plan and other proposed mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to water quality to a less than significant level. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential impacts to hydrology and drainage, see Section II.B of the Draft EIR, Section III. B of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. B of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 2 -1, 18 -8, 21 -3, 27 -2. C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1) Description of Effects The previously approved project had temporary, but significant, impacts on Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub, which serves as natural habitat for the California gnatcatcher. The gnatcatcher is currently listed by the California Department of Fish and Game as a "Species of Special Concerns" and is proposed by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for listing as an "Endangered Species." As more fully described under Proposed Mitigation below, Ocean Trails Plan proposes to eliminate all significant impacts on existing Coastal Sage Scrub and otherwise include extensive mitigation efforts that more than compensate for potential loss of existing gnatcatchers and their habitat on the subject property. Nevertheless, development of the Ocean Trails Plan will still result in the loss and disturbance of habitat and wildlife resources. A significant loss of Non- Native Ruderal grassland will still occur. Although not a sensitive natural resource itself, the grassland provides shelter and forage /seed sources for a large number of animal* species. This loss of raptor foraging area is considered a significant impact. The intertidal zones may be indirectly impacted due to increased water runoff containing contaminants. The Coastal Bluff Scrub areas will remain essentially intact, but may suffer from increased erosion and exposure to pollutants. The two main drainage courses onsite will be preserved; however, development of necessary roadways and storm drain systems may cause minor disturbances to these drainage systems. The FEIR indicates that such disturbance would result in less than significant impacts to the plant communities. 2) Proposed Mitigation Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 6 of 27 The previously approved plan has been revised to include extensive mitigation efforts to more than compensate for any potential impact on the California gnatcatcher and its habitat, Coastal Sage Scrub. The components of these efforts are summarized in the Addendum, and are reflected in the Ocean Trails Plan, a Draft Habitat Enhancement Plan, a Supplement to the Draft Habitat Enhancement Plan and a Program Summary of the Habitat Enhancement Plan. Among other things, the Habitat Enhancement Plan incorporates and expands upon the previous Biological Resources Protection Plan (BRPP) which had been reviewed and approved by the City's Director of Environmental Services. In connection with the final Grading Plan, the final Habitat Enhancement Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. In addition, golf course and residential perimeter landscaping, as well as the open space areas, shall be designed to simulate and /or use native plant communities. The lower portions of the two main drainages and the upper portion of the westernmost drainage shall be preserved. The existing coastal bluff habitats and beaches shall be preserved, except for limited public accessways. Measures will be taken to limit human exposure to sensitive habitat areas, including during grading and construction. Prior to the formulation of the final BRPP as a part of the final Habitat Enhancement Plan and the final golf course design, a detailed survey of biological resources shall be conducted, and locations of important resources shall be mapped at a level of detail appropriate for final design considerations. For any sensitive plant populations that are unavoidably impacted by the project, relocation /transplantation measures shall be included in the final BRPP. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following findings are made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. (X) Such changes or alterations may be within the responsibility of other public agencies. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agencies. (X) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant 4) Rationale for Find Based on the analysis in the FEIR, implementation of the Habitat Enhancement Plan and other mitigation measures will reduce project impacts resulting from the loss and disturbance of habitat and wildlife resources. Successful implementation of the Habitat Management Plan will not only avoid significant impacts on the gnatcatcher but will result in enhancement of its Coastal Sage Scrub habitat. With the implementation of the mitigation measures in the Hydrology sections, no significant impact upon the intertidal biology or Coastal Bluff Scrub habitat areas is expected. Limited disturbance of the two main drainage courses will result in less than significant impacts to currently existing plant communities. Impacts on the disturbed riparian areas will be subject to review and possible mitigation by the California Department of Fish and Game, the Army Corps of Engineers and the United States Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 7 of 27 Fish and Wildlife Service. The primary unavoidable impacts to ruderal grassland are attributable to grading for the golf course, which itself has already been reduced in size in the Ocean Trails Plan and minimized through the links design. Elimination of the golf course is not feasible because it would defeat an important objective of the project - to provide visitor - serving public recreational uses, which objective is encouraged by policies of the Coastal Specific Plan, and, most importantly, to p rovide a particular visitor- serving public recreation use (i.e., a golf course) which can generate the funds necessary to defray the costs of maintaining the substantial public access and recreation improvements and publicly- dedicated land that are a part of the Ocean Trails Plan. Even with the implementation of all mitigation measures detailed in the Draft EIR, Supplemental EIR and the Addendum, however, the loss of raptor foraging areas (grassland) is considered a regionally significant impact both individually and cumulatively. Therefore, a statement of overriding considerations has been adopted as discussed in Section IV. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential impacts to the existing biological resources, see Section II. C of the Draft EIR, Section III. C of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. C of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 2 -7, 15(all), 18(all), 19(all), 31 -2, 31 -3, 104(all). D. CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES ARCHAEOLOGY 1) Description of Effects The FEIR indicates potential direct and permanent impacts to four isolated chert findings on the project site as a result of ground disturbing activities, such as grading, road construction and underground utility placements. Since the Ocean Trails Plans requires less grading when compared to the previously approved plan, such potential impacts to archeological resources would be fewer than those identified in the FEIR. The deactivated military installation (cement bunkers and gun emplacements) will also be disturbed, but the FEIR indicates that it holds no special historical significance. 2) Proposed Mitigation Archaeological test level investigations are required at two archaeological sites, with procedures to be conducted by a qualified and City approved archaeologist. All materials collected pursuant to these mitigation projects shall be donated to a local institution with proper facilities. The milita ry installment shall be documented through photographs, drawings and research prior to disturbance. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 8 of 27 () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding None of the known archaeological resources on -site have been identified as significant. Implementation of the mitigation measures, including collection and test level investigations, will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential impacts to archaeological resources, see Section II. D of the Draft EIR, Section III. D of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. D of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 18 -7, 99. PALEONTOLOGY 1) Description of Effects The Ocean Trails Plan does not impact any known paleontological sites within the project area. However, there remains the potential for destruction of unknown sites which may be located within the portion of the project area to be developed. 2) Proposed Mitigation A qualified paleontologist will be present during rough grading and excavation work to monitor the site and salvage any exposed fossils. Matrix samples will be collected to salvage microvertebrates from the terrace deposits. All fossils and their stratigraphic data shall be forwarded to an institution with a research interest in such materials. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b) For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 9 of 27 () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: O Significant (X) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding While the possible loss of scientific data cannot be completely eliminated, appropriate site monitoring and resource collection will reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential impacts to the paleontological resources, see Section II.D of the Draft EIR, Section III. D of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. D of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 18 -7. E. AESTHETICS 1) Description of Effects The FOR identifies both short -term and long -term aesthetic effects resulting from development of the project. Although the short -term and long -term impacts would be less with implementation of the Ocean Trails Plan as compared to the previously approved plan, the conclusions of the FEIR remain applicable to the Ocean Trails Plan. The short -term impacts, including temporary aesthetic nuisances associated with project construction and grading activities, are not considered significant. The long- term impact resulting from the transformation of the project site's rural environment to one that would be urban and recreational in character is considered significant. In addition to the change in the site's natural appearance, the long -term impacts include light and potential glare from buildings and nighttime lighting and the potential obstruction of existing views. 2) Proposed Mitigation The project applicant shall submit schematic landscaping and irrigation plans to the Director of Environmental Services for approval. The final landscape plan will be designed to reduce the potential risk of view impairment. Potential impacts from light and glare shall be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Director of Environmental Services through a variety of measures, and the installation of lights will be subject to inspection by the Director to reduce any direct or offsite illumination. Site designs shall assure no adverse light or glare intrusion on the existing Ocean Terrace Condominiums. Existing views and view corridors from Palos Verdes Drive South will be preserved by terracing residential areas such that structures do not rise above the grade of Palos Verdes Drive South. Furthermore, energy dissipators at the terminus of the storm drains will be designed to reduce visual impacts to less than significant levels. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 10 of 27 (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding The design of the project, along with implementation of the required mitigation measures, will reduce view impacts and light and glare impacts to less than significant levels. However, the introduction of urban uses and resultant loss of undeveloped open space remains an unavoidable significant impact. A statement of overriding considerations with respect to this loss of undeveloped open space has been adopted as discussed in Section IV. 5) Reference For a full discussion of potential aesthetic impacts, see Section II.E of the Draft EIR, Section III.E of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. E of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 5 -24, 35- 3, 35 -8, 36 -3. LAND USE/RELEVANT PLANNING 1) Description of Effects The FEIR identifies the conversion of currently undeveloped land to urban use as a significant land use impact. Short -term impacts associated with construction - related activities, including increased noise and dust, increased traffic and congestion, and air quality impacts are also identified but not considered significant due to the relatively short time periods and amount of activity anticipated. The project is consistent with the policies and objectives of the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan and complies with the underlying zoning requirements as implemented by the provisions of the Development Code, including the requirements for Residential Planned Developments and conditional use permits. Although the Ocean Trails Plan does not preserve each and every trail that may exist on the subj ect site, it is consistent with the City's policy with respect to historical trails on property within the coastal region (which policy is set forth in the Coastal Specific Plan p. U -59). That policy is to require in all development projects within the Coastal Specific Plan District that adequate public access to the coast be provided in accordance with the City - adopted Conceptual Trails Plan, rather than trying to determine the precise location of existing trails and to establish through litigation that legally enforceable rights of access had been created. In the case of the previously approved plan, the Trails Committee, Planning Commission and the City Council each found that the proposed project's trails, as set forth in the project's Coastal Access and Amenities Program, were consistent with the Conceptual Trails Plan and the policies of the Coastal Specific Plan. Since the Ocean Trails Plan contains an even more extensive trails component, a similar finding of consistency is appropriate. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 11 of 27 2) Pro,Rosed Mitigation Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit a comprehensive description of all private and public improvements associated with the project to the Director of Environmental Services. Furthermore, the proposed project has demonstrated compliance with the development policies for Coastal Subregions 7 and 8. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following findings are made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding The proposed project is in substantial conformance with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' General Plan, Coastal Specific Plan and Development Code. Although the implementation of mitigation measures will reduce the land use and relevant planning impacts, the conversion of currently undeveloped land to residential and recreational uses is still considered a significant impact. A statement of overriding considerations has been adopted as discussed in Section IV. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential land use and relevant planning impacts, see Section II. F of the Draft EIR, Section III. F of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. F of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 2 -7, 5 -2, 5 -3, 5 -11, 5 -24, 35 -3, 86(all), 87(all). Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 12 of 27 G. CIRCULATION AND TRAFFIC 1) Description of Effects When compared to the previously approved plan, the Ocean Trails Plan would result in less impacts on traffic. Nevertheless, the project is still expected to increase the weekday and Saturday peak hour trips and the average weekday and Saturday trips. The increased traffic volume will impact intersection capacity in the area. The elimination of a portion of Paseo Del Mar will have a minor impact on the levels of service at two intersections along Palos Verdes Drive South and will re- direct existing traffic from Paseo Del Mar to the La Rotonda intersection. 2) Proposed Mitigation The project will provide traffic improvements which will serve to mitigate the traffic impacts. These improvements include the following: a) Contribution of its fair share of the cost of adding a second westbound left turn lane at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Palos Verdes Drive West. b) Contribution of its fair share of the cost of adding a second eastbound left turn lane and a second southbound right turn lane at the intersection of Western Avenue and 25th street. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures will maintain acceptable levels of service at all intersections. Thus, the traffic impacts are considered less than significant. 5) Reference Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 13 of 27 For a complete discussion of potential traffic impacts, including the impact of vacating a portion of Paseo Del Mar, see Section II. G of the Draft EIR, Section III. G of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.G of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 5 -13, 7 -3, 21 -5, 21 -6, 32 -1, 35 -3, 35 -5, 74- 3. AIR RESOURCES 1) Description of Effects When compared to the previously approved plan, the Ocean Trails Plan would incrementally decrease the amount of local air pollutants generated from vehicle emissions. Nevertheless, the project will still directly and indirectly generate additional ambient air pollutant concentrations, motor vehicle emissions, natural gas emissions and power plant emissions. Thus, the project will result in increased emission concentration in the site vicinity and will contribute to increased degradation of regional air quality. The project itself will not cause significant impacts to local or regional air quality, but it will contribute to significant cumulative effects. In addition, short -term air quality impacts will result from construction activities, including exhaust from construction equipment and dust generation, but these impacts are not considered significant due to their limited duration. 2) Proposed Mitigation Energy conservation devices shall be incorporated into the design of the project to limit stationary source pollutants. The project applicant and all future operator /employers of the golf course and club house shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including Regulation Xv and AQMP measure controls. Short -term dust generation during construction will be mitigated by compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and City Municipal Code Requirements, which require watering of construction sites, and by ceasing all grading activates during periods of high winds. Construction equipment will be fitted with .emission control devices and shall be frequently tuned. The proposed restaurant facilities will be subject to public health standards enforced by the City and the County of Los Angeles and such facilities shall use all reasonably available Odor control equipment. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following findings are made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. (X) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the SCAQMD and the CARB. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 14 of 27 (X) Significant ( ) Not significant 4) Rationale for Findine Although implementation of the required mitigation measures will reduce the incremental air quality impacts to a less than significant level, such impacts, on a cumulative basis, are considered significant. The proposed project is located in the South Coast Air Basin and, jurisdictionally, is governed by the SAQMD and the GARB. The SCAQMD sets and enforces regulations for stationary sources in the basin, while CARB is charged with controlling motor vehicle emissions. 5) Reference For a complete discussion on potential air quality impacts, see Section II. H of the Draft EIR, Section III. H of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. H of the Addendum. I. NOISE 1) Description of Effects Although noise impacts would be slightly less with implementation of the Ocean Trails Plan than with the previously approved plan, segments of Palos Verdes Drive South will still experience increased noise impacts generated by the project, but they are not considered independently significant. The cumulative traffic conditions, however, may result in significant noise impacts along the same segments of Palos Verdes Drive South. The FEIR also identifies short -term noise impacts associated with construction, but due to the restricted hours and short period of construction, they are not considered significant. 2) Proposed Mitigation Future cumulative noise levels along key roadways will be mitigated through implementation of vehicular trip reduction measures, including promotion of alternative transportation modes, provisions for mass transit accommodations, and reservation of a portion of the golf course parking for park and ride use. Noise generated from project construction will be mitigated by requiring all construction activities to comply with City noise restrictions and limited hours of operation. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 15 of 27 C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant 4) Rationale for Finding With the location of the clubhouse in the center of the site and implementation of required mitigation measures, the project's noise impacts are considered to be less than significant. 5) Reference For a complete discussion on potential noise impacts, see Section II.I of the Draft EIR, Section III.I of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.I of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 35 -3, 35 -4. J. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES ELECTRIC 1) Description of Effects Adequate electrical facilities exist to provide service to the project. Significant impacts to existing electrical services are not anticipated; however, extension of lines may be required. 2) Proposed Mitigation All electricity lines and cable associated with the project shall be placed underground. Site development shall comply with the energy conservation requirements in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. The project applicant shall pay all related fees. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b. Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact to electrical service, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Finding Although there are no significant impacts on existing service, the EIR recommends implementation of the mitigation measure described above. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts on electrical services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 16 of 27 GAS 1) Description of Effects Adequate gas pressure exists to provide service to the project. Significant impacts to existing electrical services are not anticipated; however, extension of lines may be required. 2) Proposed Mitigation The project applicant shall contact a Southern California Gas Company representative during the final design phase of the project to discuss the implementation of efficient energy use programs. The applicant shall pay all related fees. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b. Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on natural gas service, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Finding Although no significant impacts on existing service are anticipated, the EIR recommends implementation of the mitigation measure described above. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts on natural gas services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. TELEPHONE 1) Description of Effects The proposed project may require slight modifications to the existing underground cable system, which may result in momentary service interruptions, but significant impacts to telephone service are not anticipated. 2) Proposed Mitigate All communication lines and cables shall be placed underground in conjunction with project grading. The project applicant shall pay all related fees. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 17 of 27 b. Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on telephone service, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Finding Although no significant impacts to telephone service are anticipated, the EIR recommends implementation of the mitigation measures described above. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts on telephone services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. WATER 1) Descriution of Effects Although the amount of water necessary for irrigation of the golf course would be slightly reduced under the Ocean Trails Plan as compared to the previously approved plan, the increased water demand attributable to the residential lots and the golf course under such Plan may still result in a significant cumulative impact to the present or future water supply. 2) Proposed Mitigation Plans and specifications for the water system facilities shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. A "will serve" letter has been provided by the water purveyor. All fixtures and appliances shall meet appropriate water efficiency standards. Native vegetation and drought tolerant species shall be used in residential and landscaped areas to the fullest extent possible. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impact is found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant b. For those environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant, the following finding is made: (X) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the effect as identified in the EIR. () Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility of another public agency. Such changes have been adopted, or can and will be adopted, by the other public agency. () Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives. C. After mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: (X) Significant ( ) Not significant Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 18 of 27 4) Rationale for Finding With the implementation of the required mitigation measures, the project would not produce an individually significant impact on the water supply; however, in light of the current and continuing drought conditions, the project's cumulative effect on the water supply must be considered significant. A statement of overriding considerations has been adopted as discussed in Section IV. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts on the water supply, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 1 -1, 5 -16, 21 -4, 26 -8. SOLID WASTE 1) Description of Effects The project is expected to produce approximately 4,328 pounds of solid waste per day. Currently the BKK landfill has adequate capacity to handle the project's annual waste load, and no significant impact to solid waste service is anticipated. 2) Proposed Mitigation The proposed residences, golf course and clubhouse shall participate in the City's Solid Waste Management Plan, including recycling, upon completion of the Plan by the Public Works Department. 3) Findings a. Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b. Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on solid waste service, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Finding The project's impact on solid waste services is not considered significant at this time. Implementation of the Solid Waste Management Plan shall serve to further reduce impacts associated with solid waste generation to a less than significant level. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts on the solid waste services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 107 -1, 107 -2. FIRE 1) Description of Effects The proposed project will result in a slight increase in service and emergency calls. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 19 of 27 2) Proposed Mitigation Any vegetation which is considered a fire hazard per the Los Angeles County Fire Protection District shall be removed for all uses. All developed areas on the project site shall be served by adequately sized water system facilities. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on fire services, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Findings This project will not result in the need for additional manpower of fire service facilities. Although the FEIR characterizes the impact on fire services as not significant, it recommends implementation of the mitigation measures described above. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts to fire services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. See also Response to Comments 104 -14. WASTEWATER 1) Descri ption of Effects The proposed project will result in an increase in sewage flow through the existing wastewater system. 2) Proposed Mitigation Prior to approval of the final map, the project applicant shall obtain written approval of the tract design with regard to the existing trunk line sewer from the County Sanitation District. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall provide proof that connection fees have been paid to the County Sanitation District. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on wastewater services, no additional finding is required under CEQA. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 20 of 27 4) Rationale for Findings Existing wastewater services and capacity are considered adequate to accommodate the additional sewage generated by the project. Although the FEIR characterizes the impact on wastewater services as less than significant, the FEIR recommends implementation of the mitigation measures described above. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts to wastewater services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES 1) Description of Effects The proposed project is expected to increase the number of calls for service to the area. 2) Proposed Mitigation No mitigation is recommended or required. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on law enforcement services, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Findings The additional residential development and golf course would not significantly affect the City's basic police protection system and no significant impacts to existing law enforcement services would result. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts to law enforcement services, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. SCHOOLS 1) Description of Effects The project is expected to generate approximately 32 students: 14 students in grades K -5, 5 students in grades 6 -8, and 13 students in grades 9 -12. 2) Proposed Mitigation Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall demonstrate that required developer fees have been paid to the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 21 of 27 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on existing school facilities, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Findings The increase of 32 students is not considered significant to the existing school facilities, and recent trends have demonstrated a decrease in student enrollment. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts to existing school facilities, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. LIBRARY SERVICES 1) Description of Effects An increase in the use of existing library facilities will occur with development of the proposed project. 2) Proposed Mitigation No mitigation is recommended or required. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the FOR does not identify any potential significant impact on existing library facilities, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Findings Although the proposed project will slightly aggravate the presently overcrowded conditions of the existing library facilities, it will not result in the need for new, modified or relocated facilities. 5) Reference For a complete discussion. of potential impacts to existing library facilities, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 22 of 27 SHORELINE PARK 1) Descri ption of Effects The proposed development does not include Shoreline Park as part of the project, but it will increase human presence in the Shoreline Park area. 2) Proposed Mitigation No mitigation is recommended or required. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the FEIR does not identify any potential significant impact on Shoreline Park, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Findings No significant impacts are identified in the FEIR. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts to Shoreline Park, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. CABLE TELEVISION 1) Descri ption of Effects The relocation and /or modification of the existing cable system may be required as a result of the proposed project. 2) Proposed Mitigation Prior to grading, the existing cable television line shall either be preserved in place or relocated. 3) Findings a) Before mitigation, the potential impacts are found to be: ( ) Significant (X) Not significant b) Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on the existing cable television system, no additional finding is required under CEQA. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 23 of 27 4) Rationale for Findings No significant impacts are identified in the EIR. 5) Reference For a complete discussion of potential impacts to cable television facilities, see Section II.J of the Draft EIR, Section III.J of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.J of the Addendum. K. POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING 1) Description of Effects The development of the Ocean Trails Plan will result in an addition of approximately 219 persons at full buildout and will provide approximately 22 % of the additional high income housing units needed by the City of Ranch Palos Verdes by June 30, 1994. The golf course has the potential to generate 138 jobs. None of these projections are considered significant impacts. 2) Pro osed Mitigation No mitigation measures are needed or recommended. 3) Findings a. The impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b. Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on population, employment or housing, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Finding The project's impacts on population, employment and housing are within the City's estimates for growth. 5) Reference For a complete discussion on population, employment and housing impacts, see Section II.K of the Draft EIR, Section III.K of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.K of the Addendum. L. FISCAL IMPACTS 1) Description .of Effects The FEIR indicates that the project will result in a cash surplus to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the Los Angeles County Fire Protection District and, therefore, the project will not result in any significant fiscal impacts. 2) Proposed Mitigation No mitigation measures are needed or required. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 24 of 27 3) Findings a. The impacts are found to be: () Significant (X) Not significant b. Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on the City's fiscal resources, no additional finding is required under CEQA. 4) Rationale for Find*ng Development of the project will not have any adverse fiscal impacts. In fact, it will have positive fiscal results for the City. 5) Reference For a complete discussion on fiscal impacts, see Section ILL of the Draft EIR, Section III. L of the Supplemental EIR and Section III. L of the Addendum. III. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES The EIR presented and analyzed five alternatives to the proposed project: the No Project alternative, an alternative site location, and three alternative site configurations. The EIR described and evaluated the impacts of the various alternatives as they differ from those under the proposed project. A. "No Protect" Alternative Alternative A, the no project alternative, was identified in the FEIR as the environmentally superior alternative since it results in the least amount of environmental impacts. However, the analysis in the FEIR indicates that the land use, housing and fiscal projections under this alternative would be inconsistent with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan, which anticipate development of the site. The analysis in the EIR further indicates that this alternative would result in a loss of the housing and recreational opportunities and economic benefits provided by the proposed project. B. Alternative Site Location Alternative B contemplates development of the project on an alternative site, located at Palos Verdes Drive West and Hawthorne Boulevard. This alternative would result in less significant impacts than the proposed project in the areas of landform, geology, soils, hydrology, biological resources, cultural and scientific resources, and land use. The analysis in the FEIR indicates that these reduced impacts are related to the previously disturbed nature of the alternative site and the reduced size and scale of the project due to the smaller site acreage. Impacts to population, housing and fiscal impacts would be similar at both site locations. Impacts in the areas of traffic generation, air quality and noise would be greater at the alternative site, but not substantially greater. Aesthetic and visual impacts may be substantially greater at the alternative site. Since the alternative site is not owned by the project applicants and since the City has recently approved another project for such alternative site, it has been rejected by the City. C. School District/ County Property Alternative Alternative C contemplates the development of properties currently owned by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District and the County of Los Angeles in addition to the proposed project site. The analysis in the FEIR indicates that this alternative is ostensibly feasible, it would not be preferred over the Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 25 of 27 proposed project because it does not significantly reduce any of the unavoidable significant environmental impacts associated with the project. D. Reduced Residential Density/ Hotel/ Golf Course Alternative D contemplates the development of 100 residential estate lots, a 450 room hotel and a public golf course within the boundaries of Subregions 7 and 8. This alternative has been rejected by the City because it would not significantly reduce any unavoidable significant environmental impacts associated with the project and in the areas of traffic generation, noise and air quality would significantly increase the impacts. E. Coastal Specific Plan Design Guidelines Alternative E contemplates the development of 159 residential units and a maximum of 25,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses. The analysis in the FOR indicates that this alternative would not be preferred over the proposed project because it would not be environmentally superior. Although this alternative would reduce impacts in the areas of water demand, open space retention and consistency with land use policy, it would increase impacts in the areas of traffic generation, noise, air quality and schools as compared to the proposed project. Furthermore, extensive geotechnical investigations done in connection with the proposed project demonstrate that this alternative is not feasible. IV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes finds that the mitigation measures discussed in the Final Environmental Impact Report will, when implemented, mitigate or substantially reduce all but seven of the significant effects identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report. Specifically, significant environmental effects would remain in the following areas: 1) landform alteration; 2) seismicity; 3) biological resources (loss of raptor foraging area); 4) aesthetics (loss of undeveloped open space); 5) land use (loss of open space); 6) air quality (cumulative impact); and 7) water service (cumulative impact in light of current drought conditions). The City Council has balanced the benefits of the project against these effects in approving of the proposed project. In this regard, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby finds that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report have been and will be implemented by the project through the Mitigation Monitoring Program and that the seven remaining significant unavoidable effects are acceptable due to the following specific benefits which outweigh the significant environmental effects and justify approval of the project as conditioned: 1. The proposed project implements the RS -1 /RPD designation of the site in the General Plan and the Coastal Specific Plan while preserving much of the site as passive and active recreational open space, with publicly accessible parking, trails, active and passive parks and vista points. 2. The proposed project will provide visitor - serving uses in the coastal area, a stated goal of the City's General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan, such as public trails, vista points, parks and a first -class public golf course. 3. The proposed project will increase public recreational opportunities by providing an 18 -hole public golf course, a network of public pedestrian and bicycle trails throughout the site, including a trail located in an 8.4 acre East /West Access Corridor along the bluff top, 24.3 acres of active and passive parks, and coastal bluff access to the shoreline. 4. Although the proposed project will result in a loss of undeveloped land and open space, only approximately 88 of the 261.4 acres will be developed into residential lots, while approximately 101 acres will constitute the golf course and approximately 69 acres will be retained for public access, active and passive parks and publicly -owned open space and habitat Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B " Page 26 of 27 preservation areas. Thus, approximately 65 % of the project site will remain as open space available to the public for a variety of active and passive recreational uses. 5. The proposed project has maintained and /or enhanced public and private views through grading techniques, and efforts have been made to increase the number of, and accessibility to, off - street viewing areas. In addition, the project incorporates new viewing opportunities into the site with lookout points, pedestrian bridges across ravines, and extensive hiking trails. 6. Sensitive habitat areas will be preserved, including the lower portions of the two main drainages, the upper portion of the westernmost drainage and the coastal bluff areas. Coastal Sage Scrub on the project site, which provides habitat for the California gnatcatcher and which is currently both degraded and limited in extent, will be increased and enhanced such that the project will positively benefit California gnatcatcher recovery efforts on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. 7. In conformance with the City's projected housing needs, the project will provide an additional 83 high quality dwelling units. 8. The proposed project will provide a cash surplus to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the Los Angeles County Tire Protection District over a 20 -year period. Indeed, as conditioned the proposed project will generate the funds necessary to defray the cost of maintaining the substantial public access and recreation improvements and publicly - dedicated land that are a part of the project, so that the City's existing General Fund will not be burdened with additional obligations at a time when the City is already having difficulty meeting its existing obligations and needs. 9. The proposed project will provide for important improvements to Palos Verdes Drive South and La Rotonda Drive. 10. The proposed project will provide additional employment opportunities in the residential and golf course construction sectors of the economy and permanent employment in connection with the golf course operation. Resolution No. 92 -115, Exhibit "B" Page 27 of 27