CC RES 1992-083RESOLUTION NO. 92- 83
A RESOLUTION.OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
DENYING GRADING APPLICATION NO.
1390
WHEREAS, on November 21, 1989 the City Council of
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No.
89 -109 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 79 -2nd
Revision and Tentative Tract Map No. 37885 -2nd Revision
for the creation of forty -two (42) residential lots and
two (2) common open space lots on an approximately 163 -
acre site located north and west of the intersection of
Forrestal and Pirate Drives, east of Klondike Canyon,
and south of the City of Rolling Hills; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is the site of a
former quarry operation which created unique
topographic features and geologic hazards on the site;
a near vertical cut slope exists on the north side of
Forrestal Drive and presents a safety hazard due to
rock ravelling and sloughing; the deep quarry bowl
located in the eastern portion of the site also
presents a hazard due to the very steep slopes in the
bowl; small landslides exist in the quarry bowl and
apparently were formed by the loss of toe support
resulting from the former quarry activities, scour, and
erosion; and
WHEREAS, the site is presently unsafe for
development due to its extreme slopes, and risks of
rockfall, mudf low, erosion, and debris flow, which
risks are exacerbated by an apparently inactive fault
on the project site and several active faults in the
vicinity which can be expected to generate significant
ground- shaking on the site; and
WHEREAS, the conditions of approval of Conditional
Use Permit No. 79 as approved on November 21, 1989
require the developer to devise a grading plan which
will eliminate these hazards and make the site safe for
the development proposed in the applications for
Conditional Use Permit No, 79 -2nd Revision and
Tentative Trace Map No, 37885 -2nd Revision and to
obtain a grading permit for that grading plan prior to
approval of the Final Tract Map; and
WHEREAS, on December 1, 1989 the developer
submitted Grading Application No. 1390 and
Environmental Assessment No. 596 for the approval of
L: Wo11 \cwl \a819 .mgc
Resolution No, 92- 83
Page 2
approximately 810,000 cubic yards of grading for
development of the residential portion of the proposed
•
development and approximately 11050,000 cubic yards of
remedial grading in the fo rmer p areas to correct
quarry Y
identified geologic hazards on the property; and
WHEREAS a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report ( DSEIR) was prepared and circulated in
accordance with the State of California Environmental
Quality ualit Act Guidelines, 2 Calif. Code of Regs. §§ 15000
et se which analyzed the environmental impacts of
q �
the proposed grading plan and p otential revisions to
said grading plan; and
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the
City's Development Code, the Planing Commission of the
city of Rancho Palos Verdes held a public hearing on
September 24, 1991 to consider Grading Application No.
1390 and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report (FSEIR) at which time all interested parties
were g iven an opportunity to be heard and to present
evidence; and
WHEREAS, on October 8, 1991 the Planning
Commission adopted resolutions approving Grading
Application No. 1390 and certifying the FSEIR; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1992 the Seaview
Homeowners Association filed a timely appeal of the
Planning annin Commission's approval of the grading permit
and certification of the FSEIR; and
WHEREAS the City Council held duly noticed public
hearings s to consider the appeal of Grading Application
No. 1390 and the FSEIR on December 31 1991, December
17 1991 February 18, 1992, June 16, 1992, and July 7,
92 at time all interested parties were given
19 , resent evidence;.
an opportunity to be heard and to p
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That the foregoing recitals are true
and correct.
Section 2: That it is not possible to find, on
th e basis of the present record, that the approximately
1,860,000 cubic yards of grading proposed is not
L:Wo11 \CW1 \a819 -M9C
Resolution No. 92- 83
Page 3
excessive beyond that necessary for the permitted
primary use of the lot within the meaning of Section
17.50.070(A) of the Development Code because the
applicant has not fully explored alternative project
designs that would dispose of excess cut materials in a
manner that does not cause unacceptable adverse
environmental impacts, as described in Sections 8 and 9
of this Resolution.
Section 3: That the grading will significantly
and adversely affect visual relationships with
neighboring sites within the meaning of Section
17.50.070(8) of the Development Code as the graded
development site and quarry slope remedial grading
would create tiered residential pads and manufactured
slope banks, the existing quarry slope will be cut and
regraded into a 200' slope bank, and the existing
quarry bowl will be substantially filled with excess
cut material, all of which will be visible from
surrounding private properties and Palos Verdes Drive
South. Thus, the denial of this application is
consistent with the goals of ensuring the maximum
,preservation of the natural scenic character of the
City, the maximum retention of groundcover, and the
maintenance of the visual continuity of hills and
valleys without unsightly continuous benching of
buildable sites, as required by Section 17.50.010 of
the Development Code.
Section 4: That the nature of the proposed
grading fails to minimize disturbance to the existing
contours of the site within the meaning of Section
17.50.070(C) of the Development Code because the
proposed grading will result in significant landform
modifications to portions of the property to create
tiered building pads and manufactured slopes, as the
existing quarry slope will be cut and regraded into a
200' slope bank, and the existing quarry bowl will be
substantially filled with excess cut material. For
these reasons, too, denial of the permit serves the
goals stated in Section 17.50.010(8) of the Development
Code.
Section 5: That the application is inconsistent
with the requirements of Section 17.5 0.07 0 (D) (3) (a )
because it includes grading on.slopes in excess of
thirty -five percent which are currently zoned open
space /hazard.
L:Wo11 \cwl \a819.m9c
Resolution No. 92- 83
Page 4
Section 6: That the application is inconsistent
with the requirements of Section 17.36.040(C) because
it does not satisfy the performance criteria of that
section with respect to development in the Natural
Overlay Control District for the following reasons:
(a) The proposed grading would cover or
alter the land surface configuration by earth - moving on
more than ten percent of the total land area of the
portion of the parcel within the Natural Overly Control
District in violation of Section 17.3 6.04 0 (C) (1) ; and
(b) The proposed grading would clear the
vegetation from more than twenty percent of the parcel
area within the district in violation of Section
17.36. 040 (C) (5) .
Section 7: That the proposed grading is
inconsistent with the goals and policies of the City's
General Plan as the majority of the grading would occur
in areas included in "Resource Management Areas"
designated in the City's General Plan Land Use Map.
The proposed grading is not consistent with the Extreme
Slope (RM 2 ) and Natural Vegetation (RM 9 ) General Plan
Resource Management (RM) Districts in which the
property is included and which form the basis of the
General Plan's "Hazard Area" designation for the
subject property, as detailed below:
(a) Portions of the site are designated "RM
2 - Extreme Slope" a district described by the General
Plan as intended "to regulate use, development and
alteration of land in extreme slope areas so that
essential natural characteristics such as land form,
vegetation and wildlife communities, scenic qualities
and open space can be substantially maintained." The
proposed grading would dramatically alter the landform
of the site and would have significant impacts on views
of the site from neighboring properties and on valuable
vegetation and wildlife communities, including the
California gnatcatcher, the cactus wren, the rufous
crowned sparrow, Astragalus trichopodus, the host plant
of the possibly extinct, endangered Palos Verdes Blue
Butterfly, and the Crossosoma californicum.
The General Plan also states that, with
respect to a site in the RM 2 district, "[d]etail[ed]
engineering /geologic study must accompany any proposal
for development or use and must demonstrate to the
L: Wo11 \cwl \a819 .mgc
Resolution No. 92- 83
Page 5
satisfaction of the City that the proposed development
or use requires no alteration of topography,
significant risk to human life or significant adverse
environmental impact." The proposed grading plan calls
for substantial alteration of the topography of the
site. Even if some topographical alteration is
necessary to eliminate geotechnical hazards on the
site, this proposal has unacceptable adverse
environmental impacts as described in Section 9 of this
Resolution.
Finally, the proposed grading plan is
inconsistent with the second of the General Plan's
Policies for Public Health /Safety Related to the
Natural Environment, which states that it is City
policy to "[a]llow only low intensity activities within
the Resources Management Districts of extreme slopes
(RM 2)," because the proposal calls for very
significant earthwork in areas within the RM 2
district.
(b) The General Plan's policies for the RM 9
Natural Vegetation District include the following:
"The wild flowers, low coastal sage scrub, chaparral,
and grasslands communities should be retained wherever
possible. Any proposed development within this
district should seek to revegetate with native material
whenever clearing of vegetation is required." The
proposed grading involves unacceptable impacts to
coastal sage scrub habitat, designated as "significant
natural plant community" in the General Plan and
described by the Addendum to the DSEIR as "a critical
resource because of its value as habitat for the
California gnatcatcher and numerous other species."
Further, the project involves significant, adverse
impacts on identified plants of the species Astragalus
trichopodus and Crossosoma californicum.
The portions of the site within the RM 9
district are also included by the General Plan Natural
Environment Control District. Among the policies
applicable to that district is the following: "Site
activities shall regulate use, development, and
alteration of land in slope areas, so that essential
natural characteristics, such as land form, vegetation
and wildlife communities, ground water recharge, scenic
qualities, and open space can be substantially
maintained." The proposed grading plan does not
maintain essential natural characteristics because it
L:Wo11 \cwl \a819.mgc
Resolution No, 92- 83
Page 6
involves the unacceptable impacts on plant and animal
life on the site as described in Section 9 of this
resolution.
Section 8: That, as detailed in the geotechnical,
geological and engineering reports prepared for this
proposal, the grading necessary to eliminate geologic
hazards associated with the quarry slope north of
Forrestal Drive will generate a very significant amount
of excess cut materials and the applicant has yet to
identify an acceptable means of disposing of that cut
material:
(a) The applicant has suggested placement of the
cut materials on the portion of the site proposed for
residential development. While such a solution might
be devised in accordance with the City's General Plan
and Development Code, retention of 42 residential
parcels would require the construction of massive crib
walls to retain the fill material. These walls appear
to be larger than necessary to allow use of the site
and would involve unacceptable aesthetic impacts.
Moreover, such a proposal cannot be approved on the
basis of the present record because it was raised quite
late in the review of this application and the
necessary environmental and geotechnical studies have
not been prepared as required by the General Plan, by
the California Environmental Quality Act, Public
Resources Code SS 21000, et seq., for the protection of
the public health, safety, and welfare.
(b) The original proposal called for placing all
of the excess cut material in the quarry bowl. This
alternative would have unacceptable impacts on
sensitive species, notably identified plants of the
species Crossosoma Californicum, and would eliminate an
unacceptable amount of the critical coastal sage scrub
community, and would result in unacceptable impacts on
the animals which use that habitat, including the
California gnatcatcher, the cactus wren, and the rufous
crowned sparrow.
(c) One project alternative proposes exporting
the excess cut material to an unidentified site outside
the City. This alternative would require a massive
trucking operation with unacceptable air quality,
noise, and traffic safety implications. This proposal
would exceed thresholds of significance established by
the Southern California Air Quality Management District
L:\voII\cwI\a8I9.mgc
Resolution No. 92- 83
Page 7
(SCAQMD) for dust and other air pollutants and would
exceed the threshold for oxides of nitrogen (Nox) by a
factor of eight. Export would require one truck to
enter, and one truck to exit, the site every minute for
eight hours a day and for 31 days. This truck traffic
would disrupt traffic, create traffic safety hazards,
generate noise in excess of levels deemed acceptable
for the residential districts through which the trucks
would travel as well as those adjacent to the site, and
would accelerate the deterioration of the City's
streets.
(d) The applicant has not adequately considered
placement of fill on sites in the vicinity of the
project site which are not as environmentally sensitive
as the quarry bowl and which do not involve the
environmental consequences of export to a site outside
the City. Nor has the applicant adequately considered
design alternatives for placement of the fill on the
site of proposed residential development which would
eliminate or reduce massive crib walls, perhaps by
eliminating one or more residential lots.
Section 9: That the project and its alternatives
involve significant, adverse, and unacceptable
environmental impacts and thus warrant findings that
the proposal is inconsistent with the City's General
Plan and with public health, safety, and general
welfare. These impacts include:
(a) Biological impacts on coastal sage scrub
habitat, especially in the quarry bowl, which will have
adverse impacts on at least two significant plant
species, Astragalus trichopodus and Crossosoma
californicum, and numerous sensitive animal species,
including the possibly extinct Palos Verdes Blue
Butterfly, the California gnatcatcher, the cactus wren,
and the rufous crowned sparrow, and will contribute to
a cumulatively significant loss of coastal sage scrub
habitat on the Palos Verdes Peninsula and in the
Southern California region.
(b) Aesthetic impacts in that views of the site
will be substantially altered and manufactured slopes
and tiered building pads are to be established, and the
proposal for placement of fill on the site proposed for
residential development calls for massive crib walls.
L:\voI1\cwI\a819.mgc
Resolution No. 92- 83
Page 8
(c) Noise impacts associated with earthwork,
especially as associated with export of soil from the
site.
(d) Traffic impacts associated with export of
soil from the site.
(e) Air quality impacts, including generation of
dust, which would be a nuisance to adjacent property
owners, and which significantly exceed relevant
thresholds of significance, especially as regards the
soil export alternative.
Section 10: For all the reasons stated above, the
City Council hereby sustains the appeal of the Seaview
Homeowners Association and denies Grading Application
No. 1390.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 4th day of
August , 1992.
oe
Mayor
ATTEST:
. 7
Ci Clerk
STATE 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- 83 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by
the said City Council at a regular meeting held on
August 4 , 1992.
L: Wo11 \cwt \a819.mgc
City C11 rk, City of Rancho Palos Verdes