Loading...
RDA RES 1996-004 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ("FINAL EIR") FOR THE ALTAMIRA CANYON DRAINAGE CONTROL PROJECT; ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; ADOPTING PROJECT FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; AND REAFFIRMING FINDINGS RELATED TO THE INCIDENTAL TAKE OF THE CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER. WHEREAS, the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency ("RDA") notified all responsible and trustee agencies, interested citizen groups, and individuals of the preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR") for the Altamira Canyon Drainage Control Project ("the Project") ; and WHEREAS, the RDA public participation process included the preparation of a Notice of Preparation and the opportunity for the public to comment on the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the RDA solicited public input and comment on the proposed Project and on the environmental documentation; and WHEREAS, the RDA caused to be prepared an Initial Study in September 1993, a copy of which was included in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the RDA caused to be prepared a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") on January 28, 1994, a copy of which was included in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, written comments were received in response to the NOP and Initial Study. A copy of these comments was included in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, based on the comments received on the NOP and Initial Study, the RDA revised the Initial Study. A copy of the revised Initial Study was included in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR reflected changes which were based upon the comments that were received; and WHEREAS, at the direction of the RDA, a Notice of Completion of Draft Environmental Impact Report #39-R for the Altamira Canyon Drainage Control Project was filed with the State of California on June 14, 1995; and WHEREAS, at the RDAps request, the State established an official review period for the Draft EIR which began on June 14, 1995 and ended on July 14, 1995; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 1995, the RDA determined that changes to the Project were necessary. In response to the changes to the Project, the RDA directed that an Addendum to the Draft EIR should be prepared, since the changes did not cause any new significant environmental effects which had not already been evaluated in the Draft EIR, and only minor changes to the Draft EIR were necessary to have the Draft EIR reflect the changes to the Project and be adequate under CEQA; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Completion and Draft EIR - Mailing List was provided in the Public Participation and Review Section of the Addendum to the Draft EIR and Response to Comments/Final EIR; and WHEREAS, the RDA staff met with the staff of the State of California - Department of Fish and Game on July 19, 1995, to review their concerns regarding the Project and to visit the proposed Project site; and WHEREAS, the RDA made the Addendum to the Draft EIR and Responses to Comments/Final EIR available for public review and inspection at the City Hall on August 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, the RDA mailed the Addendum to the Draft EIR to all those responsible and trustee agencies, interested citizens, and groups that had commented on the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, on November 8, 1995, the RDA determined that additional changes to the Project were necessary. In response to the changes to the Project, the RDA directed that a Second Addendum to the Draft EIR should be prepared, since the changes did not cause any new significant environmental effects which had not already been evaluated in the Draft EIR, and only minor changes to the Draft EIR were necessary to have the Draft EIR reflect the changes to the Project and be adequate under CEQA; and WHEREAS, the RDA made the Second Addendum to the Draft EIR available for public review and inspection at the City Hall on December 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, the RDA mailed the Second Addendum to the Draft EIR to all those responsible and trustee agencies, interested citizens, and groups that had commented on the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, or the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines ("Guidelines") require that the RDA make certain findings prior to the approval of a project for which an Environmental Impact Report has been completed; and RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 2 WHEREAS, Section 15093 (a) of the Guidelines requires the RDA to balance the benefits of the proposed Project against any significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts caused by the Project in determining whether to approve the Project; and WHEREAS, Section 15093 (b) of the Guidelines requires the RDA to state in writing the reasons supporting a decision to approve a project if the project will cause significant adverse environmental impacts which are identified in the Environmental Impact Report that cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level, based on the Environmental Impact Report or other evidence in the record; and WHEREAS, the RDA has independently reviewed and considered the contents of the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") which is comprised of the Draft EIR #39R, dated June 1995, including any revisions thereto, the First and Second Addenda to the Draft EIR, the Staff Reports which have been prepared for the meetings of September 5th, November 8th and December 5th, 1995, and January 15, and February 20, 1996, the relevant portions of the Minutes of those meetings, the Statement of Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring Program ("MMP") , and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which are attached hereto, the list of persons, organizations and public agencies which have commented on the Draft EIR, the comments which have been received regarding the Draft EIR and the Addenda and the responses thereto, each of which is incorporated herein and made a part hereof by this reference; NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HEREBY FINDS, ORDERS AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. The RDA hereby certifies that the FEIR for the Project was completed in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State and Local Guidelines promulgated with respect thereto. Furthermore, the RDA has independently reviewed and considered the contents of the FEIR, as described above, prior to deciding whether to approve the Project and whether to authorize Agency Staff to issue a Request For Proposals from contractors to construct the Project. The RDA hereby finds that the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the RDA. The findings made in this Resolution are based upon the information and evidence set forth in FEIR and upon other substantial evidence which has been presented in the I/ record of this proceeding. 2. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on public services. The proposed Project may affect existing gas lines. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 3 or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 3 . The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on existing utilities. The proposed project may affect existing sewer lines. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 4. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on cultural resources. The proposed Project may result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP and which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 5. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on earth resources related to geology and soils. Potential flooding impacts could occur, if the debris basins are not properly maintained. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 6. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on air resources. The proposed Project will have a short-term impact from grading activities due to construction. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this 1/ significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 4 have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 7. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project related to the short-term impact on air resources from construction activities due to construction vehicle emissions. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 8. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on air resources. The proposed Project in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will incrementally contribute to short-term impacts on local air quality. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. Additionally, the Projectps incremental contribution will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 9. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on noise. The proposed Project will have a short-term construction noise impact. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. 10. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project in conjunction with cumulative projects on noise. The proposed Project in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will contribute to short-term noise impacts due to construction. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 5 mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. Additionally, the Projectps incremental contribution will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 11. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed project will impact the Coastal sage scrub and Coastal sage scrub/ Grassland/Disturbed plant communities. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. In addition to the conditions imposed by the RDA, required permits must be obtained from the United States Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, another public agency. In issuing the permits, conditions of approval will be imposed upon the Project with which the Project will be required to comply. 12 . The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed Project will impact the Seacliff buckwheat, a sensitive plant species. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. In addition to the conditions imposed by the RDA, required permits must be obtained from the United States Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, another public agency. In issuing the permits, conditions of approval will be imposed upon the Project with which the Project will be required to comply. 13 . The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. Although the proposed Project will not impact the use of the channel as a wildlife corridor, and although the stream sections do not contain typical vegetation, the impact upon a blue-line stream is potentially significant. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 6 identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. In addition to the conditions imposed by the RDA, required permits must be obtained from the United States Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, another public agency. In issuing the permits, conditions of approval will be imposed upon the Project with which the Project will be required to comply. 14. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed Project will impact the food plant for the El Segundo Blue butterfly and the Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. In addition to the conditions imposed by the RDA, required permits must be obtained from the United States Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, another public agency. In issuing the permits, conditions of approval will be imposed upon the Project with which the Project will be required to comply. 15. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed Project will impact the Palos Verdes ground beetle. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. In addition to the conditions imposed by the RDA, required permits must be obtained from the United States Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, another public agency. In issuing the permits, conditions of approval will be imposed upon the Project with which the Project will be required to comply. I/ 16. The FEIR identifies as a potential significant adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed Project will impact the California gnatcatcher. However, changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. The significant effect has been lessened to a level of RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 7 insignificance by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. In addition to the conditions imposed by the RDA, required permits must be obtained from the United States Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, another public agency. In issuing the permits, conditions of approval will be imposed upon the Project with which the Project will be required to comply. 17. The FEIR identifies as a potential unavoidable adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on aesthetic resources. The proposed Project will result in a change in canyon views for those members of the public utilizing the pedestrian paths. This is considered a significant aesthetic impact. Changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which partially mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. Although this significant effect has been lessened by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP, which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval, it has not been eliminated or reduced to a level of insignificance. Various alternatives to the Project were evaluated in the EIR. These alternatives were rejected by the RDA for the reasons discussed in Section 4.0 of the attached Findings and Facts in Support of Findings. Therefore, the RDA finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is applicable to this significant environmental impact. This finding is supported by the analysis and facts which are set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 18. The FEIR identifies as a potential unavoidable adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed Project will impact a breeding pair of San Diego cactus wrens. This is considered a significant impact. Changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which partially mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect. Although this significant effect has been lessened by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR and MMP, which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval, it has not been eliminated or reduced to a level of insignificance. Various alternatives to the Project were evaluated in the EIR. These alternatives were rejected by the RDA for the reasons discussed in Section 4. 0 of the attached Findings and Facts in Support of Findings. I/ Therefore, the RDA finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is applicable to this significant RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 8 environmental impact. This finding is supported by the analysis and facts which are set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 19. The FEIR identifies as a potential unavoidable adverse environmental effect the impact of the proposed Project on biological resources. The proposed Project in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will result in cumulative impacts to the California gnatcatcher and San Diego cactus wren. This is considered a significant biological impact. Changes or alterations have been required, or incorporated into, the Project which partially mitigate or avoid this significant environmental effect to the extent feasible. Although this significant effect has been lessened by virtue of Mitigation Measures 11 through 17, which are identified in the FEIR and MMP and which have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval, it has not been eliminated or reduced to a level of insignificance. Various alternatives to the Project were evaluated in the EIR. These alternatives were rejected by the RDA for the reasons discussed in Section 4.0 of the attached Findings and Facts in Support of Findings. Therefore, the RDA finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is applicable to this significant environmental impact. This finding is supported by the analysis and facts which are set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 20. The FEIR evaluated six (6) alternatives to the proposed Project. The alternatives included: 1. No Project/No Development; 2. Reinforced Concrete Pipe; 3 . Corrugated Metal Pipe; 4. Corrugated Half-Pipe; 5. Plastic Product Liner; 6. Plastic Product Pipes; and 7. Off-Site Locations. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible each of the Project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. The analysis, facts and findings in support of the RDA's decision to reject the alternatives for failure to mitigate significant potential environmental effects are set forth in Section 4.0 of the attached Findings and Facts in Support of Findings, which are incorporated herein. For the reasons set forth therein, the RDA finds that the other alternatives to the Project which were discussed in the FEIR, including the no I/ project/no development alternative, are rejected as infeasible based upon the specific economic, social, and other considerations discussed in the FEIR and the CEQA Statement of Findings and Facts. The RDA further finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and that all reasonable alternatives were considered in the RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 9 review process of the FEIR and the ultimate decision on the project. 21. The RDA makes the findings contained in the CEQA Statement of Findings and Facts in Support of Findings with respect to the significant impacts defined in the Final Environmental Impact Report and finds that each fact in support of finding is true and is based upon substantial evidence in the record, including the Final Environmental Impact Report. 22 . The RDA finds that the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations are true and are supported by substantial evidence in the record, which includes the Final Environmental Impact Report. 23 . The RDA finds that the Final Environmental Impact Report has identified all significant environmental effects of the Project and that there are no known potentially significant environmental effects of the Project not addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report. 24. The RDA finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts of the Project, as identified in the FEIR and the CEQA Statement of Findings and Facts in Support of Findings, that have not been reduced to a level of insignificance have been reduced to the extent feasible by the imposition of mitigation measures which are hereby incorporated as conditions of the Project approval. The RDA finds that each of the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts are clearly outweighed by any one, or any combination of, the economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 25. The RDA finds that although the Final Environmental Impact Report identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the Project is approved, all significant effects that can be mitigated or avoided have been reduced to an acceptable level by the imposition of mitigation measures. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been developed for the Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Program is hereby adopted and approved by the RDA and is hereby incorporated as a condition of the approval of the Project. Agency Staff are hereby directed to implement the Mitigation Monitoring Program as set forth therein. 26. The RDA finds that the RDA staff have transmitted to the I/ United States Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services ("Service") the mandatory findings, in accordance with Special Rule 4 (d) . RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 10 27. The RDA finds that the mandatory findings, as specified in the NCCP Process Guidelines, must be made for any project involving the loss of Coastal Sage Scrub ("CSS") or affecting the NCCP program for the subregion. 28. The RDA finds that the proposed habitat loss is consistent with the interim loss criteria in the Conservation Guidelines, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) , which is incorporated herein by this reference. 29. The RDA finds that the habitat loss does not cumulatively exceed the five percent guideline for loss of CSS within a subregion, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) . 30. The RDA finds that the habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat values, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) . 31. The RDA finds that the habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the subregional NCCP, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) . 32 . The RDA finds that the habitat loss has been minimized and mitigated to the maxim extent practicable, in accordance with the Interim Mitigation Criteria of the NCCP Process Guidelines, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) . 33 . The RDA finds that the habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of listed species in the wild, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) . I/ 34. The RDA finds that the habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activity, based on the information contained in the FEIR and the Special Rule 4 (d) Finding Transmittal Letter (Attachment 5 to the Staff Report of December 5, 1995) . 35. The RDA finds that a Conceptual Interim Habitat Loss Mitigation Plan (Conceptual IHLMP) is being prepared by the RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 11 environmental consultant under the direction of the RDA Staff. Preparation of the Conceptual IHLMP has involved meetings and field visits with the Service and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) . The documents and other material which constitute the record on which the findings set forth above are based are located in the City Hall of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and are in the custody of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. Upon approval of this Resolution, the RDA Secretary is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the County Recorder's Office, County of Los Angeles and the California State Clearinghouse pursuant to Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20th day of February, 1996. CHAI ATTEST: AG , CY S RETARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } SS CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES } I, Jo Purcell, Agency Secretary of the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency hereby certify that the above Resolution No. RDA 96-04 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency at the meeting held on February 20, 1996. I/ Jaig, A e NCY SECRETARY M:RESORD:RDA96-4 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-04 PAGE 12