Loading...
PC RES 2010-033 P.C.RESOLUTION NO.2010-33 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 21 IN CONNECTION WITH AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 68 (ZON2010- 00185) WHEREAS,an application package was filed by Burrell,Ltd., requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Tract Map to allow a Residential Planned Development(RPD)consisting of twenty- five(25)single family residential lots,a private park,and common areas on a 36.4 acre site located in subregion 1 of the Coastal Zone,adjacent to the Palos Verdes Estates boundary;and, WHEREAS, on November 10, 1981 the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted Resolution No. 81-57, thereby approving Conditional Use Permit No. 68, and on December 7, 1981, the City Council adopted Resolution 81-87, thereby approving Tentative Tract Map 40640, and Final Environmental Impact Report No. 21 was reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission and City Council as a part of these decisions;and, WHEREAS, on July 20, 2010 the City Council heard and approved a request from the City Staff to initiate an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No.68;and, WHEREAS, on September 28, 2010, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 68, and Addendum No. 1 to Environmental Impact Report No. 21, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence, and the item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 9,2010;and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et. seq.,the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65952.5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), on November 4, 2010, copies of the draft Addendum No. 1 to Environmental Impact Report No. 21 were distributed to the Planning Commission and prior to taking action on the proposed amendment to CUP No. 68, the Planning Commission independently reviewed and considered the information and findings contained in Addendum No. 1 to EIR No. 21;and, WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 68, and Addendum No. 1 to Environmental Impact Report No. 21, at which time all interested parties were again given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and, NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE,AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: This request is for an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 68 to eliminate the Planning Commission from the Lunada Pointe HOA's landscaping plan review process and to no longer require the Planning Commission to make landscaping determinations for individual tree, as well as to eliminate the requirement for the Community Development Director to approve private landscape plans in the Lunada Pointe Tract. Therefore, pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, approval of Addendum No. 1 to the previously certified EIR, rather than the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, is appropriate for the consideration of the proposed amendment to Condition Use Permit No.68,based on the following findings: 1. That subsequent changes proposed to the project do not require important revisions to the previous EIR, since there are no new significant environmental impacts that have been identified, P.C. Resolution No. 2010-33 1 of 5 which were not considered in the previous EIR.This is so, since the proposed changes identified in Section 1 and attached Exhibit "A" would not result in any new or increased impacts to the environment that are not already analyzed within EIR No. 21, because the amendments Staff is proposing still allow for view protection for the residents of the Lunada Pointe Tract, and for any other neighboring residents, through the City's View Restoration and View Preservation Permit processes. 2. That substantial changes to the project would not occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which would require important revisions to the previous EIR, since, as noted in #1 above, there are no new significant environmental impacts that were not considered in the previous EIR, and the project only updates the role of the Director and Planning Commission in regards to landscape plans and View Restoration. 3. That there is no new information of substantial importance to the project which indicates that these proposed changes will have one or more significant effects not discussed previously in the EIR;that significant effects previously examined will not be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR;that no mitigation measures or alternatives, previously found not to be feasible, would now in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project;or that no mitigation measures or alternatives which were not previously considered in the EIR, would now substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the environment, because the original landscaping conditions that were required to be placed in the CC&Rs are not proposed to be changed by the City, and the amendments Staff is proposing still allow for view protection for the residents of the Lunada Pointe Tract, and for any other neighboring residents, through the City's View Restoration and View Preservation Permit processes. Section 2: In approving Addendum No. 1 to EIR No. 21, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Addendum No. 1 document, attached hereto and made a part thereof as Exhibit"A". Section 3: The Addendum No. 1 to EIR No. 21 identifies no new potential significant adverse environmental impacts to the areas listed below, beyond those already identified in the Final EIR No.21, as a result of the proposed amendment to Conditional Use Permit No.68: 1. Geology 2. Drainage 3. "Biotic"Resources 4. Archaelogical/Paleontological Resources 5. Visual Character 7. Traffic and Circulation 8. Coastal Access and Recreation Section 4: That implementation of the proposed amendment to CUP No. 68 would not require additional mitigation measures or significant deletions/modifications to the mitigation measures included in the Final EIR. Section 6: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings contained in the staff reports presented at the public hearings, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Addendum No. 1 to Environmental Impact Report No.21, based on the Planning Commission's determination that the document was completed in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and State and local guidelines with respect thereto. P.C. Resolution No. 2010-33 2 of 5 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED on the 9th day of November, 2010. AYES: Commissioner Emenhiser, Knight, Leon, Tetreault, Vice Chairman Tomblin NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Chairman Gerstner RECUSALS: None ---- -rare_ Bill Gerstner, Chairman Joel -oja AICP Com' unit, Develo• ent Director and Secr:tary of the PI- - ing Commission Resolution No. 2010-33 Page 3 of 5 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-33 EXHIBIT "A" ADDENDUM No. 1 TO FINAL ENVIRONMENT IMPACT REPORT NO. 21 NOVEMBER 9, 2010 On November 10, 1981, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 81-57, thereby adopting Final Environment Impact Report No. 21 to allow for creation of a Residential Planned Development (RPD) consisting of twenty-five (25) single family residential lots, a private park, and common areas. In adopting the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), the Planning Commission found that Final Environmental Impact Report No. 21 was completed in compliance with City and Environmental Guidelines (CEQA) and that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 68 would not result in a significant adverse environmental impact because mitigation measures were required. Staff has reviewed and analyzed the proposed amendments to the conditions of approval to modify the existing conditions in the CUP to eliminate the Planning Commission from the Lunada Pointe HOA's landscaping plan review process and to no longer require the Planning Commission to make landscaping determinations for individual tree, as well as to eliminate the requirement for the Community Development Director to approve private landscape plans in the Lunada Pointe Tract. The Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed the proposed amendment to the Conditions of Approval to eliminate the Planning Commission from the Lunada Pointe HOA's landscaping plan review process and to no longer require the Planning Commission to make landscaping determinations for individual tree, as well as to eliminate the requirement for the Community Development Director to approve private landscape plans in the Lunada Pointe Tract. Having reviewed Staff's request, the Planning Commission is of the opinion that the revisions to the respective conditions will not alter nor diminish the spirit and intent of the original project approved by the Planning Commission in 1981. This is because the amendments Staff is proposing still provide for view protection for the residents of the Lunada Pointe Tract, and for any other neighboring residents, through the City's View Restoration and View Preservation Permit processes, and because the conditions within the CC&Rs (which were created as a mitigation measure to address visual impacts) are not proposed to be changed by the City. The proposed amendment will not result in any significant change that would affect the findings made by the Planning Commission when the project was approved. Furthermore, the proposed revisions will not introduce new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of the environmental impacts that previously were identified and analyzed in the FEIR. P.C. Resolution No. 2010-33 4 of 5 Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that there are no changed circumstances or new information, which were not known at the time the FEIR was certified, that would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR or major revisions to the FEIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. In accordance with Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered and hereby adopts this Addendum to the FE1R. P.C. Resolution No. 2010-33 5 of 5