PC RES 1992-068 RESOLUTION NO. 92-68
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 36 IN
CONNECTION WITH REVISIONS TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAPS NOS. 50666/50667, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 162/163,
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. 23004
and 29070, 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 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, 1992, after finding substantial issue with the project as
approved by the City Council, the California Coastal Commission denied Coastal Permit No.
103 and remanded the subject applications and Final Environmental Impact Report back to
the City for revisions; 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 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map
Nos. 50666 and 50667, Conditional Use Permits No. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103,
and Grading Permit No. 1541. 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, on November 5, 1992, in recommending approval of revisions to
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 50666 and 50667 to the City Council and in approving
revisions to Conditional Use Permit Nos. 162 and 163, Coastal Permit No. 103, and Grading
Permit No. 1541, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes considered
the information, findings, and mitigation measures contained in the Draft AEIR. In
recommending approval of the Draft AEIR to the City Council, the Planning Commission
finds that the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been fulfilled.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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
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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
Page 2 of 6
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
con sideration s 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 development 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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
Page 3 of 6
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.
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 con sideration s 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 recommending approval of Draft AEIR to the City Council, the
Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Draft AEIR. The Draft AEIR is
hereby attached hereto by reference as Exhibit "A".
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
Page 4 of 6
Section 14: In reviewing the Draft AEIR, the Planning Commission recommends
incorporation of 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 and attached 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 to the Planning Commission,
the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby recommends approval
of the Draft Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 36 to the City Council based on
the determination that the document was completed and circulated in compliance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and Sate and local guidelines with
respect thereto.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
Page 5 of 6
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of November, 1992
/ /
L
Robert Katherman
Chairman
Dudley Ond,rdonk, Director of
Environme tal Services and
Secretary to the Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 92_68
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT "B"
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
DEVELOPMENT FOR SUBREGION 7
FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
November 5, 1992
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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
Exhibit B
II. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. LANDFORM, GEOLOGY, AND SOILS
LANDFORM AND SOILS
1) Description 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) 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.
(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
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
2 Exhibit B
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 II.A 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).
SEISMICITY
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
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
3 Exhibit B
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 II.A 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 grading or alteration of any
of the on-site drainage courses.
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.
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
4 Exhibit B
( ) 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
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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
5 Exhibit B
() 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
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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
6 Exhibit B
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 Finding
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
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 provide 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
•
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
7 Exhibit B
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.0 of the
Draft EIR, Section III.0 of the Supplemental EIR and Section III.0 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 military 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.
( ) 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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
8 Exhibit B
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.
( ) 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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
9 Exhibit B
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 FEIR 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:
(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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
10 Exhibit B
( ) 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 subject
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.
2) Proposed 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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
11 Exhibit B
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).
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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
12 Exhibit B
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
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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
13 Exhibit B
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:
(X) Significant ( ) Not significant
4) Rationale for Finding
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 CARB. 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.
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
14 Exhibit B
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.
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.
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
15 Exhibit B
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.
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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
16 Exhibit B
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 Mitigation
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
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) Description 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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
17 Exhibit B
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
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
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
18 Exhibit B
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.
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) Description of Effects
The proposed project will result in an increase in sewage flow through the existing wastewater system.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
19 Exhibit B
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.
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.
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
20 Exhibit B
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.
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 FEIR does not identify any potential significant impact on existing
library facilities, no additional finding is required under CEQA.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
21 Exhibit B
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.
SHORELINE PARK
1) Description 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) Description 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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
22 Exhibit B
b) Since the EIR does not identify any potential significant impact on the
existing cable television system, no additional finding is required under
CEQA.
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) Proposed 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.
P.C. Resolution No.92-68
23 Exhibit B
2) Proposed Mitigation
No mitigation measures are needed or required.
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 Finding
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 II.L 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 Project" 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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
24 Exhibit B
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
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 FEIR 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
golf course, approximately linear feet and 8.4 acres of public trails, 24.3 acres of
active and passive parks, and coastal bluff access.
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
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
25 Exhibit B
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
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 Fire 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.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-68
26 Exhibit B