PC RES 2016-009 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT FOR VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 73817
AND GRADING PERMIT AT 30389 PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST
(SUB2015-00001, ZON2015-00187 &ZON2016-00314).
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2015, applications were submitted for Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map No. 73817 and Grading Permit for 30389 Palos Verdes Drive East; and,
WHEREAS, based on a preliminary review, the application was deemed incomplete on
May 8, 2015. After subsequent submittals and reviews of additional information by Staff and the
City Engineer, Staff deemed the project complete on June 2, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. (" CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California
Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and
Government Code Section 65962.5(f) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes prepared an Initial Study and determined that there is no substantial
evidence that the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 73817 and Grading Permit would result
in a significant adverse effect on the environment, provided appropriate mitigation measures are
imposed on the project. Thus, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and notice thereof
was given in the manner required by law; and,
WHEREAS, on June 30, 2016, notice of the Initial Study and draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Grading Permit was sent to all property owners within 500'of the subject site and
appropriate public agencies for a minimum comment period of 20-days, commencing on June 30,
2016, and concluding on July 20, 2016. Additionally, the notice was published on the same day
in the Peninsula News; and,
WHEREAS, after notices were issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on July
26, 2016, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present
evidence;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered
the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the public comments upon it, and other evidence
and finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in the manner required by law,
and there is no substantial evidence, provided appropriate mitigation measures are imposed, that
the approval of Case No. SUB2015-00001, ZON2015-00187 & ZON2016-00314 (Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map and Grading Permit) would result in a significant adverse effect upon the
environment.
Section 2: There are no sensitive natural habitat areas on the subject site and,
therefore, the proposed project will have no individual or cumulative adverse impacts upon
resources, as defined in Section 711. 2 of the State Fish and Game Code.
Resolution No. 2016-09
Page 1 of 2
Section 3: The attached proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration finds that there are
no impacts or less than significant impacts to agriculture and forestry resources, biological
resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use/planning,
mineral resources, population/housing, recreation, utilities and service systems, and mandatory
findings of significance.
Section 4: With the imposition of mitigation measures that address potential impacts
upon aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, geology/soils, hydrology/water quality, noise,
public services, and transportation/traffic in the community and as set forth in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program, Exhibit "B", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, the proposed project's potential significant impacts will be reduced below a level of
significance.
Section 5: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
included in the Initial Study and Staff Report, the Planning Commission has determined that the
project as conditioned and mitigated will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment
and also finds that the preparation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration attached hereto complies
with CEQA. Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby certifies the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference,
making certain environmental findings to allow the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map and Grading
Permit to accommodate a lot split for the future residential development on an existing vacant
parcel located at 30389 Palos Verdes Drive East.
PASSED, CERTIFIED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of July 2016, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Emenhiser, James, Leon, Nelson and Vice Chairman Cruikshank
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
RECUSALS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Bradley and Chairman Tomblin
IL VAL
John
dire. Vice • airman
Ara ►
Community Development Director; and,
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2016-09
Page 2 of 2
Exhibit "A"
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Project title:
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 73817, Grading Permit, and Environmental
Assessment/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Planning Case Nos. SUB2013-00001,
ZON2015-00187)
2. Lead agency name!address:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Community Development Department
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
3. Contact person and phone number:
Amy Seeraty, Associate Planner
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) 544-5231
4. Project location:
30389 Palos Verdes Drive East
APN 7566-002-018
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
County of Los Angeles
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
Douglas Maupin (Maupin Development, Inc.)
23505 Crenshaw Blvd. #208
Torrance, CA 90505
6. General plan designation:
Residential (<=1 d.u./acre)
7. Coastal plan designation:
This project is not located in the City's Coastal Zone
8.Zoning:
Single-Family Residential District(RS-2)
9. Description of project:
The proposed project involves a request to subdivide an existing vacant 43,610ft2 lot at
30389 Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE) (APN: 7566-002-018) into two separate parcels
for the development of one single-family dwelling unit on each lot. As proposed, Parcel
No. 1 will be 21,675ft2 in area and will be improved with a 5,390ft2 two-story residence
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 1 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
with 1,719 cubic yards of grading consisting of 1,348yd3 cut and 371yd3 cubic yards of
fill. Parcel No. 2 will be 21,925ft2 in area and will be improved with a 7,616ft2 three-story
residence with 1,817yd3 of grading consisting of 1,270yd3 of cut and 547yd3 of fill. The
proposed project does not qualify for a Class 15 Exemption (15315. Minor Land
Divisions) as the parcel has an average slope greater than 20%, thus an Initial Study is
required.
The project involves a Grading Permit request to allow earth movement to accommodate
the proposed residences. Pursuant to Section 17.76.040.0.4 of the RPVMC, since more
than 1,000 cubic yards is proposed, the proposed grading, which includes the
Neighborhood Compatibility analysis, is considered by the Planning Commission at a
duly noticed public hearing.
10. Description of project site(as it currently exists):
The project site is a vacant 43,610ft2 roughly rectangular shaped upsloping lot located on
the west side of PVDE, near the intersection of Diamonte Lane and PVDE. The site is
bounded by detached, single-family residences to the north, south and west, and across
PVDE to the east. The land use and zoning designations for the site are Residential, <=1
d.u./acre and RS-2, respectively.
11. Surrounding land uses and setting:
Land Uses
i i6cs t.
eat
ores
...:..:...
.............:...:..
: ` �'t
On-site Vacant The subject property is an upsloping lot
accessible from PVDE.
North Single-family residential These residential properties are located in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
South Single-family residential These residential properties are located in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
East Single-family residential These residential properties are located in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
West Single-family residential These residential properties are located in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
12. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
None.
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 2 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30, 2016
Figure 1: Aerial of project location west of PVDE.
c
l�„10C'
' ' ,, ' C ,....„.4 41, , ,4 ''''`f 4:7, ''''''4 ,,,4 _, _,
1"7::410, . ;1'4 ',.:', .* ' osit,iii,ip,:" t„' ._.;4:t'..1.4--- .:,',,,,-„' „„ '„,-,-,--,,:;1!', A--,...,:f 1
,,,,,.. ,:zr /, • . '''' v ' 41' 11111
,,„ .i.:.e;' - '
,-;,--,,t.,,_-it. ..,,.0,7.4 o.164- ,,,J, I " . 1107-7,--, ,-
..,, ,•:.-‘
„,,� yyy..y4".,-,
.: '^TIS' a ,,y.Y a «t ��
t .
m` GI ,N ,@ rl ,;M,., r -. r - fie•, , 4 :'. t . f �'''.,Fq ;”"
i ' A ^a, I ,l ^j i_l1.r 'Y ``a '•S '.." 3r T '°"« t; ''3i �'�l`�r ...t.::
sr_ •s, °ate• x A z w sti+ #,` .,�
P f=' •
n
f x
op, t*S".""*. ft :
il 14",' 'i), ;:l4VW '',N,,,,, ,,<',:f'',,,.,. '-, .''',...„,,,tio;404 ,.4. _.4,„,t'''. ,.., .<14.' 4 ,,,,,,,,Itt i' , , if. t .:...,,,, ---,fr„,e
o
,444\ttni
.;^- -' ;''le; 1:c..4 .
�. x i ._i.
•
- le ,I,‘.-,,;_i'',*-.:-', 2 5. A' ;;,,,'!--14 1 ' '''' , , _ ,. ,„-,,L=...,,,,,,'i , . , .,,_
lipr
.� :�; , " r !� f /X11111 j i' * '
/� '4$#""�"'"`s.;0 Fk •'Y.• ,„.. _.. r a iC ..e,---
, r 1' M
•
•
13 r =t' .:`5 , V �.' 11 c_ s yr �9+' .. __I_
_ ...�P- - f �y�{p .y --:sf
.
-,--°,7...*,,'•,'* kilt" ANC"
f.', 4 , k ' . _, ..
-' * fe...: ,: ,
F !' ';0400 �` i ` Project Site ``
in,
t
11
r
- • ,.,,r i '4 ::--:.-i'
�-... - ��� i.i
.- s * ' ..
RON
101104'„...
30389 PVDE
k
,,,‘.....77:::::-:, ,4.,..",....,':*41' 147,rv.
,. 30404 a- tiiti-_-. .
tio ' _. '.., ,.,,. ii, '-, , .,. , ,;,, , ,„, # - '. . - 441; c'') -
#**'' ' .4 ° ''''''. -'ilifr -s A ,,', ,..4 ' -4.-,_
4 <
' , ' :71/4,W''' ;'' ':::::, ..-40. ti4,-,- i i 41 5 B.,...-, .. :y 1 ,.,F - L
: - ,
..
.,.,
. ,,
A- -.,
..,
1 30.2.,1 . . "�• ;. :‘,.,..,...),,,,, ...4, .. -
... .
v ,
..... . ,., ,.,...,,4 .
......
. .....,„
,.. . .
. t
, , -
, ,
,, ,.....,,„,,,,, ,,
,.T
a-'. ' yf ' - -
.ter- t.69 a
, #:, . --4, -,,,, „.,,,50,.4 4,
't Ad,
--------7,- ::'1.541'."'. ,40°' . -' - '-: '''i '. . 1 , ' '''- , *
..
11
k
' ,eVA ''',, .ti: ,, .., ye . 4 +.4 , :.1 , .
:
4-;-,
: aw .
4 , --;7— - 1 -, */.-
r
s
3.05
..
x f �gV X513
�)b�`���`t�x �a -,.'",.... ter, r�,R �"r'«i �_ �',. ���:�. -, Z :�' �„ lt ' '_, �
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 3 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Figure 2: Site plan showing the proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 73817 and the
proposed residential development on each lot.
rt•MAX NI Pt'',Mt,./ z HI. a 114/1 i,. '
�+ a r �,���,M „�,�,; ra,mx wr err.Neto Yt a Ye INV I
R r .a. ! § ItwN kNQ b Jw tUMAI_A�Y.t It%,tr
NFWTV W.11 Mi 6 , ?.....;:::...'7.... - .•+,.1 , •1 / t ~ F in.
DARfl1'Ai YM1_lS `\�\ t \ 1 ' , - tq
R '��\��ti~`\` !�_• ` . -t_....-..:�, } , 1 i , ,;SY4XrJIMEA!LE i4'-•+s, j
swcEnER1�><tvL� } `,•.I.'.\.}.,`,...,\ - =i: .' ,/,'44.,f'a<.. .�,-r ' _ , I 1 'w
✓AIDE WAIL. • t I .` ' r ~ ' , I c.(.�YCN:I�r S'ANA •\'�a 1
, � -`t ..
' I'. ,� .... '+.. • i� � `�.: � ,
UPSLAVRE]AIt3M:co., �t\:,: �h �`�? ,•� .R ':I • -•.•.-‘ '',,,.•�'J , !,i,�+,'�'`���3::I•� �tir'. t», �... -��. I �� , •,•-.�r?�� - � I
‘,.....,...0,....•-•,_cot N 0, ♦....,\� 4 ,.•t _, ""I .:� i '=4,....7 71. ---- �4�:1 . i
Yd Y M A.iRiEE0ke0 !<�..` �.' � i,. ., `' _ i . ::.M! `4 !
srt ��j;.�`�.\�`` `, _ ` ` 1 ;: :1\ • ,1 Mrd (I. ,' -'I _1__ ..;�:.��y„'' :
v..,„.s \.,.``+` ` �\'. N .••- ';''. ,i ;( * • i— —$
• ` • • .1-z fr...,.fl.•,• t1 i __ '--{ .E-m720~,Tb,..›.?!'d•Y
1 / •'':.::1r., -fi,,, .)' I.: 'r, :!1` -.W''i'- 1iNtIi
wr.�w q f r..x•i!e'P;`\04Sil.!67÷ . I r���i��'�. , 1Y01T� 5Yd1U1ri611Y
ti, ,, f i I r�. :ry ;; , ij
.`l, f. it'.
i I }I 1 } ' j I}�''/yb•T7�',:+ ,• i t I . ��a I_;' 1 p,„,. ..i.,
.': .r r r Rf '\j 1 i, .4;, ,,,� ' y. > 7,1;1..5 't,:p .. .� I 1:11 h [I7▪r1��gy�,1.1.�7 s`i;u►r : 1 ,/ �' 7•,,,:,,),-1
' ,11 = 1 ` ::i"i I. r r , 1 '••� ;t. -- •'i' + .A•K-eT' I..i' ! F:> 1:' a , 'y,,\ ` 1 •
1•'I} i.,'�I 1' 1 , r ( t ;r �`� .TJ1t+!., I .1r ti•-•-,
."+• AC J(t��•t ' ^;;'1:
. yy J '
�i\�\� J A!\. !..,'�1 "� �" � 1 : „,..41;t7_,. •: ���'_ 1 r 1 1 `.:4,::-., v;i;.,.� 1 .,1''. ,
,:,.., ..
\INA.-''''., i : . 1'• '< ''' lt:,,t. !.:« . , .It o.�,,,r ya;::al i .,..,"...12,..,:'....,.!.;,1...n ''1 •r ..4.-,'":.-. �.:
•
• \� 1 �. .. •'t' ' 'y .i • 11_11 4 1/$T,/ I i .1=I'll tl 4$/.....:.:;...... ''1 1`t. •i f• r 1'
'\S l ('---' '1 I `‘`; • .'�' N•'��1� :�.Gs'•SM .S• . ; (f ' ;J .�.I �`T\� pi:. / /, .44
I •-., .•,,,,,,,T,,.-. 1 ...1.,....t.-..._ I ,,
.. !
of vtt..l wa. '�' i NEW..1 OI�IIr I rr �•'� ./; r�, t�1/ tae's. .a. z ���'' �'�'S'�•/ 'f S
....,,,,,,,,,...--.• I' 1 .... y. 1 ( 1,,.- �I •rt t"� 1/}`•. ,_1�1 11/
..TM.AN ..NIA7LRETAINNJ�- •• 111 RE81 10E 1 s i 5,.7 :-�!T 1.' 1' I i� Fi•_� - ... ..•' •.i ,: ` i.f' �.,iV e,1/1 / ,
'I►%Y Y A.RsEYOAeQ �~~ �-' � � ', .+•mss 1 "' � _ .1 8 � ,.......: ; .moi: I. ' � i�. � � 4 ' •{•,•,}' . F t N 2. 1 `?•4 ' •1� 'l ,/.L >. r1 r '!. ti,-, ; '�' ''y • tt/o m.w+IGA� ^
;, �; is 't.., 4 1 I.
/
r. - ,, ,,,,.)„.`, 1 ..: ! . Vii•• .- '`,.., ,
MIX I14:n�Irll1 +�}6� �' til/,�;,, Ili
�r �1 } • I ,�``` •'' S 1
rANictII6 1 ,. 1�1 .�i.4: ; 1 jl��.:,, {�4- � t. 'F•.1,;.: • .i t'' t1 I i h :
ra►IaN RE►Ar+,NowAu wras lsol+ =t'` 1: –': -; ` t, r 44,,,,,,,,,,,...-A0,.. ..._,, ,,:„...,:....,,.,,. / f W.I.OLMOPIA>LWYE :‘; , ,., �1_ � { ' ..+ T..t.t , ,- ,� 7 .R ,f r: . Itr i•r"oN a►}loeu tNllLLwlr�•N IaI— •
.,_ l"ibt,,t ' 1.:: `' ,\i- t .yyJ, :i'�► 1g j,, a�1a�\tl'rT { - 4
"'!1, I V !r�' 1�' ,� , 1:. , t' :+:fin l! I,'
` f
'It�. ttgN L..+ ,I 1 �. i=,i11•gt.,,1; t� `'.r +.r ,• 1� //•I ..
NEA9UIVI MT •..-_�_-_ ✓r_�,ll • e, r 9 \ti,\ � } {',•i /�1Fv Y.%1,_..,7,4„,;;;;.-?;.y ,.''{'/ :R•+ ` /.
�► --•�-•- ”1 ` - �•��;,�,f'��'}..'.�M .i.1;;'•. •i. / ! '..//..1:
�/:~7-�t� I.�114m11lIO:?eIVAT�Oti1R1hAT
R --/- -- _. 'c..'. Y.1'4.4..I • 1.•�j✓f . Iwo u►tE ra .lLsi
Ntrwrz v.MI CANSI-ooku ! ;` •-_•c•-• 4 1 ry - _ . .Y'' ' '.c' /I//1 '�:.f ��_-- ,' Y�WII CIIC I;I CINCA
NrtM?CYA%MT t}6RYi'Yr=+J ' '' ".-,•-. �' .�/,/ '''NE1ft2 M. /: Topc,SUPPORT
tl4 orpmE"E
i.,�..y,,`i:. 6MXe�'�C<G�fiGRE1E-•,�� _•-�-•;7'�%:;� (,.AR]E'IK1tLl•.•
% .,4 ,/ T03UpPa1T?3-?�I>•PARATVS.
.a.n w,u 1 /Of IxrJWR�ttENT A ClSi -•*_ - r.s,- EEE ORAWN.'iA9FOR PIRKI 1iE
/ ,! r / ,
,
OVERALL SITE PLAN
s:xc:l.c 1•.«•
Page 4 of 32
01203.0005/302184.1
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
•
Figure 3: Floor plans of the Lot 1 proposed residence
\ � � V •.l�s.wanln•ws•t
1 s...�u...+.wa
1 1
1 i 1�
, 0 moo
Pao
M
rL
\. Pa. Ill R *•s. ,f 1 iC"_ , !�,� 1 s �m! ` II f _ 4,;..,- 44
1!.
I �.- ,� ,
. .-.., p'
oma.J {, l n App I IIfl�l I_? l ` 1{
AwN. I ' .
• fru /J 1.... !
l ...;fis I PI VW OR.POISral,
, N
,,,.....:,...rf 1 t ......._
. itsn.:�. .I_
1 .i sl r •
--.1=1:----.1Casj
•, e. • ' / Pt • •r •.
LOWER FLOOR PLAN
/ N
' ® 1
\ 1I1: 1., �. `.. ' 1 fg3 '' roe
:1 J. 1t• NII I c.e n.A. 1 ,
,` C
.•w
D\ V. v 1/
ti '•Tlf f 1 �.:s r,.
...AL.—�.-5—_. •!,' .-JGi.._.-._.........._-�.. �t!_..�.�...._.
..„,•,,„. '4
I Ii
-1— ` r. ,•
•I
I
UPPER FLOOR PLAN
01203.00051302184.1 Page 5 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.Z0N2015-00187
June 30,2016
1Figure 4: Elevation plans of the Lot 1 proposed residence
B ,.........,
! .
im...i. i.. . .,t.
-- --,p - _,,, --0,w,y,,,y.-Ao1/4,r - -p- . ,• 1,,- ....„
..11AY 1 ‘'.."‘4.1ig'&'`-•--'''''''''Y'r':"I'"'1'44 Y:Y P'l i'fl'''''-'t,i'9-0,
. "i:0,0`64'411,SY,i ii.4%'40,04,41,11, o_r'-'1VtitWoY0401.0iY.?...',Y0.10,1,,Y1S1.N'i.lr; -,
. ,
.stI.:o.t.o!;ttft,-•,oIi.,,:;\1(\,\\\.•I,,4sii;
'L.•i-'-,-,..,",l.•t—i-il.... E..:
.'1 1;:ji 1,,r,t•0-.41
11 . - - - T • r-
= —_
-
K.
'—•.-
.-•
,.....-„.. \,
, .....
di
EAST(FRONT!ELEVATION '
•---,
in 1,
•,-....,..t.A.t.a...71,411LA,....,- ................... , ........7_,.....,..................................................-. ..-.............-...1,.s'...7.-.................-..................,.•'....'.... •
I " -,1.,f9Y-i'IFIr--i.,.. '''''.,, 1'+•I', ••. ,t.,•rt, . N.......--,:rx—
,:,...-"N
%.$11"--•-...• ,_ 1-7 Q,\\
I . -••''''''''', , . . ,[1.1 a.a .
• -k - '- __.2._,. ,-4r:dill
--_-= =__ --- ----
---.
___,.... 4- ' - H1* i t,
,,,,......_.... _ .1 _ -L--
. • -I--i.I-1 U' _LL...'
SOUTH(LEFT;ELEVATION ',-4,-,,..,, ,".....................
..........-sesm. _.. ____ . _II;; fa
..._ _
,.`„ , ... , . t.'"Til
_.____ _.7!--- -- :.hi..,'''.1:'.,.21- r.,'-T..-.=-.,-'.!ic-T..,1.;'-:! !'.I%:;%.:-'4:!i!O!I!rt.:;,:,-
s ...::._-,•P.-,,','..r.i,-.);%:.V.t:r",:,:t.:1;r:',.i;i',. ,,...,-,4,:.'.,:ii,,,,,.i.i....,,,J.,;::31,----,__
- -•-
En F-11-11
v•=7:-."--'""-'-. .
1111111111
I
I
II
I
.-- _L_ _J_.—
WEST(REAR)ELEVAIION
cwi 1.1,,T4f
!
I
f I_
ic...„,v.,...,,,,..,.„,,,.....
:z....t%,..--_. //4 , .•,,.. ..,,-...---.-.---„ ,"..-...-..,,,,ti.5-.::, " 1
...,......,... ....,____. 111, '.:17,,c,),":4,,,:,....':,[:,,,,,,...,,,,,,,,,,,,,.•••,,,,, ,:,,,,,,,,,..
'.. .
111.•7,,,!-f,ir.::;'4't;;;17'i; .'1:;:•'1.'7:1!tt'::i_''''::3".•_i;c7'::;..fli'il:;:::- ..n.!*':i.:;!..Z:,:•::'. ...,..s." 7.7....'..-'''''' I
I-,-,--7--
I I ...—
..°
. • --,--
I
• — --imm'' 111111111MIELI
s'... IIM .M•..ii,.i.,,..11 !,::...i!il,...:111;il-...,1:,•:,I.AUPiTi! .:,111111
'-- - -- - •i:-,,,.! H ',..I.,.,',,,vp,
r-...._..two,„.„. i,
sood..... _, ...\_____...:,..i,i•:,lii,;.,:,i1,1ii,i[11:0,!,;,,,„,,,,,, ,• •• ....
..,,. _.....i.-- .5 J —.. . .. . .
ri 1
c: J
NORTH imorrn ELEVATION
VAI P 14,1kif
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 6 of 32
•
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
1Figure 5: Floor plans of the Lot 2 proposed residence
, -
, .. , ....
t 1
.• -
, •
I
i
•I
1, : ,
*,...
,el,•...1...•,,....f, ft,t:,..,.....ttcr.z....,! i.1 , -
, ! ,!.2=4.4... i,'.. •i
....."---'• -.7-.. '""""".....,1, i;
. i
! •
1 •.......
AM I
,....,........ .. 't,I
•, - - .
, , , ••
.4.........w.P.,..
....—
il
•--,..
;
. .9'• .-.- ,., ., ...—,.„...,./..,in i„.. .7.!:..:7_,.• ..>„.':•71,i;j1;,j_•=r.
7.;i / ..' ''... ..';2?-"T';" '';''..' ••• • ,..,•-• \..,
;!•-- .4. t,... - ',. l' : ,4?---••:.-:-:.;.....•• r. s'',..`' '
.. • qr,....) _..___ !,•,.:.•, ill .
t- .-1--1': • a -.'
.F.,.....::
um..., . 1 v.,..... •.,....... i:.,7.-1:::'.::....' ,...,y —,,. ,
.... ,..i..-
:: . ,-,..--- • . $:"2_,,:l.s. ] ''''
.. .. :I ...,...k:,.. :•,-,. ... ... .. ... ---t-,,,
:L'. . . •.). , ..----,--,a.27 ,-.7-- ' ..N./..L.. 2,.! , i ! 1
4,/, r.,„._, d, -....,.„..„-;?.;.-,..... *-,- • '.,:,....7......e.:._. : '',..i..1 , i . ,
•.,:-.4
•,' .. i`C•1
.. , .. . .. • . ..
Plikkriagl.6.
; .. ''.. .•r
13:1.. i.! !..1. ''''.•
2 ..-. ... ,
, 2
• ., 0..
- -:irr ,,: ,,,-- , . ‘ , (!...,
! , 41...g.—; , :a,. swot
• '''••'•.I i i ..& „_. 4,, MAIM \•.' . .6 V..!....1-.7—;--,t i\I i ,
- • .1. 1,17 , • \_, , --•••--•••••....,•-,3
. ' :.i2-'41"1 . ir •
1 ,,,,.., - i il.V...•...11.1.,•11r VW',
• .--4.• L.,-...•.---...1 I
7.
i I ,44.
Ita. ILL..........11 1,---'' •1).V.--VP'4 Via •
,..
i Niam....__..
111,14W--WIT
' .
1
1 ,... —•
. •
UPPER FLOOR PLAN
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 7 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Figure 6: Elevation plans of the Lot 2 proposed residence
•A .r,
. 1'1"1,''—Tr'i'i':-.4',t!:r'Irtilti r-1'111‘i,J.. •.I'.•.: H• 1 1' 1. kill •i ii iiiih•
... ,
, a I ..-• ii
.
-,,,...--•-•-7 — —7— —.— — 777'—•— •—.......... — —•——•—•
: A N 7
..•,•,
.,
---
.• 1 1 ,
..... , 1 ,
, ..‘.,
WEST MEAN]EL EVATKM
........—e
IIII
/ Ill-..: ' --".".
. ::"7-=V:'''/, .i.liiiii.iii.:-"` --:-......>
T— 'p' 1.. •.•
;7:1' • 4---1
lit 22 [
‘ , 4 1
I
, • ,----. ri_ \_..!,.............,..,
, ,.,..
...........,.......,r-- ,...„---
t?!;,T.t.lylIGIITi ELEVATION
n
i r-:,..•
ra ...' 54':':''F'?':":' A '''1,,_,.-'';',.'..,r-•'-'•';',.:,T•'77 c,1/4.%,.'••,'',7",,.;,,,,,, :,-., .-.:.. _.-- I
...,,,,47:.,....•,,I,..'• ,...;..."',t, ' ,.,...--e:,....7.:„I.:re,,,,-4,'',.....,,4-.....,,,,! . .., _.. -- ,_
4..............*..........
. - --F.,——77-- ,....',..-.;T:...;:.;:.t-.::::z.::::,:.;..-c.....':..z!—-7-._27-- —-"'--
' '..1-...',.A',:,..,'Y 4,'',...'',6'..,4',4 , ----r..44.
'''''--- I ''i I 1 1 1,...,,4...'N rf,:I,...t,.‘ ,1 1 I
1 erj.,—•••...... , ---- . -.. '
.:4***A -4A....._ ''./#\E• A 1,...,.....,,,,,O,
— ...-... ....--,
iii i .11
\ ,
1
.I, >. i . , i
1--,I ,4-, 4, ‘. 1 , ,........
...,,,... AV• ,.-. , , - ,,-., i =_.=.I_
=I ii rs. :ii:.-.11,0
, I..'111.:41111 0 7---.77—--: .0 r—J—,— :--- -1-— r.,
. _,...,_
,,,, „,. ..,.- 1
. .. .... . ...:. -,,-,_---,- :::.-L•-__ If L'L-.L: :--_-_-_-- I .t.... f,,.,
, „,,..4kw„.L. .., .... .__:_.-_...__....,.L__,__..._.._.,__. ..21......„,•;,* ,il i ii•
JT
- \Lt....:..
:• .......„.....jelijiiiiej,....-
-s,--
EMT W Olt ElEVATC11
....-
•,.. . ' •
.,. ' ..........
s,';‘rf:41*fii3,...K
i ck .. ..., ..
I:IN iti I
,„.
.......,..:21 ,: .-•---•---,j , z 4,
_
- - I 1
-
•
,
•...,, .
„.. I - -
1 -,:-.
k.,
: :".....-4-..._-„..., ..„.... — ,
1162,t '
... ....—,.....1.111.,
..:. 7....K,,...._
. ;WM ilEFT 1 EIEVATIN
t......,
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 8 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact"as indicted by the checklist on the
following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Air Quality
Resources
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Material Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population/Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the
project proponent.A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s)on the environment, but at least one effect
1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and 2)has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the
effect is a"potentially significant impact"or"potentially significant unless mitigated".An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that
earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed •roject, othing further is required.
Signature: , Date: 4-304
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 9 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Printed Name: Amy Seeraty,Associate Planner For: City of Rancho Palos Verdes
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Issuesand Supporting
Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than No
information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
act
p P
Mitigation
Incorporated ,
L AESTHETICS. Would the pro ectra act
a) Have a substantial adverse effect 1
on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources,including,but not
limited to,trees,rock outcroppings, 1
and historical buildings,within a
state scenic highways?
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the 1
•
site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare,which would 8
adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area? _
Comments:
a), b) Less than Significant Impact: The term "vista" is defined as a confined view in the City's General
Plan,which is usually directed toward a terminal or dominant element or feature. Each vista has, in simplest
terms, a viewing station, an object or objects to be seen, and an intermediate ground. PVDE, which is
identified as a vehicular corridor with views of San Pedro,the Long Beach and Los Angeles Harbors as well
as the Pacific Ocean,has several vistas directed primarily towards the east. As the scenic views are towards
the east and the subject site is located on the west side of PVDE,while the two proposed residences will be
visible from the street, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
Additionally, the proposed lot split and residential development of the two new lots would not substantially
damage scenic resources including but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historical buildings,within
a state scenic highway, as none of these items are located on the subject lot. Therefore, for the reasons
stated above,the proposed project will cause a less than significant impact to scenic vistas and resources.
c) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The current General Plan Land Use (<=1
d.u./acre) and Zoning Map (RS-2) designations only allow for a single residential dwelling. The immediate
neighborhood is surrounded with the same land use and zoning designation as the subject lot. Due to the
size of the lot, the existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map designations allow a lot split to
accommodate a residence on each of the proposed lots. The proposed residences are designed to be
notched into the existing slope, which lowers the building pad elevation,thereby minimizing the visual
appearance of the structures as viewed from neighboring properties. Additionally, because the subject lot is
located between 20 and 60 feet lower than the adjacent residences to the west and north,any potential visual
impact from the proposed development will be minimized. Regarding the adjacent residence to the south at
30411 PVDE, although the proposed roof ridge elevations of the structures on Lots 1 and 2 are 925' and
946.5', respectively, and the pad level of 30411 PVDE is at 915', the view impact to that property will be
minimal, as their view is primarily directed to the east and south-east and the proposed homes are situated
directly north and north-east of that residence. Moreover, the topography increases in elevation east of the
subject lot, and thus already blocks any views which would potentially be taken from 30411 PVDE.
Furthermore, the Planning Commission will make a determination that the proposed residences will be
compatible with the homes in the immediate neighborhood as they are within the range of sizes,lot coverage,
and property line setback distances, and have a similar architectural design to the other homes in the
neighborhood,which will avoid a substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 10 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues and Supporting ,Sources Potentially Less
Than . :: ` Less Than r No
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
im
pact with Impact
Mitigation
incorporated
and its surroundings. Also, in terms of short-term visual impacts, although construction vehicles, equipment
and materials will be visible from the street during construction,they will be onsite for a limited time and with
the recommended mitigation measure,screened with the City's required construction fencing,thus minimizing
the potential for substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings,and result in a less than significant impact.
AES-1: During the construction of the proposed project, the applicant shall ensure that all onsite vehicles,
equipment and materials are temporarily screened by fencing pursuant to the City's requirements as
described in Section 17.56.050(C)of the Development Code.
AES-2: The Planning Commission shall find that the two new residences comply with the Neighborhood
Compatibility Analysis under the provisions of Section 17.02.030.B (Neighborhood Compatibility) of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. Factors the Planning Commission shall consider in the City's
Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis include, but are not limited to, bulk and mass, architectural styles,open
space and setbacks amongst the 20 closest homes in the neighborhood.
AES-3: The Planning Commission shall find that the proposed residences conform to the RS-2 Zoning
District(Single-Family Residential)Development Standards in terms of maximum lot coverage of 40%.
AES-4: The Planning Commission shall find that the proposed building setbacks of the two new residences
comply with the following setbacks for the RS-Zoning District: Front=20'-0", Rear=20'-0", Interior Sides= 10'-
0".
d) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The project site is proposed to be improved with
two single-family residences with attached garages.The project plans depict the use of decorative lighting on
the exterior of the proposed residential structures,which is common for properties located within a residential
zoning district.The lighting for the two proposed structures will be required to comply with the Municipal Code
lighting restrictions per RPVDC§17.56.030 which regulate lighting intensity and direction.With respect to the
creation of a new source of glare, the use of glass on both structures is primarily limited to windows and
doors located on the first and second stories of the residences for ingress and egress purposes.The project
plans indicate that the two proposed residential structures are designed in a Mediterranean style, which
includes the use of stucco, stone accents, a concrete tile roof and decorative features. The design of the
residential structures does not include the use of large areas of glass,which reduces the likelihood of creating
a new source of glare. However, in order to ensure that light and glare impacts are reduced to less-than-
signification levels and do not create a new source of substantial light or glare,which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area, the following mitigation measures are recommended resulting in a less
than significant impact:
AES-5: The Planning Commission shall find that exterior illumination for the new residential structures
complies with the provisions of Section 17.56.030 (Outdoor Lighting for Residential Uses) of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code.
AES-6: Prior to the issuance of building permits, all residential lighting shall be fully shielded, and no outdoor
lighting shall be permitted where the light source is directed toward or results in direct illumination of a parcel
of property or properties other than that upon which such light source is physically located.
AES-7: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the specifications for the glass type, color, and reflectivity
shall be submitted for the review and approval by the Community Development Director.
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 11 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
-
suees-:and:.‘Supporting 'Sources :Potentially '
Less:Than Less i an : NO
information:Sources Significant Significant Significant impact
impact with : impact
Mitigation
1
nu
orated.
�:.�i= Ft�S� �R
'.
�A C
2II.�AGRICUL' U E.AND T
RESOURCES in:determiningwhether impacts.to agricultural resources are significant'environmental
_
effects'lead aencies:ma refer to:the California Agricultural'Land Evaluation and Site Assessment4Odel
an optional model to use to assassin m a
1997� ienare�dsb�y:'the�'California�►eptr of Conservation as p .g p.
on,a riculture;and.farmland.:In.';determinin :'whether impacts.acts:to forest: resources,Including ti berland,
.... .. i the California
,are.:sib.:.. ...:............;...:..:.. .p
Department'of Forest y,:and'Fire Protection regarding:the.state's'inventory of forest l and,includ ng:the
Forest::and. tan a: sses$mentPthe Forestt Lesc :Asssssment:pro act; arid furast carbo
n
....:....... ..:.
............
:yin t o st"Protocols:adopted`b °tl a`.���aliforn a:Airsources:Board
.:.measure. ant::�nethodoi : rovided. re
...... ............
.....::...
•
y
p
.r`o oc�.;
t
o ,
..'.:.:.....
....:.......
..::......:.
.......:...:....
a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique
Farmland,or Farmland of
Statewide Importance(Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the
California Resource Agency,to
non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use,or a Williamson
Act contract? 2
c) Conflict with existing zoning for,or
cause rezoning of forest land(as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)),timberland(as
defined by Public Resources Code 2
section 4526),or timberland zoned
Timberland Production(as defined •
by Government Code section
51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non- 2
forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment that,due to
their location or nature,could
result in conversion of Farmland, 1,2
to a non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 12 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
issues and:S ortin Sources PotentiallyLess Than . Less; Than No
Stippsorting
Information Sources Significant Significant 'Significant - impact
Impact with impactact
p � p
Mitigation
Incorporated
at
r
Comments:
a-e) No Impact: The existing land use and zoning designations for the subject site is residential. Thus, the
proposed project will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resource Agency,to non-agricultural use. Additionally, the subject site does not have any agricultural
use and the property is not subject to.a Williamson Act contract, thus the proposed project will not conflict with
existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract. The proposed project does not involve any
forest land,or timberland,and therefore is not in in conflict with the existing zoning for,or cause rezoning of forest
land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland(as defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))..
Also,because no forest land exists on the subject property,the proposed project will not result in the loss of forest
land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and does not involve other changes in the existing
environment that,due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland to a non-agricultural use.
In addition, the project site is zoned RS-2, which permits the growing of crops and/or fruits on lots one acre or
less for noncommercial purposes; however, as previously stated, no portion of the project vicinity is under a
Williamson Act contract.Therefore,there would be no impact to agriculture caused by the proposed project
. ... .... ..:..:...
QUALITY:
a�aa e� ,�i���ria..
....:. - . �la�a �he�significance�clrite�a.�establi�tted.:by� �� a.
II��..�I�' ''lilrl�ece.aha i �p .�:..: .
....:.:.::..
:to-make the following determinations.
tions.
mane rrtent�.:or.::�air�: oiluti't�n��control:�district:r�na be relied upon� �n
S,
Wou•.• itl�.t
project:°
a) Conflict with or obstruct the
implementation of the applicable 8
air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment
under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors
affecting a substantial number of
people?
Comments:
a)-e) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is located within a
five-county region (6,745 square miles) in southern California that is designated as the South Coast Air Basin
(SCAB). Air quality management for the SCAB is administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan
(SCAQMP)to address federal and state air quality standards. The adopted AQMP was prepared using planning
projections based on locally adopted general plan and growth policies and the proposed project would be subject
to SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP contains a comprehensive list of pollution
control strategies directed at reducing emissions and achieving ambient air quality standards. These strategies
are developed, in part, based on regional population, housing, and employment projections prepared by the
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 13 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
........ .:........
Issues.�and Su p ortirt Sources Potsnt PotentiallyLess Than Less Than: _Vo'
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact wfth Impact
Mitigation
incorporated
.or
wed
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Additionally, the air quality of the subject site is
expected to be substantially better than in most parts of SCAB region due to the more dominant influence of the
ocean and its wind patterns.The proposed project,which includes the subdivision of an existing residential lot into
two new parcels, in conjunction with the construction of two new residential structures on those parcels,would be
limited to the total amount of 3,536 cubic yards of grading on the subject site(1,719 cubic yards for Parcel No. 1
and 1,817 cubic yards for Parcel 2). As a result of proposed construction activities, limited short-term,
construction-related air quality impacts upon sensitive receptors would occur. However, due to the temporary
nature of the construction, the project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air
quality plan nor violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation. Additionally, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors), as the
proposed project involves only site preparation (grading) and construction of two single family residences.
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Section 15.18.050 requires that construction projects with a square footage
between 5,000 to 10,000 square feet are required to complete construction within a 24-month time period.
Additionally, mitigation measure N-2 in the "Noise" section of this document requires that during demolition,
construction and/or grading operations, trucks shall not queue and/or idle at the project site or in the adjoining
street rights-of-way before 7AM Monday through Friday and before 9AM on Saturday. Furthermore, although the
proposed project would be adjacent to other single-family residents, construction emissions are considered a
temporary nuisance that would end following the construction completion.Although there are short-term air quality
impacts as a result of the proposed construction,with the following mitigation measures,the proposed project will
have less than significant impacts that will not conflict or obstruct the implementation of an air quality plan,violate
any air quality standards,result in cumulatively considerable net increase in pollutants,expose sensitive receptors
to substantial concentrations,or create objectionable odors:
AQ-1: During construction, including grading,excavating, and land clearing, storage piles and unpaved disturbed
areas shall be continuously stabilized by being kept wet, treated with a chemical dust suppressant, or covered
when material is not being added to or removed from the pile.
AQ-2: During construction, including grading, excavating, and land clearing, sufficient water shall be applied to
areas disturbed to prevent emitting dust and to minimize visible emissions from crossing the boundary line.
AQ-3: During construction, including grading,excavating,and land clearing, construction vehicles leaving the site
shall be cleaned to prevent dust, silt,mud,and dirt from being released or tracked off site.
AQ-4: During construction, including grading, excavating, and land clearing, the applicant's contractor shall be
responsible for minimizing bulk material or other debris from being tracked onto the City's public roadways,and if
tracked,the applicant's contractor shall be responsible for cleaning up the impacted City's public roadways.
AQ-5: During construction, including grading, excavating, and land clearing, no trucks shall be allowed to
transport excavated material off-site unless the trucks are maintained such that no spillage can occur from holes
or other openings in cargo compartments, and loads are either: covered with tarps; wetted and loaded such that
the material does not touch the front, back, or sides of the cargo compartment at any point less than 6"from the
top and that no point of the load extends above the top of the cargo compartment.
AQ-6: Prior to issuance of a grading and/or building permit,a Haul Route Permit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department.
AQ-7: Prior to the issuance of grading permits,the applicant shall demonstrate to the Community Development
Director's satisfaction that dust generated by grading activities shall comply with the South Coast Air Quality
Management District Rule 403 and the City Municipal Code requirements that require regular watering for the
control of dust.
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 14 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.Z0N2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues and Su9
rain Sources Potentially. Less Than Less Than No
information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact`_ with Impact
Mitigation
or
incorp ated
AQ-8: During construction,including grading,excavating,and land clearing,all excavating and grading activities
shall cease when winds gusts(as instantaneous gusts)exceed 25 mph.To assure compliance with this measure,
grading activities are subject to periodic inspections by City staff.
AQ-9:During construction,including grading,excavating,and land Bearing,construction equipment shall be kept
in proper operating condition,including proper engine tuning and exhaust control systems.
1V BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the proje
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications,on any species
identified as a candidate,sensitive,
or special status species in local or 1,4
regional plans,policies,or
regulations,or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
US of Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, 1,4
policies,regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and
Game or US Department of Fish
and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect
on federally protected wetlands,as
defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act(including,but not 1,4
limited to,marsh,vernal pool,
coastal,etc.),through direct
removal,filling,hydrological
interruption,or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident 4
or migratory wildlife corridors,or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local polices or
ordinances protecting biological 1,4,8
resources,such as tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan
or Natural Community 4
Conservation Plan,or other
approved local,regional,or state
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 15 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30, 2016
Issues and:Supporting Sources Potentially Less Than LessThan' No
information Sources Significant Significant Significant ` Impact
impact with impact
. Mitigation
r
inu orpo ated
habitat conservation plan?
Comments:
a-f) Less Than Significant Impact: The project is located within a developed area of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes and the subject site is a vacant property which has periodically been cleared of brush per Los Angeles
County Fire Department regulations. Additionally,portions of the site have non-native trees or bare soil. The City
of Rancho Palos Verdes participates in the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP) which is a
state program adopted by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Department of Fish and
Wildlife Service that helps identify and provide for the area-wide protection of natural wildlife while allowing for
compatible and appropriate local uses. The proposed project and immediate area is not located in or adjacent to
the 2004 City Council-adopted NCCP habitat areas, and is not located in or adjacent to any existing or proposed
Significant Ecological Area(SEA).As such the project is unlikely to have an adverse effect or conflict with federal
protected wetlands, native wildlife nursey sites, biological resources such as habitat, sensitive natural
communities or protected species identified as candidates or as sensitive or special-status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Department of
Fish and Wildlife Services.Additionally,the project site is not located within any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,regulations,or by other resource agencies such as
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/ or the California
Department of Fish and wildlife,etc.Lastly,the City does not have a tree preservation ordinance or policy,and the
project site is not located within federally-protected wetlands(as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act)
and no special-status animals or habitats are known to exist on or directly adjacent to this property). Therefore,
per the above discussion,there would be no impacts to habitat,sensitive natural community,wetlands, protected
or protected species,as none exist on the subject property.
CULTURALRESOURCES: ould the project: '=
a) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a 1,7 ,I
historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an 1,7 sI
archaeological resource pursuant
to§15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or 1,7 sJ
site or unique geological feature?
d) Disturbed any human remains,
including those interred outside of 1,7
formal cemeteries?
Comments:
a-d) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: According to the City's Archeology Map, the project
site is not located in the proximity of a known pre-historic or historic archaeological site, and no historical,
archaeological, or paleontological resources are known to be on the project site. Additionally,the subject site is
not located in areas the General Plan identifies as a historical resource or an archaeological site. Nevertheless, it
is possible that subsurface cultural resources may exist on the project site and may potentially be disturbed during
grading operations. Therefore, in order to reduce the cultural resources impacts of the proposed project to less
than significant levels, so that no substantial adverse change to archaeological resources, paleontological or
geologic features, or the disturbance of buried human remains occurs, the following mitigation measure are
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 16 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues and Supporting Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a.
recommended:
CUL-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or building permit,the applicant shall consult with the South
Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) regarding any known archaeological sites on or within a half-mile
radius of the subject property. Said information shall be reviewed and accepted by the Community Development
Director.
CUL-2: If any archaeological sites are identified on or within a half-mile radius of the project site per Mitigation
Measure CUL-1, then prior to the commencement of grading, the applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist
and archaeologist to monitor grading and excavation. In the event undetected buried cultural resources are
encountered during grading and excavation, work shall be halted or diverted from the resource area and the
archeologist and/or paleontologist shall evaluate the remains and propose appropriate mitigation measures.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the pro'ect:
a) Expose people or structure to
potential substantial adverse
effects,including the risk of loss,
injury,or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault,as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or 6
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault?Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? 6
iii)Seismic-related ground failure, 6
including liquefaction?
iv)Landslides? 6
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geological unit or
soil that is unstable,or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project,and potentially result in on
or off-site landslide,lateral
spreading,subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil,as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code(1994), 18 sf
thus creating substantial risks to
life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal
systems,where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 17 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
... . .......
Supporting Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than NO
htsue���a�d.:S�u.p� 9
Information��Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
p P
lIIlitigation
r
Inco a
t
ed.
Comments:
a),c)Less than Significant Impact:The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act's main purpose is to prevent
the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act only
addresses the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards. According to
the State of California Department of Conservation website, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is not one of the
cities identified as being affected by Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones as of May 1, 1999, and therefore the
project will not expose people or structure to potential substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury
or death involving ground strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure or landslides. Additionally, the Seismic
Zone Map released in March 25, 1999 (San Pedro Quadrangle) does not identify the subject site within any
earthquake induced landslide and/or liquefaction zones, and thus the project should not cause instability and/or
should not result in lateral spreading or subsidence. Furthermore, the proposed project will require building
permits and thus will meet safety standards for earthquake, landslide and liquefaction. As such, the impact
caused by the proposed project should be less than significant.
b)Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated:The project would involve a total of 3,536yd3 of grading.
Specifically, the project is proposing 1,719 cubic yards of grading within Lot No. 1 of the project site, which
involves 1,348yd3 cut and 371yd3 cubic yards of fill. On Lot No. 2 of the project site, the applicant is proposing
1,817yd3 of grading, which includes 1,270yd3 of cut and 547yd3 of fill. Soil erosion during construction will be
controlled using conventional on-site methods. Further,prior to the issuance of Building Permits,the applicant will
be required to submit an Erosion Control Plan to the Building Official for approval. Additionally, the applicant is
required to provide measures for consistency with Best Management Practice measures through the City's
Building&Safety Division as required under mitigation measure HWQ-2.
GS-1: Prior to the issuance of building permits,the applicant shall be required to submit an Erosion Control Plan
to the Building Official for approval.
d) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: Based on a review of a preliminary geotechnical
investigation report proposed by the applicant and approved (in the planning stage) by the City Geologist, the
subject site is located on expansive soil. However, grading (cut and fill) will be required on the site in order to
construct the access driveway to both properties as well as to notch the structures into the slope. As such, the
proposed grading and residential construction will be subject to review and approval by the City Geologist and the
Building&Safety Division prior to commencing any construction.Therefore,with the incorporation of the following
mitigation measure,the proposed project would cause less than significant impact:
GS-2: Prior to issuance of any grading permit and/or building permits for the properties, a grading plan and
geotechnical report shall be prepared for review and approval by the Building Official and the City Geologist.
e)Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated:A septic system is proposed for each new lot, as there
are no sewer lines available along that portion of PVDE. However, with incorporation of the following mitigation
measure,the proposed project would cause less than significant impact:
GS-3: Prior to the issuance of any grading and/or building permits, the proposed septic system for each new
property shall be reviewed and approved by the Building&Safety Division.
VII GREENHOUSE Gas;EMISSIONS:::Would the:project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions,either directly or
indirectly,that may have a sJ
significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 18 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
issues:and...:Supporting Sources ::Potentially Less Than Less Than No
'Information=Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
incorporatedorat
ed
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
Comments:
a) Less than Significant Impact: The approval of the proposed lot split allows for the development of two new
residences on the subject site. Currently, there are no generally-accepted significance thresholds for assessing
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, an Air Quality Study (LSA Associates, 2010) shows that the City
generated 0.277Tg (teragrams) of carbon dioxide in 2007, while the State produces approximately 497Tg
annually. The study also indicates that if all the remaining vacant parcels in the City were to be developed
(including the subject property),an additional 0.0086Tg of carbon dioxide will be generated.The study concludes
that the additional carbon dioxide generated in a built-out scenario would not be significant since the total
emissions generated by the City will remain below the State and federal standards. Additionally, the proposed
residences will be required to be constructed to the most current energy efficiency standards of the current
Building Code(i.e.,Title 24). For these reasons,the GHG emissions associated with the proposed project would
have a less than significant impact on the environment.
b) Less than Significant Impact: California's major initiatives for reducing climate change or greenhouse gas
(GHG)emissions are outlined in Assembly Bill 32 (signed into law in 2006), a 2005 Executive Order and a 2004
Air Resources Board (ARB) regulation to reduce passenger-car GHG emissions. These efforts aim at reducing
GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (a reduction of approximately 30 percent) and then an 80-percent
reduction below 1990 levels by 2050. Currently, there are no adopted plans, policies or regulations for the
purpose of reducing GHG emissions for the development of the proposed project. However, as such plans,
policies and regulations are adopted in the future, and potentially codified in the Building Code; the construction
would be subject to any such requirements that may be codified when plans are submitted to the Building and
Safety Division for review. For this reason,the proposed project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation related to greenhouse gases. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant
impact.
w'
l h:.Oroect.
AL
.:�wau�1:-� a �;, - .
"fiEl�i S . . .
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through 13
the routine transport, use,or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and 13 �1
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,substances, 13
or waste within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site,which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites complied pursuant
to Government Code Section 1,2,8, 13
65962.5 and,as a result,would it
create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 19 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
....... ........................ ..:.... ......................
....................
ssues.andSupporting Sources ::Potentially Less Than Less Than o`
information Sources Significant Significant } . Significant Impact
Impact with
p
Impact
Mitigation
r r
Inco ated
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or,where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport 1,2,8
or public use airport,would the
project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the
project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip,would the project
result in a safety hazard for people 1,2,8
residing or working in the project
area?
g) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an 1,2, 17
adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss,injury,or
death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are 1,2,12 �l
adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
Comments:
a-d)Less Than Significant Impact:The proposed project will not create a hazardous condition to the project site
or other properties within the vicinity of the site as no hazardous materials are proposed to be transported, used
onsite or disposed of as part of this project.Additionally, the project does not propose the use of any hazardous
materials, and thus will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Additionally, the project site is not on the California Environmental Protection Agency's list (Cal/EPA) of
Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites. As such, there will be no risk of exposure to hazardous conditions or
materials as a result of the proposed lot split and two new single family residences, and therefore there would be
less than significant impacts caused by the proposed project.
e-f)No Impact:There are no airports located within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes or in close proximity of the
subject site.The closest airport is the Torrance Airport,which is approximately 7.5 miles north of the project site.
Additionally, although there is at least one heliport within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,there are none in the
vicinity of the project site.Therefore,there would be no impact caused by the proposed project.
g)Less Than Significant Impact:The subject site is surrounded by developed residential properties.The impact
caused by two additional dwellings as a result of the proposed lot split is not substantial enough to interfere with
any adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. Additionally, the proposed project is compatible with the
Joint Hazard Mitigation Plan(Plan)was prepared in response to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000(DMA 2000).
The purpose of the plan is to promote sound public policy designed to protect citizens, critical facilities,
infrastructure, private property, and the environment from natural hazards. Furthermore, the applicants are not
requesting to subdivide the property more than what the existing zoning allows for. Per the above discussion,the
proposed lot subdivision and associated construction will cause less than significant impacts to an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan,therefore, there would be less than significant impacts
caused by the proposed project.
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 20 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.Z0N2015-00187
June 30,2016
issues:and Supporting I Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than
Information Sources Significant Significant` Significant impact
impact with Impact
Mitigation
.
incorporated d
s
h) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed design and construction of the two new residential structures
and related site improvements will be reviewed by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (Fire Prevention
Division),as well as the City's Building&Safety Division to ensure the project's compliance with all applicable fire
protection and suppression requirements. Additionally, the proposed project is bounded by a public street to the
east and developed properties to the west,north and south. Since there are no wildlands in close proximity to the
subject site, the proposed project should not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving wildland fires. Therefore, there will be a less than significant impact caused by the proposed
project.
IX.::HYDROLOGY AND:::WATER QUALITY.:Would the:Project.
a) Violate any water quality standard 8
or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level 8
(e.g.,the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been
granted)??
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
areas,including through the
alteration of the course of a 10
stream or river,in a manner,
which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area
including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river,or 10 �l
substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater 14 �I
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade 20
water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year
flood hazard area,as mapped on 15
a federal Flood Hazard Boundary
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 21 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues and Supporting Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood
hazard area structures which 15 �1
would impede or redirect flood
flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving flooding,including 11 �1
flooding as a result of the failure
of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or 11 �1
mudflow?
Comments:
a) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The septic systems proposed on the two new lots will
be subject to review and approval by the Building & Safety Division to ensure that any wastewater produced by
the development is disposed of properly.Additionally, prior to commencing any grading or construction, Building&
Safety will review drainage plans to ensure that the proposed residential development complies all requirements
for stormwater discharges. The proposed new development will be also required to apply best management
practices (BMPs) for erosion, sedimentation and run-off control during construction activities to protect the water
quality. Additionally, post-construction treatment control BMPs would be applied to treat runoff from the future
buildings, including roof run-off. With the following mitigation measures in place, future development of the site
resulting from the proposed land use and zone change for the lot split would cause less than significant impacts
by not violating any water quality standard or waste discharge requirements:
HWQ-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading and/or building permit for new construction, the applicant shall submit
and obtain approval of a Drainage Plan by the City's Building & Safety Division and the City's Public Works
Director finding that stormwater runoff as a result from the development of the subject site is designed to flow and
utilize an on-site drainage system that directs runoff into the existing storm drainage system.
HWQ-2: Prior to the issuance of a grading and/or building permit, the applicant shall submit for review and
approval by the City's Building Official an Erosion Control Plan that shall include BMPs for erosion,sedimentation
and run-off control during construction activities to protect the water quality. Additionally,the Erosion Control Plan
shall include post-construction BMPs that apply to runoff from the future buildings,including roof run-off.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The water needs of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are served by the
California Water Service Company (CWSC), which operates within the regulations and standards of the Public
Utilities Commission. The sole function of CWSC is to supply the City with sufficient fire safety requirements and
adequate amounts of potable drinking water at a pressure consistent with accepted standards. The subject site
already allows for the development of one single dwelling unit and this proposed project consisting of a lot split
would allow for the development of two residences on each of the proposed lots. Individual property owners are
responsible to re-establish or obtain new water connections through CWSC. The potential reduction in
permeability of the site as a result would not substantially impact the aquifer volume or the local groundwater table
as 39.9% of Parcel 1 and 39.74% for Parcel 2 will be covered by an impervious surface. Therefore, there would
be less than significant impacts caused by the proposed project that would substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table.
c-f) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: There are no streams or rivers on or in close
proximity of the subject site.Currently, rainfall and runoff from surrounding developed properties flow into the
existing drainage system of catch basins located within the City's right-of-way on PVDE.As required by mitigation
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 22 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues and-Su rtin Sources :Potentially::. Less Than ,' Less Than No
...:.............
spa �
Information'Sources Significant Significant: Significant :.impact
Impact with Impact
P p
Mitigation
Incorporated
e
measure HWQ-1,the stormwater runoff as a result from the proposed development of the subject site would
utilize an on-site drainage system directed into the existing storm drainage system,subject to review and approval
of the Building&Safety Division and Public Works Department.Therefore,the increased volume of run-off
resulting from an additional residential dwelling as a result of the proposed project would not cause flooding or
exceed the capacity of the existing storm drain system,would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or areas which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site,increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site,create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff,and degrade water quality,and therefore results in less than significant impact
g,h)No Impact:The properties within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are exempted from Flood Hazard Maps
due to their topographic nature. This action was initiated and accomplished by the County of Los Angeles prior to
1984 and this project will not affect the exemption. Additionally,FEMAs FIRM map(September 26,2008)does
not identify the subject property to be within any mapped flood hazard area. Therefore,the proposed project
would have no impact to a 100-year flood hazard area,as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate map or other flood hazard delineation map or would place within a 100-year flood hazard area the
proposed structures which would impede or redirect flood flows,therefore resulting in no impact.
i)Less Than Significant Impact:There are no dams and levees in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Therefore, -
the proposed project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury,or death involving
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam,resulting in a less than significant impact.
j)Less Than Significant Impact:There are no lakes within the vicinity of the project site and therefore,there is
no potential exposure to seiche. Additionally,the subject site is not located within tsunami inundation areas,
according to the State of California's tsunami inundation map(March 1,2009). Furthermore,although the subject
site consists of slopes,it is not in an area that would be subject to mudflow. Therefore,the proposed project
would not result in inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow,resulting in a less than si9nificant impact.
IME
ANDPLANNING: Wouldh
-project::
a) Physically divide an established
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land
use plan,policy,or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over
the project(including, but not
limited to the general plan, 1,2,8
specific plan,local coastal
program,or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural 1,4 �I
community conservation plan?
Comments:
a-b)Less Than Significant Impact:The proposed project is located on an existing legal parcel bordered by
PVDE to the east and existing developed lots to the west,north and south.The General Plan Land Use and
Zoning designations for the property,like those of adjacent properties to the east,west,south and north of the
project site allows for residential development. The Zoning designation of RS-2 also allows for the subject site to
be subdivided into two separate lots. Additionally,the Planning Commission will review the proposed residential
developments in terms of size,architectural style,building materials,and structure setbacks to ensure
compatibility with the existing neighborhood character.Therefore,the proposed project would not divide an
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 23 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues end Supporting-rtin Sources - Potentially Less Than Leas Than No
p�
information:Sources : Significant Significant Significant impact
impact with : impact
Mitigation
eee
Incorporated
d
established community nor will it conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or regulation of the City.
c)Less Than Significant Impact:There are no sensitive species identified in the Habitat Conservation Plan
and/or Natural Community Conservation Plan(NCCP)that were found on the subject site. As such,the proposed
project would not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or the NCCP and thus result in a less than
significant impact.
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES.::Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of
a known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region
and the residents of the State?
b) Result in the loss of availability of
a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated 8
on a local general plan,specific
plan or other land use plan?
Comments:
a,b)No Impact:There are no known mineral resources found on the subject site,identified in the local General
Plan,Specific Plan,or other land use plan.Additionally,the property records for the subject property do not
indicate the presence of any mineral resource.Therefore,there is no impact caused by the proposed project that
would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the State or result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local General Plan,Specific Plan,or other land use plan.
XIIWould
a) Exposure of persons to or
generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in 1
the local general plan or noise
ordinance,or applicable standards
of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive 1,8
groundboume vibration or
9roundboume noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase
in ambient noise levels in the 1,8
project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or
periodic increase in ambient noise 1,8
levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or,where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport 1,2
or a public use airport,would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 24 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
..
Issues:end:-Supporting - Sources Potentially Less Than tes$Than- No
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip,would the project
expose people residing or working 1,2 4
in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
Comments:
a-d)Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed lot split will allow for the development
of one residential structure on each of the new lots.As such,there is expectation of temporary construction noise
related to a potential development on the site.Potential construction noise and vibration from construction
vehicles or tools could occur as close as 10'from the nearest residential buildings to the closest property lines of
the subject lot.The Municipal Code limits construction hours in the City from 7am to 6pm Monday through Friday
and between 9am and 5pm on Saturdays.No construction shall be permitted on Sunday or legal holidays,as
defined in the Municipal Code.Given the temporary nature of the construction noise with the following mitigation
measures,the short term noise impacts would be less than significant as it relates to exposing persons to noise
levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of
other agencies,to exposing persons to excessive groundboume vibration or groundbourne noise levels,and to
exposing persons to a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels within the project
vicinity::
N-1: Permitted hours and days for construction activity are 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday,9:00AM
to 5:00PM on Saturday, with no construction activity permitted on Sundays or on the legal holidays specified in
Section 17.96.920 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code.
N-2: During demolition, construction and/or grading operations, trucks shall not park, queue and/or idle at the
project site or in the adjoining street rights-of-way before 7AM Monday through Friday and before 9AM on
Saturday, in accordance with the permitted hours of construction stated in this condition. When feasible to do so,
the construction contractor shall provide staging areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas shall be located to maximize the distance between staging activities and
neighboring properties,subject to approval by the building official.
N-3:The project shall utilize construction equipment equipped with standard noise insulating features during
construction to reduce source noise levels.
N-4:All project construction equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no additional noise,due to
worn or improperly maintained parts is generated during construction.
e,f)No Impact:There are no airports located within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes or in close proximity of the
subject site.The closest airport is the Torrance Airport,which is approximately 7.5 miles north of the project site.
Additionally, although there is at least one heliport within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,there are none in the
vicinity of the project site. Therefore, there would be no impact caused by the proposed project. Therefore, the
proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise and as such,
no impact is caused by the proposed project.
XIII. P.OPU ►TION::AND HOUSING Would the:.`ro Oct
a) Induce substantial population
growth in an area,either directly
(for example,by proposing new
homes and businesses)or 4
indirectly(for example,through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? •
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 25 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
Issues and Supporting Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing,necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people,necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Comments:
a)Less Than Significant Impact:The subject site currently allows for the development of one single-family
dwelling.As a result of the proposed project,two single-family dwellings would be allowed,resulting in a net
increase of one household.The potential to induce substantial population growth may be indicated by the
introduction of a project in an undeveloped area or the extension of major infrastructure.As the proposed lot split
and two new residences will be located on an existing vacant lot surrounded by residentially-developed properties
and will primarily be served by existing infrastructure,it is not considered substantial growth. Therefore,the
population and housing impacts of the project are expected to be less than significant and will not induce
substantial growth in an area directly or indirectly.
b-c)No Impact:The subject site is a vacant lot.Therefore,the proposed project will not cause the displacement
of substantial numbers of people or require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere as a result. As
such,the proposed project will have no impact.
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES.
a)Would the project result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities,the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios,response times or
other performance objectives for
any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? 19
ii) Police protection? 19 �1
iii) Schools? 19
iv) Parks? 19
v) Other public facilities? 19
Comments:
a)Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project,which includes the subdivision of
a developed residential lot into two new parcels in conjunction with the construction of two new residential
structures on those parcels,will result in one additional household.The Southern California Association of
Governments(SCAG)identifies the 2014 average household size for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as 2.7.
This small increase is not expected to place significant additional demands upon public safety services(i.e.fire
and police)or other public services(i.e.parks,libraries,etc.).In addition,prior to permit issuance,the proposed
project would be subject to Fire Prevention Division review and the payment of school fees to the Palos Verdes
Peninsula School District(PVPUSD)would be required prior to construction. Furthermore,pursuant to the City's
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 26 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
PotentiallyLess Than Less::Than:.
ass�es::an��-and-Supporting Sources �No
Information:Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
impact with impact
act
P
a p
Mitigation
n
Incorporated
r ed`
Municipal Code Section 16.20.100,as a condition of approval for a parcel map,the applicant is required to
dedicate land,pay a fee in lieu thereof,or a combination of both for park and recreational purposes. Thus,with
the incorporation of the following mitigation measure,there would be less than significant impact caused by the
proposed project and that the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any public services:
PS-1: Prior to approval of the Final Parcel Map, the applicant shall dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu thereof, or a
combination of both, at the option of the City,for park and recreational purposes at the time and according to the
standards and formulas contained in Municipal Code Section 16.20.100.G.
RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use
of neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of
recreational facilities,which might
have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
Comments:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: Most of the surrounding properties are already developed and the subject lot
already allows for the development of one single-family dwelling unit.The proposed project would allow for an
additional dwelling,resulting in an increase of one household.The proposed project,which includes the
subdivision of a single lot into two separate lots,each developed with a dwelling unit,would allow for a net
increase of one household. An increase of one household is not significant and would not physically
deteriorate any neighborhood or regional parks resulting in a less than significant impact.
b) Less Than Significant Impact:With mitigation measure PS-1 requiring dedication of land or fee in lieu for
park and recreational purposes,the proposed project would cause less than significant impact to the use,
expansion or services of existing parks..
PORTATIONITRAFFIC Would the project
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance,or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation
system,taking into account all
modes of transportation including
mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of
the circulation system,including
but not limited to intersections,
streets,highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths,and
mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable 16 1
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 27 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZO N2015-00187
June 30,2016
issuesand :
Supporting Sources Potentially � .Less Than .LessThan Na
�. �:�up
information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with impact
p p
Mitigation
incorporated
congestion management program,
including,but not limited to level of
service standards and travel
demand measures,or other
standards established by the
county congestion management
agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic
patterns,including either an
increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards
due to a design feature(e.g.sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses(e.g.farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies,
plans,or programs regarding
public transit,bicycle,or
pedestrian facilities,or otherwise
decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
Comments:
a,f) Less Than Significant Impact:The land use and zoning designation of the subject site already allows for
residential development and has access via Palos Verdes Drive East,which is identified in the City's General Plan
as an arterial street. Additionally,the City's Public Works Department will review and finalize curb cuts and other
right-of-way improvements prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. As such,there would be less than
significant impacts to the circulation systems in relation to mass transit which would conflict with adopted policies,
plans,or programs supporting alternative transportation.
b)Less Than Significant Impact:According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation(6th
edition),the trip generation rate for an additional residential lot is nominal and not substantial enough to cause
adverse impacts to the level of service standard for designated roads or highways.Since the property can already
be developed with a single-family residence,an additional dwelling unit as a result of the proposed project would
cause a less than significant impact.
c)No Impact:The City of Rancho Palos Verdes does not border or is in immediate close proximity of any airports
to cause any impacts to the air traffic due to the proposed project.Therefore,there would be no impact caused by
the proposed project.
d)Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The City's Public Works Department has completed a
preliminary review of the proposed new driveway access and has no concerns other than requiring maintenance
of vegetation adjacent to the driveway approach. However,a formal encroachment permit from the Public Works
Department will be required prior to construction of the new driveway. Additionally,the proposed development will
comply with the adopted Municipal Code and Uniform Building Code to ensure no adverse impacts.With said
requirements incorporated as a mitigation measure,there would be less than significant impact caused by the
proposed project.
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 28 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30, 2016
Issues and Supporting Sources Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
illlii
too
t a n
Incorporated
T-1: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits,the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from
the Director of Public Works for any work or improvements in the public right of way, such as curb cuts,
dumpsters,temporary improvements and/or permanent improvements.
e) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: Fire Department review and approval will be required
prior to grading and/or building permit issuance to ensure adequate emergency access. With said requirement
incorporated as a mitigation measure,there would be less than significant impact caused by the proposed project.
T-2: Prior to a grading and/or building permit issuance, Fire Department review will be required to ensure
adequate emergency access.
XVII :UTILITIES.AND SERVICE.SYSTEMS.'Would.#he:project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
b) Require or result in the
construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities,the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the
construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities,the construction
of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and
resources,or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal,state,and
local statutes and regulations sI
related to solid waste?
Comments:
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 29 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
issues and SupportingSources Potentially Less Less Than 'No
information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact aCt with Impact
Mitigation
ion
9
incorporated
rated
a-c) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject site already allows for the development of one single-family
residence. While a net increase one additional onsite septic system as a result of an additional dwelling unit will
generate an increase in waste water, there would be a less-than-significant impact as a result of the proposed
project because wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board would
not be exceeded,the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities
would not be warranted, and the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities would not be warranted.
d-e) Less Than Significant Impact: California Water Service Company(Cal Water) provides the existing City's
water service with no need for expanded entitlements. Given that the proposed project will result in a net increase
of one household, the increase in demand for water attributable to this project is expected to be minimal and of
adequate capacity compared to the amount of water used in the Cal Water area. As such, the water supply
impacts of the proposed project are expected to be less than significant.
f-g)Less Than Significant Impact:As previously stated,an onsite septic system is included in the plans for
each new lot,so most of the wastewater will be processed on-site. Additionally,the subject lots will not be served
directly by a landfill. Additionally,for the development of the subject site,the property owner will be required to
comply with federal,state,and local statues and regulations related to solid waste. Also,as previously stated in
Mitigation Measure HWQ-3,prior to the issuance of any grading and/or building permits,drainage plans shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Building&Safety Division and the Public Works Department for
stormwater discharges.
XVIIL..:MANDATORY:FINDINGS:OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the
potential to degrade the quality of
the environment,substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species,cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels,threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community,reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of the past projects,the
effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c) Does the project have
environmental effects, which will
cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings,either directly or
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 30 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZO N2015-00187
June 30, 2016
Issuesand Supporting- Sources :Potentially Less Than Less Than No
.. ....... ........:.... ...
Information,Sources Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact
:....... ... .
impact : with p c
Mitigation
r
lnco r ted
o a
P
indirectly? I I j I
Comments:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject site does not contain and is not located within close proximity to
areas with protected habitat or species. Therefore, the proposed project will not degrade the quality of the
environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major
periods of California history.
b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project involves a request to
subdivide an existing lot into two separate parcels for the development of one single-family dwelling unit on each
lot, which will result in a net increase of one new residence. While the cumulative effects of near-simultaneous
development of up to two new homes may have significant adverse effects, with the imposition of the
recommended mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration,these potential
cumulative impacts will be reduced to less-than-significant levels. The recommended mitigation measures are
listed in the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the project.
c)Less Than Significant Impact:There would be no substantial direct or indirect effects on human beings as no
aspect of the proposed project has significant impacts on either the environment or human beings.
...:...........
:. S 119.
::.`EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more
effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this
case a discussion should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Comments: None
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Comments: None
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures,which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
address site-specific conditions of the project.
Comments: None
2o. SOUICIE REFERENCES
1 City of Rancho Palos Verdes,Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan,and associated Environmental Impact
Report. Rancho Palos Verdes,California as amended through August 2001
2 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Zoning Map
3 City of Rancho Palos Verdes,Coastal Specific Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report,
Rancho Palos Verdes,California:December 1978
4 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Communities Conservation Plan
5 South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA AIR Quality Handbook. Diamond Bar, California:
November 1993.
6 The Seismic Zone Map(3/25/99), Department of Conservation of the State of California,Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone(5/1/99)
7 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Archeology Map
8 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 31 of 32
Environmental Checklist
Case No.ZON2015-00187
June 30,2016
9 State Interim Population Projections by Age and Sex:2004-2030, U.S.Census Bureau
10 U.S.Geological Survey Map
11 Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning(Torrance&San Pedro Quadrangle:March 1,2009)
12 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map(CAL FIRE)
13 California Environmental Protection Agency's list(Cal/EPA)of Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites
14 City of Rancho Palos Verdes,GIS Mapping
15 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map effective September 26,2008
16 Transportation Engineers Trip Generation(6th edition)
17 2014 Joint Mitigation Hazards Plan
18 Applicant's preliminary geotechnical investigation report
19 Southern California Association of Governments-5th Cycle RHNA Final Allocation Plan,1/1/2014-
10/1/2021,retrieved from the SCAG website on June 10,2016.
01203.0005/302184.1 Page 32 of 32
Exhibit "B"
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Project: Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 73817, Grading Permit and Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Planning Case Nos. SU62015-00001, ZON2015-00187 &
ZON2016-00314)
Location: 30389 Palos Verdes Drive East(APN 7566-002-018)
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Applicant: Douglas Maupin (Maupin Development, Inc.)
Landowner: Douglas Maupin (Maupin Development, Inc.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction 2
Purpose 2
Environmental Procedures. 2
Mitigation Monitoring Program Requirements 2
II. Management of the Mitigation Monitoring Program 3
Roles and Responsibilities 3
Mitigation and Monitoring Program Procedures 3
Mitigation Monitoring Operations 3
III. Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist 5
IV. Mitigation Monitoring Summary Table 6
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B - Page 1
Resolution No. 2016-
I. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) is to allow the following project at 30389 Palos Verdes Drive East
(APN 7566-002-018), located on the west side of Palos Verdes Drive East, in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes:
The proposed project involves a request to subdivide an existing vacant 43,610ft2 lot at 30389
Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE) (APN: 7566-002-018) into two separate parcels for the
development of one single-family dwelling unit on each lot. As proposed, Parcel No. 1 will be
21,682.72ft2 in area and will be improved with a 5,390ft2 two-story residence with 1,719 cubic
yards of grading consisting of 1,348yd3 cut and 371yd3 cubic yards of fill. Parcel No. 2 will be
21,925.86ft2 in area and will be improved with a 7,616ft2 three-story residence with 1,817yd3 of
grading consisting of 1,270yd3 of cut and 547yd3 of fill.
The MMP responds to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, which requires a lead or responsible
agency that approves or carries out a project where a Mitigated Negative Declaration has identified significant
environmental effects, to adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for adopted or required changes to mitigate
or avoid significant environmental effects." The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is acting as lead agency for the
project.
An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared to address the potential environmental impacts of
the project. Where appropriate, this environmental document recommended mitigation measures to mitigate or
avoid impacts identified. Consistent with Section 21080 (2)(c) of the Public Resources Code, a mitigation
reporting or monitoring program is required to ensure that the adopted mitigation measures under the jurisdiction
of the City are implemented. The City will adopt this MMP when adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
This MMP has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as
amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA
(CEQA Guidelines), as amended (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.). This MMP complies
with the rules, regulations, and procedures adopted by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for implementation of
CEQA.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code states: "When making the findings required by subdivision (a)
of Section 21081 or when adopting a negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (c)of Section
21081, the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it
has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project
implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of
an agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so
requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program."
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 2
Resolution No. 2016-
II. MANAGEMENT OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The MMP for the project will be in place through all phases of the project including final design, pre-grading,
construction, and operation. The City will have the primary enforcement role for the mitigation measures.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM PROCEDURES
The mitigation monitoring procedures for this MMP consists of, filing requirements, and compliance verification.
The Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and procedures for its use are outlined below.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist
The MMP Checklist provides a comprehensive list of the required mitigation measures. In addition,the Mitigation
Monitoring Checklist includes: the implementing action when the mitigation measure will occur; the method of
verification of compliance; the timing of verification; the department or agency responsible for implementing the
mitigation measures; and compliance verification. Section III provides the MMP Checklist.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Files
Files shall be established to document and retain the records of this MMP. The files shall be established,
organized, and retained by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes department of Community Development
Compliance Verification
The MMP Checklist shall be signed when compliance of the mitigation measure is met according to the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes Community Development Director. The compliance verification section of the MMP
Checklist shall be signed, for mitigation measures requiring ongoing monitoring, and when the monitoring of a
mitigation measure is completed.
MITIGATION MONITORING OPERATIONS
The following steps shall be followed for implementation, monitoring, and verification of each mitigation measure:
1. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Community Development Director shall designate a party responsible
for monitoring of the mitigation measures.
2. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Community Development Director shall provide to the party
responsible for the monitoring of a given mitigation measure, a copy of the MMP Checklist indicating the
mitigation measures for which the person is responsible and other pertinent information.
3. The party responsible for monitoring shall then verify compliance and sign the Compliance Verification
column of the MMP Checklist for the appropriate mitigation measures.
Mitigation measures shall be implemented as specified by the MMP Checklist. During any project phase,
unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The City of
Rancho Palos Verdes, Community Development Director with advice from Staff or another City department, is
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B - Page 3
Resolution No. 2016-
responsible for recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if needed. If mitigation measures are
refined, the Community Development Director would document the change and shall notify the appropriate
design, construction, or operations personnel about refined requirements.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 4
Resolution No. 2016-
III. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CHECKLIST
INTRODUCTION
This section provides the MMP Checklist for the project as approved by the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes on July 26, 2016. Mitigation measures are listed in the order in which they appear in the
Initial Study.
* Types of measures are project design, construction, operational, or cumulative.
* Time of Implementation indicates when the measure is to be implemented.
* Responsible Entity indicates who is responsible for implementation.
* Compliance Verification provides space for future reference and notation that compliance has
been monitored, verified, and is consistent with these mitigation measures.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 5
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
1. AESTHETICS
AES-1: During the construction of the
proposed project, the applicant shall ensure
that all onsite vehicles, equipment and
Property Owner/ Community
materials are temporarily screened by fencing Construction Durin construction p y Development
pursuant to the City's requirements as g applicant.
y Department
described in Section 17.56.050(C) of the
Development Code.
AES-2: The Planning Commission shall find
that the two new residences comply with the
Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis under
the provisions of Section 17.02.030.B
(Neighborhood Compatibility) of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code. Factors the Prior to Building &SafetyCommunity Community
PlanningCommission shall consider in the Planning o Development Development
Review permit issuance
City's Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis Department Department
include, but are not limited to, bulk and mass,
architectural styles, open space and setbacks
amongst the 20 closest homes in the
neighborhood.
AES-3: The Planning Commission shall find
that the proposed residences conform to the
Community Community Prior to Building &Safety Zoning District (Single-Family Development Development t
Reviewermit issuance
Residential) Development Standards in terms p Department Department
of maximum lot coverage of 40%.
AES-4: The Planning Commission shall find
that the proposed building setbacks of the two Community Community
new residences comply with the following Planning Prior to Building & Safety Development Developmentment
setbacks for the RS-Zoning District: Front= Review permit issuance
Department Department
20'-O", Rear= 20'-0", Interior Sides= 10'-0".
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 6
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
AES-5: The Planning Commission shall find
that exterior illumination for the new
residential structures complies with the PlanningPrior to Building & SafetyCommunity Community
provisions of Section 17.56.030 (Outdoor Development Development
Review permit issuanceLighting for Residential Uses) of the Rancho Department Department
Palos Verdes Municipal Code.
AES-6: Prior to the issuance of building
permits, all residential lighting shall be fully
shielded, and no outdoor lighting shall be
permitted where the light source is directed Community
toward or results in direct illumination of a Planning Prior to Building & Safety Property Owner/ Development
Review permit issuance applicant. p
parcel of property or properties other than that Department
upon which such light source is physically
located.
AES-7: Prior to the issuance of building
permits, the specifications for the glass type, Community
color, and reflectivity shall be submitted for the Planning Prior to Building & Safety Property Owner/
review and approval bythe CommunityReviewpermit issuance applicant.
Development
pp Department
Development Director.
2.AIR QUALITY
AQ-1: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, storage piles
and unpaved disturbed areas shall be
Communitycontinuous)y stabilized by being kept wet Construction Property Owner/
g Development t
treated with a chemical dust suppressant, or
applicant
Department
covered when material is not being added to p
or removed from the pile.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 7
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
AQ-2: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, sufficient water
shall be applied to areas disturbed to prevent Property Owner/ Community
pp Construction During construction p y Development
emitting dust and to minimize visible emissions applicant
Department
from crossing the boundary line. p
AQ-3: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, construction Communit
vehicles leaving the site shall be cleaned to Property Owner/ y
dust, silt, mud, and dirt from bein Construction During construction applicant
Development
preventgDepartment
released or tracked off site.
AQ-4: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, the applicant's
contractor shall be responsible for minimizing
bulk material or other debris from being Community
tracked onto the City'spublic roadways, and if Construction Duringconstruction Property Owner/ Development
y y ' applicant p
tracked, the applicant's contractor shall be Department
responsible for cleaning up the impacted City's
public roadways.
AQ-5: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, no trucks shall
be allowed to transport excavated material off-
site unless the trucks are maintained such that
no spillage can occur from holes or other
Communityopenings in cargo compartments, and loadsConstruction Property Owner/
During constructionDevelopment
are either: covered with tarps; wetted and applicant
Department
loaded such that the material does not touch p
the front, back, or sides of the cargo
compartment at any point less than 6"from the
top and that no point of the load extends above
the top of the cargo compartment.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 8
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
AQ-6: Prior to issuance of a grading and/or
Community
permit, a Haul Route Permit shall be Prior to Building &Safety Property Owner/
Plan Check
Development
obtained from the Public Works Department. permit issuance applicant.
Department
AQ-7: Prior to the issuance of grading permits,
the applicant shall demonstrate to the
Community Development Director's
Communitysatisfaction that dust generated by grading Prior to Building & Safety Property Owner/
Plan Check
Development
activities shall comply with the South Coast Air permit issuance applicant.
Department
Quality Management District Rule 403 and the P
City Municipal Code requirements that require
regular watering for the control of dust.
AQ-8: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, all excavating
and grading activities shall cease when winds Property Owner/ Community
P y
gusts (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 Construction During construction Development
mph.To assure compliance with this measure, applicant
P Department
grading activities are subject to periodic
inspections by City staff.
AQ-9: During construction, including grading,
excavating, and land clearing, construction Property Owner/ Community
P y
equipment shall be kept in proper operating Construction During construction Development
applicant
condition, including proper engine tuningand Department
exhaust control systems.
3. CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading
permit and/or building permit, the applicant
shall consult with the South Central Coastal
Community Center (SCCIC) regarding any Prior to Building & Safety Property Owner/
Plan Check
Development
known archaeological sites on or within a half- permit issuance applicant. P
mile radius of the subject property. Said Department
P
information shall be reviewed and accepted by
the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 9
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
CUL-2: If any archaeological sites are
identified on or within a half-mile radius of the
project site per Mitigation Measure CUL-1,
then prior to the commencement of grading, •
the applicant shall retain a qualified
paleontologist and archaeologist to monitor Property Owner/ Community
p Y
grading and excavation. In the event Construction Prior to and during grading Development
undetected buried cultural resources are applicant. p
De artment
encountered during grading and excavation,
work shall be halted or diverted from the
resource area and the archeologist and/or
paleontologist shall evaluate the remains and
propose appropriate mitigation measures.
4. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GS-1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, Community
the applicant shall be required to submit an Prior to Building &Safety Property Owner/
Erosion Control Plan to the BuildingOfficial for Plan Check permit issuance applicant
Development
Department
approval.
GS-2: Prior to issuance of any grading permit
and/or building permits for the properties, a Prior to Building &SafetyProperty Owner/ Community
grading plan and geotechnical report shall be Plan Check p Y Development
reared for review and approval bythe permit issuance applicant
prepared Pp Department
Building Official and the City Geologist.
GS-3: Prior to the issuance of any grading
and/or building permits, the proposed septic Prior to Building &SafetyProperty Owner/ Community
system for each new property shall be Plan Check p Y Development
reviewed and approved bythe Building & permit issuance applicant Department
pp p
Safety Division.
5. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
HWQ-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading Community
and/or buildingpermit for new construction, Plan Check Prior to Building &Safety Property Owner/ Development
permit issuance applicant. p
the applicant shall submit and obtain approval Department
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 10
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
of a Drainage Plan by the City's Building &
Safety Division and the City's Public Works
Director finding that stormwater runoff as a
result from the development of the subject site
is designed to flow and utilize an on-site
drainage system that directs runoff into the
existing storm drainage system.
HWQ-2: Prior to the issuance of a grading
and/or building permit, the applicant shall
submit for review and approval by the City's
Building Official an Erosion Control Plan that
shall include BMPs for erosion, sedimentation Prior to Building & SafetyProperty Owner/ Community
p y
and run-off control during construction Plan Check Development
permit issuance applicant.
activities to protect the water quality. Department
Additionally, the Erosion Control Plan shall
include post-construction BMPs that apply to
runoff from the future buildings, including roof
run-off.
6. NOISE
N-1: Permitted hours and days for construction
activity are 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday
through Friday, 9:00AM to 5:00PM on
Saturday, with no construction activityProperty Owner/ Community
py Construction During construction Development
permitted on Sundays or on the legal holidays applicant.
Department
specified in Section 17.96.920 of the Rancho p
Palos Verdes Development Code.
N-2: During demolition, construction and/or
grading operations, trucks shall not park,
queue and/or idle at the project site or in the
Community
adjoining street rights-of-way before 7AMConstruction Property Owner/
Development
Monday through Friday and before 9AM on During construction applicant.
Department
Saturday, in accordance with the permitted p
hours of construction stated in this condition.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B - Page 11
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
When feasible to do so, the construction
contractor shall provide staging areas on-site
to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas shall be
located to maximize the distance between
staging activities and neighboring properties,
subject to approval by the building official.
N-3: The project shall utilize construction
equipment equipped with standard noise Duringconstruction Property Owner/ Community
insulating features during construction to Construction p y Development
reduce source noise levels. applicant. p
De artment
N-4: All project construction equipment shall
be properly maintained to assure that no
Property Community
additional noise, due to worn or improperlyConstruction During construction Owner/
Development
maintained parts is generated during applicant.
Department
construction. p
7. PUBLIC SERVICES
PS-1: Prior to approval of the Final Parcel
Map, the applicant shall dedicate land, pay a
fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, at Community
the option of the City, for park and recreational Planning Prior to approval of Final Property Owner/
at the time and accordingto the Review Parcel Mapapplicant.
Development
purposes Department
standards and formulas contained in Municipal
Code Section 16.20.100.G.
8.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
T-1: Prior to issuance of any grading or
building permits, the applicant shall obtain an
encroachmentpermit from the Director of Prior to Building & SafetyProperty Owner/ Community
Plan Check p y Development
Public Works for any work or improvements in permit issuance applicant.
Department
the public right of way, such as curb cuts, p
dumpsters, temporary improvements and/or
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 12
Resolution No. 2016-
MITIGATION MEASURES TYPE TIME OF RESPONSIBLE COMPLIANCE
IMPLEMENTATION ENTITY VERIFICATION
.
permanent improvements.
T-2: Prior to a grading and/or building permit
Community Fire Department review will bePlan Check Prior to Building &Safety Property Owner/
Development
required to ensure adequate emergency permit issuance applicant
Department
access. p
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit B- Page 13
Resolution No. 2016-