HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 2006-52A.
G�
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF
'THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2005111118) AND
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM AND ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT AND A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE SOUTH POINTE WEST
SPECIFIC PLAN AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 63623 FOR
A SITE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 34.52 ACRES GENERALLY
LOCATED SOUTH OF LARKSTONE DRIVE, EAST OF MORNING SUN
AVENUE, AND WEST OF BREA CANYON ROAD (ASSESSORS PARCEL
NUMBERS 8765-005-01, 8765-005-02, 8765-005-03, 8765-005-07, AND
PORTIONS OF 8765-005-905,8763-026-907, AND 8763-026-901)
RECITALS
The applicant, South Pointe West, LLC, has filed an application for
certification of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2005111118)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the South Pointe West Specific Plan
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 63623, as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Environmental Impact
Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be referred to as the
"Application."
2. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 518 property owners of
record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. Three public places
within the City of Diamond Bar were posted with the public hearing notices
and a display board was posted at the project site. Notification of the public
hearing for this project was properly advertised in the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers.
3. On November 14 and continued to November 28, 2006, the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly
noticed public hearing on the Application.
RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-52
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in
this Resolution required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR
(SCH No. 2005111118) has been prepared according to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated
hereunder. The 45 -day public review period for the EIR began August 25,
2006 and ended October 9, 2006. Furthermore, the Planning Commission
has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Application.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that,
having considered the record as a whole, including the findings set forth
below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and
conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein
will have the potential of an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat
upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this
Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects
contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning
Commission hereby finds and determines that changes and alterations have
been required in or incorporated into and conditioned upon the project
specified in the application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse
environmental impacts identified in Environmental Impact Report
(SCH No. 2005111118) except as to those effects which are identified and
made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this
Planning Commission recommends to City Council and finds are clearly
outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits or the proposed
project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council certify the
EIR complete and adequate; and adopt the Findings of Facts, Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program
attached herein as Exhibits "A" and hereby incorporated by reference.
The Planning Commission shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: South Pointe
West, LLC, JCC Homes, 2632 W. 237th Street, Suite 201, Torrance, CA
90505.
2
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-52
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2006, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY: /?
Kwang Ho Lee, Acting'Chairman
I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 28th day of November 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Along,Wcretar)
3
AC/Lee; Nolan, Wei
None
VC/Lee; Chair/Nelson
None
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-52
Exhibit A
EIR
g
Facts of
Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS 949-837-3935 P.1
DRAFT
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - SOUTH POINTE WEST SPECFIC PLAN
AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 063623, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 200511.1118
Section 21051 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code
Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, Title 14, Chapter 3, California Public Resources Code
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The following statement of facts and findings (Findings) has been prepared by the City of
Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines) for the "South Pointe West Specific Plan"
(SPWSP) project and for any and all discretionary actions reasonably associated therewith. For
planning purposes, the' City andfor other responsible agencies have assigned a number of
caselfile numbers to certain actions novo contemplated by the City. Those case/file numbers
include, but are not limited to: (1) General Plan Amendment No. 2005-01; (2) Zone Change No.
2006-03; (3) Development Agreement No. 2005-01; (4) Specific Plan No. 2005-01;'(5) Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 053623; (6) Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-05; (7) Development
Review No. 2005-26; (7) Tree Permit No. 2005-06; and (8) Environmental Impact Report No.
2005-01 and State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2005111118.
Reference to the SPWSP herein is intended to be inclusive of each of the above referenced
discretionary actions and such additional discretionary and ministerial actions as may be
required for or associated with the construction, habitation, occupancy, use, and maintenance of
the SPWSP and the residential, recreational, and Infrastructure -related land uses proposed
Within the geographic area examined in the FEIR, whether of not included within the geographic
area encompassed by the SPWSP or extending beyond the boundaries of that planning area.
This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the
City Council prior to determining whether to certify the "Final Environmental Impact Report -
South Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar,
California, State Clearinghouse No. 2005111118" (FEIR), which is inclusive of, but not
necessarily limited to, the "Draft Environmental Impact Report — South Pointe West Specific
Plan, Vesting. Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State Clearinghouse
No. 2005111118' and the `Technical Appendix - Draft Environmental Impact Report — South
Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, Califomia,
State Clearinghouse No. 2-005111118" (DEIR), and the "Response to Comments on the Draft
Environmental Impact Report — South Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State Clearinghouse No. 20051111180 (RTC), and to
approve or conditionally approve the SPWSP.
The State CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project
for which an environmental impact report (EIR) has been completed which identifies one or
more significant environmental effects on the environment that would occur if the proposed
Nov 14 2006 13:01PM EIS 949-B37-3935 P.2
project is approved or carried out unless the public agency
snakes one or more written findings
of the
for each of those signwhich shcant all
State: CEQA Guidelines be supported by substantial ev den a issible Findings specified in nethe oreco d9 include:
.
or
rporated into, the
ect
at avoid
(1) Changes or allessen hevs'ignifica tenvi environmental effects, as identified the f
or substantially
final EIIR.
[This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (1)"]
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
making
public agencyaondhnot theagenca ae can and should been
be adopted by such other agency.
adopted by c
[This finding shall be referred to as. "Finding (2)"j
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained, workers,
make infeasible the. mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.
[This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (3)]
With respect to those significant effects which are subject to Finding (1) above, the agency shall
also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in
the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects.
With respect to those significant effects which are subject to Finding. (2) above, the findings shall
not be made if the agency making the findings has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency
ith respect to those
to deal- with identified feasible mitigation measures or the findings shall describe the specific
significant effects which are subject to Finding (3) above,
reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives.
In accordance with Section 15091 of the otentialtate ClEQsiAnGcantlenvironmenta effectCouncil
identified in
following findings for each .significant or potentially 9
the FEIR. Those impacts are categorized under the corresponding topical headings presented
in the FEIR. Reference to mitigation measure numbers herein are as presented in the FEIR and
may differ from those numbers or notations that may be subsequently assigned should the City
Council elect to approve or conditionally approve the SPWSP.
A. number of significant environmental effects are identified In the FEIR which cannot be avoided
or substantially lessened. In recognition of the continuing existence of significant unavoidable
adverse environmental - effects, a statement of overriding considerations, supported by
substantial evidence in the record, is, therefore, required in order for the Lead Agency to
approve the SPWSP. The statement of overriding considerations for the SPWSP is presented
in Section 8.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations) herein.
11.2 Record of Proceedings
F -or purposes of CEQA and these Findings, at a minimum, the record of proceedings for. the
SPWSP consists of the follovAng documents and other evidence:
(1) Initial Study," including all documents expressly cited therein; of Availability',
(2) "Notice of Preparation" (NOP), "Notice of Completion" (NOC), "Notice
(NOA), and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed
project;
(3) The "Draft Environmental Impact Report —South Pointe West Specific Pian, Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State Clearinghouse No.
2005111118,° including all documents incorporated by reference therein and all written
2
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.3
comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during the public review
period established by the NOP;
(4) "Technical Appendix - Draft Environmental impact Report — South Pointe West Specific
Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.053623, Diamond Bar, California, State
Clearinghouse No. 2005111118";
(5) Other site-specific andfor project -specific technical studies and exhibits not included in
the FOR but referenced therein;
(6) "Response to Comments on the [Graft Erivironmental Impact Report — South Pointe West
Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623; Diamond Bar, California, State
Clearinghouse No. 2005111118," including all written comments submitted by public
agencies and other stakeholders during the public review period established by the
NQC;
(7) All written and verbal publlc testimony presented during noticed public hearings for the
proposed project at.which public testimony was taken;
(8) "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program," as presented in the FEIR and as
subsequently adopted by the City Council;
(9) Matters of common knowledge to the City including, but not limited to, federal, State, and
local laws, rule, regulations, and. standards;
(10) All documents expressly cited in these Findings; and
(11) such other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings under Section
21167.6(e) of CEQA.
1.3 Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record for the City Council's
action related to the SPWSP are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development
Department, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178. The Community
Development Director is the custodian of the administrative record for the project. Copies of the
documents constituting the record of proceedings are and at all relevant times, during the
regular business hours of the City, have been and will be available upon request at the offices of
the Community Development Department. This information is provided in .compliance with
Section 21081.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
2.0 GENERAL FINDINGS
In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the City Council hereby finds that:
(1) The City of Diamond Bar is the "Lead Agency" for the project evaluated in the FEIR;
(2) The FEiR and all environmental notices associated therewith were prepared in
compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and in accordance with the
City's local guidelines and procedures;
(3) The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR
reflects the independent judgment of the City Council;
(4) A "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program" (MMRP) has been prepared for the
proposed project, identifying those feasible mitigation measures that the City Council
has. adopted or will likely adopt in order to reduce the -potential environmental effects of
the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible;
(5) The mitigation measures adopted or likely to be adopted by the City Council will be fully
implemented in accordance with the MRMP, verification of compliance will be
documented, and each measure can reasonably be expected to have the efficacy and
produce the post -mitigated consequences assumed in the FEIR;
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS
949-837-3935 p•4
(6) Each of the issues to be resolveandsduentif theidethe
beration of the City's advisory and
comments received by the City 9
decision-making bodies, has been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council;
(7) The impacts of the proposed project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the
time of certification of the FEIR;
but not limited
(g) The City Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including,
to, those comments received following the dissemination of the QE1R and RTC, and the
ved nor the
responses to those comments add significant newformation under Secties thereto and has determined that neither the comments on 5088.5 of
responses .
the State CEQA Guidelines;
(9) The City Council has not made any decisions that would constitute an irretrievable
commitment of resources toward the proposed project prior to the certification of the
FEIR nor has the City Council previously committed to a definite course of action with
respect to the proposed project;
(1q Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have been
available for review and request during the regular business hours of the City at the
office of the City's Comrnunity' Development Department from the custodian of records.
for such documents;
(1'i) These Findings incorporate by reference such other findings as may be required under
Sections 65454, 65455, 66474, 66474.4, 65853, and 65860 of the California
Government Code and those corresponding finding required under the "City of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code" (Municipal Code); and
(11) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record,
the City Council has or will impose conditions, mitigation measures, and take other
actions to reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum
extend feasible and finds as stated in these Findings.
NIFICANT ENVIRCiNMENTAL
3,.0 WHICH CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIFECTS
SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY GATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
The City Council has determined that existing regulations, conditions of approval, project design
features, and/or feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to
be adopted by the City Council will result in a substantial reduction of most but not all of those
environmental effects identified in the FEiR. Notwithstanding the existence of those regulations
and the adoption of those conditions and measures, the City Council finds that the following
significant environmental effects will continue to exist.
3A Biological Resources
3.1.1 Environmental Effect Implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other
reasonably foreseeable future projects, will contribute incrementally to the continuing.
reduction in relatively natural, undisturbed open space areas found within the general
project area and contribute to the progressive fragmentation of habitat areas and general
decline in species diversity throughout the region (Cumulative impact 5-9).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
N
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS
949-837-3935 p,5
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological impacts are addressed in Section 4.5
(Biological Resources) in the DEIR and in Section 3.0 (Response to Comments)
In the RTC, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Through the use of small lots and clustering, the proposed project minimizes the
area of physical disturbance and results in the preservation of approximately 15.9
acres of open space. Through those actions, the biological impacts of the
proposed project have been reduced to the maximum extent feasible.
(c) Other than through the imposition of regional growth management andlor
regional resource conservation policies, which actions are the purview of regional
governmental entities and cannot feasibly be implemented at the project level, no
feasible mitigation measures have been identified by the City Council which
would effectively address this cumulative impact.
3.2 Air Quality
3.2.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities will result in the generation of particulate,
oxides of nitrogen, and other criteria pollutants as a result of projected ground -
disturbance activities and equipment utilization (Construction Impact 7-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by referenpe.
(b) The air quality analysis was conducted in accordance with the methodology
presented in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD)
"CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (SCAQMD, April 1993) and "Localized
Significance Threshold Methodology" (SCAQMD, .tune 2005).
(c) Primarily as a result of the use of diesel -powered equipment, NOx emissions are
projected to exceed the SCAQMD's threshold standards. NOx is a regional
(ozone) concern because NOx is an ozone precursor which has been shown to
cause adverse health effects. NOx reductions through available mitigation
measures, such as regular, low-NOx tune-ups and oxidation catalysts, are on the
older of about ten percent. Even by keeping equipment in good tune, average
daily construction exhaust NOx emissions cannot be reduced to a less-than—
significant level.
(c) There are no reasonably available mitigation measures than can reduce
projected NOx emissions to less -than -significant levels.
3.2.2 Environmental Effect: Related project activities, in combination with the construction and
operation of the proposed project, will incrementally contribute to regional air emissions
within and throughout the South Coast Air Basin (Cumulative impact 7-5).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
Nov 14 2006 6:02PM EIS
949-837-3935 P•6
The SCAQMD indicates that one passible approach for determining cumulative
(b)e project shows a. one percent annual reduction in
impacts is, whether. (1)s the
project emissions; (2) has a 1.5 average vehicla� ridership;
of rate
of growth in vehicle miles traveled (V p
proposed project and other related projects is not likely to achieve either a 1.5
average vehicle ridership or a reduction in the rate of growth in vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) and vehicle trips.
(c) No mitigation measures, formulated specifically to address the project's potential
incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts, are deemed to be
reasonably feasible.
4,0 WHICt SIGNIFICANT
WHIGH CAN FEASIBLY BEMITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
The City Council has determined that existing regulations, conditions of approval, project design
features, andfor feasible mitigation
Councitmw�s�� It included
substantial Ieductioand �ptof bhe following
eny or likely to
adopted by the city cts and that each of the followin
environmental effreduced o below a level of Igni g�n��onrnental effects Mi l either _occur at or
can be effectively
4.1 Land Use
al land uses could introduce land
4,1.1 Environmental Effssues betweenntial and theProposed usesnand those eAssting and reasonably
use compatibility i exist in close proximity to those
foreseeable future {and uses that now and which may P
uses (Land Use Impact 1-1)-
Finding:
-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
Facts in Support of Findings:
Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
The proposed residential, recreational, and open spaces uses are compatible
with existing and proposed development within the general project area.
Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required_
(a)
(b)
(c)
4.1.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed mixed-use project, including the land uses,
densities, and development standards now under consideration, could conflict with the
adopted plans and policies of the City (Land Use Impact 1-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Supaort of Findings: The following facts are presenied in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The proposed project is generally consistent with the policies of the "City of
Diamond Bar Genera Plan (General Plan) (City, July 25, 1995).
0
Nov 14 2006 6:02PM EIS 949-837-3335
p.7
(c) Although the proposed number of dwelling. units exceeds the provisions of the
hillside management ordinance, when the entire park site is included, residential
densities remain within the limits established under the General Plan and
Chapter 2222 of the Municipal Code.
(d) The proposed project is generally consistent with the applicable core policies of
the Southern California Association of Govemment's (SCAG) "Regional
Comprehensive ,Plan and Guide" {RCPG) (SCAG, March 1956) and "Regional
Transportation Plan — Destination 2030" (SCAG, April 2004).
(e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified. impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.1.3 Environmental Effect: Existing development restrictions currently encumber the project
site. The elimination, modification, and/or alteration of those deed restrictions would be
required in order to allow for the development of the proposed land uses (Land Use
Impact 1-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under eAsting City policies, the owners of Lots 46-49 of Tract No. 32576 are
presently authorized only one dwelling unit per parcel. Subject to appropriate
findings, as determined by the City Attorney, the City Council is authorized to
modify those restrictions.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded; a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval retaining deed restriction on the designated remainder portion of Lot 49
(Tract No. 32576).
4.1.4 Environmental. Effect: The proposed subdivision creates a number of residual or
designated remainder parcels, identified as 'Not a Pail° in the proposed tract map, within
the area of Lot -49 of Tract No. 32576,,with reduced access (Land Use Impact 1-4).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support cf Findings: The following facts are presented in support.of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEI R, Incorporated herein by reference.
(b) LJCC — South Pointe West LLC (Applicant) seeks to acquire from the Walnut
Valley Unified School District (VINUSD) a portion of Lot 49 in Tract No. 32576
and, in combination Lots 46-48 of Tract 32576 and additional properties located
to the south of Larkstone Drive, subdivide the 'property to allow for the
development of 99 dwelling units, a portion of the new neighborhood park, and
common open space areas. The boundaries of the proposed development
application are not coterminous with existing tot lines. Residual areas will,
therefore, be created that are "not a parte' of the current development application.
7
Nov 14 2006 6:02PM EIS 949-837-3935 P.8
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval retaining deed restriction on the designated remainder portion of Lot 49
(Tract No. 32576).
the
4.1.,E Envlranmental Effect: Cumulat �� trroduc introduction w dwelling units could ement within the city xceed
population increase associated
vAtith the 2005-2010 population growth forecasts presented in the "Regional Transportation
Plan — Destination 2030" (SCAG, 2004) and which serve as a basis for regional
transportation planning (Land Use impact 1-5).
Finding: She City Council hereby makes Finding (1)•
The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
Facts in Sup ort of Findings:
project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
Implementation of the proposed project in combination with those other related
projects wlll result In the further urbanization of the general project area, including
the conversion of vacant or under -developed properties to higher -intensity uses.
Other related projects located within the City include, but may not be limited to, a
total of 355 new dwelling units (plus the 99 units associated with the proposed
project). The estimated resident population associated with those projects within
the City would exceed Citywide SCAG projections for the 2005-2010 time period.
Since regional plans reflect local growth projections, a mitigation measure has
been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP
stipulating that the City prepare and transmit to SCAG a revised growth forecast.
Formal SCAG notification constitutes full mitigation for the resulting difference
between local and regional growth projections.
4.2 population and Housing
42,1 Environmental Effect: Project -related construction will increase the local work force and,
through job creation and worker relocation, has the potential to induce short-term
population growth in the general project area (Construction Impact 2-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findin4s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in
Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The workforce required for the project's construction, operation, and
maintenance can be reasonably drawn from the available regional labor pool.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.2.2 Environmental Effect Project implementation will result in the addition of 99 dwelling
units to the City's existing housing stock and will. increase the City's population by
Nov 14 2006 6:03PM EIS 949-837-3935 P.9
approximately 326 individuals, based on the existing (January 2005) Citywide vacancy
rates and average household size (Operational Impact 2-2)_
Finding The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in
Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the DER, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The impact of the proposed project on long-term employment opportunities is not
projected to be substantial and, based on its limited scale, will not create
additional significant secondary housing impacts.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.2.3 Environmental Effect: By increasing the City's housing stock, absence a corresponding
increase in long-term employment opportunities, project implementation, in combination
with cumulative development, could contribute to a jobs/housing imbalance (Cumulative
Impact 2-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in
Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the DER, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The SCAG region is further divided into both areas governed by regional councils
of governments and into regional statistical areas. The project site is located
within the area governed by the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
(SGVCOG) and within RSA 26 (Covina). RSA 26, in which the: project is located,
is classified as "jobs rich" and the jobs -to -housing ratio is projected to increase
between 1997 and 2025. The expansion of existing housing opportunities will
serve to move the area toward a regional jobs -housing balance.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.3 Geotechnical Hazards-
4-3.1
azards-
4.3.1 Environmental Effect: Two ancient and one active landslides have been identified on the
property. Existing unstable earth conditions that have predicated past landslide activities
within the tract map area must be further remediated as part of the project's grading
plan, requiring increased earthwork and stabilization efforts in order to make the site
geotechnicalty feasible for the proposed development (Construction Impact 3-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
E
Nov 14 2006 6:03PM EIS
949-837-3935 P.10
(a) Project -related and
ial�Ha ds)hrin thehazards
DElR,impacts
incorporatedare eei
addressed
in
by
Section 4.3 (Geotech c
reference.eotechnical, seismic, and
(b} Extensive site-specific and project -specific geologic, g
soils analyses have been performed in order to assess on-site and near -site
conditions. Subject to the application of those actions, measures, and design
specifications incorporated in those studies and subject tone to pth�on of such
issuance of
additional provisions as may permits, identified oject by
be the City
developed from a
grading and building
geotechnical perspective.
(c) A "Restricted Use Area' designation be recorded for any in -tract areas where
geologic, geotechnical, seismic, or soils hazards cannot. be eliminated to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer—
(d)
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely toadopted technical'of project
se smiic, and
approval to effectively address the known geologic, 9
soils hazards affecting the Project site.
ures and other
4.3.2 Environmental the property
ty the
be subject t project,e of the period c ground shaking exulting from
rovements
constructed on the p P dY
seismic events along earthquake faults located throughout the region (Operational
lmpact 3-2).
bi [ : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
Facts in Support of Findings:
Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in
Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnie leers perspective,
tive, sigdo stare
hat
the recommend ations presented in the project's g
incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has
committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the
proposed project and the project's design, construction, and operation twill occur
in conformity and compliance therewith.
Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval to effectively address the known geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and
soils hazards affecting the project site.
(a)
(b)
(G)
4.3.3 Environmental Effect: Los Angeles County is located within a seismically acts a region.
Since earthquakes have historically occurred throughout the region and can be expected
to. occur in the future, development activities that occur throughout the region and their
occupants and users will remain subject to seismic forces (Cumulative impact 3-3).
.Findjn : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in SUDport of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
Nov 14 2006 E:03PM EIS
949-837-3935 P.11
(a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in
Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the DER, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) Adequate control measures have been formulated by State and local
governmental entities to ensure that all public and private structures are
constructed and maintained in recognition of site-specific, area -specific, and
regional geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils conditions.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.4 Hydrology and Water (duality
4.4.1 Environmental Effect: Development activities, including both residences and portions of
the internal street system, are proposed within the area presently designated as a 'Mood
hazard area" on the County Assessor's Parcel Maps (Construction Impact 4-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findincrs: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed In Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The preliminary title report for Lot 49 in Tract No. 3257 includes: specific
"protective conditions" with regards to the interference of existing drainage and
Los Angeles County Assessor's parcel maps for the subject property, as well as
the previously recorded subdivision maps for Tract 32576, depict or make
reference to flood hazard zones and/or flood control drainage improvements.
(c) Project -speck drainage and grading studies provide for new drainage patterns
and ensure that no habitable structures will be constructed within any designated
flood plain. The final subdivision map shall set forth the locations of any new
drainage structures and devices required to accommodate the proposed land use
and safety convey storm waters.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.4.2 Environmental Effect: Grading, material stockpiling, and equipment staging will result in
the removal of existing ground cover, disrupt surface soils, increase the potential for
erosion and sediment transport, and potentially impact existing beneficial uses
(Construction Impact 4-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findincis: The following facts are presented 'in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the .DER,
incorporated herein by reference.
11
949-837-3935 P.12
Nov 14. 2006 6:03PM EIS
b The "Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Storm uW eersand Urban
() s' NPDES Permit No. CAS004001) g
ater
Runoff Discharge
and imposed waste discharge requirements for municipal storm water
dischargewithin the Los Angeles County (County)
and urban runoff discharges uin:s that
The "Construction General Permit" (NPDES No. GAS000t)U2) req
(c) water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and
dischargers prepare a storm orary sediment control
Implement temporary erosion control devices and temp
best management practices (BMPs).
d Practicas and procedures are already in place to minimize erosion and sediment
() transport to the maximum extent practical (MEP).d.
e Since none of the threshold andira would bect Gen�iiions artmiiigation1 measures
eede
() would be less than significant
are recommended or required-
.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementhtion will result In the introduction impervious sr
4.,4-3 ect site and. as a result of the impedance of opportunities
surfaces onto the prof potentia to Increase the quantity,
absorption and infiltration of those waters, has the
from the tra
velocity, and durationct map area (Operational
waters stone aters discharg
Impact 4-3).. -
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1)
rt of this finding:
Faces upport of Findings: The following facts are presented in support impacts are
Project -related and cumulative hydrology and ter quality in the DEIR,
(a) drology and Water Quality)
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hy
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Engineering studies have been Theted and engineeringra drain
has demonstrated
preparedprepared for the proposed project' operate during a 50 -year
that the -proposed storm drain system will effectively
kely . to be
capital storm event.
(c) Mitigation measures have been included in the i�ip�o eiments consistor ent stent with
adopted in the MRMP to ensure that drainag
applicable design and development standards and that acts post -project mimplementation
flows do not result in any adverse public safety or other imp P
reduce the identified Impact to below a level of
of those measures will
significance.
and b the
and m
4..4.4 Environmental Eftained. 911 structural and
fect: Unless ng hose to sized
maintainedRby the County and
treatment control BMPs, inwillclung
homeowners' association, will not result in their planned performance and efficacy
(Operational Impact 4-4)•
• Findin :The Gity Council hereby makes Finding (1)• ort of this finding:
Facts in Support of Findincs: The following facts are presented in supe m acts are
(a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality e DEIR,
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in impacts
incorporated herein by reference.
12
Nov 14 2006 6:04PM EIS 949-037-3935 P.13
(b) Prior to discharge from the developed site, 851' percentile treatment flows will be
treated via three continuous deflective separators (CDS) or approved equivalent
flow -Based treatment units at the three post -development discharge locations.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval stipulating the preparation of a stormwater management plan and
ensuring that volume -based treatment control BMPs and flow -based BMPs are
designed and maintained in accordance with the County's "Manual for Standard
Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan" (County, September 2002).
4.4.5 Environmental Effect: The project's implementation and that of other development
projects could adversely impact receiving surface or groundwater quality, create
hydrologic. impacts that could result in significant adverse impacts to natural drainage
systems, and adversely affect opportunities for groundwater recharge (Cumulative
Impact 4-5).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findin s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Adequate design and development control measures, including design
specifications, have been formulated by and are implemented by the City and by
the County to ensure that all public and private drainage facilities and structures
are constructed and maintained in recognition of applicable project -related and
cumulative hydrologic conditions and drainage flows.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.5 Biological Resources
4.5.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities will result in direct impacts to about 38.8
acres, including about 25.2 acres located within the tract map area and 13.5 acres
located beyond the tract map boundaries, resulting in the removal of existing vegetation
within those areas. Fuel modification requirements imposed by the Los Angeles County
Fire Department could directly impact additional vegetation (Construction -Impact 5=1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in support of Flndin4s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding;
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEiR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project implementation will result in direct disturbance to the following plant
communities: (1) 5.6 acres of California sagebrush scrub; (2) 3.8 acres of mixed
chaparral; (3) <0.1 acres of southern willow scrub; (4) 1.2 acres of mule fat scrub;
(5) 5.9 acres of mule fat scrublruderal; (6) 0.5 acre of coast live oak woodland;
(7) 0.2 acre of developed; (8) 6.6 acres of disturbed; (9) 0.1 acres of ornamental;
13
Nov 14 2306 6_04PM EIS
949-837-3935 p.14
(10) 2.6 acres of ruderal; (11) 9.B acres of ruderalldisturbed; and (12) 0.4 acre of
ruderallmixed chaparral.
(c) Rare natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited
distribution. The most current version of the California Department of Fish and
Game's °The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program — List of California
Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the Caiifomia Natural Diversity
Database' (CDFG, 2003) serves as a guide to each community's status.
(d) With the exception of southern willow scrub, none of the habitat types identified
on the project site are categorized as high priority for inventory in the California
Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). This on-site plant community is patchy in
distribution and is not connected to larger continuous southern willow scrub
habitat areas extending beyond the project boundaries. The likelihood of this
community supporting sensitive species is considered minimal.
(e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
ss than significant and no project conditions or
identified impact would be le
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.5.2 Environmental Effect: As proposedproject
arescly
oll f United- States anently �Army Corpsof
1,042 linear feet of streambed,including
Engineers (ALOE), Regional . Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional
waters and 0.33 acres of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional
waters (Construction Impact 5-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project implementation will result in direct impacts to approximately 1,042 linear
feet of strearnbed, including approximately 0..13 acre of United States Army
Corps of Engineers (ACRE) and Regional Water Quality Control Board
(!RWQCB) jurisdictional waters of the United States and waters of the State
(including about 0.03 acres of wetlands) and approximately 0.33 acre of CDFG
jurisdictional streambed. No direct impacts to jurisdictional waters are
anticipated beyond the tract map boundaries.
(c) The project will require a nationwide Section 404 permit from the ACOE, a
Section 401 water quality certification from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602
streambed alteration agreement from the CDFG, stipulating the provision of
compensatory resources for identified impacts.
(d)' Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition Is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure compliance with the provisions of Sections 401-404 of
Federal Clean Water Act and Sections 1600-1616 of the California Fish and
Game Code.
4.5.3 Environmental Effect: Proposed grading and grubbing activities will result in the removal
of or direct impacts upon 46 protected ordinance -size trees (45 coast live oak trees and
one willow tree) of the 70 protected ordinance -size trees (65 coast rive oak trees and five
willow trees) identified on the project site (Construction Impact 5-3).
14
Nov 14 2006 6:O5PM EIS
949-837-3935 P.15
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding ('t).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding;
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Grading and grubbing operations proposed both within the tract map area and in
the vicinity of the offsite portion of the proposed neighborhood park and
stockpile site will result in direct impacts on 45 protected ordinance -sized coast
live oaks and one protected ordinance -size willow trees. Based on final grading
plans, the actual number of directly impacted trees could be greater.
(c) The project is subject to compliance with the provision of Chapter 22.38 (Tree
Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval specifying the number of replacement trees to be provided and
describing the Applicant's obligations under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA).
4.5.4 Environmental Effect: While not observed on the project site, construction could
potentially impact one' State -listed raptor (American peregrine falcon) and a number of
unlisted sensitive reptile species (coast horned lizard, coast patch -nosed snake),
sensitive birds (loggerhead shrike, southern California rufous crowned sparrDW, Bell's
sage sparrow), sensitive mammals (western mastiff bat, pallid bat, pocketed free -tailed
bat, San Diego black -tailed jackrabbit, San Diego desert woodrat, and northwestern San
Diego pocket mouse), and sensitive raptors (white-tailed kite, northern harrier, golden
eagle, sharp -shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, ferruginous hawk, merlin, and prairie falcon)
(Construction impact 5-4).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts 'in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEiR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) With the exception of the American peregrine falcon, none 'of these species are
protected by federal or State listings and the loss of individual species and their
"habitat would not threaten regional populations.
(c) The American peregrine falcon, a State -listed endangered and fully protected
species, is mainly a rare spring and fall transient in the region and inay uti-lize the
study area and general project vicinity for foraging. Locally,'the species is not a
breeding resident but only an uncommon migrant Although this species is
protected during nesting, this species is not expected to utilize the study area for
nesting activities. Removal of their habitat represents an adverse but less -than -
significant impact to regional populations.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be fess than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.5.5 Environmental Effect: Grading activities will result in the immediate mortality of small and
slow moving animals and result in a disruption of wildlife habitat and the loss and
15
Nov 14 2006 6:05PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.16
displacement of wildlife, thus resulting in a less diverse and less abundant local faunal
population (Construction Impact 5-5).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the QEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The potential mortality of small animals would reduce prey base for larger
predators, increase pressure on surviving populations in the adjacent open space
areas to absorb individuals that seek to escape mortality, result in a general
decline in genetic diversity, and reduce number of individuals available to
recolonize affected areas following site disturbance. These impacts would not
reduce general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.5.(i Environmental Effect: Project implementation has the potential to impede existing wildlife
movement patterns across the project site (operational Impact 5-6).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Based on the proximity and intensity of sprrounding development and the
eAstence of other improvements, including major roadways, that act as
impediments to wildlife mobility, the project site is not generally considered a part
of the Puente -Chino Hills wildlife corridor. The project site, therefore, does not
serve any connectivity or linkage role with regards to regional wildlife movement.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.5.7 Environmental Effect If improperly designed and maintained, the proposed on-site flood
control facilities and structural and treatment control Best Management Practices
(BMPs) could potentially provide a habitat for the propagation of mosquitoes and other.
vectors (Operational Impact 5-7).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5.(Biological Resources) In the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Urban stormwater runoff regulations mandate the installation and maintenance of
structural BMPs for both volume reduction and pollution management Effective
design and ongoing maintenance can reduce the propagation of vectors.
16
Nov 14 2006 6:05PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.17
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that structural BMPs, through both design and maintenance,
do not contribute to the production of vectors.
4.5.8 Environmental Effect: Project implementation, including the occupancy of the proposed
residential dwellings and the use of the neighborhood park site, will result in the
introduction of additional indirect or secondary effects upon the remaining biological
resources (Operational Impact 5-8).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The introduction of new light sources could result in an indirect effect on the
behavioral patterns of nocturnal and crepuscular wildlife and increase the
mortality rate of wild bird. High-intensity sports lighting is not presently proposed
as part of the project's design.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that lighting levels do not adversely impact off-site areas.
4.6 Traffic and Circulation
4.6.1 Environmental Effect: Construction vehicles will transport equipment, building materials,
and construction debris along local and collector streets within and adjacent to
established residential areas and an existing elementary school (Construction Impact 6 -
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1)_
Facts in Support of Findinos: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) During construction, the primary travel routes to and from the project site will be
from Sheppard Hills, via Chapel Hills Drive, Walnut Leaf Drive, and Colima
Road/Golden Springs Drive, and from Larkstone Drive, via Black Hawk Drive,
Lemon Avenue, and Colima Road/Golden Springs Drive. Construction traffic will
increase traffic volumes along affected roadways and could result in the spillage
of debris and increase safety risks along those roadways.
{c) The City shall incorporation measures to address public safety considerations
and to reduce construction -related traffic hazards in the project's grading permit.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval requiring the Applicant to both repair any roadway damage attributable
to project construction and to prepare a construction management plan.
17
Nov 14 2006 6:06PM EIS
949-837-3935 P•18
tion of
kstons Drive as a
4.6.2 Environmental Effect: c{Qn afject involves improv mentsto thatroadway,including street widening
lifles. Street street and the consiru
and improvements underground
to traffic along thatrroadwayenow used primuarily as a
imposition of short
primary accessway to South Pointe Middle School. Similarly, unless otherwise
conducted by the County; the repair of and improvement to Morning Sun Drive will be
undertaken as part of the project (Construction Impact 6-2).
F{ndin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Su ori of Findin s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's
(APWA) 'Work Area Traffic Control Handbook" (APWA, 1996), the California
Department . of Transportation's (Caltrans) "Manual of Traffic Controls for
Construction and Maintenance Work Zones" (Caltrans, 1996) and the `Part VI
Standards and Guides for Traffic Controls for Street and Highway
component offthe
Maintenance, Utility and Incident ManagemenOperaon Uniform Traffic Control
Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) 'Manual
Devices" (FHWA, 2003) provide guidance for the setup and operation of all work
areas on public streets and include provro
to be imposed by the City to ensure appropriate ons tand�ontinuldrouingnveh9cularasoably beeaccessxpecte�
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval requiring the Applicant's preparation of a construction traffic mitigation
plan and separate detailed traffic control plan.
4.6.3 Environmental Effect: The project is forecast togenerthPaktly1adaily
way vehicle trips.per day, including Psduring the RMend trips
during the PM peak .hour_ That traffic could increase congestion on local and regional
roadways (Operational impact 6-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The project's traffic impact analysis was conducted in accordance with the City's
'Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Analysis Report' and, for each of
the 18 study area intersections, included an assessment of the following seven
scenarios were examined: (1) Year 2005 Existing Conditions;
(2) Year 2010
Cumulative Conditions; (3) Year 2010 Cumulative Conditions plus Project; (4)
Year 2010 Gumu{ative, Conditions plus Project with Improvements; (5) Year 2020
Cumulative Conditions; {6) Year 2020 Cumulative Conditions plus Project; (7)
Year 2020 Cumulative Conditions plus Project with Improvements.
18
Nov 14 2006 6:0617M EIS
949-837-3935 P.19
(c) For Year 2010 Cumulative Conditions, 11 of those intersections are projected to
operate at an unacceptable level (LOS 'E' or "F") during the AM and/or 1'M peak
hour with the addition of ambient traffic growth and related project traffic. The
remaining seven intersections are expected to operate at adequate service levels
(LOS `D' or better) during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The proposed
project will significantly impact one study area intersections (Walnut Lead
Drive/Colima Road).
(d) For Year 2020 Cumulative Conditicins, ten of those intersections are projected to
operate poorly and the remaining eight intersections are forecast to operate at
LOS 'D" or better during the AM and PM peak hours. One study area intersection
(Walnut Leaf. DrivelColima Road) will be significantly impacted.
(e) Certain planned improvements are presently required of approved development
projects within the study area. Implementation of those identified improvements
would mitigate areawide traffic impacts at identified intersections to the extent
feasible. In accordance with the City's guidelines, the proposed project is
required to either institute, where feasible, or to pay a fair -share contribution
toward the construction cost of planned and recommended street improvements.
(f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval specifying the Applicant's obligation for the payment of a fair -share
contribution toward the identified improvements.
4.6.4 Environmental Effect The installation of access gates at the project's entryways could
create conflicts on the adjoining roadways if vehicles gaining entry into the tract map
area were to impede traffic flow along those roadways, such as might occur if the
stacking distance allocated for entering vehicles was of insufficient length to
accommodate the number of vehicles seeking entry during peak periods (Operational
Impact 6-4).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The primary project entry is expected to have a maximum queue of two non-
resident vehicles during the peak hours, requiring a minimum storage reservoir
length of 50 feet. With a proposed storage capacity of about 92 feet from the call
box to the back of sidewalk, adequate vehicular stacking capacity is provided.
(c) Guidelines for entry gates are set forth in Article 9 of the California Fire Code, as
locally amended.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that the design and operation of the project's access gates do
not unreasonably hinder emergency ingress into the tract map area.
4.6.15 Environmental Effect: Internal street design, including the provision of on -street parking
and the installation and maintenance of abutting landscaping, could create safety
hazards unless designed in accordance with appropriate traffic engineering standards
(Operational Impact 6-5).
19
949-837-3935 P.20
Nov 14 2006 6:06PM EIS
finding; The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Su ort ofFindin s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
in
(a) Project -related and GU udlatC cb1 tion) in nd circulation
IDEIR,nincorporated pacts are addressed
by
Section 4.6 (Tro
reference.
(b) A sight distance ev
and both Lakstone aDrivte and Ppivate Drive repared r"G'�based on the Caltransons of " D PrivateDrive
In accordance therewith, adequate intersection sight distance
Design Manual."
can be provided at the two study intersections.
(c) 36 specified bythe
dth iAngeles °n orderre to Department
allow parking onGboth sides of the
36 -foot pavement
access way serving the residential units. As indicated on the vesting tentative
tract map, all new local private streets will have a pavement width of 36 feet.
ition is
(d) Although none of threshold criteria would be exceas a Gond' ion oroject aproject
included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted
approval to ensure that future landscape improvements do not create
impediments to driver visibility.
e School
4.6.6 Environmental EffectThe rPra i� he potential jointbetween huseolnte of that'tlalc Pity by the school
the
proposed neighborhoodp
district may encourage additional pedestrian traffic between thostwo staeet1e introduce
combination with the .dedication of t_impact 6 6}e as a public
additional pedestrian safety hazards (operational
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this Finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) With regards to tr o low the nation
raldevic lsguidelinesifortl'nedrnia en�cCaltle Gn
Caltrans' 'Traffic
requires th Cty
Engineering Manual."
(c) Children may walk, play, or otherwise occur in proximity to the project site. Young
children may be inattentive when it comes to the presence of traffic and/or when
crossing the street.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
destrian and children's safety is fully considered..
approval to ensure that pe
4,6.7 Environmental Effect: The implementation of the proposed project, in combination with
other related projects, will collectively contribute to existing traffic congestion in the
general project area and exacerbate the need for localized areawide traffic
improvements (Cumulative Impact 6-7).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
20
Nov 14 20CIS 6:07PM EIS
949-837-3935 p.21
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The following nine intersections are projected to operate at LOS "E" or "F" under
Year 2020 cumulative conditions: (1) Fairway Drive/Brea Canyon Cut -Off
Road/Colima Road (AM and PM); (2) Lemon AvenueNalley Drive (AM and PMr);
(3) Lemon AvenuelGolden Springs Drive (PM); (4) Brea Canyon
RoadANashington Street (AM); (b) Brea Canyon Road/SR-60 WB Ramps (AM
and PM); (6) SR -60 EB RampslGolden Springs Road (AM and PM); (7) Brea
Canyon Road/Golden Springs Drive (AM peals hour and PM peak hour); (S) Brea
Canyon Road/Pathfinder Road (PM); and (9) Brea Canyon Cut -Off
Road/Pathfinder Road (AM and PM). Although the project will not significantly
impact any of the study area intersections, on a cumulative basis, the project will
contribute to the adverse service level at those intersections.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.7 Air Quality
4.7.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities will involve the use of diesel -powered off-
road equipment and on -road vehicles that, in limited areas and for limited duration, will
operate in proximity to existing sensitive areas. Since diesel particulate emissions have
been categorized by the California Air Resources Board as a toxic air contaminant,
exposure could result in possible health risks to near -site receptors (Construction Impact
7-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1}.
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Diesel exposure health risk impacts from grading equipment diesel exhaust
particulates will be minimal.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
Identified impact would ' be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.7.2 Environmental Effect: During the project's operational life, a number of criteria pollutants
wi{I be generated as a result of vehicle trips associated with the proposed land uses
(mobile sources), the consumption of natural gas associated with space heating, and the
off-site generation of electricity (stationary sources) (Operational Impact 7-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
21
Nov 14 2006 6:07PM EIS
949-837-3935 P•22
(b) Projected operational emission fall below the SCAQMD's recommended
threshold values.
(c) Since none ofw uld be Id of less than isignificant critend no ora ect conditions or
identified impact
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.7.3 Environmental Effect: Increased traffic along project otsa road(operationalyshas the potential to
result in the creation of carbon monoxide (CQ) hot p
Find!n : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts�gupport of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) No existing or fusurreacarbon r project arde rea(f
from combhot ined' background are t(no project)
any intersection
plus project traffic.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded; the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4,8 Noise
4.8.1 Environmental Effect: Project -related construction ac existing �eisidenti�al including
and vrill of heavy
in
equipment, will occur in escloperceptible
to Off-site sensitive receptors (Construction
short-term noise increases p P
impact 8-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Sugport of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts
mpa s e.
are
addressed in Section 4.8
(Noise) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
(b) Construction noise is regulated in the City under the provisions of
o eunici al
Code. The Municipal Code limits the hours of heavy equipment P
Notwithstanding those provisions, construction noise may continue to be a short-
term nuisance to proximal noise -sensitive receptors.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
onstruction noise impacts are reduced to the maximum
approval to ensure that c
extent feasible.
an
4.8.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result ithehAMe peak Ihouron f and additional
.t:
1,041 vehicular trips per day, including 81 trips during P
during the PM peak hour. Project -related traffic will be added to local roadways and
could expose off-site sensitive receptors located along affected travel ways to
perceptible increases in traffic noise (operational Impact 8-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding
22
Nov 14 2006 6:07PM EIS
949-837-3935 p.23
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8
(Noise) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The proposed pioject will cause traffic noise to perceptibly increase by more than
the 3 -dB threshold along the following four roadway segments: Black Hawk Drive
south of Lennon Avenue, Larkstone Drive east of Black Hawk Drive, Shepherd
Hills Road west of Morning Sun Avenue, and Chapel Hills Drive east of Walnut
Leaf Drive. Post -project noise levels will, however, remain below City standards_
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.8.3 Environmental Effect: Short-term construction and long-term operational noise
associated with the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will
contribute to both a localized and an areawide increase in ambient noise levels in
proximity to those projects and along those roadways utilized by project -related and
related project traffic (Cumulative Impact 8-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8
(Noise) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Development projects located in the general project area will generate short-term
noise impacts during their respective construction stages. In addition, as traffic
volumes in the general project area increase, those areas located in proximity to
the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic noise.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.9 Public Services and Facilities
4.9.1 Environmental Effect: During construction, equipment, building and landscape materials,
and a variety of household items will tie brought to the project site. Visibility of the tract
map area from off-site vantage points is limited and during certain periods, no or limited
numbers of personnel will be on the project site (Construction Impact 9-1).
Finding-, The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Suoaort of Finding's: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project construction could result in. a minor increase over existing demands for
police service but would not necessitate the hiring of additional personnel or
predicate the need for the construction of new or physical alteration to existing
28
949-937-3935 P.24
Nov 14 2006 B_09PM EIS
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LACSD) and/or California Highway
Patrol (CHP) facilities.ect conditions are
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project
included in the FE and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of Pduring roject project
approval to minimize both erm (demands on LACSD criminalhood Of a incident
and to provide
construction and any
the LACSD the opportunity to review the project's individual design elements in
order to reduce potential demands upon police services.
4,9,2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the in of equipment,
materials, and manpower into a County -designated fire hazard area prior to the provision
of water system improvements designated to respond to in -tract fire hazards
(Construction Impact 9-2).
Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in SuD rt of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services . and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference -
project with all applicable provisions of the
(b) The proposed project must fully comply
Uniform Building Code" (UBC) and "Uniform Fire Code" (UCodeasGoun�f eCade)
other applicable provisions of the "Los Angeles County ( tY
established to address fire protection and public safety.
(c) In accordance with the Los Angeles County Fire Department's (LACED) "Fuel
Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone .4 or Very High
Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (LACFD, 1998), the Applicant is required to submit
fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plans and brush clearance
condtiviti S. are
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project
included in the FEIRlaend adopted
or
likely
fireobe protectioned as programdiaQdsof woricplJace
approval requiring preparation and the approval of development and infrastructure
improvement p
standards for fire
by the LACED_
4.9.3 Environmental Effect: Construction will occur in close_ proximity to South Point Middle
School and could be disruptive to school activities and operations (Construction Impact
9-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1)•
Facts In Su ort of Findin s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
{a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DER,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project conditions are includedofi �quir ngl the preparation of alikely
schoot safety plan as conditions of project app
and separate construction traffic mitigation plan.
(c) Mitigation measures have been included in the FEIR and
f op ed or likely
t onosbe
adopted in the MRMP requiring the fencing and signage
24
Nov 14 2006 6:0SPM EIS
949-837-3935 P.25
and requiring the preparation of a school safety plan designed to minimize
disruption to school activities and enhance the safety of children near .active
construction sites. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified
impacts to below a level of significance.
4.9.4 Environmental Effect: With a resident population of approximately 326 persons and an
existing staffing ratio of one sworn officer for each 1,082 residents, In order to maintain
existing staffing levels, the LACSD would need an additional 0.30 sworn deputies.
Based on the LACSD's recommended officer to population ratio of one deputy per 1,000
residents, an additional 0.33 officers would be required based on the projected number
of in -tract residents (Operational Impact 9-4).
Finding : The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DER,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The LACSD has not established a functional mechanism for the collection of
LACSD impact fees and there exists no formal basis to quantify project -related
impacts upon police protection services. Since funding for LACSD personnel,
equipment, and facilities is derived through ad valorum taxation and based on
yearly allocations by the County Board of Supervisor, the County has the ability to
effectively respond to LACSD resource demands.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval requiring LACSD review the project's individual design elements in
order to reduce the potential demand upon police services.
4.9.;5 Environmental Effect: The introduction of 99 new residential dwellings and a new
neighborhood park will increase existing demands on LACFD facilities, equipment, and
personnel; thus predicating an incremental need for facility expansion, the purchase of
new or replacement equipment, and the addition of LACFD personnel (Operational
Impact 9-5).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DER,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Existing water mains are capable of delivering a minimum fire flow of 1,250
gallonstminute (gpm) at 20 pounds/square inch (psi) for a two-hour duration..
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval to ensure LACFD's review of the proposed water supply system, access
improvement, emergency ingress, and compliance with applicable LACED
standards.
25
Nov 14 2006 6:08PM EIS
949-837-3935 P•26
ment
in the Walnut
4.9.6 Environmental Effect: pis{ District by ect an estimated 71 new students,on will increase llinludnghapp ximately
Vatley Unitied School
25 new elementary school students (Grades If -6), 19 new junior high school students
(Grades 7-9); and 27 new high school students (Grades 9-12) (Operational Impact 9-6).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
Facts in Support of Findin s:
Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
Payment of applicable fees to the wVUSD or, alternatively, execution of an
Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 mitigation agreement acceptable to the WVUSD
constitutes full and complete mitigation residential development on the
provision of school facilities from the proposed
Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition. of project
approval requiring evidence of payment of applicable school impact fees prior to
the issuance of building permits.
(a)
(b)
(c)
4.9.7 Environmental Effect: The approval of other reasonably foreseeable future development
projects within the general project area will increaseXCofun demands
Department, and
Angeles County Sheriffs Department, on the Los AngelestY
on other law enforcement agencies and will increase the number of children served by
the Walnut Valley Unified School District (Cumulative Impact 9-7).
Findin :The City
Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings-: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:.
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Local agencies have the ability to deny or condition individual development
applications based on their assessment of potential impacts upon crime and fire
hazards, as well as upon law enforcement and fire department facilities and
personnel. State, County, and local decisionmakers have the ability to respond
to those changes through Increases or decreases in annual budgetary allocations
to police and fire protection agencies.
d non-residential (c) All qualifying residential an development projects located within
the WVUSD's district boundaries are required to pay school impact fees. The
payment of applicable fees or the execution of an AB 2926 mitigation agreement
constitutes full and complete mitigation of related project impacts on WVUSD
facilities.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
26
Nov 14 20CIG 6:09PM EIS
4.10 Utilities and Service Systems
949-837-3935 p.27
4.10.1 Environmental Effeci~ The project's residential and recreational components are
projected to generate about 26,208 gallons of wastewater per day (0.26 mgd). Applying
a peaking factor of 2.7, the peaked flow rate would be about 70,762 gallons of
wastewater per day (0.71 mgd) (operational Impact 10=1)-
Finding:
=1).
Findin : The city Council hereby makes Finding (1).
6 Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are
addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the DEIR;
incorporated herein by reference_
(b) The existing sewer system has adequate capacity to accommodate projected
project flows. Peak flows in the system, including flows from the project, have
acceptable depth -to -diameter ratios.
(c) Since none of the threshold of- significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.10.2 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects
would impose cumulative impacts on those existing sewage collection and disposal
facilities that are located in the general project area (Cumulative Impact 10-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are
addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC) facilities are sized
and improvements phased Jo serve population and economic development in
accordance with forecasts adopted in SLAG_ Projects that are consistent with
SCAG growth forecasts can be adequately served by existing and planned
CSDLAC facilities.
(c) In order to fund planned improvements, each new project within the'County is
required to pay connection fees to the CSDLAC. These fees are used to finance
future expansions and upgrades to the regional trunk sewer system and
wastewater treatment facilities.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.11 Cultural Resources
4.11.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities can result in the irretrievable loss or
damage to any prehistoric, historic, or paleontological resources that may exist within the
area of proposed disturbance (Construction Impact 11-1).
27
Nov 1'4 20'06 6:09PM EIS
949-837-3935 p.28
Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) No historic or prehistoric resources have been identified on the project site or are
likely to eidst thereupon. Earth -moving activities associated with the projects
development could, however, result in the loss of paleontological resources from
the Soquel Sandstone Member.
(c) Mitigation measures have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be
adopted in the MRMP requiring a mitigation program, prepared by a qualified
paleontologist, and monitored by a paleontologic construction monitor.
implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a levet
of significance.
4.11.2 Environmental Effect: Grading activities conducted on other sites located Within the
general project area could result in impacts to any historic or prehistoric resources that
may be - located thereupon. In addition, any earth -moving activities conducted on
undisturbed sites containing the Soquel and La Vida Members of the Puente Formation
could result in the loss of recoverable paleontological resources (Cumulative Impact 11-
2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) All cumulative project activities remain subject to site-specific environmental review
and must fully conform to and comply with all applicable local, State, and federal
requirements.
CO Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.112 Aesthetics
4.12.1 Environmental Effect: Excluding those areas that will be retained as natural open space,
the project site will take on a distinctively urban physiographic character as native
vegetation is removed, hillside areas recontoured, and other construction activities occur
(Construction Impact 12-1).
Finding: The City Council.hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Based on the City's interpretation and general application of the visual resource
assessment methodology outlined in the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM)
28
Nov 14 2006 6:09PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.29
"Visual Resource Management Program" (BLM, 1986), construction -induced
changes would be considered adverse but less than significant.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.12.2: Environmental Effect The project alters existing site topography and necessitates the
construction of numerous retaining walls, extending up to about 20 feet in height
(Construction Impact 12-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DER, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The proposed retaining walls exceed the height limitations specified in the City's
Municipal Code but would be authorized under the provisions of the SPWSP. All
walls over eight feet in height are identified as plantable cribwalls and will
incorporate landscaping as an integral design element.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that the project's retaining walls and landscape plans are fully
integrated_
4.12.3 Environmental Effect The introduction of new residential and recreational uses will add
new sources of artificial lighting to the project site and could result in light trespass
extending beyond the project boundaries (Operational lmpact 12-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project=related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DER, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) has established
recommended outdoor lighting illumination levels. Lighting that conform to those
standards would be assumed to produce a less -than -significant impact.
(c) A mitigation measure has been inciuded in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be
adopted in the MRMP to ensure compliance with IESNA outdoor lighting
standards. implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to
below a level of significance.
4.12.4 Environmental Effect: Much of the San Gabriel Valley is already highly urbanized and
the area's remaining open space areas take on greater visual significance as a respite to
the dominance of urban development (Cumulative Impact 12-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented In support of this finding:
29
949-837-3935 p.30
Nov 14 2006 6:09PM EIS
(a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) No development is authorized to occur in the absence of compliance with
adopted agency plans and policies. Compliance with and conformity to adopted
plans and policies helps to mitigate the potential impacts produced by the visual
changes to existing landscapes associated with development activities -
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would 'be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no further mitigation is
recommended or required.
4.1:3 Growth Inducement
4.13.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project Includes street dedication, infrastructure
the physical alteration of areas located outside the tract map
improvements, and
boundaries, the project could alter the nature or timing of other unrelated development
activities (Growth -Inducing impact .13-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
Facts in Support of Findin s:
Project -related and cumulative growth -inducing impacts are addressed in Section
4.13 {Growth Inducement) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
The size and duration of the proposed project is not sufficient to predicate any
substantial in -migration of new workers into the general project area. The
project's incremental contribution to localized, regional, and national employment
opportunities would not create substantial significant secondary impacts.
The proposed, infrastructure improvements, Including the
existing design
nts to
Larkstone Drive and Morning Sun Avenue,
capacities or facilitate development beyond the project site.
Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact.
would be less than significant and no further mitigation is recommended or
required.
!;.a FINDINGS REGARDING MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM
The City Council has adopted or will likely adopt the MRMP set forth in the FEIR. The City
Council hereby finds that the MRMP meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of CEQA and
Sections 15097 and 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The Councilrecognizes aSwill
significant unavoidable environmental
impacts that cannot be fsiblYreducd to below a level of significance. The City Council
that: (1) due to specked economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations each of
the project alternatives are infeasible; (2) will not fulfill, in whole or in part, the identified project
objectives; and/or (3) will not feasibly result in the avoidance or any of the significant or
potentially significant environmental impacts as associated with the proposed project.
30
Nov 14 20CIG 6:10PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.31
6.1
6.2
"No Project" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Prolect. The
City Council finds that the 'No Project" alternative" is "environmentally superior" to the
proposed project since it would, at least in the short term, result in the elimination of at
least one of the significant impact associated with the proposed project.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under this alternative, no new housing units would be constructed on the site.
(c) The "no project" alternative generally reflects the conditions and associated
environmental impacts that would predictably occur should the Lead Agency
elect to either deny the proposed project or fail to take acfion on the proposed
development application, resulting in, at least, the short-term retention of the site
in its existing condition. The denial of the current development application or the
cessation of current process would not, however, preclude the submission of a
subsequent development application to the City.
(d) While cumulative biological resource impact may be incrementally reduced
through the retention of the project site as an open space area and the
preservation of existing on-site vegetation, the subregion will continue to
experience a general decline in overall biological diversity. Cumulative impacts
on biological resources would, therefore, remain significant.
(e) Under this alternative, no construction activities would occur cn the project site.
As a result, there would be no significant project -related increase in construction
emission_ Cumulative air quality impacts would, however, continue to remain
significant since related development would still be predicted to occur.
Effectiveness in Meeting Project Obiectives. The "No Project" alternative" would not
substantially meet the identified objectives of either the City or the Applicant.
Feasibi1i . In the absence of public and/or private purchase of the project site for the
purpose of open space preservation, there exists no mechanism to ensure the long-term .
preservation of the project site in an undeveloped condition. As a result, absent that
participation, the "No Project" alternative is infeasible.
"Existing Authorized Development and No Park" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Prolect.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding;
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DER, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under this alternative, no more than five new housing units would be constructed
on the project site.
(c) Since no subdivision activities would occur under this alternative, no real property
park dedication would be provided, no in -lieu park fees would be collected, and
no park improvements would result as a direct consequence of this alternative.
31
Nov 14 20106 6:10PM EIS
6.3
6.4
949-637-3935 p•32
(d) While cumulative biological resource impact may be incrementally reduced
through the retention of the project site as an open space area and the
preservation of existing on-site vegetation, the ' subregion will continue to
experience a general decline in overall biological diversity. Cumulative impacts
on biological resources would, therefore, remain significant.
(e) Under this alternative, since construction activities Would be substantially
reduced, construction -term emissions would not be anticipated to exceed
threshold limits. Because related projects and ambient growth would, however,
continue to occur, cumulative air quality impacts would remain significant.
Effectiveness 'in Meeting Project Objectives. This alternative does not substantially
contribute to the supply of new housing opportunities within the Cify and does not serve
to substantially fulfill the stated project objectives.
Feasibility. Excluding economic considerations, which are not addressed herein, the
"Existing'Authorized Development and No Park" alternative is feasible.
"Traditional Single -Family Subdivision with Park" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Proiect.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under this development scenario, approximately 64 single-family detached
homes could be accommodated on the project site.
(c) Because related projects and ambient growth would continue to occur, biological
resource impacts would remain cumulatively significant.
(d) Although the number of dwelling units would be less, total alternative -related
construction emissions would likely be generally the same based on similarities in
the number of acres that would be disturbed each day and the similar list of
construction equipment. Construction emissions would, therefore, likely remain
significant. Additionally, because related projects and ambient growth would
continue to occur, air quality impacts would remain cumulatively significant.
Effectiveness in Meeting Proiect abiectives. Although the number of dwelling units
would be reduced, this alternative substantially fulfills the projects stated objectives.
Feasibili . Excluding economic considerations, which are not addressed herein, the
"Traditional Single -f=amily Subdivision with Park" alternative is feasible.
"Proposed Project and No Stockpile Site" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Proiect.
Facts in Support orf Findings. The following facts are presented in- support of this finding:
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
32
949-837-3935 p.33
Nov 14 2006 6:10PM EIS
(b) Under this alternative, a 99 -unit detached condominium project could be
accommodated on the project site.
(c) Because related projects and ambient growth would continue to occur, biological
impacts would remain cumulatively significant..
(d) Since the amount of daily construction operations would remain generally the
same, construction emissions would remain significant. Because related projects
and ambient growth would continue to occur, air quality impacts would remain
cumulatively significant.
Effectiveness in Meeting Project Obiectkves. This alternative fulfills the stated objectives.
Feasibili . The "Proposed Project and No Stockpile site, alternative is feasible.
7,4 PROJECT BENEFITS
The: City Council finds the proposed project be ldmesultited in a number of identifiable community
benefits. Those benefits include, b y
(1) The proposed project will result in the production of 99 new housing units within the City,
thus helping the City respond to the identified housing demand outlined in the current
"Regional Housing Needs Assessment" (RHNA).
(2) The construction and sale of detached residential condominiums present future
homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers
to better match housing choices with household needs and demands.
(3) The creation of new housing opportunities will promote the attainment or regional jabs -
to -housing ratio objectives established by regional governmental entities and produce
corresponding environmental benefits.
(4) Project approval might facilitate the sale of surplus real property by the VVVUSD and
provides revenues for that district to accommodate the needs of existing and future
students.andfor
(5,) Project construction will allow for the elimination, reduction, other abuEt ng p opertaes. of
landslide hazards affecting both the subject property a
(E;) Project approval will allow for the productive use of an underutilized property designated
for residential use in the City's General Plan.
Cr) The provision of an approximately 4.68 -acre
the inventory of parklands within the City, promote the alta nbment of estaborhood lished park
goals, and create additional recreational opportunities benefiting City residents.
8.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
As described above, the proposed project would produce significant unavoidable adverse
impact in the following three topical areas: (1) Air Quality (Construction Impact); (2) Air Quality
+;Cumulative Impact): and (4) Biological Resources (Cumulative Impact). Each of those
'identified significant environmental effects will -continue to manifest as significant impacts
notwithstanding the City Council's adoption or likely adoption of those mitigation measures
identified in the FEIR.
In order to determine whether the project's potential environmental impacts are acceptably
overridden by the project's anticipated benefits, Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines
requiring the City to balance the potential benefits of the proposed project against the project's
potential unavoidable significant impacts.
33
949-837-3935 p.34
Nov 14 2006 6:11PM EIS
The City Council finds that the previously stated benefits of the proposed project outweigh the
significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. Each of the
separate and distinct benefits of the proposed project is determined to be, in themselves and
independently of any other Identified benefit, a basis for Overriding all unavoidable
environmental impacts, as identified in these findings.
The City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy
objectives that v4ll result from implementation of the proposed project. The City Council has
sought to balance these substantial economic and social benefits against the significant
unavoidable adverse effects of the proposed project. Given the substantial -social and economic
benefits that will accrue to the City and to the region from the implementation of the proposed
project, the City Council finds that the.projecifs identified benefits override the project's identified
sign Mea nt environmental impacts.
34
Exhibit C
Mitigation Monitoring Program
@
C
O
�jCD U
m
m -a
C o
O E
EL
o
O Y
U) U
C
CL
4
Z
U
[`6 U
F- m
y C
U
4
w
Ur N
@
En, o
@ O mC 2
Eo•Cm
O EE
[a U 0- C:>
Uaca C:>
El
N
-m � Lr)
_ o
N
clot° m
m [C6�i
N • O- F" w
0 0 lY U
ad m
@ O L
O
N E o --
�0o�
U a N L
m O L
O m
c m
C @ ❑ O
O�
N ' O
E CC
@
L @ 0- Its73C
N
Qco
@
O
N Q
O m ` O
E� a)
p C >
a`)mm
v >p O a`)
O2CD@
` D 0)
O @ ( m
�O N'O �
J C
- N Q
aQ:o
D
m
N
2
N
N N
C
p
o •E
o E
�O E
p•E
m m
U @
U Q
U LL
U Q
@
C@
N O)
7 C
3 C
a w o
N a
N m
y@
N O
N @
M CIS
C7
C7
mEo)
C
3
mNa
saU
Coto m
a p
C U
a O
@
cu=L;
m m m
m
m
Qp
� E `-
a Q❑
i m
i .C:
j O N
a�
7 O N
E m
UC:
Ur
0
E(D?.
a)
E>mZ
W
w
0
O0
U (A
Q N
m
> @ -a
N
U U)
d C
_ p)C
w
Ur N
@
En, o
@ O mC 2
Eo•Cm
O EE
[a U 0- C:>
Uaca C:>
El
N
-m � Lr)
_ o
N
clot° m
m [C6�i
N • O- F" w
0 0 lY U
ad m
@ O L
O
N E o --
�0o�
U a N L
m O L
O m
c m
C @ ❑ O
O�
N ' O
E CC
@
L @ 0- Its73C
N
Qco
@
O
N Q
O m ` O
E� a)
p C >
a`)mm
v >p O a`)
O2CD@
` D 0)
O @ ( m
�O N'O �
J C
- N Q
aQ:o
D
m
C �
@N
N
N C Jz�
N N
C
p
@ 7pp
m 7 N
U m@
_o: N C N
CD
0)
C —O
O Q
Y
C
vUY
C
a) ..
m
Em m is
L w
a w o
o T c4
0) -a •�
Q Q
a _ m
C m Cy
N
@ @
C �
X
_oma
mEo)
C
3
mNa
saU
Coto m
— @
cu=L;
N _
- U
CM O
3 C J
m Q U
> @
Y
U
N C a)
a)
y C T
L Q
N� N
C O)L
CN
a) N C
p
N aC
a o
E a
a) C L)
Q N
m
> @ -a
N
Q :3
d C
_ p)C
O
m UL J
CO m
E
EC° o
C O
C p -
E @a o
a)v U
a)
m ❑ N
QoU m
¢
O
:3 N
D
3 L
N n ✓-.
Ui O N N
CD n N
'U
p m
a) x
Y
iGU-,�@.
-
U
C L C
[4
N -a-
V)
C Nrn .D
7 7
O N
to N
E
ch
>+ a)
O D> N Cl O u
0 o m U m
a o a0Q E
S Q E Y J [L V)i E
x d
$ NO o
V) z a) C
@ p L m
y 6 L O C E
0-
2mm�['6E�
U O E 0-5 Q Cr
� Q'3 p cn O N
C: @ ma E m
0 a) � .zs
U) 6 O
L Q
LO.. @ a) 4E um)
ID -@°)
CD 2
10
U
IL
m� 6 Uw m
L
U p N O 0 m
L Q O
m V Q
> •� a) D cOr) 3 C
-00
m @ C D
C mL E --
E Fo
Q C
a7 � d C 117 O O
E u� `�
C,-
0 [4
p N a Q N C O
C m N N O
N@ Y a) � N
(D L o vi � �
L E OIL CD b i
L_ a) - > _
O m yC m @ 7
S] Uf a) C N = a)
� � E
— m
d m D
aI 7
U !'D N
@ aEn ni m
C@ C C 7 Q
t/) Q.O �'
N Q N N C C
E4 rn��a m
O_
V) 6
C 6 O m
m `) � C U C m
@ w DC Caa o w
'- @ a) N N
m � CD E a) 1;:=
O 3 C1 N m
C (�j d D a
D 0-
6o En CL
ti
a
m
O O @
N
C C_ -0 -
+T' N C C C
C � C N
O @ D L
E
En C)
om cncoo
m m
m cD
Qco
C,
R @ C m C
aco
@ o
O C Q t2 >
m m d m Q
C
-V 0 u@i _,4 O
CD a)
m L
a L a U �C N
cu[` @ N C U
o @ m CZ
E Emn@
E n o N
D� > m
N t6 m Q N >
o
> L @
NO N U
U N- @ N
_ m O
C D_ Q N fLiJ E O
U N U U
@ d❑ @ N
Qpm QDQo
C > O N
.Lm. O O O
Qy
COD E _++ U @ O_ N
Ep
d C � N •C •-N
O O-❑ Q) C
N E m Oa o
c `
w @ @ UN
m O. @ p)(n N O C
m @ C:
Q.
U > aO
@ @ 0 C m@ m U
Ll_ p N@ O .- d N m
.a @ V YO m C ?.-
E >
C'Z NC ❑ w .0 U
U N U N@ m a)
> N
co N 7 LCD 0 CD 0
C C
rn
) E m o
OL o mU
U O 7 u)2v
CD 0 L O> L) O > C U
N
CL aov a--L�B 0
� I �
co N
O N
CDCf)N w
N m
7 c
Q @
7 d
Q
N
U)
W
N
[II
F"
M
SyE2„�y p C
C
.C1r"tYl cC M 7 @ rn
N
In O
N @ C Q
Cf)
CD
��'
1. yEE
0
Q 0 E Q E Q0
�c 7 D In 7 N 7 C m EDE 6 a) E 5 M
wry' E m " E cD E cD
Z o p o p
�Y6=
•C t @ oLa y C O C: m
@ C
C }'_ > m CIS CD D)LID E @ C _ co @ Q� L-. @ @'C U 01-0 1, ..y. N EO 0 U C @
-r CO -O 0 in CD
N '-' N C 'C 15-
- U ._ _lz N Q @ U O• > O ca > y C
LU M III_ _ CD Q._ @
0 ca
It —M w ul7 r. Fil: Ii+iF, N O- •> N U E a� N E C m O �, E O_ U '%. - m 0) a@� Q �.>-. D O
� ""• > a)• rn- mED U y- D.E.D� c-0- o E o �u o 7 0 �> Qc Ev
O U C> D C U_ E C U K d >@ @ L' L C Q p ` C Q7 ..J d
> D> -@ U) Q) m L_ an d C D O y L E@ p C y Q
•'11 >. O O 01 N @ N E' N 'u U L
@ .L-. @ N Q -O O
CO LcomCD E Zo.y>a)u)�a>Ec�� L�0)� @
D.- a) U' p •p N > - C1 @ [n d ._ N .O ?. @ U -0 O_1 _c E O a_.
ca
D O O > Cl 'D O D` C > 'O > L U) N D)= m d C .B •O > O •D .L--. 0-0
•-� L c E L rn c E m o •-
�J 4LL'aC, .r N O �' U C @ C6 Q N _- U 7>> i p L U 4=- C> C In > N rn
o@ O E .� o O ° O -L-Q O) N L L O O@ v [C6 E Q @ >O ` C N
d @ p -- C O .... N ,,,_ [6 E (a C o @ a] U U U U N O- N It p y m c m y
❑ ta.? 'M > > Q E m m >. •C �'- _ O C L 0.- a) :° C Q O C C L O
Z F : t_ d D) > m m ° d7 > aS N 'D D '> N '(p @ y -D ,�... @ @ ' @ O c C N O L' y
Q - a) I C E L U U> C U@ 0 7@ p' Q.o d> c- m m E N °' "6 °-
> 7 7 N -O E Q O°> D �.°- N E `- > m m @ N' C O N m>
� O C C •.. a) �. T C - E 7 E U) D .L-� C y.
0» N m@ m U .0 c> > m a) o �) @ L) v n L'� o.�-�.... 0 D-> E >
c>a)7 `-U 3mein>m�0c Ey >v Eo>:cd� o mE�� @'u�
> C E m =03
N OI C U C C 3 2@ O> y> y C� [QE � �@' m a) E�� C N C
_r >.D -"D .Q C CSO .m a) --L y = a) O - D- > > O E >
QS.a E E m- c oL m. EBF �.c m E y m> E `m• U o o u)
-O a) N N C O •D U U N a) E y O y O L U C @
LL! y y m E 'E) E 0 o 0)- E �_ - v) m �L o� yH C� o "' Y oL o> mF- rn
.- o T'CJ 3 D -- - o- m @ Q v v Y > c o f c
@ U C a) :.. U N -p a) .> > y @ a) C C -0 .- C 7
1r+:' ..�'rae• L > > @ O. C C D p) @ N a) O
V a N a) O C C L O 0 .N U cn o N@ C y @ E- U).0 > O o CD@ C
D@ O-0 'D U O 0 y N .,... > C m__ :fin Q@ >, m V@ L L@ R 0) `�-• 'D
U >. .- U@ C @ D) C D U l7 C ° O Q m C D En EZ 0N - E E 'B p O L
Q # Lc3c. oo Q oma) of �@ o E In �• > o0
_�'+.•A4•�� ,.. Q -D 3 m U co U @ >. O O N y D "- > C - -0 >@ 2 '� � 7 C L 7 L
d> O C C U co - L C ` m0-0 >> C> y @ N a) 7 0) D� O- U) D In U .` O
>o ECmn m >> E o E� D
Yam��oEo ���u�E°cv�ciov�a)� >Dm@�
°) CD m U C1"E N O U D N @ -C E > C >` ` d .� @ Q -- •d C t C -� m
LL k .. E C C. C Q) 'C > c > O@ y� In o d@ m
> p) ¢ m m > a) O O -M 'D @ .0 L U L) L Q m m 7 O O) N :_ C @ C .Lm @ C @
oDN a)LEn E a)oa)16>=°Iv°imyn�D c� a)E La a)Ea)C
°) M .D @ C N N> y @ N a) o O -U °) N E, -�- D
❑ksyy��'' a)c �°EEm neoaN�"In of r - E> mZ`-'o�v)> L0- U� 0)0
'O p m O +_+ r-- m - y In 'p > c y ca O > O E C C L . >. a) - •- 7 D >
cL > in @ @ •— v1 O N C 0)'.' O @ .,L... C L C O
rnm' o DO)L�m�� m� Q wo�+oE m_cC°i�Ec�
w� @ a) ac)N > E y y 7 o T> E EQ D 0-Qy a! E13 o o m N m
-` o m � m m E a) > a) O_ :1a)a E E cmm Cl) > In �)�.� >� U = r: U) - � o
N a)-0 E@ _>mnim-2 p oQ'cE0� O@N cL a@.ao
:I d 0 y- L 0--0 > > EoOm �E mm yc
z c U C-0 7 m > °) a) m�-�gn > c �? a) m. 73 0) C: rz V EL
7 7 m N DL --O m InD) d m -° > L OC O@@ U y O 3 .fl O> O y 0)" a Q, U P O N
s,� :.i_ ul CL Co -0 c_OmaL� ENrna)>EEc°iu Nro o) c�-o °�) D�
> O .- m C >. N - L' C D
H m D D O d > O TL C V @ UO -C C to > Q)� C m O v- >
m [4 C Nm> c O E>cz
> E C y C> L U N m = > In C U O U
Y> D. 7 C.Q> O O .0 > w TL co > 01 E> D Q E o .� >, Q --.'U N
0, 71E
O m� u) > > O N C C V) O 6 O m N [6 N N E �p V)i E Z a) •- -Fa
> j Q o
QZa��mn �S7>mE-0U0E>� 0uc@O.N B o..v@❑=InLQ
T l.:�•l°y :• T tV
ii•
0
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2005111118) AND
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM AND ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT AND A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE SOUTH POINTE WEST
SPECIFIC PLAN AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 63623 FOR
A SITE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 34.52 ACRES GENERALLY
LOCATED SOUTH OF LARKSTONE DRIVE, EAST OF MORNING SUN
AVENUE, AND WEST OF BREA CANYON ROAD (ASSESSORS PARCEL
NUMBERS 8765-005-01, 8765-005-02, 8765-005-03, 8765-005-07, AND
PORTIONS OF 8765-005-905, 8763-026-907, AND 8763-026-901)
A. RECITALS
The applicant, South Pointe West, LLC, has filed an application for
certification of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2005111118)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the South Pointe West Specific Plan
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 63623, as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Environmental Impact
Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be referred to as the
"Application."
2. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 518 property owners of
record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. Three public places
within the City of Diamond Bar were posted with the public hearing notices
and a display board was posted at the project site. Notification of the public
hearing for this project was properly advertised in the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers.
3. On November 14 and continued to November 28, 2006, the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly
noticed public hearing on the Application.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-52
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in
this Resolution required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR
(SCH No. 2005111118) has been prepared according to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated
hereunder. The 45 -day public review period for the EIR began August 25,
2006 and ended October 9, 2006. Furthermore, the Planning Commission
has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Application.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that,
having considered the record as a whole, including the findings set forth
below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and
conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein
will have the potential of an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat
upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this
Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects
contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning
Commission hereby finds and determines that changes and alterations have
been required in or incorporated into and conditioned upon the project
specified in the application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse
environmental impacts identified in Environmental Impact Report
(SCH No. 2005111118) except as to those effects which are identified and
made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this
Planning Commission recommends to City Council and finds are clearly
outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits or the proposed
project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council certify the
EIR complete and adequate; and adopt the Findings of Facts, Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program
attached herein as Exhibits "A" and hereby incorporated by reference.
The Planning Commission shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: South Pointe
West, LLC, JCC Homes, 2632 W. 237th Street, Suite 201, Torrance, CA
90505.
2
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-52
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2006, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
j
BY:
Kwang Ho Lee, Acting'Chairman
II, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certifythatthe foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held
on the 28th day of November 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: AC/Lee; Nolan, Wei
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: VC/Lee; Chair/Nelson
ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None
ATTEST:
3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-52
Exhibit A
EIR
Facts of Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Nov 14 2006 6:*01PM EIS 949-837-3935 P.1
DRAFT
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - SOUTH POINTE WEST SPECFIC PLAN
AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 063623, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 200511.1118
Section 21081 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code
Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, 'Fite e 14, Chapter 3, California Public Resources Code
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The following statement of facts and findings (Findings) has been prepared by the City of
Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (GEQA) and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines) for the "South Pointe West Specific Plan"
(SPWSP) project and for any and all discretionary actions reasonably associated therewith. For
planning purposes, the, City andlor' other responsible agencies have assigned a number of
case/file numbers to certain actions now contemplated by the City. Those case/file numbers
include, but are not limited to: (1) General Plan Amendment No. 2005-01; (2) Zone Change No.
2006-03; (3) Development Agreement No. 2005-01; (4) Specific Plan No. 2005-01;'(5) Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 063623; (6) Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-05; (7) Development
Review No. 2005-26; (7) Tree Permit No. 2005-06; and (8) Environmental Impact Report No.
2005-01 and State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2005111118.
Reference to the SPWSP herein is intended to be inclusive of each of the above referenced
discretionary actions and such additional discretionary and ministerial actions as may be
required for or associated with the construction, habitation, occupancy, use, and maintenance of
the SPWSP and the residential, recreational, and infrastructure -related land uses proposed
within the geographic area examined in the FEIR, whether of not included within the geographic
area encompassed by the SPWSP or extending beyond the boundaries of that planning area.
This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the
City Council prior to determining whether to certify the "Final Environmental Impact Report -
South Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar,
California, State Clearinghouse No. 2005111118" (FEIR), which is inclusive of, but not
necessarily limited to, the "Draft Environmental Impact Report - South Pointe West Specific
Plan, Vesting. Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State Clearinghouse
No. 2005111118' and the "Technical Appendix - Draft Environmental Impact Report - South
Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California,
State Clearinghouse No. 2-005111118" (DEIR), and the "Response to Comments on the Draft
Environmental Impact -Report - South Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State Clearinghouse No. 20051111180 (RTC), and to
approve or conditionally approve the SPWSP.
The State CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project
for which an environmental impact report (EIR) has been completed which identifies one or
more significant environmental effects on the environment that would occur if the proposed
I
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.2
project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more written findings
for each of those significant effects. The possible findings specified in Section 15091 of the
State CEQA Guidelines, which shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, include:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid
or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the final EIR.
[This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (1)"]
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
This finding shall be referred to as. "Finding (2) j '
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained, workers,
make infeasible the. mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.
This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (3)"]
With respect to those significant effects which are subject to Finding (1) above, the agency shall
also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in'
the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects.
With respect to those significant effects which are subject to Finding. (2) above, the findings shall
not be made if the agency making the findings has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency
to deal, with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. With respect to those
significant effects which are subject to Finding (3) above, the findings shall describe the specific
reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives.
In accordance with Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council makes the
following findings for each significant or potentially significant environmental effect identified in
the FEIR. Those impacts are categorized under the corresponding topical headings presented
in the FEIR. Reference to mitigation measure numbers herein are as presented in the FEIR and
may differ from those numbers or notations that may be subsequently assigned should the City
Council elect to approve or conditionally approve the SPWSP.
A number of significant environmental effects are identified in the FEIR which cannot be avoided
or substantially lessened. In recognition of the continuing existence of significant unavoidable
adverse environmental - effects, a statement of overriding considerations, supported by
substantial evidence in the record, is, therefore, required in order for the Lead Agency to
approve the SPWSP. The statement of overriding considerations for the SPWSP is presented.
in Section 8.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations) herein.
1.2 Record of Proceedings
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, at a minimum, the record of proceedings for the
SPW SP consists of the following documents and other evidence:
(1)
(2)
(3)
"Initial Study," including all documents expressly cited therein;
"Notice of Preparation" (NOP). "Notice of Completion" (NOC), "Notice of Availability"
(NOA), and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed
project;
The "Draft Environmental Impact Report - South Pointe West Specific Plan, Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State Clearinghouse No.
2005111118," including all documents incorporated by reference therein and all written
2
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.3
comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during the public review
period established by the NOP;
(4) "Technical Appendix - Draft Environmental Impact Report - South Pointe West Specific
Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State
Clearinghouse No. 2005111118";
(5) Other site-specific andlor project -specific technical studies and exhibits not included in
the FEIR but referenced therein;
(6) "Response to Comments on the Oraft Erivironmentat Impact Report - South Pointe West
Specific Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.063623, Diamond Bar, California, State
Clearinghouse No. 2005111118," including all written comments submitted by public
agencies and other stakeholders during the public review period established by the
NOG;
(7) All written and verbal public testimony presented during noticed public hearings for the
proposed project at.which public testimony was taken;
(8) "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program." as presented in the FEIR and as
subsequently adopted by the City Council;
(9) Matters of common knowledge to the City including, but natlimited to, federal, State, and
local laws, rule, regulations, and. standards;
(10) All documents expressly cited in these Findings; and
(11) Such other relevant materials required to'be in the record of proceedings under Section
21167.6(e) of CEQA.
1.3 Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record for the City Council's
action related to the SPWSP are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development
Department, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178. The Community
Development Director is the custodian of the administrative record for the project. Copies of the
documents constituting the record of proceedings are and at all relevant times, during the
regular business hours of the City, have been and will be available upon request at the offices of
the Community Development Department. This information is provided- in .compliance with
Section 21061.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091 (e) of the State GEQA Guidelines.
2.0 GENERAL FINDINGS
In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the City Council hereby finds that:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
The City of Diamond Bar is the 'Lead Agency" for the project evaluated in the FEIN;
The FE1R and all environmental notices associated therewith were prepared in
compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and in accordance with the
City's local guidelines and procedures;
The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR
reflects the independent judgment of the City Council;
A "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program" (MMRP) has been prepared for the
proposed project, identifying those feasible mitigation measures that the City Council
has. adopted or will likely adopt in order to reduce the -potential environmental effects of
the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible;
The mitigation measures adopted or likely to be adopted by the City Council will be fully
implemented in accordance with the MRMP, verification of compliance Will be
documented, and each measure can reasonably be expected to have the efficacy and
produce the post -mitigated consequences assumed in the FEIR;
3
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS 949-837-3935
p.4
(6) Each of the issues to be resolved, as identified in the FEIR and subsequently raised in
comments received by the City and during the deliberation of the Citys advisory and
decision-making bodies, has been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council;
(7) The impacts of the proposed project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the
time of certification of the FEIR;
(8) The City Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including, but not limited
to, those comments received following the dissemination of the DE1R and RTC, and the
responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the
responses to those comments add significant new information under Section 15088.5 of
the State CEQA Guidelines;
(9) The City Council has not made any' decisions that would constitute an irretrievable
commitment of resources toward the proposed project prior to the certification of the
FEIR nor has the City Council previously committed to a definite course of action with
respect to the proposed project;
(10) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have been
available for review and request during the regular business hours of the City at the
office of the City's Community Development Department from the custodian of records.
for such documents;
(11) These Findings incorporate by reference such other findings as may be required under
Sections 65454, 65455, 66474, 66474.4, 65853, and 65860 of the California
Government Code and those corresponding finding required under the "City of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code" (Municipal Code); and
(11) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record,
the City Council has or will impose conditions, mitigation measures, and take other
actions to reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum
extend feasible and finds as stated in these Findings.
1.0 SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
WHICH CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
The City Council has determined that existing regulations, conditions of approval, project design
features, and/or feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to
be adopted by the City Council will result in a substantial reduction of most but not all of those
environmental effects identified in the FEIR. Notwithstanding the existence of those regulations
and the adoption of those conditions and measures, the City Council finds that the following
significant environmental effects will continue to exist.
3.'1 Biological Resources
:3.1.1 Environmental Effect Implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other
reasonably- foreseeable future projects, will contribute incrementally to the continuing.
reduction in relatively natural, undisturbed open space areas found within the general
project area and contribute to the progressive fragmentation of habitat areas and general
decline in species diversity throughout the region (Cumulative Impact 5-9).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
4
Nov 14 2006 6:01PM EIS
949-837-3935
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological impacts are addressed in Section 4.5
(Biological Resources) in the DEIR and in Section 3.0 (Response to Comments)
In the RTC, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Through the use of small lots and clustering, the proposed project minimizes the
area of physical disturbance and results in the preservation of approximately 15.9
acres of open space. Through those actions, the biological impacts of the
proposed project have been reduced to the maximum extentfeasible.
(c) Other than through the imposition of regional growth management and/or
regional resource conservation policies, which actions are the purview of regional
governmental entities and cannot feasibly be implemented at the project level, no
feasible mitigation measures have been identified by the City Council which
would effectively address this cumulative impact.
P.5
3.2 Air Quality
3.2.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities will result in the generation of particulate,
oxides of nitrogen, and other criteria pollutants as a result of projected ground -
disturbance activities and equipment utilization (Construction Impact 7-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The air quality analysis was conducted in accordance with the methodology
presented in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD)
"CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (SCAQMD, April 1993) and "Localized
Significance Threshold Methodology" (SCAQMD, June 2005).
(c) Primarily as a result of the use of diesel -powered equipment, NOx emissions are
projected to exceed the SCAQMD's threshold standards. NOx is a regional
(ozone) concern because NOX is an ozone precursor which has been shown to
cause adverse health effects. NOx reductions through available mitigation
measures, such as regular, low-NOx tune-ups and oxidation catalysts, are on the
order of about ten percent. Even by keeping equipment in good tune, average
daily construction exhaust NOx emissions cannot be reduced to a less -than -
significant level.
(c) There are no reasonably available mitigation measures than can reduce
projected NOx emissions to less -than -significant levels.
3.2.2 Environmental Effect: Related project activities, in combination with the construction and
operation of the proposed project, will incrementally contribute to regional air emissions
within and throughout the South Coast Air Basin (Cumulative impact 7-5).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
5
Nov 14 2006 6:02PM EIS 949-837-3935
(b) The SCAQMD indicates that one possible approach for determining cumulative
impacts is- whether. (1) the project shows a. one percent annual reduction in
project emissions; (2) has a 1.5 average vehicle ridership; or (3) reduces the rate
of growth in vehicle miles traveled (VIAT) and trips. Implementation of the
proposed project and other related projects is not likely to achieve either a 1.5
average vehicle ridership or a reduction in the rate of growth in vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) and vehicle trips.
(c) No mitigation measures, formulated specifically to address the project's potential
incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts, are deemed to be
reasonably feasible.
P.6
4.0 SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .
WHICH CAN FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL QF SIGNIFICANCE
The City Council has determined that existing regulations, conditions of approval, project design
features, and/or feasible mitigation measures included in the FE1R and adopted by or likely to
be adopted by the City Council will result in a substantial reduction of the following
environmental effects and that each of the following environmental effects will either occur at or
can be effectively reduced to below a level of significance.
4.1 Land Use
4.1.1 Environmental Effect: New residential and recreational land uses could introduce land
use compatibility issues between the proposed uses and those existing and reasonably
foreseeable future land uses that now and which may exist in close proximity to those
uses (Land Use impact 1-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIFY, incorporated herein by reference.'
(b) The proposed residential, recreational, and open spaces uses are compatible
with existing and proposed development within the general project area.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.1.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed mixed-use project, including the land uses,
densities, and development standards now under consideration, could conflict with the
adopted plans and policies of the City (Land Use Impact 1-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The proposed project is generally consistent with the policies of the "City of
Diamond Bar Genera Plan (General Plan) (City, July 25, 1995).
6
Nov 14 2006 6:02PH EIS 949-837-3935
p.7
(c) Although the proposed number of dwelling. units exceeds the provisions of the
hillside management ordinance, when the entire park site is included„ residential
densities remain within the limits established under the General Plan and
Chapter 22.22 of the Municipal Code.
(d) The proposed project is generally consistent with the applicable core policies of
the Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) "Regional
Comprehensive. Plan and Guide" {RCPG) (SCAG, March 1996) and "Regional
Transportation Plan - Destination 2030" (SCAG, April 2004).
(e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified. impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.1.3 Environmental Effect: Existing development restrictions currently encumber the project
site. The elimination, modification, and/or alteration of those deed restrictions would be
required in order to allow for the development of the proposed land uses (Land Use
Impact 1-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under existing City policies, the owners of Lots 46-49 of Tract No. 32576 are
presently authorized only one dwelling unit per parcel. Subject to appropriate
findings, as determined by the City Attorney, the City Council is authorized to
modify those restrictions.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, 'a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval retaining deed restriction on the designated remainder portion of Lot 49
(Tract No. 32576).
4.1.4 Environmental. Effect: The proposed subdivision creates a number of residual or
designated remainder parcels, identified as "Not a Part" in the proposed tract map, within
the area of Lot -49 of Tract No. 32576„with reduced access (Land Use Impact 1-4).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support.of this finding:
(a)
(b)
Project -related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
LJCC - South Pointe West LLC (Applicant) seeks to acquire from the Walnut
Valley Unified School District (WVUSD) a portion of Lot 49 in Tract No. 32576
and, in combination Lots 46-48 of Tract 32576 and additional properties located
to the south of Larkstone Drive, subdivide the 'property to allow for the
development of 99 dwelling units, a portion of the new neighborhood park, and
common open space areas. The boundaries of the proposed development
application are not coterminous with existing lot lines. Residual areas will,
therefore, be created that are "not a part” of the current development application.
7
Nov 14 2006 6:02PM EIS 949-837-3935
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval retaining deed restriction on the designated remainder portion of Lot 49
(Tract No. 32576).
4.1.5 Environmental Effect Cumulative residential development within the City and the
population increase associated with the introduction of new dwelling units could exceed
the 2005-2010 population growth forecasts presented in the "Regional Transportation
Plan - Destination 2030" (SCAG, 2004) and which serve as a basis for regional
transportation planning (Land Use Impact 1-5).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
P-8
(a) Project related and cumulative land use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1
(Land Use) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Implementation of the proposed project in combination with those other related
projects will result In the further urbanization of the general project area, including
the conversion of vacant or under -developed properties to higher -intensity uses.
(c) Other related projects located within the City include, but may not be limited to, a
total of 355 new dwelling units (plus the 99 units associated with the proposed
project). The estimated resident population associated with those projects within
the City would exceed Citywide SCAG projections for the 2005-2010 time period.
(d) Since regional plans reflect local growth projections, a mitigation measure has
been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP
stipulating that the City prepare and transmit to SCAG a revised growth forecast.
Formal SCAG notification constitutes full mitigation for the resulting difference
between local and regional growth projections.
4-2 Population and Housing
4.2.1 Environmental Effect: Project -related construction will increase the local work force and,
through job creation and worker relocation, has the potential to induce short-term
population growth in the general project area (Construction Impact 2-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in
Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The workforce required for the project's construction, operation, and
maintenance can be reasonably drawn from the available regional labor pool.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.2.2 Environmental Effect Project implementation will result in the addition of 99 dwelling
units to the City's existing housing stock and will increase the City's population by
8
Nov 14 2006 6:03PM EIS 949-837-3935 P.9
approximately 326 individuals, based on the existing (January 2005) Citywide vacancy
rates and average household size (Operational impact 2-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in
Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The impact of the proposed project on long-term employment opportunities is not
projected to be substantial and, based on its limited scale, will not create
additional significant secondary housing impacts.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.2.3 Environmental Effect: By increasing the City's housing stock, absence a corresponding
increase in long-term employment opportunities, project implementation, in combination
with cumulative development, could contribute to a jobs/housing imbalance (Cumulative
impact 2-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing. impacts are addressed in
Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the DER, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The SCAG region is further divided into both areas governed by regional councils
of governments and into regional statistical areas. The project site is located
within the area governed by the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
(SGVCOG) and within RSA 26 (Covina). RSA 26, in which the project is located,
is classified as "jobs rich" and the jobs -to -housing ratio is projected to increase
between 1997 and 2025. The expansion of existing housing opportunities will
serve to move the area toward a regional jobs -housing balance.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.3 Geotechnical Hazards
4.3.1 Environmental Effect: Two ancient and one active landslides have been identified on the
property. Existing unstable earth conditions that have predicated past landslide activities
within the tract map area must be further remediated as part of the project's grading
plan, requiring increased earthwork and stabilization efforts in order to make the site
geotechnically feasible for the proposed development (Construction Impact 3-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
9
Nov 14 2006 6:03PM EIS 949-B37-3935 p.10
(a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnicai hazards impacts are addressed in
Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the DER incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) Extensive site-specific and project -specific geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and
soils analyses have been performed in order to assess on-site and near -site
conditions.. Subject to the application of those actions, measures, and design
specifications incorporated in those studies and subject to the application of such
additional provisions as may be identified by the City prior to the issuance of
grading and building permits, the project can be feasibly developed from a
geotechnical perspective.
(c) A "Restricted Use Area" designation be recorded for any in -tract areas where
geologic, geotechnical, seismic, or soils hazards cannot. be eliminated to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer..
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval to effectively address the known geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and
soils hazards affecting the project site.
4.3.2 Environmental Effect: During the life of the project, structures and other improvements
constructed on the property will be subject to periodic ground shaking resulting from
seismic events along earthquake faults located throughout the region (Operational
Impact 3-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in
Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
'reference.
(b) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that
the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical -investigations are
incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has
committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the
proposed project and the project's design, construction, and operation t will occur
in conformity and compliance therewith.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval to effectively address the known geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and
'soils hazards affecting the project site.
.4.3.3 Environmental Effect: Los Angeles County is located within a seismically active region.
Since earthquakes have historically occurred throughout the region and can be expected
to occur in the future, development activities that occur throughout the region and their
occupants and users will remain subject to seismic forces (Cumulative Impact 3-3).
-Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this -finding:
10
Nov -14 2006 8:03PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.11
4.4
(b) Adequate control measures have been formulated by State and local
governmental entities to ensure that all public and private structures are
constructed and maintained in recognition of site-specific, area -specific, and
regional geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils conditions.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
reference.
(a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in
Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
Hydrology and Water Quality
4.4.1 Environmental Effect: Development activities, including both residences and portions of
the internal street system, are proposed within the area presently designated as a "flood
hazard area" on the County Assessor's Parcel Maps (Construction Impact 4-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed In Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The preliminary title report for Lot 49 in Tract No. 3257 includes: specific
"protective conditions" with regards to the interference of existing drainage and
Los Angeles County Assessor's parcel maps for the subject property, as well as
the previously recorded subdivision maps for Tract 32576, depict or make
reference to flood hazard zones and/or flood control drainage improvements.
(c) Project -specific drainage and grading studies provide for new drainage patterns
and ensure that no habitable structures will be constructed within any designated
flood plain. - The final subdivision map shall set forth the locations of any new
drainage structures and devices required to accommodate the proposed land use
and safety convey storm waters.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.4.2 Environmental Effect: Grading, material stockpiling, and equipment staging will result in
the removal of existing ground cover, disrupt surface soils, increase the potential for
erosion and sediment transport, and potentially impact existing beneficial uses
(Construction Impact 4-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented 'in support of this finding:
(a)
'Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the .DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
11
Nov 14 2006 6:03PM EIS 949-837-3935
P. 12
(b) The "Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Storm Water and Urban
Runoff Discharges' (NPDES Permit No. CAS004001) regulates storm water
discharge and imposed waste discharge requirements for municipal storm water
and urban runoff discharges within the Los Angeles County (County).
(c) The "Construction General Permit" (NPDES No. CAS000002) requires that
dischargers prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and
implement temporary erosion control devices and temporary sediment control
best management practices (BMPs).
(d) Practices and procedures are already in place to minimize erosion and sediment
transport to the maximum extent practical (MEP).
(e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4 .4.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the introduction of impervious
surfaces onto the project site and, as a result of the impedance of opportunities for
absorption and infiltration of those waters, has the potential to Increase the quantity,
velocity, and duration of storm waters discharged from the tract map area (Operational
Impact 4-3).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project-related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Engineering studies have been conducted and storm drain plans have been
prepared for the proposed project. The engineering analysis has demonstrated
that the-proposed storm drain system will effectively operate during a 50-year
capital storm event.
(c) Mitigation measures have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be
adopted in the IVIRMP to ensure that drainage improvements are consistent with
applicable design and development standards and that post-project drainage
flows do not result in any adverse public safety or other impacts. Implementation
of those measures will reduce the identified impact to below a level of
significance.
4.4.4 Environmental Effect: Unless effectively sized and maintained, all structural and
treatment control BMPs, including those to be maintained by the County and by the
homeowners' association, will not result in their planned performance and efficacy
(Operational impact 4-4).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project-related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
12
Nov 14 2006 6:04PM EIS 949-837-3935 p. 13
(b} Prior to discharge tram the developed site, 85—' percentile treatment flows will be
treated via ttuee continuous deflective separators (GDS} or approved equivalent
flav-r-based treatment units at the thn"e post-development discharge locations.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval stipulating the preparation of a starmwater management plan and
ensuring that volume-based treatment control BMPs and flow-based BMPs are
designed and maintained in accordance with titre County's "Manua{ for Standard
Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan" (Gounty, September 20(?2).
4.4.5 Environmental Effect: The project's implementation and that of other development
projects could adversely impact receiving surface or groundwater quality, create
hydrologic. impacts that could result in significant adverse impacts to natural drainage
systems, and adversely affect opportunities for groundwater recharge (Cumulative
Impact 4-5).
Finding: The City Council her6by makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The fallowing facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project-related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are
addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality} in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference. " .
(b) Adequate design and development control measures, including design
specifcations, have been formulated by and are implemented by the City and by
the County to ensure that all public and private drainage facilities and structures
are constructed and maintained in recognition of applicable project -related and
cumulative hydrologic conditions and drainage f{ows.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended ar required:
4.5 i3iologicallZeso—arces
4.5.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities will result in direct impacts to about 38.8
acres, including about 25.2 acres located within the tract map area and 13.5 acres
located beyond the tract map boundaries, resulting in the removal of existing vegetation
within those areas. f=uel modification requirements imposed by the Los Angeles Gounty
Fire Department could d'srectly impact additional vegetation (Construction"Impact 5=1 ).
Findin :The Gity Council hereby makes Ffinding (11.
Facts in Support of Flndin4s: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a)
(b)
Protect related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources} in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
Project implementation will result in direct disturbance to the following plant
communities: (1) 6.6 acres of California sagebrush scrub; (2) 3.8 acres of mixed
chaparral; (3} <0.1 acres of southern willow scrub; (411.2 acres of mule fat snub;
(5) 6.9 acres of mule fat scrublruderal; (6) 0.5 acre of coast live oak v"roodland;
(7) 0.2 acre of developed; (8) 6.6 acres of disturbed; (910.1 acres of ornamental;
13
_ Nov 14 2006 6_04PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.14
(10) 2.6 acres of ruderal; (11) 9.13 acres of ruderaldisturbed; and (12) 0.4 acre of
ruderaUmixed chaparral.
(c) Rare natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited
distribution. The most current version of the California Department of Fish and
Game's The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program - List of California
Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the California Natural Diversity
Database' (CDFG, 2003) serves as a guide to each community's status.
(d) With the exception of southern willow scrub, none of the habitat types identified
on the project site are categorized as high priority for inventory in the California
Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). This on-site plant community is patchy in
distribution and is not connected to larger continuous southern willow scrub
habitat areas extending beyond the project boundaries. The likelihood of this
community supporting sensitive species is considered minimal.
(e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
-4.5.2 Environmental Effect: As proposed, the project will permanently impact approximately
1,042 linear feet of streambed, including 0.13 acres of United- States Army Corps of
Engineers (ALOE), Regional. Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional
waters and 0.33 acres of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional
waters (Construction Impact 5-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project implementation will result in direct impacts to approximately 1,042 linear
feet of streambed, including approximately 0.13 acre of United States Army
Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and Regional Water Quality Control Board
(IRWQCB) jurisdictional waters of the United States and waters of the State
(including about 0.03 acres of wetlands) and approximately 0.33 acre of CDFG
jurisdictional streambed. No direct impacts to jurisdictional' waters are
anticipated beyond the tract map boundaries.
(c) The project will require a nationwide Section 404 permit from the .ACOE, a
Section 401 water quality certification from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602
streambed alteration agreement from the CDFG, stipulating the provision of
compensatory resources for identified impacts.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure compliance with the provisions of Sections 401-404 of
Federal Clean Water Act and Sections 1600-1616 of the California Fish and
Game Code.
4.5.3 Environmental Effect: Proposed grading and grubbing activities will result in the removal
of or direct impacts upon 46 protected ordinance -size trees (45 coast live oak trees and
one willow tree) of the 70 protected ordinance -size trees (65 coast rive oak trees and five
willow trees) identified on the project site (Construction Impact 5-3).
14
Nov 14 2008 8:05PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.15
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Grading and grubbing operations proposed both within the tract map area and in
the vicinity of the off-site portion of the proposed neighborhood park and
stockpile site will result in direct impacts on 45 protected ordinance -sized coast
live oaks and one protected ordinance -size willow trees. Based on final grading
plans, the actual number of directly impacted trees could be greater.
(c) The project is subject to compliance with the provision of Chapter 22.38 (Tree
Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval specifying the number of replacement trees to be provided and
describing the Applicant's obligations under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA).
4.5.4 Environmental Effect: While not observed on the project site, construction could
potentially impact one' State -listed raptor (American peregrine falcon) and a number of
unlisted sensitive reptile species (coast horned lizard, coast patch -nosed snake),
sensitive birds (loggerhead shrike, southern California rufous crowned sparrow, Bell's
sage sparrow), sensitive mammals (western mastiff bat, pallid bat, pocketed free -tailed
bat, San Diego black -tailed jackrabbit, San Diego desert woodrat, and northwestern San
Diego pocket mouse), and sensitive raptors (white-tailed kite, northern harrier, golden
eagle, sharp -shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, ferruginous hawk, merlin, and prairie falcon)
(ConstrUctiOn impact 5-4).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) With the exception of the American peregrine falcon, none of these species are
protected by federal or State listings and the loss of individual species and their
habitat would not threaten regional populations.
(c) The American peregrine falcon, a State -listed endangered and fully protected
species, is mainly a rare spring and fall transient in the region and may utilize the
study area and general project vicinity for foraging. Locally, 'the species is not a
breeding resident but only an uncommon migrant Although this species is
protected during nesting, this species is not expected to utilize the study area for
nesting activities. Removal of their habitat represents an adverse but less -than -
significant impact to regional populations.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.5.5 Environmental Effect: Grading activities will result in the immediate mortality of small and
slow moving animals and result in a disruption of wildlife habitat and the loss and
15
Nov 14 2006 6:05PM EIS
949-837-3935 P.16
displacement of wildlife, thus resulting in a less diverse and less abundant local faunal
population (Construction Impact 5-5).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The potential mortality of small animals would reduce prey base for larger
predators, increase pressure on surviving populations in the adjacent open space
areas to absorb individuals that seek to escape mortality, result in a general
decline in genetic diversity, and reduce number of individuals available to
recolonize affected areas following site disturbance. These impacts would not
reduce general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required. .
4.5.6 Environmental Effect: Project implementation has the potential to impede existing wildlife
movement patterns acros's the project site (Operational Impact 5-6).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Based on the proximity and intensity of sprrounding development and the
existence of other improvements, including major roadways, that act as
impediments to wildlife mobility, the project site is not generally considered a part
of the Puente -Chino Hills wildlife corridor. The project site, therefore, does not
serve any connectivity or linkage role with regards to regional wildlife movement.
(c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.5.7 Environmental Effect: If improperly designed and maintained, the proposed on-site flood
control facilities and structural and treatment control Best Management Practices
(BMPs) could potentially provide a habitat for the propagation of mosquitoes and other
vectors (Operational Impact 5-7).
Finding: The City council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5.(Biological Resources) In the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Urban stormwater runoff regulations mandate the Installation and maintenance of
structural BMPs for both volume reduction and pollution management Effective
design and ongoing maintenance can reduce the propagation of vectors.
16
Nov 14 2006 6:05PM EIS 949-837-3935
p.17
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that structural BMPs, through both design and maintenance,
do not contribute to the production of vectors.
4.5.8 Environmental Effect: Project implementation, including the occupancy of the proposed
residential dwellings and the use of the neighborhood park site, will result in the
introduction of additional indirect or secondary effects upon the remaining biological
resources (Operational Impact 5-8).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The introduction of new light sources could result in an indirect effect on the
behavioral patterns of nocturnal and crepuscular wildlife and increase the
mortality rate of wild bird. High-intensity sports lighting is not presently proposed
as part of the project's design.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that lighting levels do not adversely impact off-site areas.
4.6 Traffic and Circulation
4.6.1 Environmental Effect: Construction vehicles will transport equipment, building materials,
and construction debris along local and collector streets within and adjacent to
established residential areas and an existing elementary school (Construction Impact 6
1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findinas: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) During construction, the primary travel routes to and from the project site will be
from Sheppard Hills, via Chapel Hills Drive, Walnut Leaf Drive, and Colima
Road/Golden Springs Drive, and from Larkstone Drive, via Black Hawk Drive,
Lemon Avenue, and Colima Road/Golden Springs Drive. Construction traffic will
increase traffic volumes along affected roadways and could result in the spillage
of debris and increase safety risks along those roadways.
(c) ' The City shall incorporation measures to address public safety considerations
and to reduce construction -related traffic hazards in the project's grading permit.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval requiring the Applicant to both repair any roadway damage attributable
to project construction and to prepare a construction management plan.
17
Nov 14 2006 6:06PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.18
4.6.2 Environmental Effect The project involves the dedication of Larkstone Drive as a public
street and the construction of improvements to that roadway, including street widening
and improvements to underground utilities. Street improvements could result in the
imposition of short-term restrictions to traffic along that roadway, now used primarily as a
primary accessway to South Pointe Middle School. Similarly, unless otherwise
conducted by the County; the repair of and improvement to Morning Sun Drive will be
undertaken as part of the project (Construction Impact 6-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's
(APWA) "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook" (APWA, 1996), the California
Department. of Transportation's (Caltrans) "Manual of Traffic Controls for
Construction and Maintenance Work Zones" (Caltrans, 1996) and the 'Part VI
Standards and Guides for Traffic Controls for Street and Highway Construction,
Maintenance, Utility and incident Management Operations," a component of the
Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices" (FHWA, 2003) provide guidance for the setup and operation of all work
areas on public streets and include provisions that could reasonably be expected
to be imposed by the City to ensure appropriate and continuing vehicular access.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval requiring the Applicants preparation of a construction traffic mitigation
plan and separate detailed traffic control plan.
4.6.3 Environmental Effect: The project is forecast to generate approximately 1,041 daily two-
way vehicle trips.per day, including 81 trips during the AM peak hour and 108 trips
during the PM peak hour. That traffic could increase congestion on local and regional
roadways (Operational impact 6-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The project's traffic impact analysis was conducted in accordance with the City's
"Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Analysis Report" and, for each of
the 18 study area intersections, included an assessment of the following seven
scenarios were examined: (1) Year 2005 Existing Conditions; (2) Year 2010
Cumulative Conditions; (3) Year 2010 Cumulative Conditions plus Project; (4)
Year 2010 Cumulative Conditions plus Project with Improvements; (5) Year 2020
Cumulative Conditions; (6) Year 2020 Cumulative Conditions plus Project; (7)
Year 2020 Cumulative Conditions plus Project with Improvements.
18
Nov 14 2006 6:06PM EIS
949-837-3935 P.19
(c) For Year 2010 Cumulative Conditions, 11 of those intersections are projected to
operate at an unacceptable level (LOS 'E' or "F") during the AM and/or PM peak
hour with the addition of ambient traffic growth and related project traffic. The
remaining seven intersections are expected to operate at adequate service levels
(LOS "D' or better) during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The proposed
project will significantly impact one study area intersections (Walnut Lead
Drive/Colima Road).
(d) For Year 2020 Cumulative Conditions, ten of those intersections are projected to
operate poorly and the remaining eight intersections are forecast to operate at
LOS °D" or better during the AM and PM peak hours. One study area intersection
(Walnut Leaf,DrivelColima Road) will be significantly impacted.
(e) Certain planned improvements are presently required of approved development
projects within the study area. Implementation of those identified improvements
would mitigate areawide traffic impacts at identified intersections to the extent
feasible. In accordance with the City's guidelines, the proposed project is
required to either institute, where feasible, or to pay a fair -share contribution
toward the construction cost of planned and recommended street improvements.
(f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval specifying the Applicant's obligation for the payment of a fair -share
contribution toward the identified improvements.
4.6.4 Environmental Effect: The installation of access gates at the project's entryways could
create conflicts on the adjoining roadways if vehicles- gaining entry into the tract map
area were to impede traffic flow along those roadways, such as might occur if the
stacking distance allocated for entering vehicles was of insufficient length to
accommodate the number of vehicles seeking entry during peak periods (Operational
Impact 6-4).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The primary project entry is expected to have a maximum queue of two non-
resident vehicles during the peak hours, requiring a minimum storage reservoir
length of 50 feet. With a proposed storage capacity of about 92 feet from the call
box to the back of sidewalk, adequate vehicular stacking capacity is provided.
(c) Guidelines for entry gates are set forth in Article 9 of the California Fire Code, as
locally amended.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that the design and operation of the project's access gates do
not unreasonably hinder emergency ingress into the tract map area.
4.6.5 Environmental Effect: Internal street design, including the provision of on -street parking
and the installation and maintenance of abutting landscaping, could create safety
hazards unless designed in accordance with appropriate traffic engineering standards
(Operational Impact 6-5).
19
Nov 14 2006 6:06PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.20
Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEER, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) A sight distance evaluation was prepared for the intersections of Private Drive "A"
and both Larkstone Drive and Private Drive "C" based on the Caltrans"Highway
Design Manual." In accordance therewith, adequate intersection sight distance
can be provided at the two study intersections.
(c) As specified by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD). a minimum
36 -foot pavement width is required in order to allow parking on both sides of the
access way serving the residential units. As indicated on the vesting tentative
tract map, all new local/private streets will have a pavement width of 36 feet.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that future landscape improvements do not create
impediments to driver visibility.
4.6.6 Environmental Effect: The proximity between South Pointe Middle School and the
proposed neighborhood park and the potential joint use of that facility by the school
district may encourage additional pedestrian traffic between those two facilities and, in
combination with the .dedication of Larkstone Drive as a public street, introduce
additional pedestrian safety hazards (Operational Impact 6-6).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) With regards to traffic control devices, the California Vehicle Code (CVC)
requires the City to follow the national guidelines outlined in Caltrans' "Traffic
Engineering Manual."
(c) Children may walk, play, or otherwise occur in proximity to the project site. Young
children may be inattentive when it comes to the presence of traffic and/or when
crossing the street.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that pedestrian and children's safety is fully considered..
4.6.7 Environmental Effect: The implementation of the proposed project, in combination with
other related projects, will collectively contribute to existing traffic congestion in the
general project area and exacerbate the need for localized areawide traffic
improvements (Cumulative Impact 6-7).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
20
Nov 14 2006 6:07PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.21
(a) Project related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in
Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by
reference.
(b) The following nine intersections'are projected to operate at LOS "E" or "F" under
Year 2020 cumulative conditions: (1) Fairway Drive/area Canyon Cut -Off
Road/Colima Road (AM and PM); (2) Lemon AvenueNalley Drive (AM and PMr);
(3) Lemon Avenue/Golden Springs Drive (PM); (4) Brea Canyon
Road/Washington Street (AM); (5) Brea Canyon Road/SR-60 WB Ramps (AM
and PM); (6) SR -60 EB Ramps/Golden Springs Road (AM and PM); (7) Brea
Canyon Road/Golden Springs Drive (AM peak hour and PM peak hour); (8) Brea
Canyon Road/Pathfinder Road (PM); and (9) Brea Canyon Cut Off
Road/Pathfinder Road (AM and PM). Although the project will not significantly
impact any of the study area intersections, on a cumulative basis, the project will
contribute to the adverse service level at those intersections.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.7 Air Quality
4.7.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities will involve the use of diesel -powered off-
road equipment and on -road vehicles that, in limited areas and for limited duration, will
operate in proximity to existing sensitive areas. Since diesel particulate emissions have
been categorized by the California Air Resources Board as a toxic air contaminant,
exposure could result in possible health risks to near -site receptors (Constriction Impact
7-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Diesel exposure health risk impacts from grading equipment diesel exhaust
particulates will be minimal.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would ' be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.7.2 Environmental Effect: During the project's operational life, a number of criteria pollutants
will be generated as a result of vehicle trips associated with the proposed land uses
(mobile sources), the consumption of natural gas associated with space heating, and the
off site generation of electricity (stationary sources) (Operational Impact 7-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
21
Nov 14 2006 6:07PM EIS 949-837-3935 P.22
(b) Projected operational emission fall below the SCAQK4D's recommended
threshold values.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.7.3 Environmental Effect: Increased traffic along project area roadways has the potential to
result in the creation of carbon monoxide (CO) "hot spots" (Operational Impact 7-4).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7
(Air Quality) in the DER, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) No existing or future carbon monoxide (CO) "hot spots" are forecast to occur at
any intersections near the project area from combined background (no project)
plus project traffic.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded; the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required. .
4.8 Noise
4.8.1 Environmental Effect: Project -related construction activities, including the use of heavy
equipment, will occur in close proximity to existing residential units and will result in
short-term noise increases perceptible to off-site sensitive receptors (Construction
Impact 8-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8
(Noise) in the DER, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Construction noise is regulated in the City under the provisions of the Municipal
Code. The Municipal Code limits the hours of heavy equipment operations.
Notwithstanding those provisions, construction noise may continue to be a short-
term nuisance to proximal noise -sensitive receptors.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that construction noise impacts are reduced to the maximum
extent feasible.
4.8.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the generation of an additional
1,041 vehicular trips per day, including 81 trips during the AM peak hour and 108 trips
during the PAR peak hour. Project -related traffic will be added to local roadways and
could expose off-site sensitive receptors located along affected travel ways to
perceptible increases in traffic noise (Operational Impact 8-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
22
Nov 14 2006 6:07PM EIS 949-837-3935
p. 23
. Facts in Sut—oart of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8
(hioise) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The proposed project will cause traffic noise to perceptibly increase by more than
the 3 -dB threshold along the following four roadway segments: Black Hawk C3rive
south of Lemon Avenue, Larkstone Drive east of Black Hawk Drive, Shepherd
Hills Road t—+est of Morning Sun Avenue, and Chapel Hills Drive east of Walnut
Leaf Drive. Past -project noise levels will, however, remain below City standards_
(c) Since Wane of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.8.3 Environmental Effect: Short-term construction and. long-term operational noise
associated with the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will
contribute to bath a— localized and an areawide increase in ambient noise levels in
proximity to those projects and along those roadways utilized by project -related and
related project traffic (Cumulative Impact $-3).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1}.
f=acts in Supoort of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a)
(b}
(c)
Project related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8
(Noise} in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
Development projects located in the general project area will generate short-term
noise impacts during their respective construction stages. [n addition, as traffic
volumes in the general project area increase, those areas located in proximity to
the area's arterial highway system wilt experience increased traffic noise.
Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.9 Public Services and Facilities
4.9.1 Environmental Effect: During construction, equipment, building and landscape materials,
and a variety of household items will be brought to the project site. Visibility of the tract
map area from off-site vantage points is limited and during certain periods, no or limited
. numbers of personnel will be on the project site (Construction Impact 9-11.
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Suoaorf of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
{a) Project -related and cumulative pabiic services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Service_ s and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project construction could result in. a minor increase aver existing demands for
police service but vrould not necessitate the hiring of additional personnel or
predicate the need for the construction of nevr or physical alteration to existing
23
Nov 14 2006 6 08PM EIS 949-837-3935 P. 24
Las Angeles Gounty Sheriffs Department (LAGSD) and/or California Highway
Patrol (CHP}facilities.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval to minimize both the likelihopd of a criminal incident during project
construction and any short-term demands on LAGSD resources, and to provide
the LACSD the opportunity to review the project's individual design elements in
order to reduce potential demands upon police services.
4.9.2 Environments( Effect: —'roject implementation will result in the introduction of equipment,
materials, and manpower into aCounty-designated fire hazard area prier to the provision
of wafer system improvements designated to respond to in -tract fire hazards
(Construction Impact 9-21.
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
i=acts in Sugaort of Findincts: Ti he fallowing facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services .and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b} The proposed project must fully comply with ail applicable provisions of the
Uniform Building Code" {UBC) and "Uniform Fire Code" (UFC}, as modified, and
other applicable provisions of the 'Los Angeles County Code" (Gounty Code)
established to address fire protection and public safety.
(c} In accordance. with the Los Angeles County Fire Department's (CAGED) "Fuel
h!lodification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone,4 or Very High
Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (CAGED, 19981, the Applicant is required to submit
fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plans and brush clearance activities.
(d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval requiring the preparation of fire protection program and workplace
standards for fire safety and the approval of development and infrastructure
improvement plans by the LACED.
4.9.3 Environmental Effect: Construction will occur in close, proximity to South Point Middle
School and could be disruptive to school activities and operations (Construction Impact
9-3},
. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts In Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this Ending:
{a) Project -related and cumulative public services and €acitities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project conditions are included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted
as conditions of project approval requiring the preparation of a school safety plan
and separate construction traffic mitigation plan.
(c) Mitigation measures have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be
adapted in the MRMP requiring the fencing and signage of the construction site
24
Nov 14 2006 6:08PM EIS 949-837-3935
p.25
and requiring the preparation of a school safety plan designed to minimize
disruption to school activities and enhance the safety of children near active
construction sites. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified
impacts to below a level of significance
4.9.4 Environmental Effect: With a resident population of approximately 326 persons and an
existing staffing ratio of one sworn officer for each 1,082 residents, In order to maintain
existing staffing levels, the LACSD would need an additional 0.30 sworn deputies.
Based on the LACSD's recommended officer to population ratio of one deputy per 1,000
residents, an additional 0.33 officers would be required based on the projected number
of in -tract residents (Operational Impact 9-4).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2)_
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The LACSD has not established a functional mechanism for the collection of
LACSD impact fees and there exists no formal basis to quantify project -related
impacts upon police protection services. Since funding for LACSD personnel,
equipment, and facilities is derived through ad valorum taxation and based on
yearly allocations by the County Board of Supervisor, the County has the ability to
effectively respond to LACSD resource demands.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval requiring LACSD review the project's individual design elements in
order to reduce the potential demand upon police services.
4.9.5 Environmental Effect: The introduction of 99 new residential dwellings and a new
neighborhood park will increase existing demands on LACFD facilities, equipment, and
personnel; thus predicating an incremental need for facility expansion, the purchase of
new or replacement equipment, and the addition of LACFD personnel (Operational
Impact 9-5).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Existing water mains are capable of delivering a minimum fire flow of 1,250
gallons/minute (gpm) at 20 pounds/square inch (psi) for a two-hour duration..
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, project conditions are
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as conditions of project
approval to ensure LACFD's review of the proposed water supply system, access
improvement, emergency ingress, and compliance with applicable LACFD
standards.
25
Nov 14 2006 6:08PM EIS 949-837-3935 p.26
4.9.6 Environmental Effect. Project implementation will increase -enrollment within the Walnut
Valley Unified School District by an estimated 71 new students, including approximately
25 new elementary school students (Grades K-6), 19 new junior high school students
(Grades 7-9), and 27 new high school students (Grades 9-12) (Operational Impact 9-6).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Payment of applicable fees to the WVUSD or, alternatively, execution of an
Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 mitigation agreement acceptable to the WVUSD
constitutes full and complete mitigation of project -related impacts on the
provision of school facilities from the proposed residential development.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition. of project
approval requiring evidence of payment of applicable school impact fees prior to
the issuance of building permits.
4.9.7 Environmental Effect: The approval of other reasonably foreseeable future development
projects within the general project area will increase existing demands on the Los
Angeles County Sheriffs Department, on the Los'Angeles County Fire Department, and
on other law enforcement agencies and will increase the number of children served by
the Walnut Valley Unified School District (Cumulative Impact 9-7).
Finding : The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support -of this finding:.
(a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are
addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Local -agencies have the ability to deny or condition individual development
applications based on their assessment of potential impacts upon crime and fire
hazards, as well as upon law enforcement and fire department facilities and
personnel. State, County, and local decisionmakers have the ability to respond
to those changes through Increases or decreases in annual budgetary allocations
to police and fire protection agencies.
(c) All qualifying residential and non-residential development projects located within
the WVUSD's district boundaries are required to pay school impact fees. The
payment of applicable fees or the execution of an AB 2926 mitigation agreement
constitutes full and complete mitigation of related project impacts on WVUSD
facilities.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the- identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
26
Nov 14 20CIG 6:09PM EIS 949-837-3935
4.10 Utilities and Service Systems
p.27
4.10.1 Environmental Effect The project's residential and recreational components are
projected to generate about 26,208 gallons of wastewater per day (0.26 mgd). Applying
a peaking factor of 2.7, the peaked flow rate would be about 70,762 gallons of
wastewater per day (0.71 mgd) (Operational Impact 10-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
6
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are
addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the DEIR;
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The existing sewer system has adequate capacity to accommodate projected
project flows. Peak flows in the system, including flows from the project, have
acceptable depth -to -diameter ratios.
(c) Since none of the threshold of, significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.10.2 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects
would impose cumulative impacts on those existing sewage collection and disposal
facilities that are located in the general project area (Cumulative Impact 10-2).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are
addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the DEIR,
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC) facilities are sized
and improvements phased Jo serve population and economic development in
accordance with forecasts adopted in SGAG_ Projects that are consistent with
SCAG growth forecasts can be adequately served by existing and planned
CSDLAC facilities.
(c) In order to fund planned improvements, each new project within the'County is
required to pay connection fees to the CSDLAC. These fees are used to finance
future expansions and upgrades to the regional trunk sewer system and
wastewater treatment facilities.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact
would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures
are recommended or required.
4.11 Cultural Resources
4.11.1 Environmental Effect Construction activities can result in the irretrievable loss or
damage to any prehistoric, historic, or paleontological resources that may exist within the
area of proposed disturbance (Construction Impact 11-1).
27
Nov 14 2006 6:09PM EIS 949-837-3935
p. 28
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) No historic or prehistoric resources have been identified on the project site or are
likely to eidst thereupon. Earth -moving activities associated with the projects
development could, however, result in the loss of paleontological resources from
the Soquel Sandstone Member.
(c) Mitigation measures have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be
adopted in the MRMP requiring a mitigation program, prepared by a qualified
paleontologist, and monitored by a paleontologic construction monitor.
Implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level
of significance.
4.11.2 Environmental Effect: Grading activities conducted on other sites located within the
general project area could result in impacts to any historic or prehistoric resources that
may be - located thereupon. In addition, any earth -moving activities conducted on
undisturbed sites containing the Soquel and La Vida Members of the Puente Formation
could result in the loss of recoverable paleontological resources (Cumulative Impact 11-
2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in
Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) All cumulative project activities remain subject to site-specific environmental review
and must fully conform to and comply with all applicable local, State, and federal
requirements.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.12 Aesthetics
4.12.1 Environmental Effect: Excluding those areas that will be retained as natural open space,
the project site will take on a distinctively urban physiographic character as native
vegetation is removed, hillside areas recontoured, and other construction activities occur
(Construction Impact 12-1).
Finding: The City Council.hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Based on the City's interpretation and general application of the visual resource
assessment methodology outlined in the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM)
28
Nov 14 2006 6:09PM EIS 949-837-3935
p. 29
"Visual Resource Management Program" (BLM, 1986), construction -induced
changes would be considered adverse but less than significant.
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or
mitigation measures are recommended or required.
4.12.2 Environmental Effect The project alters existing site topography and necessitates the
construction of numerous retaining walls, extending up to about 20 feet in height
(Construction Impact 12-2).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The proposed retaining walls exceed the height limitations specified in the City's
Municipal Code but would be authorized under the provisions of the SPWSP. All
walls over eight feet in height are identified as plantable cribwalls and will
incorporate landscaping as an integral design element.
(c) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, a project condition is
included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted as a condition of project
approval to ensure that the project's retaining walls and landscape plans are fully
integrated.
4.12.3 Environmental Effect The introduction of new residential and recreational uses will add
new sources of artificial lighting to the project site and could result in light trespass
extending beyond the project boundaries (Operational Impact 12-3).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findinos: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) has established
recommended outdoor lighting illumination levels. Lighting that conform to those
standards would be assumed to produce a less -than -significant impact.
(c) A mitigation measure has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be
adopted in the MRMP to ensure compliance with IESNA outdoor lighting
standards. Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to
below a level of significance.
4.12.4 Environmental Effect: Much of the San Gabriel Valley is already highly urbanized and
the area's remaining open space areas take on greater visual significance as a respite to
the dominance of urban development (Cumulative Impact 12-1).
Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented In support of this finding:
29
Nov 14 2006 6:09PM EIS
949-837-3935 p.30
(a) Project related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12
(Aesthetics) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) No development is authorized to occur in the absence of compliance with
adopted agency plans and policies. Compliance with and conformity to adopted
plans and policies helps to mitigate the potential impacts produced by the visual
changes to existing landscapes associated with development activities
(c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the
identified impact would be less than significant and no further mitigation is
recommended or required.
4.13 Growth Inducement
4.13.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project includes street dedication, infrastructure
improvements, and the physical alteration of areas located outside the tract map
boundaries, the project could alter the nature or timing of other unrelated development
activities (Growth -Inducing Impact .13-1).
Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1).
Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) Project -related and cumulative growth -inducing impacts are addressed in Section
4.13 (Growth Inducement) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The size and duration of the proposed project is not sufficient to predicate any
substantial in -migration of new workers into the general project area. The
project's incremental contribution to localized, regional, and national employment
opportunities would not create substantial significant secondary impacts.
(c) The proposed. infrastructure improvements, Including the improvements to
Larkstone Drive and Morning Sun Avenue, will not increase existing design
capacities or facilitate development beyond the project site.
(d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact.
would be less than significant and no further mitigation is recommended or
required.
5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM
The City Council has adopted or will likely adopt the MRMP set forth in the FEIR. The City
Council hereby finds that the MRMP meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of CEQA and
Sections 15097 and 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The City Council recognizes that the SPWSP will result in significant unavoidable environmental
impacts that cannot be feasibly reduced to below a level of significance. The City Council finds
that: (1) due to specified economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations each of
the project alternatives are infeasible; (2) will not fulfill, in whole or in part, the identified project
objectives; and/or (3) will not feasibly result in the avoidance or any of the significant or
potentially significant environmental impacts as associated with the proposed project.
30
Nov 14 2006 6:1OPM EIS 949-637-3935
. 6.1 "No Project" Alternative
p.31
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project. The
City Council finds that the "No Project" alternative" is "environmentally superior" to the
proposed project since it would, at least in the short term, result in the elimination of at
least one of the significant impact associated with the proposed project.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under this alternative, no new housing units would be constructed on the site.
(c) The "no project" alternative generally reflects the conditions and associated
environmental impacts that would predictably occur should the Lead -Agency
elect to either deny the proposed project or fail to take action on the proposed
development application, resulting in, at least, the short-term retention of the site
in its existing condition. The denial of the current development application or the
cessation of current process would not, however, preclude the submission of a
subsequent development application to the City.
(d) While cumulative biological resource impact may be incrementally reduced
through the retention of the project site as an open space area and the
preservation of existing on-site vegetation, the subregion will continue to
experience a general decline in overall biological diversity. Cumulative impacts
on biological resources would, therefore, remain significant.
(e) Under this alternative, no construction activities would occur on the project site.
As a result, there would be no significant project -related increase in construction
emission. Cumulative air quality impacts would, however, continue to remain
significant since related development would still be predicted to occur.
Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives. The "No Project" alternative" would not
substantially meet the identified objectives of either the City or the Applicant.
Feasibility. In the absence of public and/or private purchase of the project site for the
purpose of open space preservation, there exists no mechanism to ensure the long-term
preservation of the project site in an undeveloped condition. As a result, absent that
participation, the "No Project" alternative is infeasible.
6.2 "Existing Authorized Development and No Park" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding;
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under this alternative, no more than five new housing units would be constructed
on the project site.
(c) Since no subdivision activities would occur under this alternative, no real property
park dedication would be provided, no in -lieu park fees would be collected, and
no park improvements would result as a direct consequence of this alternative.
31
Nov 14 2006 6:1OPM EIS 949-837-3935
p. 32
(d) While cumulative biological resource impact may be incrementally reduced
through the retention of the project site as an open space area and the
preservation of existing on-site vegetation, the ' subregion will continue to
experience a general decline in overall biological diversity. Cumulative impacts
on biological resources would, therefore, remain significant.
(e) Under this alternative, since construction activities Would be substantially
reduced, construction -term emissions would not be anticipated to exceed
threshold limits. Because related projects and ambient growth would, however,
continue to occur, cumulative air quality impacts would remain significant.
Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives. This alternative does not substantially
contribute to the supply of new housing opportunities within the Cify and does not serve
to substantially fulfill the stated project objectives.
Feasibility. Excluding economic considerations, which are not addressed herein, the
"Existing'Authorized Development and No Park" alternative is feasible.
6.3 "Traditional Single -Family Subdivision with Park" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Proiect.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in support of this finding:
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Under this development scenario, approximately 64 single-family detached
homes could be accommodated on the project site.
(c) Because related projects and ambient growth would continue to occur, biological
resource impacts would remain cumulatively significant.
(d) Although the number of dwelling units would be less, total alternative -related
construction emissions would likely be generally the same based on similarities in
the number of acres that would be disturbed each day and the similar list of
construction equipment. Construction emissions would, therefore, likely remain
significant. Additionally, because related projects and ambient growth would
continue to occur, air quality impacts would remain cumulatively significant.
Effectiveness in Meeting Proiect Objectives. Although the number of dwelling units
would be reduced, this alternative substantially fulfills the project's stated objectives.
Feasibili . Excluding economic considerations, which are not addressed herein, the
"Traditional Single -Family Subdivision with Park" alternative is feasible.
6.4 "Proposed Project and No Stockpile Site" Alternative
Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project.
Facts in Support of Findings. The following facts are presented in- support of this finding:
(a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0
(Alternatives Analysis) in the DEIR, incorporated herein by reference.
32
Nov 14 2006 6:1OPM EIS 949-837-3935
P.33
(b) Under this alternative, a 99 -unit detached condominium project could be
accommodated on the project site.
(c) Because related projects and ambient growth would continue to occur, biological
impacts would remain cumulatively significant..
(d) Since the amount of daily construction operations would remain generally the
same, construction emissions would remain significant. Because related projects
and ambient growth would continue to occur, air quality impacts would remain
cumulatively significant.
Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives. This alternative fulfills the stated objectives.
Feasibility. The "Proposed Project and No Stockpile Sites alternative is feasible.
7.0 PROJECT BENEFITS
The City Council finds the proposed project would result in a number of identifiable community
benefits. Those benefits include, but may not be limited to:
'(1) The proposed project will result in the production of 99 new housing units within the City,
thus helping the City respond to the identified housing demand outlined in the current
"Regional Housing Needs Assessment" (RHNA).
(2) The construction and sale of detached residential condominiums present future
homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers
to better match housing choices with household needs and demands.
(3) The creation of new housing opportunities will promote the attainment or regional jobs -
to -housing ratio objectives established by regional governmental entities and produce
corresponding environmental benefits.
(4) Project approval might facilitate the sale of surplus real property by the WVUSD and
provides revenues for that district to accommodate the needs of existing and future
students.
(5) Project construction will allow for the elimination, reduction, and/or remediation of
landslide hazards affecting both the subject property and other abutting properties.
(6) Project approval will allow for the productive use of an underutilized property designated
for residential use in the City's General Plan.
7) The provision of an approximately 4.68 -acre "turn -key" neighborhood park will expand
the inventory of parklands within the City, promote. the attainment of established park
goals, and create additional recreational opportunities benefiting City residents.
8.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
As described above, the proposed project would produce significant unavoidable adverse
impact in the following three topical areas: (1) Air Quality (Construction Impact); (2) Air Quality
(Cumulative Impact): and (4) Biological Resources (Cumulative Impact). Each of those
'identified significant environmental effects will continue to manifest as significant impacts
notwithstanding the City Council's adoption or likely adoption of those mitigation measures
identified in the FEIR.
In order to determine whether the project's potential environmental impacts are acceptably
overridden by the project's anticipated benefits, Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines
requiring the City to balance the potential benefits of the proposed project against the project's
potential unavoidable significant impacts.
33
Nov 14 2006 6:11PM EIS 949-837-3935
p.34
The City Council finds that the previously stated benefits of the proposed project outweigh the
significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. Each of the
separate and distinct benefits of the proposed project is determined to be, in themselves and
independently of any other Identified benefit, a basis for overriding all unavoidable
environmental impacts, as identified in these findings.
The City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy
objectives that will result from implementation of the proposed project. The City Council has
sought to balance these substantial economic and social benefits against the significant
unavoidable adverse effects of the proposed project. Given the substantial.social and economic
benefits that will accrue to the City and to the region from the implementation of the proposed
project, the City Council finds that the projects identified benefits override the project's identified
significant environmental impacts.
34
Exhibit C
Mitigation Monitoring Program
South Pointe West
City of Diamond Bar, California
Table ES -2
::.4":: :kit ?- —' f—it?§'":rms ,^" :'r-"-r"5pv' S'}+if' {;7-. us^u4su?- 'L' • FI e xat w ;.. • •moi! - OTdy. s c+..
'k 'A: _ .A: C. —':.:! .a— (fi. -?1 — ..,�..', f T— ate'. Y4, 6r. "" '" """
y
4
7
h
3"
y
%y :#' : --Is YJT "r 9 1.
IY
wa +t.—:4„F,a' ”—la—'
--y--t?—. rt — .
LI Lt—a
Ci m i—t—o—
_y_
I't
+ty
1
IYICC
y
4
7
h
3"
y
NNS
5a".ic
Y
=q—
J
3-
0
U
.t-
}
a —ter
Imo{ y
I„
q
4R":.
"f"4M .G
�4�
"I IYi M!A.:"°t..Gfl"'t i"W"i il:"G'3-2;N"1.. _J _z"?, .
Y"I:".Ci' 1"{Y
I
m
q
.."Y '.•':'l.""t""ppia"RSa" I'ii^_-•:t";Yl Si"iL
"a'fl'
41gr;—
{
43
J
4
u
A.,
I si u.,—,:F.1—
.4.r-
1.
c .....
I ^!
,'—$'—Y"!A—irzF,S.£ L -s., w
r�
t n
".v—,r _..: Yr..IiA-I
i,
23
iYs'u!"
{x fes- - F G::—y L" tra';'". S:'Tf"+cl? ",.1_.z,. -. .;
_..1.:Sj'— "i"t y 1'M St'jMl:"'.iY. Y""i;x+ter f"'Sv "e"l .4se'"A'R. YF",",i"R" Y .-."5:-• fe h"ac
Land -Use
Prior to the recordation of the final subdivision map, the City shall request that the Southern California
1 1 Association of Governments (SCAG) amend and, when deemed appropriate"by and at the discretion of SCAG, City
Tract Map
update the "Regional Transportation Plan - Destination 2030" (2004 RTP) and other regional planning forecasts
Attorney Recordation
to reflect a greater level of population and housing growth within the City during the 2005-2010 time period.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, all revetment structures, debris basins, and other drainage facilities and
4-1 improvements shall be subject to final design and engineering review and approval by the City Engineer and, for
City Issuance of
those storm drain facilities under County jurisdiction, by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Engineer
Grading Permits
(LACDPW).
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall verify that that the existing detention basin is
4-2 serviceable for its -specific purpose and calculated design capacity. If it is determined that the basin requires City
Issuance of
remediation, subject to prior LACDPW authorizations, specifications, and timing requirements, those actions shall
Engineer Grading Permits
be undertaken with the site's development.
Air Quality
In order to reduce emissions attributable to both heavy equipment and vehicle travel, the following actions will be
implemented by the Applicant to reduce these emissions: (1) use electric -powered or natural gas -powered
equipment in lieu of gasoline -powered or diesel -powered engines where possible; where diesel equipment has to
7-1 be used because there are no practical alternatives, the Applicant shall use particulate filters and low sulfur diesel,
as defined in SCAQMD Rule 431.2 (i.e., diesel with less than 15 ppm sulfur content); (2) require 90 -day low-NOx
tune-ups for off-road equipment; and (3) limit allowable idling to 5 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment before
shutting the equipment down and require the use of soot traps on all on-site heavy diesel powered equipment.
Public Services and Facilities
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and the Director of the Community and
Community and Issuance of
9-1 Development Services Department (Director) shall approve a temporary fencing and signage plan designed to
Development Grading Permits
discourage access to any active construction areas by children. Services Director
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and the Director and the Superintendent of
the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD) shalt approve a school safety plan to the City and to the
Community and Issuance of
9-2 WVUSD. The safety plan shall identify appropriate measures to be undertaken by the Applicant during
Development Grading Permits
construction to minimize potential disruptions to school activities and school operations and to enhance the safety
Services Director
of children near active construction sites.
August 2006
Page ES -22
EZ -S3 abed—oda";oedw! !e;uawuo"!nuS ue"Q
sn6ny
90021
•sasn uel ani;isuas-;y6il-uou "aylo "o 'sal;!I!ae} !euoi;ea"oa" "o Iooyos 's;aa";s oygnd
6u!wofpe r(ue o; pa!!dde aq;ou pays sp—epue;s asayl 'tiepunoq "{wed ayl;e pamseaw se 'alpueo;oo}
!e;uozuoy
o;oa—lp saoinJaS g•p uey; avow;ou o; uo!sn";ul;y6l! az!w!u!w o; 'sa"n;ea} }}o-ano y;!rn a"ieulwn! 6upoa!as se vans
'uo!;eo!}!Dads
-Z 6
6u!leuliunll!
—o sam;ea} u6!sap gay;o u!e;uoo "o sal}}eq "o saannoi 6u!pla!ys apnlou! sea"e "noop"ey pue play
uaw—edaQ
}o asodmd ay; —o} papa;su! sal"eu!wnl palunow-alod 'd;!sualu!-y6!y;ey; a;eo!pu! !ieys sueid
6u1;y6!— s"odg
;uawdo!anao
sao!n."ag;uawdo!anaa pue "(;!unwwo" ayl o;" pa"!wgns pue 'aoueuiwnll! leluozuoy 6u!;eo!pu! sls"(leue
}o uol;ape;sul pue—S;!unwwo" ou;awo;oyd a 6uipnlou! 'sea"e leuol;ea"oa" an!;oe }o uo!;eu!wnip ay; moo} pa"eda"d aq
pays ueid 6u!;y6!i pai!e;ap
6!au asodad a o ease a u! s;y6li sods "(;isua;u!-y6!y "(ue }o uo!leile;su! ay; o; "o!"d
e 'a;ls ""ed pooy"ogy p yl } y"
so!;ay"say
ano"dde ue o; pa}I!wgns aq pays we"6o"d 6uuo;!uow ay; }o s;lnsa" ay; 6urcuewwns
a
I—(gpP
y
ip
"oloa
's;uawa—inba" "(;!" pue 'sau!lap!n6 (d/1S) "(6olo;uoa!ed a;e"ga"a" }o "(;a!oog y;!nn aouep"000e u!
pa—eda"d
'—oda— leo!uyoa; !euy y •e;ep a;!s olyde"6oa6 pue ol6o!oa6 6wpuodsa""oo pue a;ep uaw!oads pa;eloosse
p"ooa" !legs pue pa"anooa" suawloads !isso} ayl pue palonpuoo seen 6uuo;!uow a"aynn suoileool ay; a;ou
;ey; s6oi 6uuo;!uow "(liep uie;u!ew pinn "o;iuow ayl •s!s"(!e.ue "aylo "o ilsso}-aoiw moo} sauo;e"ogel
le! o—awwoo
Ipe—
;oa—!Q sao!n"ag
o; payiwgns aq !lays "!oa }o saldwes !laws 'pa;ue""enn }I 's;uawa"lnba" do;!sodas wnasnw pa;eu6isap
61
6uunp ;uawdo!anaQ y;!nn aouep"000e u! (pan6ole;eo :pa;emo'pa!}i;uap! 'pa"eda"d) pa;ear; aq !legs we"6ad
6uuo;!uow ay; }o;insa"
e se—(}"adoad ay; wa} pa"anooa" suawioads !isso} I!d 'slisso};ueld pue a;e"ga}"anu! }o saldwes
and;e;uasa—dam
pue suawioads sl!sso} a;e—ga}man He "anooa" pays "o;iuow ay; 'leo!;oe"d se uoos sy 'pa"anooa"
'palue...nn
}I 'pue pa;eniena uaaq aney su!ewaa I!sso} ay; !!;un alis !!sso} ay; woa} —(enne "(lue"odwa; "(;!npoe
6ulnow-yea
—(ue "an!p o; "(;uoy;ne ay; aney !ieys "o;!uow ayl •sai;!n!;oe 6ul"o;iuow }o uol;essao "o uo!;onpa" a
azuoy;ne —(ew
sal;ini;oe 6wnow yea ay; }o
ane
d
y
woo uaaq
—o;oaa!a ay; 'boa pagm;s!pun d!snoina"d "(q u!el"apun sea"e u! para!
;uao"ad Og ,(Ia;ew!xadde "a}}e 6ulao;!uow }o;insa" a se pa"anonea aae su!ewa" ilsso} nna} "(luo "o ou
}! '—(!as"anuo"
•a;ls ay; 6u!uie;uoo len—a;u! olyde"6!;e";s ay; uiy;!nn pue avis i!sso} ay; }o ";i eioine uo"pe;onpuo " q
peysp6u "o;iuow
6ulo6up pue "(;!unwwo" se 'pasea"oul aq pays 6uuo;iuow'puno} aye su!ewa" I!sso} }! •s!seq awl; -}I y
'"Ile!I!ul •su!ewa" i!sso} i!ews }o tianooe" ay; moo} nnoile o; sugap 10 6wuaa"os;sa;tip oipouad apnlou! osie
Ileys 6uuo;luow'a;eudo"dde }! •e;ep a;!s pue, suawlaads I!sso; pa;e!oosse 10 6u!p"ooa" ay; moo} pue
'pa"anooun
u!e!—apun
uo!;oadsu!
}! 'sulewa— ysso} a6"e! }o tianooa" ay; moo} nnolle !ieys 6uuo;!uow —Ioa paq"n;sipun "(isno!na"d I(q
sea—e u! sal;!n!;oe 6u!now-yea gay;o pue '6ulyoua"; '6uipe"6 "tq pa;ea"o aye ;eyl samsodxa ysa"} }o
; apnlau! pays pue —o;!uow uol;one;suoo oi6o!o;uoaled a "(q pa"o;luow aq pays sail!n!;oe 6uipe"6 y6noa
a
y
s moo} "Golisada" ayl "(q pa;daoae aq p!noM uo!;oapoo lisso} we"6ad uo!;e6!;!w ay; ago}aq pa"!nba" aq
a
s
6e"o
e :e
e
p
e
—o;pa"la sao!n"ag
pinonn;ey; su!ewa" ay; }o (6ui6ole;eo 'uo!;e"no 'uoi;eo!}!;uapl 'uo!;e"eda"d);uaw;ear; }o Jana! ay; (E) pu
;!woad 6ulpe""
;uawdo!ana4
o!yde"6oa6 pue o!6oioa6 6u!puodsa""oo pue a;ep uaw!oads pa;e!oosse 10 6u!n!yo"e ay; (Z) :we"6ad uo!;e6!;!w ay;
6-61
to aouenss! pue "(;!unwwo" }o;lnse" a se pa"anooa" eq;y6iw;ey; su!ewa" lisso} "(ue }o aoueua;u!ew pue
a6e"o;s;uauew"eds s 6000l!uoa ed
'wea6ad
!eui— ay; (6) :6uip"e6a" do;isoda" wnasnw pez!u600a" a yl!M luawaa"6e !ew"o} a do!anep !! y ; . I I I
ayl 'sal;ini;oe 6u!now-yea 6uunp pa;uawaldwl aq o; '—(;uno" seia6uy sod ay; }o wnasnw tiols!H Iam;eN
ay; }o;uaw—edaa "(6olo;uoaled a;e"ga"en ay; pue "li" ay; dq panadde;si6olo;uoaled a "(q pa"eda"d
;lw a ano—dde pays "o;oa"iQ ay; pue;lwgns pays;ueol!ddy ay; ';!woad 6ulpea6 a }o aouenssi ay; o; Loud
e6
uo
I
!;
sao—nosa" ie"n;!n"
..—.r—e,r—u.! e-nn?Jn i inlnini C1NH JNII—IOd--I NOII'd—JIIIW I—b'-10
Z -S— alq"l
e!w4}i!e" 'peg puowe!Q }o
asaM a"uiod ta"no5