Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
   

TO:

MEMORANDUM

TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM: DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT

DATE: AUGUST 28, 2002

SUBJECT: conditional use permit no. 195, revision "a"; grading Permit No 1903, revision "a"; and environmental assessment (case no. zon2001-00055), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5701 CRESTRIDGE ROAD. (Applicant: BelmontCorp; Property Owner: Marriott International)

Staff Coordinator: Dave Blumenthal, Associate Planner

RECOMMENDATION

(1) Adopt Resolution No. 2002-__, certifying the Supplement to Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27; and (2) adopt Resolution No. 2002-__, approving, with conditions, Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" (Case No. ZON2001-00055).

BACKGROUND

On July 23, 2002, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider Belmont Village’s proposal to modify the design and increase the amount of grading associated with the previously approved Marriott Assisted Living Facility. After considering staff’s analysis, the Supplemental FEIR, written, and oral testimony, the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Supplemental FEIR and approval of the revised project, by a 5-0 vote, with Commissioners Long and Duran Reed being absent.

On August 7, 2002, staff sent notice of the public hearing to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject site and to persons on the interested parties list. Additionally, the notice was sent out on the City’s list server. Furthermore, the notice was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on Saturday, August 10, 2002.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

In 1999, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes conditionally approved the Brighton Gardens, which allowed for a three story, 122 unit assisted living facility. The approved project included constructing a 35-foot high H-shaped building. The proposed building measured 74,775 square feet (43,000 square feet in rooms, 9,500 square feet in corridors, and 22,275 square feet of common area). The project also included a 70-space parking lot. Additionally, the approved project was proposing 160,000 cubic yards of grading (80,000 cubic yards of cut & 80,000 cubic yards of fill).

As a result of the subsurface rock conditions, the applicant is proposing to modify the approved grading. The new proposed grading will encompass 163,060 cubic yards of earth movement (89,500 cubic yards of cut, 73,560 cubic yards of fill, & 15,940 cubic yards of export). Additionally, BelmontCorp is proposing some minor modifications in the building. As noted in Figure 1, the proposal includes a U-shaped building. Additionally, the new proposed building is 94,000 square feet, whereas the approved building is 74,774 square feet. This 19,226 square foot increase is accomplished by increasing the depth of the building and utilizing the U-shaped design. It should be noted, as seen in Figure 1, that the proposed building essentially utilizes the same building footprint area. Furthermore, the proposed building is the same height (35 feet above building pad elevation) as the approved building.

The larger building size allows the applicant to provide larger resident room sizes, wider corridors, and more open space within the building. The project characteristics and the differences between the approved project and the proposed project are demonstrated below on Table 1.

PROJECT CHARACTERISTIC

APPROVED ASSISTED LIVING PROJECT

(BRIGHTON GARDENS PROJECT)

PROPOSED BELMONT VILLAGE ASSISTED LIVING PROJECT REVISIONS

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APPROVED AND PROPOSED PROJECTS

Acreage

4.57-acre project site

4.57-acre project site

No change

Grading

80,000 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 80,000 cy of fill to be balanced on site (total earth movement 160,000 cy)

89,500 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 73,560 cy of fill with 15,940 cy of export (total earth movement 163,060 cy)

Increase of 9,500 cubic yards (cy) of cut; decrease of 6,440 cy of fill; export of 15,940 cy (increase in total earth movement of 3,060 cy)

Number of Units

122 units (of which 24 are dementia units)

122 units (of which 24 are dementia units)

No change

Number of Beds

128 beds (6-2 bedroom units)

128 beds (6-2 bedroom units)

No change

Parking

70 off-street parking spaces

70 off-street parking spaces

No change

Architecture

Mediterranean

Mediterranean

No change

Number of Stories

Three

Three

No change

Building Height

35 feet above pad elevation

35 feet above pad elevation

No change

Building Size (SF)

74,774 SF

94,000 SF

Increase of 19,226 SF

Resident Room Sizes (in square feet – SF)

320 to 600 SF

350 to 840 SF

Increase of between 30 and 240 SF

Rooms Square Footage (SF)

43,000 SF

54,000 SF

Increase of 11,000 SF

Corridor Square Footage (SF)/Width

9,500 SF/6 feet wide

12,500 SF/8 feet wide

Increase of 3,000 SF/Increase of 2 feet

Common Area Square Footage (SF)

22,500 SF

27,500 SF

Increase of 5,000 SF

Building Length Along Crestridge Road

250 feet

233 feet

Decrease of 17 feet

Building Depth

178 feet

196 feet

Increase of 18 feet

Employee Shift Count*

Maximum of 50 employees per shift

Maximum of 34 employees per shift

Decrease of up to 16 employees per shift

Table 1

The portion of Crestridge Road, which fronts the project site, slopes up from the east to the west. The difference between the street elevation and the building pad elevation on the southeast corner is approximately 35 feet. Accordingly, the building pad will have a 2:1 transition slope from the street to the southeastern corner of the property. The height of the transition slope gradually decreases along the property frontage to the southwestern corner of the site, where the building pad is approximately the same elevation as the street. On the north side of the parcel, a 2:1 transition slope will extend from the building pad to the adjacent parcel.

Vehicle access to the site will be from Crestridge Road via a single driveway on the west side of the property. The proposed building will be setback 153 feet from the street (106 feet for the porte cochere), 78.5 feet from the west side property line, 67.5 feet from the east side property line, and 93 feet from the rear property line.

The front setback includes a 53-foot landscape setback and 50 parking spaces. Along the west side of the building is an additional 20 parking spaces, which will be used for employee parking. Furthermore, the west side of the building includes areas for trash and recycling bins, air conditioning condensers, a 3-foot diameter satellite dish, electrical transformer, and an emergency generator. The north and east sides of the property are reserved for open space, walkways, two gazebos (one on each side of the building), and a 28-foot wide fire lane. It should be noted that removable bollards block the fire lane from non-emergency vehicular access. In the center courtyard of the building is additional open space, a gazebo, and an exercise pool. The Uniform Building Code will require that this exercise pool be enclosed with a 5-foot high fence.

The three-story building is 35 feet tall, as measured from the building pad elevation to the maximum ridgeline. There will be a total of 122 individual assisted living units (24 will be used for dementia units) in a variety of configurations. In addition to the living units, common space, housekeeping and mechanical areas, each floor will include the following:

First: Kitchen and dining areas, bistro (casual dining area), town hall (conference room), and office area.

Second: Learning center and office area.

Third: Styling salon, life enhancement (exercise area), wellness area and exam room.

The approved architecture for the project is Mediterranean style. This style utilizes terra cotta, mission style, clay roof tile; dark bronze wrought iron railing; archways on the first floor; and a light, medium, and dark colored finish. The proposed building modifications include utilizing the approved architecture.

DISCUSSION

A detailed background, site description, code consideration, and analysis of the revised Conditional Use Permit and Grading Permit application is contained in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 23, 2002. Therefore, the body of this "Discussion" section will focus on the issues raised at the Planning Commission public hearing.

During the Planning Commission public hearing, four people spoke in favor of the proposal, two of which represented the applicant, and one person spoke against the application. The specific concerns raised by the person in opposition were that the proposed building is not keeping with the aesthetics of the area, the building size would obstruct views, and that the proposed earth export will take approximately one year to complete.

The aesthetic qualities of the Belmont proposal (architecture, building height, site design) have not been substantially altered from the Marriott project, approved by the City Council on February 2, 1999. As such, the Supplement to FEIR No. 27 did not analyze aesthetics of the area. However, this impact was analyzed in the 1999 Supplement to FEIR No. 27, which found that there would be impacts to visual resources and views caused by the approval of the assisted living facility. The City Council found that there are significant technical and economic factors that would make it infeasible to completely mitigate these impacts. Furthermore, the Council found that lowering the building pad to mitigate these impacts would cause significantly more grading and additional associated adverse environmental impacts. As such, since the aesthetic qualities of the Marriott project were previously considered and approved by the City Council and since the current proposal does not alter the aesthetic qualities, the Planning Commission found the proposed Belmont project to be consistent with the aesthetics of the area.

The proposed building modifications will reduce the length along Crestridge Road by 17 feet and the height of the building is the same as previously approved, 35 feet above the building pad. As noted above the City Council found, in the 1999 approval of the Marriott project, that there are technical and economic factors that would make mitigating the impact to views infeasible. Accordingly, as noted in P.C. Resolution No. 2002-18, the Planning Commission found that the proposed modifications to the building would not have a significant impact to views in the area. Furthermore, the Planning Commission found that views might improve, since tall foliage will be removed from the property.

Regarding the concern about the length of time for export, the according to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the project, it is estimated that grading will be last for approximately 81 days. The Supplemental EIR concluded that the potential impacts, caused by the export activity, can be mitigated below a level of significance.

Trails Easement:

During the public hearing, the Planning Commission addressed a concern raised in a letter from Sunshine (see attached) that a trail connection from Crestridge Road to Indian Peak Road be provided through the subject BelmontCorp property. It was noted by staff that the previously approved Marriott project did not require a trail connection, as it was determined at that time that it would be more beneficial to locate the trail connection through the adjoining undeveloped property. The Planning Commission directed staff to bring this issue to the attention of the City Council and to work with the applicant to determine if there was a way to develop a trail connection though this property, in case the adjoining property is not developed.

The Conceptual Trails Plan identifies a trail (Section 2, Segment F2, Radio Tower Trail), on the subject property. This trail is intended to provide pedestrian access from Crestridge Road, across the subject parcel and the vacant parcel to the north, to Indian Peak Road. Mitigation measures from the original FEIR No. 27, certified in 1989, required that a trail network be developed on the entire 33.97-acre parcel. Accordingly, a condition of the approval was placed on the 1989 Marriott project, which encompassed the entire site, that the Radio Tower Trail be constructed. This trail connection was subsequently included in the 1993 amendments to the Conceptual Trails Plan. However, with the 1999 Marriott project, due to the reduced project site (4.57-acres), physical constraints, and the nature of the operations of the site, the City Council determined that there would be a better opportunity to develop the trail connection as part of the adjoining vacant property, at such time that it is developed.

Staff has examined the trail issue with the applicant and still believes that due to physical constraints of the subject property, as well as the assisted living operations of the site, that a trail connection should be developed as part of the adjoining property. Specifically, in order to avoid using retaining walls on the property, and lower the building pad as much as possible, there will be 2:1 slopes along the front, eastern side and rear of the property. These slopes would make it difficult to construct a trail that would be pedestrian friendly. Additionally, staff believes that a public trail through the site might not be compatible with the operational characteristics of the assisted living facility. The applicant has expressed concerns about the impact that a public trail through the site may have on the general comfort of the senior residents and the security of the facility.

Staff agrees with the applicant and therefore believes that a better trail experience may be achieved by locating the trail connection on the western portion of the adjoining undeveloped parcel. As the Council may recall, the adjoining parcel was the subject of a joint City Council/Planning Commission/Finance Advisory Committee workshop, which concluded that an ideal development of the site would integrate senior housing, a senior center, and a passive park. Staff believes that placing the trail connection on this parcel would provide greater opportunity to integrate the trail connection with a trail system that would be more accessible to actual trail users.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

On January 18, 2002, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a draft supplement to FEIR No. 27 was circulated for a thirty (30) day comment period. Based on the NOP and the comments received, it was determined that the draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) should focus on the geology/grading, transportation/circulation, air quality, and noise. All other environmental impacts caused by the proposed modifications were found not to be significant. A detailed discussion of each area of analysis is included in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 23, 2002. Provided below is a summary for each area of analysis.

Geology/Grading

As a result of the subsurface rock conditions on the site, the applicant has proposed to modify the grading on the project, which will now include export of material. As a result of this modification, potential environmental impacts caused by the change and increase in grading activity were analyzed. The analysis concluded that there would be significant cumulative impacts caused by the grading and/or subsequent construction of the proposed building. With implementation of the applicable mitigation measures from certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 (as well as the Brighton Gardens Supplement, certified in 1999), and the additional mitigation measures identified in the attached proposed mitigation monitoring program, a significant unavoidable adverse impact related to grading in areas of "high" and "extreme" slopes resulting from project development remains, although the extent of this impact is less than that associated with the project approved in 1989. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant impacts caused by geology/grading.

Transportation/Circulation

Since the revised project would require export, the potential impacts to transportation and circulation were analyzed. Accordingly, a traffic study was prepared, which analyzed the impacts caused by construction, the project, and cumulative impacts caused by the project and anticipated development in the vicinity. The traffic study concluded that with existing conditions, plus ambient growth, plus the project, the streets in the vicinity of the project would operate at an acceptable level of service (Level of Service (LOS) of "D" or better). Therefore, it has been determined that the project would not cause long-term impacts to the traffic in the vicinity of the project. The traffic study also analyzed the potential impacts caused by the grading and construction of the site, more specifically, the export of material from the site. The study concluded that the increase of truck traffic resulting from exporting material from the site would cause a significant impact to traffic in the area. However, the traffic study further concluded that these impacts could be mitigated below the level of significance.

Air Quality

The third area that was analyzed was air quality. Accordingly, an air quality assessment was prepared for the project, and related construction activity. The air quality analysis concluded that the operational impacts of the Belmont Village project: will not result in an increase in local air pollutant concentrations near intersections in the vicinity of the project as the project will not emit air pollutants that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) threshold. Therefore, emissions from operation of the project do not result in significant regional air quality impacts and no mitigation is required. However, the air quality assessment did conclude that short-term impacts are anticipated from the grading and construction activity and that such impacts would be significant, even with mitigation. Since these significant impacts are short term, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Noise

The fourth area of analysis for environmental impacts is noise. A noise assessment was completed for the project, which analyzed both short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) impacts. The noise assessment concluded that there is no long-term impacts cause by the operation of the facility. However, "as part of certification of Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 (1989), the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for potentially significant noise impacts of the project related to noise resulting from project construction, acknowledging that even with mitigation, it was not possible to entirely eliminate this impact. The noise assessment prepared for this project also concluded that there will be significant short-term impacts associated with construction activity. The assessment further concluded that these impacts could be mitigated to a level below significance. Even though actual short-term noise impacts may increase because the applicant needs to utilize a rock breaker on-site, the conclusions of the current supplement are that there are fewer environmental impacts caused by noise than the Brighton Gardens project. Since there are no long-term significant impacts and the short-term impacts can be mitigated below a level of significance, the Planning Commission recommends that a Statement of Overriding Considerations is not necessary for noise.

The draft Supplement to FEIR No. 27 was circulated for public review between May 22, 2002 and June 21, 2002. During the comment period, staff received six letters from public agencies (three were actually received after the comment period) and one letter from a resident. Accordingly, a "Response to Comments" document was complied and responses to individual comments were mailed to commentors on July 18, 2002. It should be noted, the "Response to Comments" document did not include a response to a letter received from the Department of Fish and Game, which was received after the comment period and after the responses were prepared. As noted in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report, the Department of Fish and Game’s comments raised no new environmental issues and are the same as their comments received during the Notice of Preparation comment period. These comments have already been addressed in the attached draft Supplement to FEIR No. 27

A copy of the Supplement to FEIR No. 27 and the "Response to Comments" document were previously transmitted to the City Council on July 25, 2002.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

On August 20, 2002, an email, sent by Ray Mathys, was received through the citycouncil@rpv.com email address. In his email, Mr. Mathys, states his support for the project and requests that the City Council approve the proposed project. Additionally, Mr. Mathys raises a concern about the trail connection through the subject property, which was previously discussed in this report.

CONCLUSION

Based on the Supplement to Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 (including Technical Appendices and Responses to Comments) the Planning Commission has found that the City Council can adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant impacts to air quality and geology/grading, which cannot be mitigated to a level less than significant. Additionally, the Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council certify the Supplement to FEIR No. 27, subject to the recommended mitigation measures.

With regards to the CUP and Grading Permit, the Planning Commission has found that all required findings can be made to approve the proposed modifications to the CUP and Grading Permit. As such, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve, with conditions, Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" (Case No. ZON2001-00055).

FISCAL IMPACT

The City Council’s action in this matter will have no fiscal impact upon the City.

ALTERNATIVES

In addition to the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the following alternatives are available for the City Council’s consideration:

  1. Deny, without prejudice, Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A"; or,
  2. Identify any issues or concerns with the proposed project, and provide the applicant with direction in modifying the project, and continue the hearing to a date certain.

Respectfully submitted:

Joel Rojas, aicp, Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

Reviewed:

Les Evans, City Manager

Attachments:

  • Draft Resolution No. 2002-__, for Supplement to FEIR No. 27 and mitigation monitoring program
  • Draft Resolution No. 2002-__, for Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" (Case No. ZON2001-00055), and conditions of approval
  • Supplement to FEIR No. 27 (Distributed to the City Council on July 25, 2002)
  • Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 23, 2002
  • Minute Excerpts for Planning Commission meeting on July 23, 2002
  • Project Plans
  • Planning Commission Resolution No. 2002-17, recommending certification of the Supplement to FEIR No. 27
  • Planning Commission Resolution No. 2002-18, recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" (Case No. ZON2001-00055)
  • Correspondence received from Sunshine, dated July 8, 2002
  • Correspondence received from Congregation Ner Tamid, dated July 9, 2002
  • Correspondence received from State Clearinghouse/Department of Fish and Game, dated July 11, 2002
  • Correspondence received from Patricia Arand, dated July 17, 2002
  • Correspondence received from Peninsula Seniors Corporation, dated July 19, 2002
  • Correspondence received from Ray Mathys, dated July 22, 2002
  • Correspondence received from Ray Mathys, dated August 20, 2002

RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES CERTIFYING A SUPPLEMENT TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 27, ADOPT THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, MAKE CERTAIN FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA"), AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 195, REVISION "A" AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 1903, REVISION "A’, ALLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED 122 UNIT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5701 CRESTRIDGE ROAD

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOW:

Section 1: In 1988, an application was filed by Marriott Corporation requesting the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Grading Permit to permit a retirement community consisting of a 250-unit independent living facility, a 100-bed health care facility and a community center on a 33.97 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Boulevard. On January 31, 1989, the City Council certified that Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 (FEIR No. 27) for this project was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The City's certification of FEIR No. 27 was upheld by the Superior Court in the case of Segreto, et al. v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. SWC 107 173. Although the related Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Grading Permit for the project were approved in 1989, those entitlements expired in 1995.

Section 2: On September 23, 1996, Marriott Senior Living Services, with the consent of the property owner (Host Marriott, Inc.), submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Grading Permit No. 1903, Tentative Parcel Map No. 24655, and Sign Permit No. 842, to allow the construction of a three story, 122 unit, 73,606 square foot assisted living facility, including; 68,660 cubic yards of cut and 68,660 cubic yards of fill (with all grading balanced on site), the subdivision of the existing 33.97 acre lot into two lots (a 4.57 acre subject lot and a 29.40 acre remaining parcel), landscaping and various site improvements, and a new sign on the existing vacant lot located at the northwest corner of Crestridge Road and Crenshaw Boulevard. The independent care facility is proposed to be located on the 4.57 acre parcel. These entitlements were approved on February 2, 1999, survived legal challenge, and have been subsequently extended through February 2, 2003.

Section 3: On September 6, 2001, the applicant (BelmontCorp), with approval from property owner (Marriott), submitted applications to modify Conditional Use Permit No. 195 and Grading Permit No 1903, which allows the construction of a new assisted living facility for senior citizens on a 4.57-acre lot located within the City’s Institutional (I) zoning district. The proposed modifications consist of an increase in the structure’s floor area from 74,774 square feet to 94,000 square feet; a reduction in the total length of the building along Crestridge Road by 17 feet; an increase in the total depth of the building by 18 feet; and, an increase in the amount of grading from 160,000 cubic yards to 163,060 cubic yards. The modified earth movement is not a balanced operation, as previously approved for the Marriott Brighton Gardens project, as it consists of 89,500 cubic yards of cut, 73,560 cubic yards of fill and 15,940 cubic yards of export. The application was deemed complete on October 5, 2001. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163, a Supplement to FEIR No. 27 ("Supplement") was prepared for the proposed project and circulated for public and agency comment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087.

Section 4: In response to the circulation of the Supplement to the FEIR, the City received written and oral comments regarding the adequacy of the Supplement. The City has prepared written responses to all comments that were received during the comment period, which raised significant environmental issues. The City has incorporated the comments and the City's responses into the Final Supplement and returned responses to commenting agencies at least ten (10) days prior to the Certification of the Supplement, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.5.

Section 5: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65962.5(f) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council certification of a Supplement to Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 (FEIR No. 27) by the adoption of P.C. Resolution No. 2002-17

Section 6: Pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes held a duly noticed public hearing on July 23, 2002, at which the Planning Commission recommended approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" by the adoption of P.C. Resolution No. 2002-18

Section 7: A duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on August 28, 2002. At the hearing, all persons both in favor of and in opposition to the Project were permitted to be heard. The findings adopted herein are based upon substantial evidence in the record of those hearings.

Section 8: The Final EIR ("FEIR") for the proposed project is now comprised of certified FEIR No. 27, the Supplement, including any revisions thereto and appendices; the list of persons, organizations and public agencies which commented on certified FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement; the comments which were received by the City regarding FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement and the City's written responses to significant environmental points raised in the public review and comment process. No re-certification or reconsideration of certified FEIR No. 27 is required by this action or has been undertaken by the City. The actions taken herein are based in part upon the previously certified adequacy of FEIR No. 27, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163.

Section 9: The findings made in this Resolution are based upon the information and evidence set forth in the FEIR, as defined in Section 8, and upon other substantial evidence, which has been presented in the record of this proceeding. The documents, staff reports, technical studies, appendices, plans, specifications, and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution is based and the FEIR for the Project are on file and available for public examination during normal business hours in the Office of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard, Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90274. The custodian of said records is the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Section 10: The City Council finds that the public and government agencies have been afforded ample notice and opportunity to comment on the FEIR and the Supplement.

Section 11: The City Council finds, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15084(e), that certified FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement have been independently reviewed and analyzed by the City and its Staff, and that said documents represent the independent judgment of the City as lead agency with respect to the Project. The City Council further finds that the additional information provided in the staff reports accompanying the Project descriptions, certified FEIR No. 27, and the Supplement, the corrections and modifications to the Draft EIR and Supplement made in response to comments, and the evidence presented in written and oral testimony presented at the above-referenced hearings do not represent significant new information so as to require re-circulation of any portion of the EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.1.

Section 12: The City Council finds that the comments regarding the Supplement and the responses to those comments have been received by the City; that the City Council has received public testimony regarding the adequacy of the certified FEIR No. 27 and the Supplement; and that the City Council, as the final decision-making body for the lead agency, will review and consider all such documents and testimony prior to acting on the Project. The City Council certifies that the Final Supplement to certified FEIR No. 27 has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA").

Section 13: The Supplement and the record of these proceedings indicates that the Project is smaller in scale and a less intensive use of land than the previously approved project analyzed in certified FEIR No. 27. The previously approved project included in excess of 280,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, the export of 250,000 cubic yards of graded material, and development of a much larger facility on a larger parcel than the 4.57 acres currently proposed. By comparison, the current project proposes a significant reduction in project grading and the development of a facility slightly more than one-third the size of the original proposal. The City Council finds that the expected impacts of the Project will be less intense than those identified in certified FEIR No. 27 and, except as provided in herein and in the Supplement, were therefore adequately addressed in certified FEIR No. 27.

Section 14: Based upon the information and analysis contained in certified FEIR No. 27, the Supplement, public and agency comments and the record of these proceedings, the City Council finds that the changes in the Project not previously analyzed in certified FEIR No. 27, but analyzed in the Supplement, will not cause significant environmental impacts in the areas of Land Use and Planning; Population and Housing; Water; non-construction Air Quality; Biology; long-term Transportation and Circulation; Energy and Mineral Resources; Hazards; Public Services; Utilities and Service Systems; Aesthetics; Noise; Cultural Resources; and Recreation. Explanations for why the foregoing impacts were found to be insignificant are contained in Section 3.0, Table 3.1 of the Supplement. In some cases, less-than-significant impacts identified above and in Section 3.0 of the Supplement were also discussed in detail in the relevant sections of certified FEIR No. 27.

Section 15: With respect to the potential significant environmental effects identified in the Final Supplement to FEIR No. 27, the City Council finds as follows:

1. Certified FEIR No. 27 identified as a potential significant environmental impact the effect of grading in areas of high and extreme slopes. Changes or alterations have been incorporated into the Project that will avoid or substantially lessen this impact. An independent engineering study evaluating geotechnical, soils and other stability factors including seismic considerations, and giving special attention to the areas of extreme and high slopes was required prior to issuance of building permits, and compliance with specific mitigation measures of the City's geotechnical consultant are required. FEIR No. 27 concluded that it was not possible to entirely eliminate this impact, however, and the previous project was approved subject to a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

A second independent engineering study was conducted as part of the Supplement. Mitigation measures A-1 through A-11, inclusive, described in Appendix F of the Supplement and the applicable sections of the Supplement and FEIR No. 27 have been incorporated into the Project as conditions of approval. The Supplement and the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation set forth in Appendix B of the Supplement indicate that as a result of these measures, impacts associated with fault rupture, seismic ground shaking and failure, and other potential geologic impacts can be mitigated. Although the significant adverse environmental impacts of the previously proposed project associated with grading in areas of high and extreme slopes remains a significant adverse environmental impact of the Project, the impact will be somewhat less significant than those associated with the originally proposed project and about the same as the current approved project. Nonetheless, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as discussed and adopted below, is necessary.

No additional potentially significant grading/geology impacts of the Project, other than those previously addressed in certified FEIR No. 27, were identified in the Supplement.

2. Certified FEIR No. 27 identified as a potential significant impact the short term air quality impacts from emissions of fugitive dust and nitrogen oxides, which would be generated during grading and construction activities, and long-term emissions from the use of electricity and natural gas by the facility and fossil fuels in automobiles. Changes or alterations were required or incorporated into the originally approved project, which will avoid or substantially lessen these impacts. Such changes have been incorporated as conditions of approval of the Project through the imposition of mitigation measures D-1, as set forth in Appendix F of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27. Although fugitive dust impacts will be reduced through a program of on-site watering, roadway cleaning, and the suspension of grading in high winds, the supplement indicates that it is not possible to entirely eliminate this impact. However, these impacts are short-term, and will cease upon conclusion of the construction. . Nonetheless, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as discussed and adopted below, is necessary.

No additional potentially significant air quality impacts of the Project, other than those previously addressed in certified FEIR No. 27, have been identified in the Supplement.

3. Certified FEIR No. 27 identified as a potential significant impact the short term noise resulting from Project construction. Changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project, which will avoid or substantially lessen these impacts. Such changes are incorporated as conditions of approval of the Project through the imposition of mitigation measures E-1 through E-6, inclusive, as set forth in Appendix F of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27. Construction noise impacts will be reduced, but not eliminated, through the on-site storage of properly tuned construction equipment, reducing the need for construction traffic in adjacent areas. In addition, hours of construction, deliveries and trash collection will be limited to days and hours when noise-sensitivity is reduced. The Supplement indicates that it is possible mitigate these construction-related impacts to below a level of significance with implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures.

No additional potentially significant noise impacts of the Project, other than those previously addressed in certified FEIR No. 27, have been identified in the Supplement.

4. FEIR No. 27 identified potentially significant environmental impacts related to traffic and circulation that would result from short-term, construction-related traffic around the project. Specifically, significant truck traffic would have been required to export 250,000 cubic yards of graded material from the site under the previous proposal. As the current project has a significant reduced amount of export of graded material from the site, such impacts will be dramatically reduced. Mitigation measures C-1 through C-7, inclusive, as described in Appendix F of the Supplement and the applicable sections of FEIR No. 27 will be imposed as conditions of approval of the project. The FEIR indicates that traffic and circulation impacts from the project will be reduced to a level of insignificance due to the reduction in truck traffic resulting from the reduction in grading, and the enhanced safety and traffic management resulting from the mitigation measures.

5. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts identified in the Supplemental EIR.

Section 16: Section 4.0 of the Supplement describes, and the City Council has fully considered, a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project, which might fulfill the basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include the "No Project Alternative;" "Existing Brighton Gardens Project Alternative;" "Reduced Scale Alternative;" and "Alternate Institutional Use Alternative." The alternatives identified in the Supplement either would not sufficiently achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only with unacceptable adverse environmental impacts, as noted below.

1. The "No Project" alternative is described in the Supplement as existing conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published for the proposed project. At the time the NOP was published, the entire 4.57-acre parcel was vacant. Therefore, the No Project/No Development Alternative means "no build" (or "no development"), wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained.

2. As explained in the Supplement, the Existing Brighton Gardens Entitlements Alternative includes development of a 122-unit (128-bed) assisted living facility with 70 off-street parking spaces. Although the Existing Brighton Gardens Entitlements Alternative represents fewer environmental impacts for all impact categories addressed in the Belmont Village Supplement to FEIR No. 27, implementation of the Brighton Gardens project as approved is not feasible to implement. As discussed in the Project Description section of the Supplement, during the course of BelmontCorp’s due diligence, geotechnical investigations revealed that the entitlements granted by the City for the Brighton Gardens project could not be constructed due to subsurface rock conditions and grading issues.

3. The Reduced Scale Alternative would include a reduction in the amount of assisted living units, and, therefore, a corresponding reduction in the square footage of the assisted living facility from that included in the proposed project. Under the Reduced Scale Project Alternative, approximately thirty percent (30%) fewer units would result (for a total of 85 units), with a corresponding reduction in overall square footage of the project from 94,000 square feet to approximately 66,000 square feet. However, due to existing subsurface rock conditions on the project site, earth movement would not balance on site, and export would still be required. Export could be reduced, however, if the pad elevation is increased. An increase in pad elevation, however, would result in the creation of view impacts that are not associated with the approved or proposed project.

As shown in the Supplement, grading/geology, air quality, transportation/circulation and noise impacts of the Reduced Scale Project Alternative would be slightly less than those associated with the proposed project. Since the building footprint would be smaller, there may be less grading included as part of the Reduced Scale Project Alternative. Further, the export-related transportation/circulation, air quality and noise impacts of the proposed project may be less, as there may be less export required.

Of the alternatives analyzed in this Supplement, the Reduced Scale Project Alternative represents the environmentally superior alternative.

According to the applicant, the Reduced Scale Project Alternative is not feasible for several reasons. First, there are economic implications associated with the Reduced Scale Project Alternative. The land costs would be substantially beyond industry costs. Operational costs would remain relatively constant, although there would be fewer assisted living units. These higher costs would result in rental rates that would exceed market rates.

4. The Alternate Institutional Use Alternative considers the development of institutional uses other than an assisted living facility. Grading/geology impacts could be greater, as an alternate use may require more grading in a larger envelope than is required as part of the proposed project. Construction-related transportation/circulation, air quality and noise impacts associated with the Alternate Institutional Use Alternative could all be greater as a result of potential greater quantities of export. Further, operational aspects associated with some of the alternate institutional uses (e.g., educational facilities) could result in greater operational impacts related to transportation/circulation, air quality and noise than the proposed project.

None of the project objectives associated with the Belmont Village project would be met with the implementation of the Alternate Institutional Use Alternative. Further, BelmontCorp is in the business of development, ownership and management of assisting living housing communities, and does not develop alternate land uses.

Accordingly, and for any one of the reasons set forth herein or in the Supplement, the City Council finds that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible each of the Project alternatives, including the "No Project" alternative, identified in the FEIR. None of the alternatives would reduce or avoid a significant environmental impact of the Project without creating or making more significant another impact or impacts. Each alternative is hereby rejected for those reasons. The City Council further finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives into the preparation of the FEIR, and that all reasonable alternatives were considered in the review process of the Supplement and the ultimate decision on the Projects.

Section 17: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines section 15093(a)). CEQA requires the agency to provide written findings supporting the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are unavoidable. Such reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines section 15093(b)). Those reasons are provided in this Statement of Overriding Considerations.

The City Council finds that the economic, social or other benefits of the Project outweigh each and all of the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts discussed above and any other remaining significant effects found to be unavoidable. In making this finding, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those adverse impacts. The City Council finds that each one of the following benefits of the Project, independent of the other benefits, would warrant approval of the Project notwithstanding the unavoidable impacts of the Project.

1. The Project implements the Institutional designation of the site in the General Plan. Page 197 of the General Plan specifically notes that the location where the Project is proposed is "centrally located on the Peninsula." The General Plan states that the intent of the General Plan is to locate a "complex" of such institutional uses in the area of the Project, rather than scattered throughout the City where they might be incompatible with other uses.

2. The Project will provide a high quality living and care facility for seniors in need of housing in an area where institutional services are provided.

3. The Project provides a needed service for residents of the Palos Verdes Peninsula who may have limited care options in the area for elderly parents or family members.

4. Any institutional development on the site, uses which are conditionally permitted under the General Plan and Zoning Code, can be expected to generate the same types of short term, construction-related environmental impacts which will result from the Project.

5. The mass of the structure has been reduced over initial proposals. Any building constructed on the site for institutional purposes can be expected to have some impact on views of the currently undeveloped site from adjacent residences. Pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Section 17.02.040(a)(14), views of undeveloped property are not protected views. In addition, although it is possible to reduce visual impacts by lowering the building pad and thereby further reducing impacts on views over the site, other significant environmental impacts result from the grading and export of soil that would be necessary to do so. Moreover, development of the Project will improve views over the site by eliminating existing vegetation. Thus, any development of the site with an institutional use that will provide a needed service to the community will cause some significant environmental impacts. Accordingly, the City Council hereby finds that the significant environmental impact on views and aesthetics that will be caused by the Project are outweighed by the benefits to the community from the Project because it will provide a needed service to senior citizens and their relatives residing in and around the City.

Section 18: As required by CEQA, the Mitigation Monitoring Program attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted.

Section 19: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, Public Resource Code Section 21167, and other applicable short periods of limitation

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of August 2002, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

_______________________

John McTaggart, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________
Jo Purcell, City Clerk

State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2002-__ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on August 28, 2002.

_________________________________

City Clerk

Exhibit A

Mitigation Monitoring Program

Project: A request to modify Conditional Use Permit No. 195 and Grading Permit No 1903, which allows the construction of a new assisted living facility for senior citizens on a 4.57-acre lot located within the City’s Institutional (I) zoning district. The modifications proposed consist of an increase in the structure’s floor area from 74,774 square feet to 94,000 square feet; a reduction in the total length of the building along Crestridge Road by 17 feet; an increase in the total depth of the building by 18 feet; and, an increase in the amount of grading from 160,000 cubic yards to 163,060 cubic yards. The modified earth movement is not a balanced operation, as previously approved for the Marriott Brighton Gardens project, as it consists of 89,500 cubic yards of cut, 73,560 cubic yards of fill and 15,940 cubic yards of export

Location: North side of Crestridge Road, west of Crenshaw Boulevard, at 5701 Crestridge Road.

Applicant: BelmontCorp

Landowner: Marriott International


TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction 2II. Management of the Mitigation Monitoring Program 3
Roles and Responsibilities 3
Mitigation and Monitoring Program Procedures 3
Mitigation Monitoring Operations 3
III. Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist 5
IV. Mitigation Monitoring Summary Table 6

I. INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE

This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), which is for the Belmont Village Assisted Living Facility at 5701 Crestridge Road, in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, responds to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Section 21081.6, requires a lead or responsible agency that approves or carries out a project where a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report has identified significant environmental effects, to adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for adopted or required changes to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects." The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is acting as lead agency for the project. An Initial Study and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report were prepared to address the potential environmental impacts of the project. Where appropriate, this environmental document recommended mitigation measures to mitigate or avoid impacts identified. Consistent with Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, a mitigation reporting or monitoring program is required to ensure that the adopted mitigation measures under the jurisdiction of the City are implemented. The City will adopt this MMP when adopting the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES

This MMP has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines), as amended (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.). This MMP complies with the rules, regulations, and procedures adopted by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for implementation of CEQA.

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code states: "When making the findings required by subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when adopting a negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 21080, the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of an agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program."

II. MANAGEMENT OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The MMP for the project will be in place through all phases of the project including final design, pre-grading, construction, and operation. The City will have the primary enforcement role for the mitigation measures.

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM PROCEDURES

The mitigation monitoring procedures for this MMP consists of, filing requirements, and compliance verification. The Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and procedures for its use are outlined below.

Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist

The MMP Checklist provides a comprehensive list of the required mitigation measures. In addition, the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist includes: the implementing action when the mitigation measure will occur; the method of verification of compliance; the timing of verification; the department or agency responsible for implementing the mitigation measures; and compliance verification. Section III provides the MMP Checklist.

Mitigation Monitoring Program Files

Files shall be established to document and retain the records of this MMP. The files shall be established, organized, and retained by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement.

Compliance Verification

The MMP Checklist shall be signed when compliance of the mitigation measure is met according to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement. The compliance verification section of the MMP Checklist shall be signed, for mitigation measures requiring ongoing monitoring, and when the monitoring of a mitigation measure is completed.

MITIGATION MONITORING OPERATIONS

The following steps shall be followed for implementation, monitoring, and verification of each mitigation measure:

1. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement shall designate a party responsible for monitoring of the mitigation measures.

2. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement shall provide to the party responsible for the monitoring of a given mitigation measure, a copy of the MMP Checklist indicating the mitigation measures for which the person is responsible and other pertinent information.

3. The party responsible for monitoring shall then verify compliance and sign the Monitoring Milestone column of the MMP Checklist for the appropriate mitigation measures.

Mitigation measures shall be implemented as specified by the MMP Checklist. During any project phase, unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement with advice from Staff or another City department, is responsible for recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if needed. If mitigation measures are refined, the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement would document the change and shall notify the appropriate design, construction, or operations personnel about refined requirements.

III. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CHECKLIST

INTRODUCTION

This section provides the MMP Checklist for the project as approved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes on __________, 2002. Mitigation measures are listed in the order in which they appear in the Initial Study.

* Monitoring and Reporting Action indicates when the measure should be monitored and reported.

* Party Responsible for Mitigation indicates who is responsible for implementation.

* Enforcement Agency/Monitoring Agency/Monitoring Milestone indicates what agency is responsible for enforcing the measure, and provides space for future reference and notation that compliance has been monitored, verified, and is consistent with these mitigation measures.

Exhibit "A"

Mitigation Monitoring Program
(Resolution No. 2002-__)

Mit #

Text of Mitigation Measure

Monitoring and Reporting Action

Monitoring Milestone

Monitoring Responsibility

A. GEOTECHNICAL RESOURCES AND DRAINAGE

1

Prior to approval of grading plans and building plans, the recommendations contained in "Addendum Geotechnical Report, Revised Grading Plan, Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 24655, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, County of Los Angeles, California" (September 21, 2001), shall be incorporated into the grading and building plans.

Approved Grading Plans; Approved Building Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit and Prior to Issuance of Building Permit

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2

Prior to approval of grading and building plans, recommendations of the City Geologist, as enumerated in the Zeiser Kling Consultants, Inc., letter of October 24, 2001, shall be incorporated into the proposed plans.

Approved Grading Plans; Approved Building Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit and Prior to Issuance of Building Permit

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

3

Prior to approval of building plans, the project plans will be reviewed to ensure that no portion of project habitable structure(s) infringe upon the building setback line (refer to Exhibit 3-2, Building Setback Line). Further, any future alterations to habitable building(s) shall conform to the requirements of the Building Setback Line.

Approved Building Plans

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

4 (*)

Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a hydrology report and storm drain improvement plans, subject to the review and approval of the Director of Public Works, for the proposed and existing storm drain that meets the 50-year storm drain design requirements.

Approved Storm Drain Improvement Plans and Hydrology Report

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit

Department of Public Works

5 (*)

Prior to approval of storm drain plans, it shall be demonstrated that all drainage from hard surfaces shall be carried in nonerosive devices.

Approved Storm Drain Improvement Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit

Department of Public Works

6 (*)

Prior to approval of storm drain plans and landscape plans, it shall be demonstrated that all irrigation and drainage on the north-facing slope shall be controlled during and after grading and construction.

Approved Storm Drain Improvement Plans; Approved Irrigation Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; Prior to Approval of Landscape and Irrigation Plans

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement; Department of Public Works

7 (*)

Prior to approval of grading plans, it shall be demonstrated that all pad drainage shall be directed away from slopes and around structures to approved disposal areas. All berms shall be constructed and compacted as part of fine grading and shall be maintained by the owner. The recommended drainage patterns shall be established at the time of fine grading and maintained throughout the life of the structure(s).

Approved Grading Plan; Submittal of Documentation Demonstrating Ongoing Compliance

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

8 (#)

Prior to approval of building plans, the project proponent shall avoid conditions which will lead to groundwater saturation which may result from altering site drainage by constructing retaining walls, paved walkways, parking areas and patios.

Approved Building Plans

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

9 (#)

Prior to approval of building plans, the owner shall ensure that all interceptor ditches, drainage terraces, downdrains and any other drainage devices shall be periodically cleaned to promote slope stability.

Submittal of Documentation Demonstrating Ongoing Compliance

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

10 (#)

Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the owner shall undertake a program for the elimination of burrowing animals. This must be an ongoing program in order to promote slope stability.

Submittal of Documentation Demonstrating Ongoing Compliance

Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

11 (#)

Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall incorporate by detail or reference appropriate post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs). Further, the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall contain requirements to be adhered to during project construction.

Approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit

Department of Public Works

B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1

(*#)

Prior to the issuance of building permits and prior to the approval of street improvement plans, lighting plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. The lighting plans shall demonstrate that exterior residential lighting and street lighting is of low intensity and is directed away from the adjacent off-site areas and native habitat.

Approved Building Plans; Approved Street Improvement Plans

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits; Prior to Approval of Street Improvement Plans

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement; Department of Public Works

2 (*)

Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a landscape plan will be prepared for the proposed project and submitted for review and approval of the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement. The landscape plan shall include provisions for the revegetation of graded areas at the perimeter of the project site. Said revegetation shall incorporate native species to the extent possible in order to reduce the dependence on watering and to provide a natural buffer to the adjacent off-site areas.

Approved Landscape Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

3 (*)

Prior to commencement of grading or construction, the project site areas that are not to be graded shall be fenced off to prevent unintended access or disturbance.

Approved Grading Plan; Site Inspection Clearance

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

4 (#)

Prior to commencement of grading or construction, project site areas not intended for access or disturbance shall be fenced off.

Site Inspection Clearance

On-going During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

5 (#)

Prior to landscape plan approval, the project proponent shall ensure that all landscaping at the periphery of the developed area shall consist of species that provide food for wildlife to increase utilization of the plantings by wildlife.

Approved Landscape and Irrigation Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

C. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION

1

Prior to issuance of a grading permit and prior to the approval of street improvement plans, sight distance at the entrance to the proposed project shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works, in accordance with standard sight distance requirements of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the California Department of Transportation.

Approved Street Improvement Plans; Approved Grading Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; Prior to Approval of Street Improvement Plans

Department of Public Works

2

Prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall submit an internal traffic signing/striping plan for review by the Director of Public Works. Said plan shall include provision for stop sign control by installing a stop sign, stop bar and stop legend internal to the project site at its access with Crestridge Road.

Approved Traffic Signing/Striping Plan

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Public Works

3

During construction, construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and shall be prohibited on legal holidays and Sundays, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. Vehicular stacking for construction activities prior to 7:00 a.m. shall be prohibited. Grading activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and shall be prohibited on legal holidays and Sundays.

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Public Works

4

Prior to commencement of construction activities that involve transportation of heavy construction equipment and/or materials that require the use of oversized-transport vehicles on State highways, a transportation permit from the California Department of Transportation shall be obtained.

Verification of Receipt of Permit

Prior to Commencement of Construction Activities

Department of Public Works

5 (*)

Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall submit a Construction Phasing and Traffic Control Plan. This Plan shall identify haul routes, as well as the number of truck trips and the resultant period of time required for soil export and construction materials import activities. If determined necessary by the Director of Public Works, measures to minimize potential traffic conflicts shall be included in the Construction Phasing and Traffic Control Plan. These measures include: utilizing flagmen, signage, etc., to assist truck trips and truck movement on to and off of the local street system; control of traffic at project entrance/exit points; control of queuing of construction traffic prior to 8:00 a.m.; scheduling operations affecting traffic during off-peak hours; and modifying the soil export period.

Approved Traffic Phasing and Traffic Control Plan

Prior to Issuance of Haul Route Permit; Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits

Department of Public Works

6 (*)

During construction, streets shall be cleaned regularly at the direction of the Direct of Public Works.

Approved Grading Plans; Site Inspection Clearance

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits; Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Public Works

7 (*)

During construction, loads shall be covered to prevent materials from blowing out of trucks, thus reducing the potential for cracked windshields.

Approved Grading Plans; Site Inspection Clearance

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits; Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Public Works

D. AIR QUALITY

1

The following measures will be implemented during construction:
Water site and clean equipment morning and evening to comply with AQMD Fugitive Dust Measures BCM-03 and BCM-06.
Wash off trucks leaving the site to comply with AQMD Fugitive Dust Measure BCM-01.
Require haul trucks leaving the site to have a minimum freeboard distance of 12" or to cover payloads.
Spread soil binders on site, unpaved roads and parking areas.
Apply chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturer’s specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded which remain inactive for 96 hours)
Reestablish ground cover on construction site through seeding and watering on portions of the site that will not be disturbed for lengthy periods (two months or more)
Sweep streets if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares
Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less
Suspend grading operations during first and second stage smog alerts
Suspend grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour)
Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned
Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean fuel generators rather than temporary power generators
Provide on-site power sources during the early stages of the project
Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference
Provide a flagperson to properly guide traffic and ensure safety at construction sites
Schedule operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours, where feasible
Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interferences from construction activities
Schedule goods movement for off-peak hours

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

E. NOISE

1

Ongoing during construction, construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and shall be prohibited on Sundays and legal holidays.

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2

Ongoing during construction, trucks used for soil export activities shall not approach to or depart from the project site before 8:00 a.m. or after 4:00 p.m.

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

3

Ongoing during construction, rock breaking activities will be located at the furthest location from the existing residences and from the adjacent Synagogue, as feasible (the actual location will be depend on site conditions, as the size of some rocks may necessitate that they be broken where they are found).

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

4 (*)

During grading and construction, grading and construction equipment shall be stored on the project site during the construction period.

Approved Grading Plans; Site Inspection Clearance

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

5 (*)

During construction, internal combustion engines on construction equipment shall be kept in proper tune and shall be fitted with properly maintained mufflers.

Approved Grading Plan; Site Inspection Clearance

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; Ongoing During Grading and Construction

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

6 (#)

On an on-going basis, to avoid nuisance noise on weekdays and during evening and early morning hours, deliveries and trash collection services shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., weekdays.

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Operations

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

F. VISUAL RESOURCES

1 (#)

On an on-going basis, the applicant shall maintain vegetation to ensure that vegetation does not exceed the ridge height of the project.

Site Inspection Clearance

Ongoing During Operations

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2 (#)

Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall show on the plans how all roof-mounted equipment is screened from view. These plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.

Approved Building Plans

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

G. WATER SERVICE

1 (*)

Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall identify improvements to the water distribution system that are required to provide water service and meet minimum fire flow requirements. These improvements, which shall be provided for and funded by the project proponent, shall be identified on the project improvement plans.

Approved Water System Improvement Plans, Including Funding Mechanism; Approved Fire Protection Plan

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2 (*)

Prior to approval of grading and building plans, water conservation measures shall be provided for. These measures, such as the following, shall be included in the project: use of low-flow toilets, water-conserving laundry facilities and reduction in water pressure to 50 psi or less, and provision of landscape with low water-using plants (where feasible), extensive use of mulch and installation of irrigation systems that minimize runoff and evaporation.

Approved Landscape and Irrigation Plans; Approved Building Plans

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

H. SANITARY SEWERS

1 (*)

Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall identify improvements to the sanitary sewer system that are required to accommodate project-generated wastewater. These improvements, which shall be provided for and funded by the project proponent, shall be identified on the project improvement plans.

Approved Sewer System Improvements Plans, Including Funding Mechanism

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2 (*)

Prior of approval of building plans, the project proponent shall provide verification that connection fees have been paid to the County Sanitation District.

Verification of Payment of Fees

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

I. FIRE AND POLICE PROTECTION

1 (*)

Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall provide fire flow and fire hydrant placement in accordance with the standards of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Any additional requirements of the Los Angeles County Fire Department, as part of its review of the project, including provision of Fuel Modification Plans, shall be incorporated into the project.

Approved Fire Protection Plan

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2 (*)

Prior to approval of building plans, the project proponent shall contact the Lomita Sheriff’s Substation, Crime Prevention/ Community Relations Department, for recommendations to increase site security.

Approved Building (Site) Plans

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

J. ARCHAEOLOGY/PALEONTOLOGY

1 (*)

Prior to approval of grading plans, the project archaeologist shall submit a protocol to the City for monitoring and for the discovery of archaeological resources. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during rough grading operations, as required, to further evaluate cultural resources on the site. During grading, any "finds" shall be immediately reported to the City. All archaeological finds shall be first offered to the City for preservation. If the City does not accept the archaeological finds, they shall be offered to an institution with an educational and/or research interest in the materials. At the completion of grading, the project proponent shall submit a report detailing findings, if any.

Approved Protocol; Site Inspection Clearance; Report Documenting Findings

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits; Ongoing During Grading and Construction; Completion of Grading

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

2 (*)

Prior to approval of grading plans, the project paleontologist shall submit a protocol to the City for monitoring and for the discovery of paleontological resources. A qualified paleontologist shall be present during rough grading operations, as required, to further evaluate cultural resources on the site. During grading, any "finds" shall be immediately reported to the City. All paleontological finds shall be first offered to the City for preservation. If the City does not accept the paleontological finds, they shall be offered to an institution with an educational and/or research interest in the materials. At the completion of grading, the project proponent shall submit a report detailing findings, if any.

Approved Protocol; Site Inspection Clearance; Report Documenting Findings

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits; Ongoing During Grading and Construction; Completion of Grading

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement

K. EQUESTRIAN, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACCESS

1 (*)

Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall submit plans that document how walkways for pedestrians (sidewalks) along Crestridge Road have been incorporated into the project design.

Approved Improvement Plans

Prior to Issuance of Building Permits

Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement; Department of Public Works

Notes: 1. "*" Indicates mitigation measures from certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 that remain applicable to this Supplement to the FEIR (said mitigation measures have been modified/updated as appropriate)

2. "#" Indicates mitigation measures from the Supplement to certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 for the approved assisted living facility that remain applicable to this Supplement to the FEIR (said mitigation measures have been modified/updated as appropriate)

3. Mitigation measure numbers without "*" or "#" represent mitigation measures that have been added to the certified FEIR No. 27 by this Supplement to the FEIR

RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 195, REVISION "A", AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 1903, REVISION "A" (CASE NO. ZON2001-00055) ALLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED 122 UNIT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5701 CRESTRIDGE ROAD.

WHEREAS, On April 18, 1989, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes conditionally approved a project to allow the construction of a mixed-use senior living facility for the Marriott Corporation (referred to herein as the "Marriott Project") on a 33.97-acre lot located on Crestridge Road. The approved project included 250 independent living units, a 100-bed health care facility (consisting of 50 assisted living beds and 50 skilled nursing beds) and a 26,000-square-foot community center building. In addition to the approval of the project applications (Conditional Use Permit No. 131, Variance No. 182 and Grading Permit No. 1066), the City also certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) No. 27, making certain findings and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Although City entitlements were obtained, survived legal challenge, and were extended, none of the approved project components were constructed. Subsequently, the approved entitlements expired in April 1995, and the project could not be developed without receiving new entitlements; and

WHEREAS, on September 23, 1996, Marriott Senior Living Services, with the consent of the property owner (Host Marriott, Inc.), submitted applications for Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Grading Permit No. 1903, Tentative Parcel Map No. 24655, Sign Permit No. 842, Site Plan Review No. 7942, and Environmental Assessment No. 688 (referred herein as "Brighton Gardens"). On February 2, 1999, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes conditionally approved the Brighton Gardens project for the Marriott Corporation to allow the construction of a 122-unit assisted living facility for seniors on a 4.57-acre portion of the original 33.97-acre project site. As part of the revised project, the City approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 24655, allowing a land division of the 33.97-acre lot into two lots. The approved land division created one lot entirely within the City’s designated Institutional zoning district (the 4.57-acre project site) and another lot partially within the Institutional and Open Space Hazard zoning districts (the 29.4-acre parcel). Additionally, a Supplement to FEIR No. 27 was certified by the City for the Brighton Gardens project. These entitlements have survived legal challenge and have been extended through February 2, 2003; and

WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 24655 has been recorded; and

WHEREAS, on September 6, 2001, the applicant (BelmontCorp), with approval from property owner (Marriott), submitted applications to modify Conditional Use Permit No. 195 and Grading Permit No 1903, which allows the construction of a 122 unit assisted living facility on a 4.57-acre lot, which is located within the City’s Institutional (I) zoning district. The modifications proposed consist of an increase in the structure’s floor area from 74,774 square feet to 94,000 square feet; a reduction in the total length of the building along Crestridge Road by 17 feet; an increase in the total depth of the building by 18 feet; and, an increase in the amount of grading from 160,000 cubic yards to 163,060 cubic yards. The modified earth movement is no longer a balanced operation, as was previously approved for the Marriott Brighton Gardens project, because it consists of 89,500 cubic yards of cut, 73,560 cubic yards of fill and 15,940 cubic yards of export. On November 5, 2001, staff deemed that the applications to be complete; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes held a duly noticed public hearing on July 23, 2002, at which the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report by adoption of P.C. Resolution No. 2002-17, and approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" by the adoption of P.C. Resolution No. 2002-18; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65962.5(f) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the City Council certified a Supplement to Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27 (FEIR No. 27) by the adoption of Resolution No. 2002-__; and

WHEREAS, after notice was issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on August 28, 2002, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: The modifications to the Conditional Use Permit are warranted since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and for all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping and other features required by the Development Code or by conditions imposed under Section 17.60.050 of the Municipal Code to integrate said use with those on adjacent land and within the neighborhood.

The subject site is a 4.57-acre parcel, located in the Institutional (I) zone. The Development Code requires a minimum of a 25-foot front, and 20-foot side and rear setback. The proposed building will be set back 153 feet from Crestridge Road (106 feet for the porte cochere), 78.5 feet from the west side property line, 67.5 feet from the east side property line, and 93 feet from the rear property line, all of which exceed the minimum requirements of the Development Code. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to provide 70 off street parking spaces, whereas 32 are required. The requested revisions do not require the approval of a Variance application, inasmuch as the proposal meets all of the Municipal Code requirements for the development of the site. As such, the site is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the project.

Section 2: The modifications to the Conditional Use Permit are warranted since the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways sufficient to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the use.

As part of the environmental analysis for the proposed revisions, a traffic study was completed for the project. The traffic study concluded that no long-term impacts would result from the proposed project. The City’s standard for Level of Service (LOS) is a LOS "D" or better. The traffic study concluded that the existing streets in the vicinity of the project, plus the traffic from the ambient growth, plus the traffic from the proposed project, would operate at a LOS "D" or better. Furthermore, the traffic study noted that the existing volume of traffic plus the traffic from ambient growth would provide the same LOS. Therefore, the proposed project does not cause a decrease in the LOS in the vicinity of the project site and the related streets and highways are sufficient to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the use

Section 3: The modifications to the Conditional Use Permit are warranted since in approving the subject use at the specific location, there will be no significant adverse effect on adjacent property or the permitted use thereof.

All of the adjacent parcels are located within the Institutional (I) zone, with portions of the adjacent properties located in the Open Space Hazard (OH) zone. The adjacent parcel on the west side of the site is a religious use; whereas, the adjacent parcels on the north and east sides of the site are currently un-improved lots. As part of the previous approval for the assisted living facility on the site, FEIR No. 27 (1989) and the Supplement to FEIR No. 27 (1999) were certified by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. With the certification of the FEIR the city concluded that the project would not have any significant adverse effect on the adjacent properties, or the permitted use thereof. As part of the analysis of the proposed modifications to the approved project, a Supplement to FEIR No. 27 has been prepared. Said supplement has concluded that the proposed project will not have any significant adverse effect on the surrounding properties.

Section 4: The modifications to the Conditional Use Permit are warranted since that the proposed use is not contrary to the general plan.

The project site, like much of the surrounding area, has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Institutional, which is implemented by the Institutional (I) zone. "The purpose of the Institutional zone is to provide for the wide range of major public and quasi-public, institutional and auxiliary uses established in response to the health, safety, educational, cultural and welfare needs of the city in efficient, functionally compatible and attractively planned administrative centers, medical centers, cultural centers, educational institutions and similar uses in conformance with the general plan" (Municipal Code Section No. 17.26.010). Furthermore, it is a policy of the General Plan (page 93) to, "Review the location and site design of future institutional uses very carefully to ensure their compatibility with adjacent sites."

Not only does the proposed building comply with the development standards of the Municipal Code, but also the proposed use is a conditionally permitted use in the "I" zone, thus making the proposed building and use consistent with the zoning. Moreover, the proposed project is compatible with the adjoining "I" zoned properties, as set forth in the aforementioned General Plan policy. Therefore, approval of the proposed use is not contrary to the General Plan and this finding can be adopted

Section 5: The modifications to the Conditional Use Permit are warranted since conditions regarding any of the requirements, which the City Council finds to be necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare, have been imposed.

The conditions of approval are included in Exhibit "A" of this resolution. Furthermore, the proposed Supplement to FEIR No. 27 includes additional mitigation measures and a updated mitigation monitoring program incorporating all mitigation measures applicable to the project. These modifications are necessary to bring the conditions of approval and mitigation measures in compliance with current codes and the updated studies that were complied for this project. These conditions of approval, in conjunction with the mitigation measures are necessary to ensure that the project does not adversely impact the public health, safety, and welfare. As such, with the conditions of approval and mitigation measures, "conditions" regarding the requirements, which are necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare, have been imposed.

Section 6: The modified grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted primary use of the lot, as defined in Chapter 17.96 of the Municipal Code.

Chapter 17.96 of the Municipal Code defines the primary use as, "the most important purpose for which a particular zoning district was established." Within the Institutional zone, this means uses such as the proposed assisted living facility. The proposed primary use on the site is a 122 unit assisted living facility, which is consistent with uses in the Institutional (I) zone. The requested grading is needed to create a building pad which will contain the building, parking area, and emergency access.

Section 7: The modified grading and/or related construction do not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring properties.

In the 1999 approval of the Brighton Gardens project, it was determined that the proposed structure would not significantly impact views or visual relationships from neighboring properties, and that some views would be improved since the larger foliage on the property would be removed.

Additionally, the proposed project is the same height, and is located within approximately the same building footprint, and has the same building pad elevation as the approved Brighton Gardens Project. The highest elevation of the property, outside of the setbacks, is approximately 1,230 feet (above sea level). Therefore, a 16 feet tall allowable building height, above the finished grade, would extend to an elevation of 1,246 feet. The approved project, involves grading the building pad at an elevation of 1,206 feet. The 35-foot building height will put the ridge height at an elevation of 1,241 feet, which is unchanged by the proposed modifications. The proposed building is the same height and location as what is currently approved on the property, and the currently approved Brighton Gardens project did not cause significant view impairment or significant adverse visual relationships with neighboring properties. Further, the building is lower than the allowable height. Therefore, the proposed grading will not impact views or visual relationships.

Section 8: The modified grading minimizes disturbances to the natural contours and finished counters are reasonably natural.

While the proposed grading will remove most of the natural contours on the site in order to create the building pad, the proposed contours will blend into the adjoining properties without the need for retaining walls. The finished contours will slope up from the street to the building pad and again from the rear of the building pad to the adjoining property. Furthermore, the proposed building pad and finished contours are the same as the approved 1999 Brighton Gardens project.

Section 9: The modified grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographical features and appearances by means of land sculpturing so as to blend any man-made or manufactured slope into natural topography.

The grading is proposed to create a building pad for the site. The manmade slopes are to the rear of the property and along Crestridge Road. These slopes are 2:1 slopes, which will simulate the existing slopes on the property and in the surrounding area. Furthermore, the building pad and slopes have been designed such that they blend into the adjoining properties without the need for retaining walls.

Section 10: The modified grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of the natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation.

The proposed grading is to create a building pad for the site. The manmade slopes are to the rear of the property and along Crestridge Road. These slopes are 2:1 slopes, which will simulate the existing slopes on the property and in the surrounding area. Furthermore, the building pad and slopes have been designed such that they blend into the adjoining properties without the need for retaining walls. As such, the City Council finds that this criterion has been met.

Section 11: The modified grading does not conform to all of the criteria for grading on slopes, height of cut and fill, and height of retaining walls.

The proposed grading will include an area of extreme slopes (35%), but will not include the construction of any portion of the building over an extreme slope. The proposal, however, includes maximum cuts of 20 feet (on the northern limits of grading) and a maximum fill of 35 feet (on the southwestern corner of the property). The Municipal Code limits the heights of cut and fill outside of the building footprint to a maximum of five feet. Since the proposed cut and fill is greater than five feet, this criterion has not been met. Additionally, the Municipal Code states that no finished slope greater than 35% shall be created. Inasmuch as the proposed grading will create 2:1 (50%) slopes, this criterion has not been met.

Section 12: Although the proposed project does not meet all of the criteria required for approval of a Grading Permit, pursuant to Municipal Code Section No. 17.76.040(E)(10) the project is approved because

  1. The first eight criteria Municipal Code Section No. 17.76.404 have been satisfied.
  2. The approval is consistent with the purpose of Municipal Code Section No. 17.76.040. The purpose of the chapter is to provide reasonable development of land, ensure the maximum preservation of the scenic character of the area, ensure that the development of properties occurs in a manner harmonious to adjoining properties, and that the project complies with the goals and polices of the General Plan. The proposed grading is requested in order to complete the development of an assisted living facility while minimizing impacts to adjoining properties, including grading down to minimize the overall building height. The grading is being proposed to create a building pad which will contain the building, parking area, and emergency access. Furthermore, the conditions of approval and the mitigation-monitoring program are proposed to minimize any potential impact the proposal has to adjoining properties.
  3. Departure of the standards will not constitute a special privilege with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity. The subject property is an up sloping lot in the Institutional (I) zone. The grading is necessary in order to create a building pad on the property, much like other properties located within the "I" zone along Crestridge Road.
  4. Departure from the standards will not be detrimental to the public safety, nor to other property. As part of the proposed Supplement to Final Environmental Impact Report No. 27, a Geotechnical Report was prepared for the proposed project. The report concluded that the proposed grading and subsequent development of the site would not present a detrimental impact to public safety, or to other property. Furthermore, the report was reviewed by the City’s Geotechnical Staff, who concurred with the findings of said report.

Section 13: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure and other applicable short periods of limitation.

Section 14: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of these proceedings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" and Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A" (Case No. ZON2001-00055), thereby approving the modifications to the project including an increase in the structure's floor area from 74,774 square feet to 94,000 square feet; a reduction in the total length of the building along Crestridge Road by 17 feet; an increase in the total depth of the building by 18 feet; and, an increase in the amount of grading from 160,000 cubic yards to 163,060 cubic yards, on an existing vacant lot located at the north side of Crestridge Road, west of Crenshaw Boulevard, at 5701 Crestridge Road, subject to the mitigation measures identified in certified FEIR No. 27, the Supplement to said FEIR, and all conditions of approval as modified and as contained Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which are necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of August 2002, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

_______________________

John McTaggart, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________
Jo Purcell, City Clerk

State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2002-__ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on August 28, 2002.

_________________________________

City Clerk

Exhibit "A"

Conditions of Approval
(Resolution No. 2002-__)

Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A"
Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A"
(Case No. ZON2001-00055)

(Bold type indicates new text added to the existing conditions of approval for the 1999 Brighton Gardens approval; while, strikethrough type indicates deleted text from the existing conditions of approval for the 1999 Brighton Gardens approval)

General

  1. Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 195, Revision "A" Grading Permit No. 1903, Revision "A"(Case No. ZON2001-00055) shall not be construed to mean any waiver of applicable and appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County, and City laws and regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code shall apply.
  2. Prior to the submittal of plans to building plan check, the applicant and the property owner shall submit to the City a statement, in writing, that they have read, understand, and agree to all conditions of approval contained in this Resolution. Failure to provide said written statement within ninety (90) days of final approval by the City Council adoption of this Resolution shall render this approval null and void.
  3. All construction shall be completed in substantial conformance to the plans approved by the City Council.
  4. This approval is for the subdivision of an existing 33.97 acre site into two parcels, the proposed project site of 4.57 acres, and a 29.40 acre remainder parcel not associated with the development of this proposed project. The proposed project includes the construction of an assisted living facility for senior citizens to be constructed on the 4.57 acre portion of the 33.97 acre site. This approval is for a 122 unit assisted living facility on a 4.57-acre parcel. Any proposed future changes to the size of the subject 4.57 acre parcel, through a Lot Line Adjustment or other subdivision process, shall require approval of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 195, and shall be reviewed through a public hearing by the City Council.
  5. The facility is approved to contain 122 units (97 98 assisted living units and 24 dementia units 25 Alzheimer patient units), 128 beds (6-2 bedroom units), and associated services. The major function of the proposed facility is to provide 24-hour care to the elderly. The proposed three story facility is 94,000 74,744 square feet in size, with a building footprint of 45,668 27,841 square feet (including the center courtyard). Seventy parking spaces are proposed, eight of which are proposed to be covered by a 12' high carport structure. The site also will include other improvements such as landscaping, three 12' high gazebos, a fountain, concrete walkways, a 28' wide access road surrounding the proposed structure, private outdoor areas, trash enclosure, one satellite dish antennae, a monument sign, and a loading area. Any proposed future changes to the approved project shall require approval by the City Council through a public hearing.

  6. These approvals shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of this action unless application for building permits is made. Extensions of up to one year may be granted by the City Council, if requested prior to expiration.
  7. This facility shall be operated in compliance with the requirements of, and licensed by, the State Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Branch, Department of Health Services and other appropriate government agencies.
  8. All utilities on the property shall be provided underground, including cable television, satellite dish antenna, telephone, electrical, gas and water. All necessary permits shall be obtained for their installation. Cable television shall connect to the nearest trunk line at the property owner's expense.
  9. Permitted hours of construction are 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No work is permitted on Sundays or legal holidays.
  10. The construction site, adjacent public and private properties shall be kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that material used for immediate construction purposes. Such excess material may include, but not be limited to: the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances or other household fixtures.
  11. The applicant shall obtain approval of a Special Use Permit for the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement prior to locating the proposed temporary Marketing Information Center on the site.
  12. All construction shall adhere to the requirements of the California Uniform Building Code, including but not limited to:
  13. 310.1.1 [For SFM] Special Provisions for Group R, Division 2 Occupancies. Clients who become temporarily bedridden as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 1569.72, as enforced by the Department of Social services, may continue to be housed on any story in Group R, Division 2 Occupancies classified as Residential-care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE). Every Residential-Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) admitting or retaining a bedridden resident shall, within 48 hours of the resident’s admission or retention in the facility, notify the local fire authority with jurisdiction of the estimated length of time the resident will retain his or her bedridden status in the facility.

    310.1.2 [For SFM] In Group R, Division 2 Occupancies classified as Residential Facilities (RF), bedridden clients shall not be located above the first story.

    310.1.3 [For SFM] Restraint shall not be practiced in Group R, Division 2 Occupancies.

    Exception: Group R, Division 2 Occupancies which meet all the construction requirements for a Group I, Division 3 Occupancy.

    Mitigation Measures

  14. The development shall comply with all mitigation measures found in FEIR No. 27 and the Final Supplement to FEIR No. 27 as certified through Resolution No. 2002-__, 99-__, which are incorporated herein as conditions of approval of the project.
  15. Conditional Use Permit No. 195

  16. Detailed landscape (including all planted, hardscape and fencing elements) and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement prior to issuance of any building permits. Said plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plant materials. Irrigation systems shall be on automatic timers and shall use drip and bubbler systems where appropriate. Hillside plant materials shall be minimal and of low maintenance and low water use varieties. Irrigation systems shall be adjusted for seasonal water needs. Particular attention shall be paid to the plant palette in an attempt to ensure that plants will not encroach into protected views, as defined by the Municipal Code. Subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, the final landscape plan shall incorporate additional (more than as currently proposed on the approved site plan) on-site pedestrian paths for recreational use of the on-site occupants. The landscape plan shall include the following:
    1. Hedges shall be used to screen the proposed air conditioning condenser from Crestridge Road.
    2. A three-foot tall hedge shall be planted between the south parking lot and Crestridge Road.
  17. The building setbacks shall not be less than 73' 78.5’ to the west side property line, 56' 67.5’ to the east property line, 93' to the northern property line, and 154' 153’ from the building and 106’ feet from the porte cochere to the southern property line. However, the proposed covered parking structure may be constructed at 20' from the west side property line.
  18. The maximum height of the proposed facility shall not exceed 35' (elevation 1241.5' msl) as measured from the finished pad elevation of 1206.5'. The maximum height of the proposed covered parking structure, and gazebos shall not exceed 12' from the nearest adjacent finished grade. Subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, prior to pouring of concrete for foundations and slab, the developer shall provide certification of finished pad elevation. Subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, prior to installation of roof sheathing, Ridge Height Certification shall be submitted by the developer.
  19. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, and subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, the developer shall submit plans for the proposed service area and trash enclosure to show how these areas will be compatible with the colors and materials of the main structure. The trash enclosure shall have a separate pedestrian access, be no higher than 6 feet high, have solid, self-closing gates, and be integrated into the building design. Additionally the developer shall show how the proposed trash enclosure area is consistent with Section 17.58.030 "Requirements and Guidelines for Collecting and Loading of Recyclable materials in Development Projects".
  20. The emergency generator and transformer and transformer shall not exceed six (6) feet in height.
  21. There shall be no roof mounted mechanical equipment on the building.
  22. The project shall have 70 parking spaces, which shall meet the minimum size requirements of Municipal Code Section 17.50.040(F)(7) 8 of which are to be located under the approved covered parking structure and are to be used by residents of the facility, and 9 of which shall be located to the north (rear) of the main building. All employees of the facility shall utilize the twenty (20) parking spaces on the west side of the building. Parking demand characteristics shall be reviewed and evaluated twelve (12) months after issuance of Certificate of Occupancy and annually thereafter and a report shall be provided to the City Council by the operator of the facility.
  23. All curbs on site, not associated with parking spaces, shall be painted red.
  24. The use of gardening equipment and garbage collection shall not occur between the hours of 7:00 5:00 pm and 7:00 am. The use of Leaf Blowers on the site shall be consistent with Municipal Code Section 8.16.
  25. Parking and security lighting shall be kept to minimum safety standards and shall conform to City requirements within the Development Code. Fixtures shall be shielded so that only the subject property is illuminated; there shall be no spillover onto residential properties. A trial period of three (3) months from issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, for assessment of exterior lighting impacts shall be instituted. At the end of the 3-month period, subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning Building and Code Enforcement, the City may require additional screening or reduction in intensity of any light which has been determined to be excessively bright.
  26. No gates or other devices shall will be constructed which limit direct access to the site.
  27. Subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, all block wall fences shall be composed of a decorative material such as slumpstone. All fences within the front twenty-five foot setback shall be a maximum 3'-6" tall. All fences and screen walls on the property, which are located outside of the front setback, shall be maximum six (6) feet tall, as measured from the lowest adjacent finished grade.
  28. The maximum height of the cooling tower shall be 7'-10" from adjacent finished grade. The maximum height of the block wall fence surrounding the cooling tower shall be 8'-0". The block wall fence shall have a stucco finish that matches the color of the main building.
  29. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, the covered parking structure, cooling tower screening walls, and satellite dish antenna shall be screened with landscaping.
  30. Changes in operational characteristics, including but not limited to, change in unit count (122 units = 24 dementia units 25 Alzheimer units and 98 assisted living units), or change in bed count (128 beds), shall require approval of a major revision to the Conditional Use Permit to be approved by the City Council through a public hearing. Changes to the employee shift count from 34 35 to 50 employees may be permitted. Accessory services, such as food service, health services and transportation shall not be sold commercially to non-residents.
  31. Prior to submittal of plans to the Building Department for Building Plan Check, an Exiting Plan, complete with occupancy calculations and approved by the Fire Department, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement and the Building Official. Depending upon the results of the Exiting Plan, the developer may be required to modify the interior and exterior of the proposed structure in order to ensure safe exiting for all occupants.
  32. Grading Permit No. 1903

  33. Grading activity shall be limited to a total of 89,500 cubic yards of cut and 73,560 cubic yards of fill with 15,940 cubic yards of export (total earth movement 163,060 cubic yards) 80,000 cubic yards of cut and 80,000 cubic yards of fill. The approved grading quantities shall consist of 36,000 cubic yards of raw cut, 44,000 cubic yards of remedial cut, 36,000 cubic yards of raw fill, and 44,000 cubic yards of remedial fill. With the exception of some minor off-site grading onto the adjacent 29.40 acre parcel, grading shall be limited to balanced on site. There shall be no export or import of earth material. The applicant may also clean and grub the site of existing landscaping. Any proposed changes to the grading of the project as described above and shown on the approved plan, shall require review and approval by the City Council through a public hearing.
  34. The approved haul route for the project shall be as follows: trucks may arrive at the site from Pacific Coast Highway, via Crenshaw Boulevard, turning right onto Crestridge Road; trucks leaving the site shall turn right onto Crestridge Road, then turning right onto Highridge Road, then turning right onto Hawthorne Boulevard to Pacific Coast Highway. A haul route permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of grading permits.
  35. Prior to issuance of grading permits, a bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof, shall be posted to cover costs for any geologic hazard abatement in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works.
  36. An as-built geological report shall be submitted for structures founded on bedrock. An as-built soils and compaction report shall be submitted for structures founded on fill as well as for all engineered fill areas.
  37. An as-graded soils and geologic report, complete with geologic map, will be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
  38. Foundations and floor slabs cast on expansive soils will be designed in accordance with Los Angeles County Code Section 2907-i.
  39. Foundations shall be set back from a descending slope in accordance with the Code and will extend to such a depth as to be unaffected by any creep prone surficial soil and/or weathered bedrock. Field review is required.
  40. All grading shall be monitored by a licensed engineering geologist and/or soils engineer in accordance with applicable provisions of the Municipal Code and the recommendations of the Director of Public Works and/or City Engineer.
  41. Grading activity on the site shall occur in accordance with all applicable City safety standards.
  42. Any dirt or other material deposited on the roadways from construction operations shall be removed by the applicant on a timely basis.
  43. Graded slopes shall be properly planted and maintained. Plants shall be selected that are capable of developing deep root systems. Watering shall be done on cycles that will promote deep rooting. Watering shall be diminished or stopped just prior to and during the rainy season.
  44. Slope planting shall generally consist of low ground cover to impede water flow on the surface.
  45. To provide greater slope protection against scour and erosion, slopes shall be covered with a jute mat to provide protection while the ground cover is being established.
  46. All manufactured slopes shall be contour graded.
  47. The use of a rock crusher is not permitted on the site.
  48. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, the developer shall provide proof that approval for off-site grading on the adjacent parcel has been obtained from the owner(s) of the adjacent parcel.
  49. Sewers

  50. A bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof, shall be posted prior to the issuance of grading permits, to cover costs for construction of any required sanitary sewer system, in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works.
  51. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, a written statement from the County Sanitation District accepting any new facility design and/or system upgrades with regard to existing trunk line sewers. Said statement shall include any necessary conditions of approval.
  52. Approval of this development is contingent upon the installation, dedication and use of local main line sewers.
  53. If it is found that the requirements of the Plumbing Code cannot be met, no building permit will be issued for construction.
  54. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the final location and requirements for Sewer Easements, if any are needed, shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and Director of Public Works.
  55. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit to the Director of Public Works, a study analyzing the capacity of the existing sewer system versus the impact from the development.
  56. Water

  57. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer must submit a labor and materials bond in addition to either:
    1. An agreement and a faithful performance bond in the amount estimated by the Director of Public Works and guaranteeing the installation of the water system; or
    2. An agreement and other evidence satisfactory to the Director of Public Works indicating that the developer has entered into a contract with the servicing water utility to construct the water system, as required, and has deposited with such water utility security guaranteeing payment for the installation of the water system.

     

  58. There shall be filed with the Director of Public Works a statement from the purveyor indicating that the proposed water mains and any other required facilities will be operated by the purveyor, and that under normal operating conditions, the system will meet the needs of the development.
  59. The development shall be served by adequately sized water system facilities, which shall include fire hydrants of the size and type and location as determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The water mains shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows required for the development. Domestic flow requirements shall be determined by the Director of Public Works. Fire flow requirements shall be determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department and evidence of approval by the Los Angeles County Fire Department is required.
  60. Framing of structures shall not begin until after the Los Angeles County Fire Department has determined that there is adequate fire fighting water and access available to the said structures.
  61. Drainage

  62. Prior to issuance of grading permits, a bond, cash deposit, or combination thereof, shall be posted to cover costs of construction in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works.
  63. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer shall submit a hydrology study to the Director of Public Works to determine any adverse impacts to existing flood control facilities generated by this project. Should the Director of Public Works determine that adverse impacts will result, the developer will be required to post a cash deposit or bond or combination thereof in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works, which will be based on the project's share of the necessary improvements.
  64. Drainage plans and necessary support documents to comply with the following requirements must be approved by the Director of Public Works prior to the issuance of building permits or commencement of grading, whichever comes first:
      1. Provide drainage facilities to remove any flood hazard to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and dedicate and show easements on the Final Map.
      2. Eliminate any sheet overflow and ponding.
      3. Provide drainage facilities to protect the property from high velocity scouring action.
      4. Provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties.

  65. Subject to the review and approval by the Director of Public Works, the developer shall pay its fair share in upgrading the existing storm drain system in Crestridge at Crenshaw to accommodate flow from the project site.
  66. All drainage swales and any other on-grade drainage facilities, including gunite, shall be of an earth tone color, as deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.
  67. Prior to the issuance of grading permits by Building and Safety, the applicant shall submit a Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for review and approval.
  68. Streets

  69. The developer shall post an additional bond, cash deposit, letter of credit, or a combination thereof in an amount sufficient to cover the cost of full improvement and repairs to all facilities within the right of way of Crestridge Road, adjacent to the development. Said improvements shall include, but are not limited to, A.C. paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, drainage improvements, bikeways, and landscaping. The design of such improvements shall be subject to the adopted street standards and the approval of the Director of Public Works.
  70. The proposed improvements to public streets shall be designed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, pursuant to the following specifications:
      1. Sidewalks along Crestridge Road shall be concrete, and six (6) feet wide, with a minimum of unobstructed width of 48" in all areas. The developer shall also provide handicapped accessible curb cuts as applicable.
      2. Traffic circulation signs shall be placed at all intersections and/or corners unless modification is authorized by the Director of Public Works, and shall meet City standards.
      3. The proposed driveway shall be designed in substantially the same alignment as shown on the approved development plans.
      4. Any raised and landscaped medians and textured surfaces shall be designed to standards as approved by the Director of Public Works.

  71. The contractor shall be responsible for repairs to any neighboring streets, which may be damaged during development of the site including, but not limited to, damage caused by trucks using the designated haul route to remove vegetation and debris from the site. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer shall post a bond, cash deposit or combination thereof, in an amount sufficient to cover the costs to repair any damage to streets and appurtenant structures as a result of this development. In addition to providing a bond or cash deposit, the developer shall for a pavement analysis of the streets to be used as the designated haul truck route prior to the start of construction and at completion of construction. The developer shall provide compensation for any loss of pavement life along the designated truck haul route as a result of this development.
  72. Detailed plans of the project entrance areas shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for geometric review and to review sight distance at the time of preparation of final grading, landscaping and street improvements plans prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
  73. A "Stop" sign and appropriate pavement markings shall be installed at the project driveway.
  74. Full access will be allowed to the project to include left turn out, subject to the following:
      1. Sight distance at the project entrance to be further reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City of Rancho Palos Verdes sight distance standards prior to the issuance of grading permits.
      2. Traffic Flow Access and operation will be reviewed six (6) months after the project is fully occupied.
      3. Crestridge Road may be redesigned to incorporate a raised median barrier, based on traffic conditions such as accident problems or information as may be identified through implementation of "Part B" of this condition.

  75. Internal traffic signing and striping shall be implemented in conjunction with the detailed construction plans for the project.
  76. The minimum width of the driveway shall be at least 28 feet, with a flat pad of 20-foot depth at the bottom of the driveway.
  77. The driveway shall be a curb return type to facilitate ingress/egress.
  78. If the nature or characteristic of the project changes, such that the ADT and peak hour traffic volumes increase, the project’s traffic access and circulation issues shall be returned to the Traffic Committee for review.
  79. Construction activity shall be restricted to the hours between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. This recommendation is based on the restriction mobility and reduced speeds of the loaded trucks. No vehicle staging will be allowed on Crestridge Road prior to 8:00 a.m. Construction traffic (dirt hauling) shall use Crenshaw southbound unloaded and Crestridge-Highridge-Hawthorne northbound loaded.
  80. The applicant shall prepare a detailed public improvement plans for submittal to the City’s Public Works Department for review and approval. This will include a signing and striping plan for modification of markings and controls on Crestridge Road to accommodate access requirements/restrictions and a separate traffic control plan.
  81. Tentative Parcel Map No. 24655

    Note: These conditions remain applicable to the Parcel Map, but they are being deleted from this set of conditions because the map has been recorded.

  82. The City's filing fee for a final map shall be paid within six (6) months of approval of the tentative map.
  83. The applicant shall supply the City with one mylar and one print of the recorded map.
  84. The approval of the Tentative Parcel Map expires twenty-four (24) months from the date of final approval of the parcel map, unless extended per the Subdivision Map Act. Any request for extension shall be submitted to the City prior to the expiration date.
  85. Within 24 months from the date of filing of the final map, the developer shall set survey monuments and tie points and furnish tie notes to the City Engineer. All lot corners shall be referenced with permanent survey markers in accordance with the Municipal Code. All boundary corners shall be referenced with permanent survey markers in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.
  86. The subject lot shall be served by adequately sized water system facilities, which shall include fire hydrants of the size and type and location as determined by the L.A. County Fire Department. The water mains shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows required for the land division. Domestic flow requirements shall be determined by the L.A. County Fire Department. All Fire Department requirements shall be satisfied.
  87. Any address numbering proposed by the subdivider must be approved by the City Engineer.
  88. Easements shall not be granted within easements already dedicated or offered for dedication to the City, or a public utility, until after the final map is filed and recorded with the County Recorder. No easements shall be granted after recording of the final map that in any way conflict with a prior easement dedicated to the City, or any public utility. If any easements are granted before recordation of the final map, the holder of said easement shall execute a quitclaim deed in favor of the City or any public utility.
  89. All utilities to and on the lots shall be provided underground, including cable television, satellite dish antenna, telephone, electrical, gas and water. All necessary permits shall be obtained for their installation. Cable television shall connect to the nearest trunk line at the property owner's expense.
  90. Prior to submitting the final map to the City Engineer for his/her examination, the applicant shall obtain clearance from all affected departments and divisions, including a clearance from the City Engineer for the following items: mathematical accuracy, signatures, etc.
  91. Utility and other easements shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer to determine their final locations and requirements.
  92. The final map shall include a dedication of a temporary construction easement to permit grading, generally in the southwesterly portion of Parcel 2 (29.40 acre parcel) to accommodate off-site grading for the proposed project located on Parcel 1 (4.57 acre parcel). Alternatively, the developer may provide to the City a deed or other document that is to be recorded with the County memorializing the location of said off site grading. Said easement or other document shall be reviewed by and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, the City Engineer and the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.
  93. No permits shall be issued until the Final Parcel Map has been recorded.
  94. Sign Permit No. 842

  95. One monument sign shall be permitted on the subject property as shown on the approved Site Plan and approved Sign Plan. The sign shall be a maximum 6' above adjacent finished grade and have a maximum sign area of 20 square feet. Any other proposed signage or changes to the approved sign will require an amendment to the Sign Permit, to be reviewed by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.