Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2 - TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 DATE: June 9, 2015 TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 1939 – APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. TPM 14-01 (72681); RESIDENTIAL MOUNTAINOUS DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. RM 14-01; AND CONSIDERATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AND GRADING OF A 90.46-ACRE, UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONE, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 2111-2125 CANYON ROAD Recommended Action: Conduct the public hearing and direct staff to complete the Final EIR and Resolution No. 1939 with the Statement of Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Consideration for adoption at the June 23, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. SUMMARY The applicant, Mr. Scott Yang of Nevis Capital, LLC, submitted Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01 (72681), Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 14-01, and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a proposed subdivision and grading of a 90.46-acre, undeveloped property in the foothills of Arcadia at 2111-2125 Canyon Road. See Attachment No. 1 for the Tentative Parcel Map, and Attachment No. 2 for the Aerial photo with Zoning Information, and Photos of the Subject Property and Surrounding Properties. An 11.68-acre parcel will be improved to create an access road/driveway and a building pad for one, single-family residence, and a 78.78-acre parcel will remain as undeveloped open space. An EIR was prepared to address the environmental impacts of this proposal. The Draft EIR was made available for public review from March 23, 2015 to May 8, 2015, and it was circulated to various State Departments by the State Clearinghouse of the Office of Planning TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 2 of 20 and Research (OPR) for review and comment. The report identified short-term aesthetic impacts of the proposal to be unavoidable adverse impacts, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required to certify the EIR. Comments were received from four government agencies, and five residents. These comments, and the Draft Responses to the Public Comments are included as Volume 3 of the draft EIR (Attachment No. 9). Because the proposed project meets the findings for approval of a subdivision, and an R-M Development Permit, and its impacts can be mitigated as stated in the EIR, it is recommended that the Planning Commission approve these applications, and direct staff to draft Resolution No. 1939 to incorporate the Commission’s findings for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) with a Statement of Overriding Considerations. BACKGROUND The subject property is currently a vacant and mostly undisturbed mountainous hillside area containing native vegetation and wildlife. Santa Anita Canyon Road runs diagonally through the property from the southwest to the northeast. In September 1977, the Planning Commission recommended a zone change of the subject property and surrounding area from R-1&D-10,000 – Single-Family Residential and Architectural Design Overlay with minimum 10,000 square-foot lots, to R-M&D – Residential Mountainous Single-Family and Architectural Design Overlay. The zone change was approved and enacted by the City Council on October 18, 1977. In 2000, Nevis Homes submitted a proposal to subdivide the subject property into 11 lots (Highland Oaks Specific Plan No. SP 00-01 and Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 51941) but withdrew the applications before they could be considered by the Planning Commission. In 2003, Nevis Homes submitted a revised proposal to subdivide the property into seven lots (Highland Oaks Specific Plan No. SP 03-01 and Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 51941). The Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposal due to significant and unavoidable environmental impacts (see Attachment No. 3 for PC Resolution No. 1717) and the City Council subsequently denied the applications (see Attachment No. 4 for CC Resolution No. 6466). In 2007, Nevis Homes submitted another proposal for two developable lots and a third remainder parcel. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1776 (Attachment No. 5) on August 26, 2008, to conditionally approve Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 07- 05 (69775), Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 07-01, Oak Tree Permit No. TR 08-04, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration. These entitlements were to subdivide the subject property into three parcels with Parcels 1 and 2 to be developed with new, single-family residences along Canyon Road, and Parcel 3 (80.33 acres) to remain undeveloped and be dedicated as open space. As a condition of approval, a mitigation measure required a non-refundable, $200,000 deposit to the City to endow the maintenance of the approximately 80 acres of undeveloped land that was to be maintained as open space. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 3 of 20 The developer determined that this project was not financially feasible, and submitted TPM 09-08 for a two-lot subdivision with requests to eliminate the mitigation measure for the maintenance endowment for the open space parcel, and renewal of Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 07-01. This proposal was to eliminate the open space parcel and divide the property into two parcels with the owners to be responsible for the maintenance of their respective undeveloped hillside areas, which were to be designated and rezoned for open space. On February 23, 2010, the Planning Commission approved this revised proposal. The approval of a Tentative Parcel Map normally expires in two years, but subdivisions throughout the State and any associated development applications have been extended by State legislation for four years. Barring any further extensions by the State, TPM 09-08 and RM 07-01 will expire in March 2016. However, it is the applicant’s assertion that there is no market for the lot configuration approved by these applications, which have the building pads fronting on Canyon Road. In 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6991 (Attachment No. 6) to deny TPM 11-02 and RM 11-01 for a subdivision of the subject property into two parcels, with a new, single-family residence on each lot, and a tennis court situated above on a filled ravine on the westerly portion of the property. An access road was proposed as a driveway for the building pads that would be situated approximately 90 feet and 140 feet above the access point at Canyon Road. The proposed development would have required substantial grading of approximately 3.9 acres of the property. The proposal included the removal of 45 healthy oak trees and 4 dead oak trees, and the encroachment into the protected zone of 35 oak trees. This proposal was denied based on the City Council’s determination that the proposal would likely cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, and injuriously affect the neighborhood because the proposal will result in permanent landform modifications that would be highly visible offsite, and contribute to an unavoidable adverse environmental impact. The City Council also found that there was insufficient evidence to support the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) in that the proposed project could not be altered to adequately mitigate a significant environmental effect, and that a Statement of Overriding Consideration could not be made for the Unavoidable Adverse Impact. DISCUSSION For the current applications, the proposal is to subdivide the subject 90.46-acre site into two (2) parcels for the development of one, single-family residence. An 11.68-acre parcel (Parcel 1) is to be improved to create an access road/driveway and a building pad for one, single-family residence, and a 78.78-acre parcel (Parcel 2) will remain as undeveloped open space. Thirty-two (32) healthy oak trees are proposed to be removed for this proposal. Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01 (72681) According to Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9117.1, a Tentative Parcel Map shall be processed for all proposed divisions of land resulting in four or fewer parcels. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 4 of 20 Implementation of the subject Tentative Parcel Map will result in two parcels. Parcels 1 and 2 will contain approximately 11.68 and 78.78 acres, respectively. Parcel 1 will be developed with a single-family dwelling, and Parcel 2 will remain as undeveloped open space. The two lots will be situated on the west side of Canyon Road, between two, existing, single-family lots at 2109 and 2127 Canyon Road. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Residential Estate for up to two dwelling units per acre, and the zoning is R-M&D, Residential Mountainous with an Architectural Design Overlay, which requires a minimum of 15,000 square feet (0.34 acres) per lot and Architectural Design Review approval for any significant improvements by the Architectural Review Board of the Highlands Homeowners’ Association. The following two findings are required for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map: 1. That the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the City’s General Plan. 2. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the community sewer system will comply with existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed Project will allow for a single-family residential development that is consistent in character with the Residential Estate designation as described in the City’s General Plan, and the project is consistent with the Residential Mountainous Zoning Regulations. The Project as proposed is consistent with the City’s Subdivision regulations and the State Subdivision Map Act. The Arcadia Public Works Services Department confirmed that the proposed development will be adequately served by the existing sewer infrastructure and the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board will be satisfied. The proposed subdivision should not be approved if the Planning Commission finds that any of the following findings per Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9117.8 are applicable: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with the applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 66451 of the Subdivision Map Act. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans and/or the City’s Multiple-Family Residential Design Guidelines. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 5 of 20 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the requested subdivision injuriously affects the neighborhood wherein said lot is located. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the legislative body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements for access or for use, will be provided and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 14-01 According to the Arcadia Municipal Code, no person shall grade, excavate, or fill in the R-M zone without a development permit from the Planning Commission if such grading, excavation, or filling is in excess of 15 cubic meters (19.62 cubic yards). The following are the evaluation criteria for an R-M Development Permit Application per AMC Section 9250.5.9: A. The following criteria shall be considered in assessing the application for a development permit: 1. Extent of grading required for the reasonable use of the property. 2. Visual impact of the proposed project. 3. Relationship of the proposed project to adjoining properties and/or structures. 4. Adequacy of proposed landscaped areas, drainage facilities, erosion control devices and other protective devices. 5. Adequacy of fire equipment access. 6. Extent of preservation of existing ridge and crest lines. 7. Extent of attempt to have roads follow existing contours. 8. Developability of sites. B. An application shall be denied if, in the judgment of the City, based upon the purpose of this Division, the proposed work or design of the lots and streets in the development would: TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 6 of 20 1. Cause excessive or unnecessary scarring of the natural terrain and landscape through grading or removal of vegetation; or 2. Cause unnecessary alteration of a ridge or crest line; or 3. Unnecessarily affect the view from neighboring sites; or 4. Would adversely affect existing development or retard future development in this zone; or 5. Be inconsistent with the provisions of this Division. C. In granting a development permit, the City may impose conditions which may be reasonably necessary to prevent danger to public or private property or to prevent the operation from being conducted in a manner likely to create a nuisance. No person shall violate any conditions so imposed in said permit by the City of Arcadia. Such conditions may include but not be limited to any of the aforementioned requirements of this Division. The City Engineer or a designated alternate may issue a permit for any emergency hillside work that may be necessary to prevent danger to public or private property. The proposed project involves approximately 7,000 cubic yards of cut and an equal amount of fill. The balanced grading will minimize the number of truck trips for export hauling. The portion of the 90.46-acre site that will be graded is approximately 1.34 acres in area, which consists of 0.98 acre for the access road/driveway, and 0.36 acre (15,600 square feet) for the building pad. In accordance with the Arcadia Municipal Code, all cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 slope. The grading improvements will include catch basins, landscape planters, retaining walls, and drain inlets to minimize erosion and runoff. Below is a section drawing of a portion of the proposed grading: The proposal meets the criteria for the approval of an R-M Development Permit. The proposed 7,000 cubic yards of balanced cut and fill is a reasonable amount of grading for a hillside property of this size to allow for the construction of one, single-family residence. The creation of the proposed building pad will be visible from the neighboring properties because it will be situated 90 feet above the street, and is located near the TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 7 of 20 ridgeline of the hill. The proposed building pad measures approximately 130 feet wide and 190 feet deep, and the cut measures approximately 16 feet tall at its deepest point for the building pad, and approximately 10 feet tall for the access road. Contour grading is proposed around the building pad to preserve as much of the existing landform as possible. Based on the height of the cut for the building pad, and the vantage point from 90 feet below, the visual impacts of this development will be sufficiently mitigated by the planting of mature trees and landscaping appropriate for the screening of a hillside development. The proposed pad will be approximately 25 feet below the ridgeline. The proposed layout will be inconsistent with the existing adjoining developments, which are closer to the street level along Canyon Road. However, the installation of an access road/driveway will have less of a visual impact along Canyon Road than would the construction of two new homes closer to the street, which due to the topography of the site, would not allow for a substantial landscape buffer. The proposal will impact a relatively small portion of existing ridge and crest lines, and most of the site will remain as undeveloped open space. Based on the foregoing findings, it is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 14-01. Oak Trees A separate oak tree permit is not required where tree removals and/or encroachments are approved as part of a development permit. In this case, the development permit is RM 14-01. There are 128 oak trees on the subject parcel to be developed. The proposed oak tree removals and encroachments are necessary for the access road/driveway to follow the contours of the hillside. Also, the building pad is proposed at a location that has a more gradual slope, which is typically more heavily vegetated than the steep slopes. The amount of grading is minimize based on these design criteria, however, it will require the removal of 32 healthy oak trees. In addition, this project will encroach into the protected zones of 31 oak trees. Sixty-five oak trees are to remain undisturbed. An arborist report was prepared by certified arborist, Jan Scow in February 2014. The report includes a matrix that shows specific observations on each of the 128 oak trees, and their disposition. It should be noted that Tree Numbers 22 and 95 have been added to the list of trees to be removed, due to revisions necessary to address Fire Department and Engineering Services comments, subsequent to the preparation of the report for a total of 32 oak trees to be removed. The matrix shows that, of the 32 oak trees to be removed, 11 of these trees are in “good” condition or better, and the rest are either in “fair” condition or worse. The trees to be removed range from six (6) inches to 25 inches in trunk diameter at breast height, with eight of the oaks having trunk diameters greater than 10 inches. Although many oak trees are proposed to be removed, most of these trees are not significant in size and are in less than good condition. As a mitigation measure, the applicant/property owner shall plant young oak seedlings from pots on Parcel 2 of the subject property. A certified horticulturist shall supervise the planting and confirm that a minimum of thirty-two oak trees are established after ten TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 8 of 20 years, and annual reports shall be provided to the City by July 1st of each year on the health of the seedlings. Furthermore, the applicant will plant five (5) 24” box Coast Live Oak trees, 13 five-gallon Scrub Oaks, and six (6) one-gallon Scrub Oaks on Parcel 1. Sixteen, five-gallon Coast Live Oak trees will be planted on Parcel 2. The establishment of these mitigation oak trees shall be monitored by a horticulturist for a period of three (3) years. Because several months will have elapsed since the oak trees were evaluated, the applicant shall submit an Oak Tree Permit Application with an updated arborist’s report prior to the issuance of a grading permit.Open Space Parcel 2 is proposed to remain as undeveloped open space. To preclude development of this parcel, a Conservation Easement is to be recorded, and the City shall be given the authority to designate and rezone this parcel as Open Space. The applicant must also agree to grant any necessary easements on the property for utility and road maintenance purposes. The City had been working with the Arroyos and Foothills Conservancy in an effort to find an entity to accept a conservation easement or a transfer of land of the subject site. As of today, no entity has expressed interest without an endowment to generate sufficient income to maintain the land in perpetuity. To cover the cost of maintaining the property, which is estimated to be approximately $6,000 per year for weed abatement, brush clearance, et cetera, the applicant must establish a funding source, either through an assessment, or through an endowment. In 2007, the Finance Department had estimated that such an endowment would need to be at least $200,000. The endowment amount required should be about the same as previously estimated since the cost to maintain the property would not be changed significantly. Therefore, staff recommends a condition of approval to require a non- refundable, $200,000 deposit to the City to endow the maintenance of the remaining 78.78-acre undeveloped land in perpetuity. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the subject proposal. The purpose of the EIR is to analyze and disclose all potential impacts the proposal may have on the environment, and identify methods to eliminate, or mitigate the impacts, and address alternatives to the proposed project. Prior to the preparation of an EIR, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was sent out to the State Clearinghouse of the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), local and regional government agencies, utility companies, and all other parties of interest to this proposal, to solicit comments for specific environmental issues to be covered in the EIR. An EIR consultant, Mr. Sid Lindmark prepared the EIR to thoroughly analyze the impacts of the proposed project, and the draft EIR was peer-reviewed by Mr. John Bellas of the planning consulting firm, PMC. The EIR identified significant environmental impacts that are mitigated to a less than significant level, impacts that are not significant, adverse impacts that are unavoidable, and alternatives to the project. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 9 of 20 Mitigated Significant Impacts The EIR discusses significant impacts on Biological Resources, Oak Tree Preservation, Soils and Geology, Hydrology and Water Quality, Wildland Fire Hazards, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases, and Construction Noise and Vibration. Mitigation measures are proposed to minimize these impacts to a less than significant level. Biological Resources – vegetation clearing, grading and other ground disturbing activities onsite during respective sensitive seasons may impact nesting migratory birds and raptors, breeding birds, wood-rat nests, special status plants, bats, and oak trees. Many of these biological resources are on various levels of Federal and State lists special status. The specific birds that are present on the subject site include the Cooper’s Hawk, South California Rufous Crowned Sparrow, the Oak Titmouse, and the Turkey Vulture; plants of concern that may occur on the subject site include the Plummer’s Mariposa Lily and Parish’s Gooseberry, in addition to oak trees; and animals of concern include the San Diego Desert Woodrat, and the Dusky-footed Woodrat. Specific mitigation measures have been incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to minimize impacts to these biological resources to less than significant. The mitigation measures include surveys that shall be completed by a professional biologist prior to the removal of trees or vegetation within the grading area and adjacent areas of impact. The applicant shall implement all recommendations of the approved surveys, which may involve the fencing of the sensitive areas to avoid disturbance, construction monitoring, and the planting of replacement trees. Soils and Geology – the proposed grading onsite may result in slope instability, mudflows, soil erosion, fire danger and landslides, alter the existing landforms, area and site drainage and debris flows, and decrease the water quality of drainage flows. The slope cuts are required by Code to be no steeper than 2:1 (H:V) for slope stability. Furthermore, geotechnical and geologic reports have been prepared to provide specific recommendations on grading and construction to minimize soils and geology impacts. The loading of heavy equipment is restricted from occurring at the top of the slope. Grading will be limited to non-rainy seasons between April and October to protect the drainage flow quality and prevent mudflows, soil erosion, and landslides. Hydrology and Water Quality – creation of impervious surfaces onsite, construction activities, and grading will change area and site drainage and debris flows, and will decrease the water quality of drainage flows. A hydrology analysis was prepared for the subject proposal. Improvements for mitigation includes onsite retaining walls, filtration basin, and parking drainage units. Furthermore, the project complies with the criteria for a Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) report. Wildland Fire Hazards – construction activities, construction equipment, building of structures and human habitation may result in fire danger onsite and offsite. The project is subject to all 2013 California Fire Code regulations adopted by the City, 2013 California Building Code (Chapter 33), and all other Fire Department policies and regulations, including the preparation of a Fuel Modification Plan. Compliance with these requirements will ensure the Fire Safety of the proposal. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 10 of 20 Air Quality – although the daily emissions for construction and operation of the project are not above SCAQMD thresholds, measures are required to reduce certain cumulative emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) in the South Coast Air Basin. The applicant and the contractors shall comply with all Best Available Control Measures as required by Building Services. Fugitive dust from construction operations shall be reduced by watering using soil binder, and when dust generation is evident. The project is also subject to the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Fugitive Dust requirements. Greenhouse Gases – although project construction and operational GHG emissions are not above SCAQMD thresholds, measures are required to reduce GHG cumulative emissions in the SCAQMD and in the State of California. For the future construction of the single-family residence, roof coverings shall have a minimum three-year aged reflectance and thermal emittance, or as specified in the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen). Construction Noise and Vibration – construction equipment may cause ground-borne vibrations that are annoying to offsite residents of dwelling units within 50 meters (164 feet). The applicant and contractors is required to phase earth-moving and ground- impacting operations so as not to occur in the same period to minimize vibration. Grading and construction activities will be limited to the construction hours as specified by Building Services. The full analysis of these impacts may be found beginning on page 59 of Volume 1 of the EIR. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was prepared to address the significant and potentially significant impacts, the suggested mitigation measures for each, the agency and/or City department responsible for ensuring the implementation of the mitigation measures, and timetables for compliance. The mitigation measures are to have any significant and potentially significant impacts made less than significant. The mitigation measures outline the specific performance standards and specific procedures to address the mitigated significant impacts as discussed on Biological Resources, Oak Trees, Soil and Geology, Hydrology and Water Quality, Wildland Fire Hazards, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases, Construction Noise and Vibration, and Land Use. See Attachment No. 7 for the MMRP. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Short-term Aesthetic impacts of the proposed project cannot be mitigated, and therefore is considered an Unavoidable Adverse Impact. The analysis of this impact begins on page 169 in Volume 1 of the EIR. The building pad is at the upper portion of Parcel 1, and the removal of all vegetation in the graded areas and the landform modifications will be highly visible offsite, even at great distances. However, as previously mentioned, the grade cut is approximately 16 feet tall at its deepest point, and approximately 10 feet tall TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 11 of 20 for the access road. Mature trees and landscaping appropriate for a hillside location are proposed to mitigate the long-term visual impacts of the grading and the residence. As the landscaping matures and establishes over time, the visual impacts of the proposal will be mitigated. Less Than Significant Impacts The proposal is found not to have significant impacts on the following: Agricultural Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazardous Materials, Mineral Resources, Population/Housing, Public Services, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, Other City Public Facilities, Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Service Systems. Agricultural Resources – the subject site is undeveloped and zoned for Residential Mountainous uses. There are no agricultural resources on site and the project will have no agricultural resource impacts. Cultural Resources – there are no known historical, archaeological or paleontological resources on site. The site is not included in the cultural or historical resource studies previous performed on the City. An archaeological survey was completed for the subject site, and no cultural resource was identified. The Native American Heritage Commission completed a search to identify any traditional cultural properties or sacred sites within a half mile of the project area, and no sites were identified in that search. Therefore, the proposed project will have no impact to cultural resources. Hazardous Materials – there is no evidence of dumping onsite or evidence of materials that would be considered hazardous. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board does not identify any hazardous waste sites within the project vicinity. All hazardous fuels and lubricants used for construction will be subject to local, State, and Federal regulations. Upon buildout, the project site will use only common landscaping, paint, and household chemicals. The project has a less than significant impact on hazardous materials. Mineral Resources – the Arcadia General Plan identifies the subject site to be within a MRZ-3 mineral resource zone, where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined. The City has identified four sites which are undeveloped and only the Livingston Graham sand and gravel extraction site in Irwindale is available. The amount of grading proposed would have a less than significant impact on mineral resources. Population/Housing – the proposed project, at buildout, will include only one dwelling unit and a project population of less than five persons. The project does not displace any existing housing units or persons, or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the project has no impact on housing and population displacement. Public Services – specific service providers include Police Protection, Schools, Parks, Other City Public Facilities, Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Service TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 12 of 20 Systems. The public service demands for a project of one dwelling unit are minimal and less than significant. The detailed analysis of these issues begins on page 161 of Volume 1 of the EIR. Alternatives to the Project As required per Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines; beginning on page 187 in Volume 1 of the EIR is a discussion that identifies and analyzes the potential impacts of five (5) alternatives to the proposed project. The alternatives are as follows: 1) No- build/Existing Conditions; 2) Contiguous Development with Eastern Access; 3) Contiguous Development with Western Access; 4) Open Space/Resource Protection; and, 5) Previously Approved Two Unit Subdivision under Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 09-08. Alternative 1: No-build/Existing Conditions – No improvements or grading would occur on the subject site. The entire property will remain in private ownership. No permanent open space would be designated, and the property would not benefit from improvements that are subject to current development standards. It also does not attain the objectives of the project. Alternative 2: Contiguous Development with Eastern Access – this alternative moves the building pad to a lower elevation with a shorter access road from Canyon Road. It would reduce the amount of grading required and impacts on topography, and only three oak trees would have to be removed. The viewshed impact from Canyon Road would be improved. However, the viewshed impact from the residential lots to the south is much greater because of the reduced distance from these neighbors. Alternative 3: Contiguous Development with Western Access – this alternative moves the building pad to the southwesterly portion of the site, with a short access road from Santa Anita Canyon Road. The grading would be slightly more than that proposed for the project due to its topography, and no oak trees will be impacted. However, extensive retaining walls may be required to create the access road, which would also cross the onsite drainage. This alternative has similar viewshed impacts as Alternative 2 because, while the viewshed impact from Canyon Road would be improved, the building pad will be much closer to the adjacent neighbor to the south, thus creating a greater viewshed impact on these neighbors. Fire access is restricted due to the sharp curves and narrow lanes on Santa Anita Canyon Road. Alternative 4: Open Space/Resource Protection – this alternative is similar to Alternative 1, except that the entire site is designated as Open Space: Resource Protection. The property would be purchased by either a public agency or a non-profit, who would be responsible for its maintenance. The City has been unsuccessful in its search for an entity to consider the acceptance of a conservation easement or land transfer. It is possible, however, that with a substantial endowment for maintenance, an entity would be interested. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 13 of 20 Alternative 5: The previously approved two-unit subdivision (Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 09-08) – this alternative consists of two lots fronting on Canyon Road adjacent to existing development. It has steeper compacted slopes of 1.5:1 (H:V) than the proposed project at slopes of 2:1. Twelve oak trees were proposed to be removed. The grading plan required 5,000 cubic yards of cut and 40 cubic yards of fill. These units will be highly visible from Canyon Road, but would be consistent with the existing development pattern. Based on the information above, the subject proposal is the preferred option. Alternatives 1 and 4 do not attain the same objectives as the subject proposal, which is to develop a single-family residence in a residential zone. Alternative 1 would not benefit from improvements under current development standards such as enhanced drainage. Alternative 4 does not seem feasible as the City has been unable to find an entity to accept the conservation easement or land transfer. Alternatives 2 and 3 will have more viewshed impacts to the adjacent neighbors to the south, though they would both reduce viewshed impacts from great distances. Alternative 3 would limit emergency vehicle access and requires extensive retaining walls for the access road. Alternative 5 is an environmentally superior alternative that will attain the objectives of the project. However, it is the applicant’s assertion that since its approval in 2009, there has been no market support for this proposal, and it is therefore deemed infeasible and removed from further consideration. Due to extensions granted by State legislation, the approval of TPM 09-08 is effective until March 2016. Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) The draft EIR, public comments, and Responses to Comments all become part of the EIR document, and constitute a final EIR. The final EIR must be certified in order to approve the project. Statement of Facts and Findings Prior to approving a project, the decision-making body must make a Statement of Facts and Findings. Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines states the following: a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. 2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 14 of 20 have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives. d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section. A Statement of Facts and Findings will be drafted as part of Resolution No. 1939 approving Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01 and R-M Development Permit Application No. RM 14-01. The Statement of Facts and Findings will be based on the Planning Commission’s determinations, statements, and discussion in arriving at its decision. Statement of Overriding Consideration When an EIR discloses an unavoidable adverse impact, a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be made by the decision-making body in order to certify the EIR. The Statement must cite benefits of the proposed project that outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines states the following: a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 15 of 20 against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. Based on these CEQA Guidelines, in order to certify an EIR with unavoidable adverse impacts, the Planning Commission must make a Statement of Overriding Consideration that finds substantial evidence in the record to balance specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed project that outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. The Statement of Overriding Consideration will be drafted as part of Resolution No. 1939 that would be presented for consideration and adoption at a future meeting. The EIR identifies short-term aesthetics to be an unavoidable adverse environmental impact. The aesthetics impact is mitigated on a long-term basis by the proposed landscaping, and the short-term aesthetic impact may be overridden by the benefits of the proposal, which allows for a low-density housing development on a residentially-zoned property, and the provision for a conservation easement and rezoning to Open Space to protect the remaining 78.78-acre parcel as open space in perpetuity. Approval of this proposal would achieve the Arcadia General Plan’s Goal to protect a substantial portion of the property from further development as open space. The proposed residential development would be on a small portion of the 90.46-acre property, which the current zoning could allow for up to 180 units, or two dwelling units per acre. The conservation easement and rezoning to Open Space help to achieve the Arcadia General Plan’s Goal to preserve open space resources. PUBLIC COMMENTS/NOTICE The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated locally for public review for a period of 45 days from March 23, 2015 to May 8, 2015. The DEIR was also filed with the State Clearinghouse (SCH), and was reviewed by responsible agencies from March 24, 2015 to May 7, 2015. Comments were received from the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, and the Sierra Madre Mountain Conservancy (Attachment No. 8). Most of the agencies did not identify specific environmental concerns, with the exception of the Sierra Madre Mountain Conservancy, that expressed concerns over the following impacts of the proposal: aesthetics, fire TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 16 of 20 safety, impacts to wildlife, oak tree removal, seismic, and light pollution. Responses have been prepared to address each of the comments, including the relevant mitigation measures and conditions of approval for the project; such as the establishment of fuel modification zones to alleviate fire hazards, the planting of replacement oak trees and seedlings, the use of “Dark Sky” light standards, and the analysis of seismic hazards in the included Regional Geology Map. The Draft Response to Public Comments is provided as Attachment No. 9; Volume 3 of the DEIR. Public hearing notices of Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01, Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 14-01, and the Notice of Availability of a DEIR were mailed on May 14, 2015, to the property owners, tenants, and occupants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property. Five letters of opposition were received as of June 1, 2015, and they are included with this staff report as Attachment No. 8. The opponents are generally concerned about the loss of 32 mature oak trees, the substantial grading proposed, construction noise, drainage, hillside stability, and wildlife habitat. Draft responses to the comments include the planting of replacement oak trees and seedlings, references to the appropriate studies performed to ensure compliance with slope stability, drainage requirements, and the preservation of wildlife. The responses to each of the comments are included in the Draft Response to Public Comments – Volume 3 of the DEIR (Attachment No. 9). The Response to Comments is to include all comments pertaining to the EIR, and the responses to each comment will complete the EIR. The required 45-day public comment period on the EIR ended on May 8, 2015. However, the Planning Commission may elect to include any or all public testimony received during the public hearing for which responses will be included in the Response to Comments for the Final EIR. The City’s Public Works Services Department, Engineering Services, and the Fire Department reviewed the proposal, and provided comments and recommended conditions of approval. Their memoranda are included as Attachment Nos. 10, 11, and 12, respectively, and their recommended conditions are incorporated into the following conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION For the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01 and Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 14-01, it is recommended that the Planning Commission impose the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide a non-refundable, $200,000 deposit to the City to endow the maintenance of the remaining 78.78-acre undeveloped land in perpetuity, or in an amount deemed acceptable to the City at the time when the Parcel Map is recorded. The applicant shall also provide a conservation easement and authorize the City to designate and rezone the remaining 78.78-acre property as Open Space. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 17 of 20 2. The applicant shall submit an Oak Tree Permit Application with an updated arborist’s report prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3. The applicant shall agree to and execute the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) thereby agreeing to pay the City any applicable fees and expenses to implement the mitigation measures in the design, construction, and maintenance of the project. All mitigation measures shall be considered conditions of approval. 4. All structures shall be sprinklered per the City of Arcadia Fire Department Single and Multi-Family Dwelling Sprinkler Standard. 5. All structures shall comply with Section R327 of the 2013 California Residential Code. 6. All landscaping within 30 feet of all structures shall be fire resistant and provided with means of irrigation. Landscaping within a distance of 30 to 100 feet of all structures shall be cleared of all dead and/or non-fire resistant vegetation. A detailed landscaping plan showing compliance with these requirements shall be provided upon building permit application. 7. The access road/driveway shall be capable of supporting a 75,000 lb. load, and shall allow for adequate turnaround for emergency vehicles, subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. 8. An approved water supply must be provided in compliance with the minimum required fire flow of 750 gpm for a one hour duration. The approved water supply must be provided within 600 feet of the structure along an approved access road. 9. The developer shall provide a private booster system, or extend the City water main from pressure Zone 6 to provide the necessary water pressure. 10. The design of the sewer lateral shall not exceed a flow rate of 10 feet/second at the connection to the existing sewer main. 11. Two 36-inch box Fern Pine Trees shall be planted along the right-of-way on Canyon Road, with the locations to be determined by the Public Works Services Director, or designee. 12. An approved SUSMP report must be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 13. The applicant shall provide additional geotechnical investigation and analysis at the building pad location prior to the issuance of a building permit for any structures on the building pad. 14. The Owner/Applicant shall be required to pay a Map Fee of $100.00, and a Final Approval Fee of $50.00, prior to approval of the Parcel Map. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 18 of 20 15. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, and/or the issuance of a Building Permit, the Owner/Applicant shall either construct or post security for all public improvements as shown on Tentative Parcel Map No. 72681, and remove and replace damaged sections of existing curb and gutter along the entire property frontage on Canyon Road, and grant to the City of Arcadia the right to restrict vehicular ingress and egress to Santa Anita Canyon Road along the property frontage, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or designee. 16. A General Construction permit must be obtained from the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 17. The applicant shall grant any easements deemed necessary by the City Engineer and/or Public Works Services Director for utility and/or public maintenance activities. 18. The applicant shall obtain approval from the County Sanitation District of Los Angeles County for annexation into District No. 15 prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 19. The applicant/property owner shall comply with all City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right-of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development Services Director. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 20. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals. 21. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 19 of 20 22. Approval of TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 shall not take effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after the Planning Commission adoption of the Resolution, the applicant and property owner have executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator or designee an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should approve a motion to approve TPM 14-01 (72681) and RM 14-01; direct staff to draft Resolution No. 1939 for adoption at a future meeting to certify the final Environmental Impact Report with the Statement of Facts and Findings and the Statement of Overriding Consideration; and incorporate the conditions of approval set forth above, or as may be modified by the Commission. The Planning Commission may choose to include any additional comments on the EIR submitted at the hearing, and direct staff to prepare responses to be included in the Final EIR. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should approve a motion to deny TPM 14-01 (72681), RM 14-01, and/or not certify the final Environmental Impact Report, and state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at a future meeting that incorporates the Commission’s decision and specific findings. The Planning Commission may wish to consider for denial the findings for a Tentative Parcel Map, an R-M Development Permit, and the certification of the Final EIR that are listed in the report on pages 4, 5, and 8, respectively. If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the June 9, 2015 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li by calling (626) 574-5447 or by email to tli@ArcadiaCA.gov. Approved: Attachment No. 1: Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01 (72681) Attachment No. 2: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information and Photos of the Subject Property and Surrounding Properties Attachment No. 3: PC Resolution No. 1717 Attachment No. 4: CC Resolution No. 6466 TPM 14-01 and RM 14-01 2111-2125 Canyon Road June 9, 2015 – Page 20 of 20 Attachment No. 5: PC Resolution No. 1776 Attachment No. 6: CC Resolution No. 6991 Attachment No. 7: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment No. 8: Comment Letters from Public Agencies and Residents Attachment No. 9: Draft Response to Public Comments (Volume 3 of the EIR) Attachment No. 10: Memorandum from Public Works Services Department Attachment No. 11: Memorandum from Engineering Services Attachment No. 12: Memorandum from the Fire Department The Environmental Impact Report is included as a separate file due to its size. It includes Volume 1: the Draft EIR, and Volume 2: the Appendices, and is available on the City’s website, www.ArcadiaCA.gov, or at the link below: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxSU3c0ybInGfjJiR0FOUHZaa0p0Y3JUU21abnUyS DdBVjRwUWRHUnEyd0dVVXRqenphczQ&authuser=0 Attachment No. 1 Attachment No. 1 Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 14-01 (72681)