682, Amendment of Zoning ordinance , Staff Reports (2)I,
IF._.J`
MAR 1_ i. 2004
CONNYB,MCCOI ,JuiviYCLERf� ' CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
A l f r DEPUTY
I
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
04, l 0090 7 0
TO: • County Clerk FROM: City of Rolling Hills
County of Los Angeles 2 Portuguese Bend Road
12400 East Imperial Highway Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Norwalk, CA 90650
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 and 21152 of the
Public Resources Code.
ZONING CASE NO. 682
Project Title
NONE YOLANTA SCHWARTZ
State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency
(If submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person
(310) 377-1521
Area Code/Phone
CITY WIDE — CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Project Location (include county)
Project Description: Request for a Zoning Code amendment to allow rental of merchandise, supplies
or equipment in support of school district operation on school district property.
This is to advise that the CITY COUNCIL has approved the above described project and adopted
Ordinance No. 949 on February 23, 2004 amending the Zoning Code, and has made the following
determinations regarding the above described project:
1. The project [ will • will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. An Environmental Impact Report was NOT prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures [_were, XX were not] made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [ was _IN was not] adopted for this project.
5. Findings [ ■ were were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at the City of
Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road. Rolling Hills, CA 90274.
This document is being filed in duplicate. Please acknowledge the filing date and return
acknowledged copy in the enclosed stamped, self-addressed envelope.
ature (Public Agency,
Date received for filing:
March 9, 2004 PLANNING DIRECTOR
Date Title
r
g. '/Ift t) l; �. r00!;
'
A
03/11/04 3:38PM 0000O1#0932 r�-.K79
CECk
P0Y TO L.A. TRE0SU5.'ER
COU0TY CLERK
FOR DEPOSIT ONLY �
}
• •
04 0009070
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION
De Minimus Impact Finding
Project Title/Location Name and Address of Project Proponent (include county):
Project Title: 'ZONING CASE NO. 682, ZONING CODE AMENDMNENT
Location: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS. CA 90274, LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
Proponents: PALOS VERDES PENINSULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Project Description: Request for a Zoning Code amendment to allow rental of merchandise, supplies
or equipment in support of school district operation on school district property.
Findings of Exemption (Attach Required Findings):
The City Council finds that there is no evidence that the proposed project, which involves zoning
code amendment to allow rental of merchandise (costumes) on the school district property in
conjunction with school district operations, will have an effect on endangered or threatened species
of plants and animals.
The City Council finds that there is no evidence that the proposed project, which involves zoning
code amendment to allow rental of merchandise (costumes) on the school district property in
conjunction with school district operations, will have an effect on wetlands and that water courses
will not be eliminated or converted.
The City Council finds that there is no evidence that the proposed project, which involves zoning
code amendment to allow rental of merchandise (costumes) on the school district property in
conjunction with school district operations, will have a significant adverse impact on the environment
and has adopted a Negative Declaration consistent with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Certification:
I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings of fact and that based upon
the initial study and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse
effect on wildlife resources, as in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
YOL TA SCHWARTZ L� Title: Planning Director
(C�ii f Planning Official) Lead Agency: City of Rolling Hills
Date: March 9, 2004
Date received for filing:
03/11/O4 3:30�U OOODO1�0032 ��?�
[XfECK $�5^Di
PAY TO L"A" T�EASURER
COUNTY CLERK �
• , •
c tr a RAJ.,J c o
NOTICE OF
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
INCORPORATED JANUA.RY 24, 1957
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cilyotrh9 aol.com
ITT
Fla
_. 1"_.1
MAR r 1 20D4.
CONNY McCORIMAGOUNTY CLERK
,ga r DEPUTY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling
Hills will hold a Public Hearing at 7:30 PM on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA for the purpose of
receiving public input regarding the following:
ZONING CASE NO. 686
Consideration of a request by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District
(PVPUSD) on behalf of the Costume Closet, a fund raising committee of the
Palos Verdes Peninsula PTA, for a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit
for the construction of a new building on the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified
School District property at 38 Crest Road West in the City of Rolling Hills.
The request is briefly described as proposed Site Plan Review and Conditional Use
Permit applications to construct a new building on the school district property to house
the Costume Closet operations, which include storage and rental of costumes in support
of school district activities.
FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT:
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY AND CRITERIA CONTAINED IN THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND THE CEQA
GUIDELINES OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, THE LEAD AGENCY HAS
PREPARED AN INITIAL STUDY, ANALYZED THE PROJECT AND
DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON THE ENVIRONMENT. BASED ON THIS FINDING, THE LEAD AGENCY
PREPARED THIS NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
A period of at least 20 days from the date of publication of the notice of this NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be provided to enable public review of the project specifications,
the Initial Study and this document prior to the final adoption of the NEGATIVE
,
CiR�f k I) 2001
(g noun
u 3
• . •
DECLARATION by the Lead Agency. A copy of the proposal and pertinent documents
is on file in the offices of the City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling
Hills. CA 90274. (3101 377-1521.
We welcome your input. You may provide your comments in writing to. the Planning
Department, at the above address, by March 26, 2004 or come to the meeting and address the
Planning Commission on this project.
If you challenge the approval or denial of this permit application in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning
Department.
Date: Marc 1., 2004
By: ('/ ,6:47 �L�V
i` olanta Schwartz, Pl fining Director
Published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on March 6, 2004.
03/11/04 3 $5P1 i 000001Ii00 1 ; :79
CHECK .25„00
PAY IT LA„ TREASURER
COMM Ct..ER!i
FOR DEPOSIT OWI...Y
y \ fo � i Ip7---..
:,- %/^\\� • ,�
•
i 1 (
f•' 111
x.' �ro�
x , t s�
�,✓ � � � - _•QP t�-.r .,,rj'f
'''' '
ijll � � I ! _fir\ 'rYt �•
Ai
�. '• I , J r __;..�--_,i r , :':
?.�--...,\i�,,, �:i„tea l�i r, '` ,5 \ \ t ,. �..+
1:4-r c
r' 1! wp ` + 2_t_ \,. ,69 �'7"-
`V`'� c.;<< a _, i, ____ i � ' •/ / �a,.lr � \ Y src�
� \~1' tos + I \�ff�'
,,,D :::: _o . -
d?JfE�je�.\ f 7pq\\•I,
}Ji i-.r,•��7j \ s �• / �'` 1 e r>
i.
to
\f- t �,,•' ! pR IMP i n\ \� rat
`: i t
Tt D IY., �.. ,T, .� 1 • Ii+
x+,.o� Jr,. �i ��+ 1 J' �i e�� f' it�'` vk; f<<„a
,TeG'x ptt ( ter' ! Y s tea/
•
L.._ � r`.•
� ,,'``` y.4,
f~-• K a
•
PROPOSED PROJECT:
NAME & ADDRESS OF
APPLICANTS:
LOCATION OF PROJECT:
ASSESSOR'S Book, Page &
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE DESIGNATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
LOT SIZE:
LOCATION MAP:
ZONING CASE NO.
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
QUESTIONNAIRE
Consideration of a proposed Site Plan Review and Conditional Use
Permit to construct a new, one story, 7,200 square foot pre -fabricated
building on the school district property, for the purpose of housing the
operations of the Costume Closet, which is a fund raising committee of
the Palos Verdes Peninsula PTA. The proposal is to be implemented by
the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District, on behalf of the
Costume Closet.
Costume Closet is a fund raising committee of the PTA, whose purpose is
to store and rent costumes to local schools at no fee, and to the general
public for a minimal fee.
Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District
3801 Via La Selva
Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274
38 Crest Road West
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
7569-22-900
Single Family Residential, low density.
RA-S-2, Residential Agricultural -Suburban 2 acres minimum lot size.
No change.
(+) (-) 31.14 acres.
Attached.
Zoning Case No. 686, Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit
I. APPLICABILITY OF THE INITIAL STUDY
A. Is the proposed action a "project" as defined by CEQA? (See Section I. of the City's
CEQA Guidelines. If more than one application is filed on the same site, consider them
together as one project).
x Yes No
1. If the project qualifies for one of the Categorical Exemptions listed in Appendix E
of the City's CEQA Guidelines, is there a reasonable possibility that the activity
will have a significant effect due to special circumstances?
Yes x No
II. INITIAL STUDY REVIEW
A.
Does the project require a 30-day State Clearinghouse review for any of the following
reasons? Yes x No
1. The lead agency is a state agency.
I-1
• •
2. There is a State "responsible agency" (any public agency which has discretionary
approval over the project).
3. There is a State "trustee agency" (California Department of Fish and Game,
State Department of Parks and Recreation, University of California, and State
Lands Commission).
4. The project is of Statewide or area wide significance including the following:
(A) A proposed local general plan, element, or amendment thereof for which
an EIR was prepared.
(B) A project which would interfere with the attainment or maintenance of
State or national air quality standards including:
A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units.
(1)
(2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more
than 1,000 persons or encompassing more than 500,000 square feet of
floor space.
(3)
A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000
persons or encompassing more than 250,000 square feet of floor space.
(4) A proposed hotel/motel development of more than 500 rooms.
(5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing or processing plant, or industrial
park planned to house more than 1,000 persons occupying more than 40
acres of land, or encompassing more than 650,000 square feet of floor
area.
(C) A project which would substantially affect sensitive wildlife habitats
including but not limited to riparian for rare and endangered species as
defined by Fish and Game Code Section 903.
(D) A project, which would interfere with attainment of regional water quality
standards as stated in the approved area wide wastewater management
plan.
III. PROJECT ASSESSMENT
A. Project Description:
Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 7,200 square foot pre -fabricated
building on the school district property, for the purpose of housing the operations of the Costume
Closet, a fund raising committee of the Palos Verdes Peninsula PTA. The proposal is to be
implemented by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District, on behalf of the Costume
Closet.
B. Description of the Project Site: (Describe the project site as it exists at the present time,
including information on topography, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects.
Describe any existing structures on the site, and use of the structures.)
The project site is a (+) (-) 31.14 acre parcel consisting of undulating hillsides and knolls covered
by grasses and mature shrubs and trees, with some areas being somewhat wooded. There are
approximately 14 one-story structures on the site. They consist of school buildings, maintenance
building, warehouse building, office and administrative buildings, repair shop and parking areas
I-2
• •
for the school facility and the Palos Verdes Transit buses. A long tree lined driveway off of Crest
Road West outside the Rolling Hills Crest Road gate, beginning at the westernmost portion of the
lot serves as the accessway to the Palos Verdes School District property. This road is parallel to
and is separated from Crest Road West by a sloped vegetated buffer. Only a very small portion of
the school district's property is visible from Crest Road West.
C. Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Single family dwelling units within the City of Rolling Hills.
East: Single family dwelling units within the City of Rolling Hills.
South: Single family dwelling units within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
West: St. John Fisher Church and private school affiliated with the church within the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes.
These areas also consist of undulating hillsides and knolls covered by grasses and mature
shrubs and trees with some areas being heavily wooded.
D. Is the proposed project consistent with:
City of Rolling Hills General Plan
Applicable Specific Plan
City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance
South Coast Air Quality Management Plan
Congestion Management Plan
Regional Comprehensive Plan
No N/A
u
The specific use, as proposed, is a permitted use in the City of Rolling Hills, with a Conditional Use Permit
Recently, a zoning code amendment was approved by the City to allow rental of costumes at no charge
for school related activities and for a minimal fee to the general public.
E.
Have any of the following studies been submitted?
_ Geology Report
Hydrology Report
_ Soils Report
_ Traffic Study
_ Noise Study
_ Biological Study
Native Vegetation
Preservation Plan
_ Solid Waste Generation Report
_ Public Services/
Infrastructure Report
Historical Report
Archaeological Report
Paleontological Study
Line of Sight Exhibits
Visual Analysis
Slope Map
Fiscal Impact Analysis
Air Quality Report
Hazardous Materials/
Waste
I-3
• •
s.
IV. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation: (Select one)
X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed
to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
This initial study was prepared by:
Date: March 6, 2004
YOLANTA S /IWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
v% 1
I-4
,✓
[Signature]
•� r
f
+ ! t� 1:5% i,\\ • _'a`�•.� •. ' i� � : o� N `2
•t•
I 0.* �'r T Ill •c.a•F i 1 I f (
s '�`( I 1 t ` `. � \ ror
T'=--' — -; ii i6,](r t "` �� I , zec \\ \
.roe �'t. 1i . t) .. r•. ,: , • , G �\ \ \ r A iro \\
pQ01�imec`�:� fi. �•'')`\ n1 tJ°
r } 1_i` ^ t a t o. - __ .. "�f I tOG.9
• \\.- •� t t \ n tb9—i,...�.'_ t1 : + 1 ` c ,yu
�! ts.•1" rr9 .�.\ , �\ s '% 4t ,06' � �aC, 4� \ \ rr•" e
' Yii 'fr^"`'\ . , t GP 1'` r ,. �./'+ t L •
At
%
=Y-iO; i+ - ...a %''i"`, \ �'(, t•a _ .\ .. ser" •
/ \ ! i
��`� ex`ybc "i t \\`'r•"0pi''o.a, i�)zaSe«� \\ t'�.� i�� !O6t }\ ,+��
° c - �s °�; I � � � x - `�"' r�l aj0 "� t rp9 \ \.� a•
'>,; --, . ,: Jt„ ! ! .•
Zbs \i; pR t5� ':l'7e/{ OR'` \ `y1rN' .. ' pd � �� { (" `� �f(�'^
.: �• da -. .I j'--µ \ 'c t __ `Y, - �- 'z� \• \ � � ��'
?��. ` tt +,�" :`• '� a ...«• '_ ,?;a ' ,:•tL !` r \ \ t ,\ l- N� ' ' !..t„ �... t .c
• � �:�.•! ��, e� i \.\ �,t t,.l Jr 'tl5 G 4� � . 55 �•\�- c--•Y-T/ .,' !!7
-t ,�;! rr.?•'
„`-�.. .7 oi`p !lam• � t1G ,5 � ; , A\)
• •
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to
a "Less Than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures
from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," above may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. See
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify
the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific
conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously
prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or
pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that
are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
I-5
•
Issues:
I. AESTHETICS — Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
ss Than
ignificant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ I1
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including .❑ 0 0
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:
In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture
and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use?
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑ ❑ a
❑ 0 0
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑ ❑ t]
I-6
•
III. AIR QUALITY — Where available, the
significance criteria established by the applicable air
quality management or air pollution control district
may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions, which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
Less Tf �
Significa
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ C]
❑ ❑ ❑ p
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑ E ❑
❑ ❑
❑ 0
I-7
b) Have substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5 of the State CEQA
Guidelines?
s Than
nificant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ O
El
❑ a
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑ ❑ ID
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ 0
❑ 1]
I-8
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on -
or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1 B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life and
property?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
Less Dila
Signifi
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
El
❑ 0 ❑
❑ 0 ❑
0
El
❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ 0
❑ ❑ 0
O ❑ ❑
No
Impact
IZI
I]
E1
0
I-9
•
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
-- Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area/
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
ess Than
'ignificant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporation
0 ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
Less Than
Significant
Impact
CI
0
CI
0
No
Impact
I�
El
t7
DI
0
I-10
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
--Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater able level (e.g., the production rate
of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been
granted?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or areas including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner, which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or areas including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner, which would result in flooding on- or
off -site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
CI
Less Thim
Significa
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
CI
Less Than
Significant
Impact
CI
❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
O ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
O ❑ ❑
No
Impact
0
CI
E1
0
IZI
I1
0
•
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures, which would impede or redirect flood
flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the
project
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including but not limited to the
general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
I-12
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporation
❑ ❑
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
❑ 11
❑ 0 ❑ O
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
0
0
El
IxJ
IKI
lKI
IO
•
Xl. NOISE — Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Less Think
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x
❑ ❑ 0 ID
❑ ❑ 0 ❑X
❑ ❑ ❑ El
❑ . 0 ❑ El
❑ 0 0 0
❑ ❑ 0 I:3
I-13
•
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment
alts Than
nilicant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑ 0 EJ
o ❑ ❑ 0
❑ 0 0 ID
O ❑ 0 ID
❑ 0 0 a
❑ ❑ 0 El
❑ ❑ ❑ E
O ❑ 0 E1
I-14
•
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial
in relation to the existing traffic load and
capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections?
b) Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., but turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Item XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
Less Thoh
SignificaRIF
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ 0 0 I]
❑ 0 ❑ ID
❑ 0 0 El
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑ 0 0
❑ ❑ 0 0
❑ ❑ ❑ a
I-15
c) Require or result in the construction of new
stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
g)
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples
of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
ess Than
ignificant
Potentially With
Significant
Impact
El
Mitigation
Incorporation
❑ ❑
O 0
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
Less Than
Significant
Impact
0
0
No
Impact
a
0
0
I]
I-16
•
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects,
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less T
Signifi
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ II
❑ ❑ ❑ I]
• •
The following analysis is a description of the findings contained in the Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Issues Checklist Form, which preceded this page. A detailed discussion of all potential environmental
impacts checked "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and
"Less Than Significant Impact" is provided, along with appropriate mitigation measures.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Item I. AESTHETICS.
a-c.
No Impact. The proposed structure will not affect the aesthetics of the area, as the
structure will be located among other already existing structures, and will be better looking
than the existing structures. The proposed building will be tucked in among existing
Eucalyptus trees, behind an existing structure and will not be visible from Crest Road.
Item II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
No Impact. The City of Rolling Hills is not considered an agricultural City, and therefore,
the impact of the proposed structure does not apply.
Item III. AIR QUALITY
Less than significant impact. The proposed use will generate a slight increase in
vehicle trips onthe school district's property, which is located outside the gate to Rolling
Hills. It is determined that there will be an increase of 5 cars per hour throughout the
school year, with approximately 12 cars per hour three weeks before and one week after
Halloween, and approximately 2 cars per hour from mid -June to mid -September The
proposed development will have less than significant impact on the air quality in the City,
as the development will blend into the existing uses on the property and will not generate
additional pollution or other odors. The use will be limited to the school district's property
and will have limited hours of operation, and therefore will have less than significant
impact on air quality.
Item IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a-d.
No Impact. The proposed development will have no impact on the biological resources in
the City, as the structure will be located on an existing building pad, although overgrown
with non-native brush and trees. No grading is proposed, therefore, no disturbance to
native animals is expected. The structure and use will be limited to the school district's
property only and will not affect any biological resources within the City.
In addition, The General Plan and Zoning Code set forth policies, which encourage the
retention and use of native drought tolerant vegetation in landscaping. Any known rare or
endangered species of plants, which exist in the City, are required to be re -vegetated,
when disturbed by a development. There are no known rare or endangered species on the
school district property.
Item V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
No Impact. The proposed structure will not change the way the City addresses cultural
resources, when found during construction.
Item VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a-e.
No Impact. The proposed structure does not change the density, or requirements for
construction, and therefore, will not cause any additional removal of natural vegetative
cover. The area of the proposed structure is overgrown with non-native grasses, shrubs
and Eucalyptus trees and some will be removed.
There will not be any movement of soil necessary for the proposed development and
since existing development standards are not being affected, the proposed structure will
have no impact on the geology or soils in the City.
I-17
• •
Item VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
No Impact. The proposed development will not cause any hazards or create any
hazardous materials to be located in the City. The project does not change how the City
handles such materials.
Item VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a.
g-j
No Impact. The City's Buildings & Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and
the Rolling Hills Community Association's Construction Ordinance carefully regulate
development construction activities and building materials. The existing development
standards are not being amended. Therefore, the proposed development will have no
impact on the hydrology or water quality.
No major floodplains exist in the City, and development is not permitted in the canyon
areas most likely to be affected by flooding. No open bodies of water occur within the City;
thus no such hazard exists.
No water bodies are located in the project area. Future development within the City of
Rolling Hills is not expected to result in change in the amount of any water bodies located
in the vicinity.
Item IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING.
a-c.
No Impact. The Zoning Ordinance establishes the maintenance of strict development
standards to preserve the community's natural terrain and the Building & Construction
Ordinance requires a balanced cut and fill ratio. The proposed development will not affect
any changes to those requirements and will have no impact on the environment.
Item X. MINERAL RESOURCES
a-b
No Impact. There are no known mineral resources that would be of value to the region
and the residents of the state or delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or land
use plan within the City of Rolling Hills.
Item Xl. NOISE
a
Less than significant impact. The proposed use will generate a slight increase in
vehicle trips on the school district's property, which is located outside the gate to Rolling
Hills. It is determined that there will be an increase of 5 cars per hour throughout the
school year, with approximately 12 cars per hour three weeks before and one week after
Halloween, and approximately 2 cars per hour from mid -June to mid -September The
proposed development will have less than significant impact on noise in the City, as the
development will be located away from the residential area within the City, and will blend
into the existing activities at the school district property The change in the allowed use will
be limited to the school district's property only and will have less than significant impact on
noise.
Item XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
No Impact. The proposed development will have no impact on population or housing in
the City. The proposed project will not change the density; lot coverage or other
development standards or type of uses permitted in the City, (except a use specifically
limited to the school district's property), and therefore, will not have any impact on the
natural growth and development of the City.
Item XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
I-18
•
No Impact. The proposed project will not affect the current or future public services
needed in the City, as no additional residential or commercial development will result from
the project.
Item XIV. RECREATION
No Impact. Goals of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan
include continuing the City's program of acquisition and development of strategically
located recreation centers, encouraging the maintenance and improvement of the system
of hiking and equestrian trails in Rolling Hills through the Community Association,
encouraging the continued upkeep of all City -owned recreation facilities within Rolling
Hills, and providing expanded recreational opportunities for children. The proposed
development will have no impact on the recreation within the City.
Item XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Less than significant impact. The proposed use will generate a slight increase in
vehicle trips on the school district's property, which is located outside the gate to Rolling
Hills. It is determined that there will be an increase of 5 cars per hour throughout the
school year, with approximately 12 cars per hour three weeks before and one week after
Halloween, and approximately 2 cars per hour from mid -June to mid -September The
proposed development will have less than significant impact on traffic in the City, as the
development will have limited hours and will become a part of the school district activities
on their property.
Item XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
No Impact. The proposed development will have no impact on water supplies or
wastewater treatment requirements for the City, since the proposed project will not change
the density, lot coverage or other development standards permitted in the City, and
therefore, will not have any impact on the natural growth and development of the City,
which would affect utilities and service systems. All utilities already exist to the site, as the
site is developed with buildings utilized by the school district.
Item XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a-c.
No Impact. The proposed development is limited to the school district's property and
does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, does not have
impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, nor does the project
have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly.
I-19