HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 2002-49 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SOUTHEAST COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS REGARDING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT, AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach ("Agency")
initiated the process to adopt a Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the Southeast
Coastal Redevelopment Project ("Project") in order to address conditions of blight existing
within the proposed redevelopment project area("Project Area"); and
As part of the Redevelopment Plan adoption process, a Draft Environmental Impact
Report ("Draft EIR") for the Project was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the
Project and circulated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") of 1970,
as amended and State and Agency Guidelines adopted pursuant thereto; and
Notice was duly provided to the public, government agencies and all other interested
parties that the Draft EIR was completed and that written comments on the Draft EIR may be
submitted to the Agency as provided under CEQA; and
A duly noticed public hearing on the Draft EIR was held by the Agency at which time all
interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and
A Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR") for the Project was prepared
pursuant to CEQA and the State and Agency Guidelines, which incorporated the Draft EIR and
included written responses to the verbal and written comments made at the public hearing and
during the CEQA review process; and
The Final EIR was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of implementing the
Project's goals and objectives which relate to alleviating conditions of blight through housing
programs, infrastructure programs, public facility programs, and commercial rehabilitation and
economic development programs; and
The Final EIR included and evaluated five alternative levels or intensities of
development, which are described in the Final EIR as the "No Redevelopment Plan", "Lower
Density", "Residential", "Industrial" and "Alternative Site" alternatives; and
t
02reso/SE CC Cega
Res.No.2002-49
The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final
EIR.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Huntington
Beach, California as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all of the foregoing
recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby certifies that the Final EIR has been completed in
compliance with CEQA and State and local guidelines adopted pursuant thereto.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby certifies that the information contained in the
Final EIR for the Project has been reviewed and considered by the City Council members.
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby certifies that the Final EIR reflects the City
Council's independent judgment and analysis.
SECTION 5. Each and all of the findings and determinations contained in this document
are based on competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire
record relating to the Redevelopment Plan for the Project and the Final EIR. The findings and
determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all
respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence. All of the language
included in this document constitutes findings by the City Council, whether or not any particular
sentence or clause includes a statement to that effect.
SECTION 6. All summaries of information in the findings to follow are based on the
Final EIR, the Redevelopment Plan for the Project (and every component thereof) and/or other
evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an
indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact. The summaries of
information below are only summaries. Cross references to the Final EIR and other evidence in
the record have been made where helpful, and reference should be made directly to the Final EIR
and other evidence in the record for more precise information regarding the facts on which any
summary is based.
SECTION 7. The City Council hereby incorporates by reference Attachment "A"
entitled "Findings of Facts, Including a Statement of Overriding Considerations" in support of
this Resolution.
SECTIONS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, regarding the
environmental impacts of the proposed Redevelopment Plan that the environmental impacts of
the proposed Project have been considered and recognized by the City Council.
2
02reso/SE CC Ceqa
Res.No.200249
SECTION 9. The City Council hereby finds and determines that implementation of the
Redevelopment Plan may have a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 10. With respect to those "potentially" significant impacts analyzed in the
Final EIR, the City Council finds and determines as follows:
a. The Project will not have a significant environmental effect in the following
environmental issue areas, and therefore no mitigation measures are required for
such impacts.
1) Land Use / Relevant Planning — consistency with applicable relevant
planning programs
2) Transportation and Circulation— traffic impact to local circulation system,
internal circulation and access to Project Area, and parking
3) Biological Resources—noise
4) Geology, Soils and Seismicity—topography
5) Noise—mobile noise sources
6) Air Quality— local and regional air quality planning documents
7) Human Health/Risk of Upset hazardous materials
8) Public Services and Utilities police, drainage, reclaimed water, local
natural gas, telephone and cable
9) Cultural Resources—historical resources
b. Mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR will reduce potentially significant
impacts in the following environmental issue areas to below the level of
signif icanee-
1) Land Use / Relevant Planning— adjacent sensitive receptors in regards to
aesthetics, traffic, noise and air quality
2) Aesthetics / Light and Glare construction debris, equipment, and
associated heavy traffic, site character and surrounding vicinity, light and
glare
3) Biological Resources — dust and urban pollutants, introduction of invasive
plant species, additional nighttime lighting, and increased human contact
4) Geology, Soils and Seismicity — wind and water erosion, seismic,
liquefaction, shallow groundwater conditions, seismicity, faulting; and
geologic hazards
5) Noise short-term construction related noise, long-term stationary noise,
and long-term operational noise
6) Human Health / Risk of Upset — due to construction and remediation of
contaminated portions of Project Area
7) Public Services and Utilities — fire service, schools, libraries, roadway
maintenance, parks and recreation, wastewater service, drainage facilities,
water provision, solid waste disposal, and electricity facilities
3
oaresa/$E CC Ceqa
Res.No.2002-49
8) Cultural Resources — archeological resources and paleontological
resources
SECTION 11. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the Project will have
significant unavoidable impacts for which alternatives and mitigation measures to reduce the
impacts to below the level of significance are not feasible for the reasons described in the Final
EIR and the Attachment "A", in the following environmental impact or issue areas and for this
reason the City Council hereby adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in
Section 7.0 of Attachment "A":
1) Biological Resources— sensitive habitat,plants, and/or wildlife
2) Quality — short-term nitrogen oxides, and long-term operational nitrogen oxides
and reactive organic gases
SECTION 12. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR for the Project have been eliminated or
substantially lessened where feasible, or are acceptable due to overriding concerns, in that:
a. All significant environmental effects that can be feasibly avoided have been
eliminated or substantially lessened as discussed in the Final EIR and the
Attachment "A"; and
b. Based on the Final EIR, Attachment "A" and other documents and information
contained in the record with respect to the Project, all remaining unavoidable
significant effects of the proposed Redevelopment Plan are overridden by benefits
of the Project as described in Section 7.0 of Attachment "A".
SECTION 13. The City Council hereby adopts Section 7.0 of Attachment "A" as a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed Redevelopment Plan.
SECTION 14. The City Council hereby adopts Exhibit I to Attachment "A" as the
Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program for implementation of the proposed
Redevelopment Plan.
SECTION 15. The City Council makes and adopts these environmental findings and
Statement of Overriding Considerations in regard to the approval and adoption of the proposed
Redevelopment Plan and all actions in furtherance thereof.
4
02reso/SE CC Ceqa
Res. No.2002-49
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a
regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of June , 2002.
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk City A torney �-
'Il
REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: etc
. , (__10_1A9L1 &d 0, #�
City AdTfKnistrator Direc r of Economic Development
5
02reao/SE CC Ceqa
2002-49
FINDINGS OF FACTS Ras.t Attachment chmentA
A
INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Section 15091(a)of the CEQA Guidelines states the following:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental
Impact Report 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
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."
Therefore, in order for the City of Huntington Beach to approve the Southeast Coastal
Redevelopment Plan, it will be necessary to make at least one of the above findings for each
significant impact identified in the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan Draft Program EIR.
Each impact and the associated finding(s)for the City to consider are discussed below.
Suggested findings are presented for each applicable issue area. A CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a)(3) finding indicates that the impact is still significant and specific economic, legal,
social, technological or other considerations of employment make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR, and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations must be.prepared.
The Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan Draft Program EIR (State Clearinghouse No.
2001091144) identifies significant, potentially significant, and unavoidable significant
environmental impacts, prior to mitigation, that may occur as a result of the project. The
following discussion is a brief summary of impacts and mitigation measures as discussed in the
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan Program EIR.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL
The Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan proposes a 1 T2-acre redevelopment area within
the southeastern portion of the City of Huntington Beach. The project area contains industrial
facilities, public works uses, and a small amount of open space. The Redevelopment Plan is
proposed to provide aesthetic enhancements, infrastructure improvements, and hazardous
City of Huntington Bead May, 2002
1
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
.Program EIR No. 01-01 Attachment A
materials remediation to this blighted and under-utilized area. The Plan will act as a policy tool
and funding source for the mitigation of potential impacts associated with future development
within the project area, which is anticipated to occur regardless of Redevelopment Plan
implementation. Although there are various specific development proposals within the proposed
project area (being processed under separate entitlement processes), the proposed
Redevelopment Plan does not include any site-specific development proposals, nor does it
propose to change any existing General Plan or Zoning designations. A more detailed project
description is provided in Section 3.0, PROJECT DESCRIPTION of the Draft EIR.
3.0 IMPACTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
The following impacts were found not to be significant (either "not significant" or "no impact"),
based on the Initial Study and EIR. Additional issues were determined not to require further
analysis in the EIR, as set forth in Final EIR Section 7, EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE
SIGNIFICANT.
It should be noted that the following issues were determined to be "not significant" or of "no
impact", in consideration of the absence of project conditions to cause such impacts, in
recognition of project design features that avoid, reduce or offset such impacts, and/or due to
existing standard conditions of approval.
LAND USEIRELEVANT PLANNING (Draft EIR page 4.140)
The proposed Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan would conflict with applicable relevant
planning programs.
The Plan would not conflict with any applicable relevant planning programs or policies, as it
would be consistent with the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance. As specific future development is proposed within the project area, the
Applicant will be required to submit detailed plans reflecting compliance with local codes and
policies.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION (Draft EIR pages 4.2-1 to 4.2-7)
Implementation of the Redevelopment Plan would cause a significant traffic impact to the local
circulation system (page 4.2-5 and 4.2-6 of the Draft EIR).
Redevelopment Plan implementation would not create significant impacts in regards to the local
circulation system. The proposed Plan will be consistent with the City's General Plan and
Zoning, and traffic impacts have been previously analyzed within the City's General Plan and
General Plan EIR. In addition, improvements identified within the City's General Plan
Circulation Element and "Transportation System Needs Analysis 2000-2010" are anticipated to
bring projected deficient local roadways to an acceptable level of service.
The proposed Redevelopment Plan would impact internal circulation and access to the project
area (page 4.2-6 of the Draft EIR).
As the Redevelopment Plan does not include any site-specific development proposals, no
impacts exist in regards to access and internal circulation. All potential future development
facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan will require separate discretionary review.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
2
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Attachment A
The Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan will adversely impact parking within and
surrounding the project area (page 4.2-6 of the Draft EIR).
As the Redevelopment Plan does not include any site-specific development proposals, no
impacts exist in regards to parking. Potential future development facilitated by the
Redevelopment Plan will require separate discretionary.review, which will include analysis of
parking impacts.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (Draft EIR pages 4.4-1 to 4.4-20)
The proposed Redevelopment Plan would adversely impact local biological resources in
regards to noise (page 4.3-16 of the Draft EIR).
As the project area and surrounding vicinity are relatively urbanized, an incremental increase in
noise generated by potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan is not
anticipated to result in significant impacts.
GEOLOGY, SOILS, & SEISMICITY (Draft EIR pages 4.5-1 to 4.5-7)
The Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan would have adverse impacts on the natural
topography of the project area (page 4.5-5 of the Draft EIR).
The existing project area is relatively flat, and lacks unique geological or physical features. In
addition, it is anticipated that a nominal amount of grading will be required for potential future
development facilitated by the proposed Redevelopment Plan. Impacts are anticipated to be
less than significant.
NOISE (Draft EIR pages 4.6-1 to 4.6-8)
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan would generate a significant
amount of noise resulting from mobile noise sources (page 4.6-7 of the Draft EIR).
It is estimated that potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan would
result in a 1.5 dBA noise increase from mobile noise sources. Such a nominal increase would
typically not be noticeable to the human hear. Impacts in this regard are anticipated to be less
than significant.
AIR QUALITY(Draft EIR pages 4.7-1 to 4.7-19)
The Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan would conflict with local and regional air quality
planning documents(page 4.6-15 through 4.6-17 of the Draft EIR).
The proposed Plan does not involved a General Plan amendment, zone change, or other
change in land use, and is consistent with the County of Orange and City of Huntington Beach
land use assumptions. Since the regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is based on
the City and County's General Plan assumptions, and since the proposed Plan is consistent
with these assumptions, the Plan would be considered consistent with the AQMP. Impacts in
this regard are not anticipated to be significant.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
3
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Attachment A
HUMAN HEALTH/RISK OF UPSET (Draft EIR pages 4.8-1 to 4.8-7)
Potential future development facilitated by the proposed Plan would result in long-term impacts
in regards to hazardous materials.
While potential future uses may require the storage, use, transportation, and/or handling of
hazardous materials, any such hazards would be minimized by adherence to Federal, State,
and City regulations. These requirements include monitoring devices, spill control, emergency
response plans, appropriate on-site safety equipment, and the proper design of all facilities.
Impacts in this regard are not anticipated to be significant.
Development potentially facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan on the AsconlNesi site would
result in adverse impacts to the health of on-site occupants.
The proposed development of approximately 500 residential units on the Ascon/Nesi site would
require adequate site remediation, in addition to proper setbacks and buffers between proposed
residences and adjacent industrial areas. Impacts in this regard are not anticipated to be
significant.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES (Draft FIR pages 4.9-1 to 4.9-12)
Potential future development facilitated by the proposed Redevelopment Plan would adversely
impact police facilities within the City of Huntington Beach (page 4.9-6 and 4.9-7 of the Draft
EIR).
Potential future development facilitated by the proposed Redevelopment Plan is not anticipated
to create a significant increase in service calls to the project area nor is it expected to result in
the need for additional police facilities within the City of Huntington Beach. Impacts in this
regard are not anticipated to be significant.
Storm water runoff resulting from potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment
Plan would adversely impact drainage facilities within the project area (page 4.9-8 of the Draft
EIR).
The City of Huntington Beach and the County of Orange have both designated the project area
for drainage improvements. In addition, potential future development facilitated by the
Redevelopment Plan will be subject to separate environmental review, including an analysis of
drainage impacts. Impacts are not anticipated to be significant.
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan would adversely impact the
City's reclaimed water facilities (page 4.9-9 of the Draft EIR).
The project area is not anticipated to utilize reclaimed water, as no reclaimed water facilities
exist within the vicinity. Impacts are anticipated to be significant.
The proposed Redevelopment Plan will have adverse impacts on local natural gas facilities
(page 4.9-10 of the Draft EIR).
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
4
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No. 01-01 Attachment A
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan will not have adverse
impacts on local natural gas facilities. The Southern California Gas Company currently provides
natural gas to the project vicinity, and future service to the project area can be provided via
numerous gas mains surrounding the project area.
Telephone and cable service facilities within the vicinity of the project area will be adversely
impacted by Redevelopment Plan implementation(page 4.9-12 of the Draft EIR).
Verizon provides telephone service to the project area, while Time Warner Communications
provides cable service. Both companies will be able to provide adequate service to the project
area as potential future projects facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan develop, and impacts are
not anticipated to be significant.
CULTURAL RESOURCES (Draft EIR pages 4.10-1 to 4.10-4)
Implementation of the proposed Redevelopment Plan may disturb historical resources within the
project area (page 4.10-4 of the Draft EIR).
No known historical resources exist within the project area, and, as such, no impacts are
anticipated to occur.
4.0 FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The following issues were determined to be "less than significant with mitigation", as set forth in
the EIR. The City of Huntington Beach finds that these potentially significant adverse impacts
can be mitigated to a level that is considered less than significant after implementation of the
existing City development review requirements, standards, and codes, as well as mitigation
measures identified within the EIR:
LAND USE AND RELEVANT PLANNING(Draft EIR pages 4.1-1 to 4.1-10)
Potential Impacts
The proposed Redevelopment Plan would create adverse impacts on adjacent sensitive
receptors in regards to aesthetics, traffic, noise, and air quality.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The potential impacts from aestheticsllight and glare have been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level of less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the
mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project.
Measures for the mitigation of potential aesthetic, traffic, noise, and air quality impacts are
described below in AESTHETICS/LIGHT & GLARE, TRANSPORTATIONyTRAFFIC, NOISE,
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
6
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No. 01-01 Attachment A
and AIR QUALITY, respectively. Refer to Attachment C, MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements.
AESTHETICS/LIGHT & GLARE
Potential l m pacts
Potential future construction and associated debris, construction equipment, and associated
heavy traffil may adversely impact views of and across the project area.
Development within the project area facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may adversely
impact the site character of the project area and surrounding vicinity.
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may generate light and
glare through on-site nighttime security lighting and additional automobile traffic.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The potential impacts from aesthetics/light and glare have been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level of less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the
mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project.
Required mitigation measures include the concentration (to the extent feasible) of construction
activities away from adjacent residential areas, and restricting the placement of construction
equipment and soil stockpiles at least 100 feet away from adjacent residential property lines. In
addition, a screening fence shall be maintained around the perimeter of the construction site.
Exterior mechanical equipment will be screened and setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of
the building. All such screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building. To
mitigate impacts from light and glare, light intensity shall be limited to only that necessary for
adequate security and safety, and light "spillages onto adjacent properties shall be controlled by
directional or shielded lighting fixtures. Refer to Attachment C, MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Potential Impacts
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan would result in the
generation of dust and urban pollutants, and may adversely impact local biological resources
surrounding the project area.
The proposed Plan may introduce invasive plant species to the project area, thereby having
negative impacts on native biological resources within the project area and surrounding vicinity.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
B
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res. No.2002-49
Program EIR No. 01-01 Attachment A
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may introduce additional
nighttime lighting to the project area, and could disturb the behavioral pattems of nocturnal
wildlife within and surrounding the project area.
Increase human contact as a result of the proposed Plan may result in the disturbance of
biological resources within the project area and surrounding vicinity.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final.EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The potential impacts to biological resources have been eliminated or substantially lessened to
a level of less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the mitigation
measures identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project. Measures to
mitigate impacts to sensitive vegetation include the avoidance of such areas to the maximum
extent feasible. If such areas are developed, the project applicant shall mitigate the impacts to
the satisfaction of responsible resource agencies. Focused surveys for special status plant
species will be conducted during the optimal survey period prior to development approvals from
the City. To minimize impacts to wildlife resources, focused surveys for wildlife and an analysis
of wildlife movement will be performed prior to development within the project area, if
necessary. To minimize impacts on sensitive ground-nesting bird species, measures such as
raptor foraging habitat mitigation and minimizing raptor nesting habitat will be required for
potential future development. A mitigation plan shall be developed should it be determined by
future discretionary review that special status wildlife would be impacted by noise levels as a
result of potential future development facilitated by the Plan. For the mitigation of dust and
urban pollutants, the project applicant shall attain all necessary permits and approvals from the
State Water Resources Control Board, and will prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) and implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion control
measures. To minimize the possibility for the introduction of invasive plant species to the
project area, the landscape designs for each potential future project will be reviewed by a
qualified biologist to ensure that no such plant species are included. Lighting impacts will be
mitigated by ensuring that lighting from potential future development is directed away from
natural open space areas and any proposed mitigation sites. In addition, signage and fencing
will be utilized to minimize human disturbance where a development is proposed to be adjacent
to a natural open space area. Refer to the MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a
complete listing of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements.
GEOLOGY, SOILS, & SEISMICITY
Potential Impacts
The proposed Redevelopment Plan may have adverse impacts in regards to wind and water
erosion resulting from potential future development facilitated by the Plan.
Potential future development may be subject to adverse conditions resulting from seismic,
liquefaction, and shallow groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the project area.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
7
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res. No.2002-09
Program EIR No. 01-01 Affachment A
Potential future development occurring within the project area would be subject to hazards from
seismicity and faulting.
As the project area has a very high liquefaction potential, potential future development facilitated
by the Redevelopment Plan may be subject to geologic hazards in this regard.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The potential impacts from geology, soils, and seismicity have been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level of less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the
mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project.
Potential future development facilitated by the Plan would be required to prepare a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to minimize wind and water erosion impacts. A detailed
soils analysis would be prepared to minimize impacts in regards to geology and soils, while
compliance with all UBC standards and California Division of Gas and Geothermal Resources
(DOGGR) Special Publication 117 would mitigate impacts of potential future development in
regards to seismicity and liquefaction. Measures such as fire protection precautions, setbacks,
site access regulations, plugging/replugging/reabandonment, and venting systems will be
required to mitigate impacts from the potential development of projects over or nearby active or
abandoned oil wells. In addition, the DOGGR shall be notified if any plugged, abandoned, or
unrecorded wells are damaged during excavation or grading, and the DOGGR shall review final
building plans prior to the issuance of grading permits. Refer to Attachment C, MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation measures and monitoring
requirements.
NOISE
Potential Impacts
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may result in adverse short-
term construction-related noise impacts to adjacent sensitive receptors.
The Redevelopment Plan may create impacts to sensitive receptors within and adjacent to the
project area from long-term stationary noise sources associated with potential future
development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan.
Potential future development on the AsconrNesi site may create long-term operational noise
impacts on adjacent sensitive receptors.
Findings
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
8
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Attachment A
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
Potential noise impacts have been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level of less than
significant by virtue of project design considerations and the mitigation measures identified in
the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project. All potential future development
facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan will be consistent with the City of Huntington Beach
Municipal Code, Chapter 8.40 (Noise Control). Potential future development will also
incorporate measures to control short-term construction noise such as mufflers on equipment,
locating stockpiles/staging areas away from dwellings, limiting construction hours, minimizing
construction equipment engine idle times, development appropriate truck routes, and requiring
proof of noise compliance on grading plans. For the mitigation of long-term stationary noise and
long-term noise impacts on the AsconlNesi site, future development will require an acoustical
analysis report prepared by a City-certified acoustical consultant, which will include noise
generation potential and mitigation measures, if necessary. Refer to Attachment C,
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation measures and
monitoring requirements.
HUMAN HEALTHIRISK OF UPSET
Potential Impacts
Construction and remediation of contaminated portions of the project area may result In short-
term human health/risk of upset impacts on the project area and surrounding vicinity.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The potential impacts from human health/risk of upset have been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level of less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the
mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project.
Mitigation measures to minimize such impacts include the on-site clearing of vegetation, trash,
piping, debris, and other deleterious materials from the contaminated site and proper disposal of
such materials. If underground utility locations are not well documented, geophysical surveys
will be performed to locate subsurface structures and utilities. Remedial activities will comply
with all OSHA Safety and Health Standards, and an SCAQMD Rule 1166 permit will be
acquired if necessary. Proper Phase 11 and Remedial Action Plan-(RAP) documentation will be
prepared and approved prior to the commencement of remedial activities. A contingency plan
shall be prepared prior to the remediation of a contaminated site within the project area.
Contaminants such as lead-based paints and asbestos, if detected, shall be properly disposed
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
9
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No. 01-01 attachment A
of, and if any hazardous materials not identified within prior documentation are detected,
remedial operations shall cease immediately, and the City shall be notified immediately. For
structures located on a contaminated portion of the project area, all such structures will be
cleaned prior to off-site transport, or hauled off-site as a waste, and all structure removal
operations shall comply with all regulations and standards as administered by the SCAQMD.
Future projects shall also be required to post appropriate signage prior to remedial activities to
the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. In addition, any unknown or unrecorded oil
wells encountered during remedial activities shall be reported immediately to the City, State
Division of Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), County of Orange Environmental Health
Division, and Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). Refer to
Attachment C, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation
measures and monitoring requirements.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Potential Impacts
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may create an increased
demand for on fire service, schools, libraries, roadway maintenance, parks and recreation,
wastewater service, drainage facilities, water provision, solid waste disposal, and electricity
facilities.
Findings
.Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the .potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The potential impacts from public services and utilities have been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level of less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the
mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project. To
properly mitigate impacts to fire service, schools, libraries, roadway maintenance, and parks
and recreation, adequate impact and mitigation fees will be paid by the project applicant to
provide for additional facilities, if necessary. Development impacts from potential future
development shall be reviewed by the City, project applicant, and affected school district(s) prior
to project review to discuss mitigation measures beyond the payment of impactldevelopment
fees. In addition to the payment of such fees, any residential development located south of
Hamilton Avenue and west of Magnolia Street will be required to incorporate a neighborhood
park of two to five acres in size into the potential future project. To mitigate impacts to
wastewater and water facilities, the project applicant for potential future development facilitated
by the Redevelopment Plan will be required to pay the prevailing connection/service fees and
capital facility charges in addition to any costs for installation, connections, and metering.
Potential project applicants shall also coordinate with the City's recycling representative to
ensure compliance with the City's waste reduction and recycling program, and will be required
to prepare a waste reduction plan for the project. To minimize impacts to electricity facilities,
additional electrical load analyses shall be performed to determine the need for additional
electrical transformers. Refer to Attachment C, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a
complete listing of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
10
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No. 01-01 Attachment
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potential Impacts
As archaeological artifacts are known to exist within the vicinity of the project area, potential
future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may disturb archaeological resources
within the project area.
Paleontological resources are known to exist within the older Quarternary Alluvium or Terrace
deposits. As such deposits exist within the vicinity of the project area, potential future
development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may disturb paleontological resources
through grading and/or excavation activities.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan
that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant environmental effects identified in the
final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
Potential cultural resources impacts have been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level of
less than significant by virtue of project design considerations and the mitigation measures
identified in the Draft EIR, and have been incorporated into the project. For potential future
development, a qualified archaeologist will be retained to perform a site-speck cultural
resources investigation for each individual project. In addition, should potential future
development require an encroachment permit from Caltrans, the project applicant shall provide
proof of Native American consultation through the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC).. To mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources, a qualified paleontologist
will be retained to monitor grading operations and salvage scientifically significant fossil
remains. Such remains shall be identified, stabilized, and mapped on a USGS topographic
map, catalogued, prepared to the point of identification, and sent to a proper research or
educational institution within the County of Orange. In addition, the project applicant shall be
required to pay any curation fees for the long-term curation and maintenance of donated
collections. Refer to Attachment C, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a complete
listing of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH WOULD REMAIN
SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE AFTER MITIGATION
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Unavoidable Significant Impact
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
11
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Attachment A
Implementation of the Redevelopment Plan may result in unavoidable significant impacts to
sensitive habitat, plants, and/or wildlife within the project area.
Findings
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
Redevelopment Plan that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant
environmental effects identified in the final EIR.
• 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 within the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
As stated within the Draft EIR, despite the implementation of stated mitigation measures within
Section 4.4, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, significant and unavoidable impacts to sensitive
habitat, plants, and/or wildlife may occur. This impact is overriden by the project benefits as set
forth in the following statement of overriding considerations. As numerous special status plant
and wildlife species either occur or are known to occur within the project area, potential future
development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan may adversely impact such resources.
Mitigation measures as referenced in Section 4.4, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, will be
implemented, but these measures may not be able to reduce impacts to a level of
nonsignificance. Thus, biological resources impacts in this regard are considered an
unavoidable significant impact of the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan. Refer to the
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation measures and
monitoring requirements.
AIR QUALITY
Unavoidable Significant Impact
The proposed Redevelopment Plan may facilitate future development resulting in an
unavoidable significant impact in regards to short-term NO, (nitrogen oxides) and long-term
operational NO,and ROG (reactive organic gases)_
Findings
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
Redevelopment Plan that avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant
environmental effects identified in the final EIR.
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
• 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 within the final EIR.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
12
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Attachment A
Facts in Support of Findings
As detailed within the Draft EIR, despite the implementation of stated mitigation measures within
Section 4.7, AIR QUALITY, significant and unavoidable air quality impacts remain. This impact
is overriden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations.
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and California Air Resources
Board (CARB) have jurisdiction over stationary and mobile emission sources, respectively.
Potential future development facilitated by the Redevelopment Plan is anticipated to exceed
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds in regards to short-term air
emissions (demolition, grading/paving) and long-term operational emissions (off-site mobile).
Mitigation measures as referenced in Section 4.7, AIR QUALITY, will be implemented, but these
measures are unable to reduce NO,and ROG emissions to a level of nonsignificance according
to SCAQMD thresholds. Thus, air quality impacts in this regard are considered an unavoidable
significant impact of the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Project. Refer to Attachment C,
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM for a complete listing of mitigation measures and
monitoring requirements.
6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21002 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6,
an EIR must assess a reasonable range of alternatives to the project action or location.
A. Section 15126.6 places emphasis on focusing the discussion on alternatives which
provide opportunities for eliminating any significant adverse environmental impacts, or
reducing them to a level of insignificance, even if these alternative would impede to
some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly. in this
regard, the EIR must identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other
alternatives.
B. As with cumulative impacts, the discussion of alternatives is governed by the "rule of
reason".
C. The EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably
ascertained, or does not contribute to an informed decision-making and public
participation process.
The range of alternatives is defined by those alternatives which could feasibly attain the
objectives of the project. Accordingly, Section 6.0 of the Draft EIR analyzes various alternatives
to the propose_ d project in evaluating the opportunity for avoiding or substantially lessening
environmental impacts. Section 6.0 of the Draft EIR provides descriptions and analysis of each
alternative in adequate detail to allow the decision-makers) to evaluate the proposed project in
comparison to identified alternatives.
Section 6.0 of the Draft EIR evaluates five alternatives, including No Redevelopment Plan,
Lower Density, Residential, Industrial, and Alternative Site Alternatives. These alternatives are
summarized in the following matrix:
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
13
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program E!R No. 01-01 Attachment A
ALTERNATIVE IMPACTS
Alternative lmpaet.St,tmmary Matrix .
Altennative Impact
(compared to the proposed Feasible Meets
Redevelopment Plan) Objectives
No Redevelopment Plan Equal Yes No
*Lower Density Less Yes No
Residential Greater Yes No
Industrial Greater Yes No
Alternative Site Unknown No No
*Environmentally superior to the Applicant's proposal
The No Redevelopment Plan Alternative has been rejected due to the project area's blighted
and under-utilized condition. Implementation of the No Redevelopment Plan Alternative would
not produce the tax increment necessary to perform necessary improvements to the project
area.
The "No Development" alternative would:
• not meet basic project objectives;
• likely have overall similar environmental impacts as the proposed Plan, but over a longer
period of time;
• not be consistent with the City's plans for the project area; and
• not preclude site development of a similar or worse nature.
The Lower Density Alternative would have slightly reduced environmental impacts in
comparison to the proposed Plan, and is considered the environmentally superior alternative.
However, this alternative is not being considered by the City of the following reasons:
The "Lower Density" alternative would:
• not eliminate any of the identified potential avoidable significant impacts of the proposed
Plan; and
• not produce the desired tax increment necessary to accomplish the basic project objectives.
The "Residential" alternative would generally have a greater environmental impact than the
proposed Plan and is not being considered by the City for the following reasons:
The "Residential" alternative would:
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
14
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Affachment A
• limit all development to residential use, thereby requiring a General Plan amendment and
zone change and conflicting with the basic project objectives of the Plan;
• create potential land use impacts by placing residences in close proximity to the AES
Huntington Beach Generating Station; and
• result in increased traffic and public services and utilities impacts when compared to the
proposed Redevelopment Plan.
The "Industrial" alternative is anticipated to have greater impacts in comparison to the proposed
Redevelopment Plan. This alternative would limit all potential future development to industrial
uses.
The "Industrial" alternative"would:
• likely have overall greater impacts than the proposed Plan in regards to land use,
aesthetics, noise, air, and human health/risk of upset;
• not eliminate any of the identified potential unavoidable significant impacts of the proposed
Plan; and
• limit all development to industrial use, thereby requiring a General Plan amendment and
zone change and conflicting with the basic project objectives of the Plan.
The "Alternative Site" alternative conflict with the primary purpose of the proposed project, and
is not being considered by the City for the following reasons:
The "Alternative Site alternative"would:
conflict with the basic objectives of the proposed Plan, as the Plan will facilitate aesthetic
and infrastructure improvements within the blighted and under-utilized Southeast Coastal
Area.
7.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, decision-makers are required to balance
the benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to
approve a project. In the event the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable". The CEQA
Guidelines require that, when a public agency allows for the occurrence of significant effects
which are identified within the Final EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency
shall state in writing the speck reasons the action was supported. Any statement of overriding
considerations should be included in the record of project approval and should be mentioned in
the Notice of Determination.
To the extent the significant effects of the project are not avoided or substantially lessened to a
level of insignificance, the City of Huntington Beach, having reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, and having
reviewed and considered the information contained in the public record, and having balanced
the benefits of the project against the unavoidable effects which remain, finds that such
unmitigated effects to be acceptable in consideration of the following overriding considerations
discussion.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
15
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 Attachment A
The City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been imposed to lessen project
impacts to a less than significant level where feasible, and furthermore, that alternatives to the
project are either infeasible because they have greater environmental impacts, do not provide
the benefits of the project, or are otherwise socially or economically infeasible.
The environmental analysis undertaken for the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
indicates that, while mitigation measures would be effective in reducing the level of certain air
quality and biological resources impacts, the project may still result in significant adverse
impacts in regards to air quality and biological resources. It should be noted that the project's
unavoidable adverse impacts would occur under current General Plan designations, and that
the proposed Redevelopment Plan does not include site-specific development proposals.
The City of Huntington Beach as Lead Agency and decision-maker for the project, has reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prepared for the Southeast Coastal
Redevelopment Plan and the public record. The project benefits include the following:
Project Objectives and Goals
❑ Assist with screening, design, or environmental improvements to mitigate impacts on
adjoining neighborhoods and environmentally sensitive areas associated with
modernization and reconstruction of the AES Huntington Beach Generating Station;
❑ Advance the cleanup of environmentally contaminated properties;
❑ Facilitate the reuse of project area properties, including the Edison and tank farm
properties, by monitoring and assisting hazardous material cleanup activities and
ensuring that any ultimate development is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods
and properties;
❑ Facilitate the protection and restoration of environmentally sensitive open space areas in
connection with proposed redevelopment activities;
❑ Facilitate the implementation of park and trail improvements if any project area
properties are designated for such uses;
❑ Undertake public improvements in, and of benefit to, the project area, such as streets,
flood control facilities, and other public facilities;
❑ Ensure that project area revenues are pledged to projects that directly benefit the area,
and that the project area remains separate and distinct from the existing Huntington
Beach Redevelopment project area;
❑ Restrict the use of eminent domain to any non-fee ownership interests such as oil and
gas leases;
❑ Eliminate blight and environmental deficiencies in the project area;
❑ Assemble land into parcels suitable for modern, integrated development with improved
pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the project area;
❑ Encourage the replanning, redesign, and development of properties that are stagnant or
improperly utilized; and
❑ Increase, improve, and preserve the community's supply of housing affordable to very
low, low, and moderate income households.
The Lead Agency makes the following finding, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA
Guidelines, with regard to the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Southeast Coastal
Redevelopment Plan:
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
16
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
FINDINGS OF FACTS, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Res.No.2002-49
Program EIR No.01-01 AttachmentA
California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 1 b093{a} states: "if the benefits of a proposed
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental
effects may be considered 'acceptable'." Based on the above discussion and on the evidence
presented, the City of Huntington Beach therefore finds that the benefits of the proposed project
outweigh the adverse air quality and biological resources impacts associated with the Southeast
Coastal Redevelopment Plan, which cannot be eliminated or reduced to a less than significant
level.
City of Huntington Beach May, 2002
17
Res. No. 2002-49
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss:
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
1, CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of
the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said
City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council
of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was
passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the
members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd
day of June, 2002 by the following vote:
AYES: Green, Dettloff, Houchen, Winchell, Bauer
NOES: Boardman, Cook
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the
City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach, California