HomeMy WebLinkAbout89-142 - Environmental Impact Report, Triangle Square Development Project3S
RESOLUTION NO. 89-142
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING AN EARLIER
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND MAKING FINDINGS
REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PRO-
POSED TRIANGLE SQUARE DEVELOPMENT PROTECT.
WHEREAS, the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environ-
mental Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15153) pro-
vide authority for the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa (the "City
Council") to use an earlier Environmental Impact Report prepared in connec-
tion with an earlier project as the Environmental Impact Report for a later
project if the circumstances of the projects are essentially the same; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 1985, by Resolution Nos. 76-85 and 85-109,
respectively, the Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") and the
City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 1026 (the
"earlier EIR") for the proposed development of commercial and retail space
in a project area which included the 4.5 acres bounded by Newport Boule-
vard, 19th Street, and Harbor Boulevard in the City of Costa Mesa; and
WHEREAS, the City Staff, relying on the earlier EIR, has prepared, and
circulated for public review, and Initial Study (the "Initial Study") for
the Triangle Square Development Project (the "Project"), a proposed retail
and commercial development on the 4.5 acres bounded by Newport Boulevard,
19th Street and Harbor Boulevard in the City of Costa Mesa (the "Project
Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Agency proposed the development of commercial and retail
space on the Project Site by Triangle Square Associates, a private developer
(the "Developer") under a Disposition and Development and Owner Participa-
tion Agreement (the "DD/OPA") between the Agency and the Developer and a
Development Agreement between the City of Costa Mesa and the Agency (the
"Development Agreement") (the DD/OFA and the Development Agreement collec-
tively comprise the "Agreement"), and
WHEREAS, the approvals necessary for the development of the Project
include: (i) amendments to the General Plan, Land Use Element and Public
Services and Facilities Element (GP -89-1C); (ii) a rezone of the Project
Site frcm General Business District to Planned Development Commercial
(R-88-09); (iii) a Planning Action for the lanai use plan, including a site
coverage variance and a conditional use permit for deviating from parking
standards (PA -89-31); (iv) a Redevelopment Action on the Project (RA -89-05);
(v) the consideration and action on Resolutions of Necessity for the acqui-
sition of certain portions of the Project Site for purposes of redevelop-
ment, a public purpose authorized by Health and Safety Code Section 33391
(b); (vi) the consideration and action on a resolution to change the public
use and convey certain property within the Vehicle Parking District No. 2
located within the Project Site; (vii) the consideration of a resolution of
intent and subsequent action on a resolution to abandon and/or vacate
certain portions of public rights-of-way on the Project Site; (viii) the
Disposition and Development and Owner Participation Agreement; and (ix) the
Development Agreement (collectively, the "Project Development Approvals");
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Costa Mesa, California, as follows:
1. The City Council hereby determines and certifies that:
a. the information contained in the earlier EIR and the Initial
Study, including all comments received during the public review period,
has been reviewed and considered by the City Council with respect to each
of the Project Development Approvals set forth in the Recital E above, and
b. the earlier EIR and the Initial Study are adequate and have
been prepared in compliance with the provisions of the California Environ-
mental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Local Guidelines of
the City of Costa Mesa for Implementing CEQA.
SI
2. The City Council hereby makes and adopts the Findings of Fact,
Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program
Relating to The Environmental Impact of the Triangle Square Development
Project as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference (including without limitation the mitigation measures
therein set forth). Based on such Findings of Fact and Statement of Over-
riding Considerations, the City Council hereby finds that significant
environmental effects have been reduced to an acceptable level in that all
significant environmental effects have been eliminated or substantially
lessened except for the following: cumulative air quality impacts; dis-
placement of existing businesses resulting from redevelopment activities;
and increased ambient noise levels due to short term construction. Based
on the foregoing, the City Council finds and determines that the Project
will have a significant effect upon the environment.
3. The City Council hereby adopts The Mitigation Monitoring Program
in the aforementioned Exhibit "A".
4. As to each of the significant environmental effects identified
in Section 2 of this Resolution which are not eliminated or substantially
lessened, the City Council hereby adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations in the aforementioned Exhibit "A".
5. Staff is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with
the County Clerk of the County of Orange pursuant to the provisions of
Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code and the State FIR Guidelines
adopted pursuant thereto.
The foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted at a
meeting of the City Council for the City of Costa Mesa duly held on the
25th day of May, 1989.
Mayor of the Ci f Costa Mesa
ATTEST:
C ty Clerk of the City of Costa sa
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, EILEEN P. PHINNEY, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of
Costa Mesa, hereby certify that the above foregoing Resolution No. 89-142
was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council at a special
meeting thereof, held on the 25th day of May, 1989.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal
of the City of Costa Mesa this 26th day of May, 1989.
�. p
ity Clerk and ex -officio Clerk 4 the
City Council of the City of Cos Mesa
1
I]
J
38
EXHIBIT "A"
FINDINGS OF FACT, STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM RELATING TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE TRIANGLE
SQUARE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
FINDINGS CONCERNING USE OF EARLIER EIR
1. The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa (as used
herein "City Council" includes the Board of Directors of the
Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency) hereby finds:
A. That the Initial Study was prepared and
circulated in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15153;
B. That the circumstances of the Triangle Square
Development Project (the "Project") and the Project analyzed in
EIR 1026 (the "earlier EIR" certified by this City Council in
December, 1985) are essentially the same. The earlier EIR
adequately describes the general environmental setting of the
Project, the significant environmental impacts of the Project,
and alternatives and mitigation measures related to each
significant effect of the Project;
C. That substantial changes have not been proposed
in the Project which would have required major revisions of the
earlier EIR;
D. That substantial changes have not occurred with
respect to the circumstances under which the Project is being
undertaken which would have required major revisions in the
earlier EIR; and
E. That no new information, which was not known and
could not have been known at the time the earlier EIR was
certified as complete, has become available.
FINDINGS CONCERNING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE INITIAL STUDY AND EARLIER EIR
1. Hydrology
A. Impact
The City Council finds that potential adverse
drainage impacts may result from development of
the Project. The project area is not within a
designated Flood Hazard Area, but historically
has experienced pooling during major storms.
Since the site is already developed and largely
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 1 of 24
impervious, the Project should not contribute
significantly more runoff to the drainage system,
as compared with the present development.
Careful project design can minimize hazards such
as excessive runoff entering underground
structures.
Mitigation
1. An erosion/siltation control plan for
Project grading shall be submitted by the
Developer to the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board for approval prior to
issuance of grading permits.
2. Buildings and subterranean parking garages
shall be designed to prevent or minimize
flooding potential. Compliance shall be
identified in the final building plans and
approved by the Building Division prior to
issuance of building permits.
3. The Project sponsor shall submit final
hydrology calculations to the Engineering
Division prior to approval of the grading
plan.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that incorporation of the
above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval for the Project and the Agreements
concerning development of the Project will result
in full mitigation of drainage impacts to a level
of insignificance.
Air Quality
A. Impact
A short-term construction phase of the
development of the Project will produce two
sources of air pollution emissions: exhaust
emissions during construction, and dust
generation as a result of earth movement and
equipment traffic over temporary roads. The
long-term impacts associated with the proposed
development consist of emissions generated from
stationary and mobile sources. Stationary
sources will include the off-site generation of
electricity and the on-site use of natural gas.
Exhibit "A"
Pffisolution No. 89-142
Page 2 of 24
s?
Motor vehicles will comprise the only significant
source of mobile emissions within the Project
area.
B. Mitigation
1. The project sponsor shall maintain the site
in a wet -down condition during excavation
and grading to the degree necessary to
prevent excessive dust as required by
Rule 403 of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
2. Trucks hauling dirt away during excavation
should be tarped when necessitated by soil
and weather conditions, ■s required by the
Building and Engineering Divisions.
3. All demolition, excavation and grading shall
be discontinued during first and second
stage smog alerts.
4. The AQMP includes transportation systems
management measures, such as encouragement
of alternative means of travel (i.e., buses,
bicycles and walking) and energy efficient
vehicles (i.e., preferred parking for
compact cars, car pools and motorcycles) to
help reduce vehicle emissions associated
with the proposed Project. The project
sponsor shall submit a TS17 plan to
Transportation Services demonstrating
compliance with the AQMP prior to issuance
of building permits. Thereafter, the
property owner shall submit an annual report
to the Planning Division detailing the
effectiveness of the TSM plan.
S. The implementation of the energy
conservation measures presented in
Section 12 herein will also reduce air
quality impacts.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that the individual air
quality impacts of this Project alone are
potentially insignificant or reduced to a level
of insignificance by implementation of the above
mitigation measures. However, the cumulative air
quality impacts of this Project and other
development in the South Coast Air Basin are
-3-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 3 of 24
significant and will only be partially mitigated
by implementation of the above measures.
Although the above mitigation measures shall be
required to be implemented in the conditions of
approval for the Project and in the Agreements
concerning development of the Project, this City
Council adopts a Statement of Overriding
Considerations with regard to the cumulative air
quality impact of this Project (See Statement of
Overriding Considerations below).
Geology
A. Impact
The Project will not significantly affect
the overall topography of the area, nor
result in increased soil erosion. No
significant long-term impacts are expected.
The Project as proposed will require
significant amounts of excavation to
accommodate retail uses and two levels of
parking structure below street grade.
Excavation will exceed any fill req=irements
of the proposed development and will require
the hauling of excess fill off-site.
Furthermore, proposed site excavation may
encounter high ground water levels.
B. Mi-igat 10
If dewatering is necessary and the discharge
of wastewater to receiving waters is
proposed, an NPDES permit (Waste Discharge
Requirements) must be obtained from the
California Regional Water Quality Control
Board - Santa Ana Region, prior to
initiating the discharge.
The proposed haul route(s) shall be
submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that implementation of
the above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval and as inclusions in the Agreements
concerning development of the Project will avoid
any significant geological impacts.
-4-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 4 of 24
k
K
4. TL.e and Other Plants/Animal Life
A. Impact
At least 49 mature £icus and pine trees may be
removed if the project is constructed. However,
since the loss of existing landscaping will be
compensated for by conventional project
landscaping, no significant impacts are
anticipated.
B. Mitigation
1. All efforts shall be made to retain existing
mature, healthy trees. No tree shall be
removed prior to approval of the Planning
Division. Those that cannot be retained or
relocated on-site shall be replaced with
specimen sized trees as shown on the
landscape plan to be approved by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of
building permits.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that implementation of
the above mitigation measure as a condition of
approval and as an inclusion in the Agreements
concerning development of the Project will avoid
any significant impacts of the Project on trees
and other plant or animal life.
S. Noise
Imnact
There will be a significant increase in noise and
vibration levels on and adjacent to the
development site during demolition, excavation,
grading and other construction activities. The
long-term noise impacts resulting from the
Project are due to an increase in average daily
trips for traffic in the area. Presently, every
major street in the Project area exceeds 60 d8
CNEL at a distance of 50 feet from the nearest
travel lane. The resulting incremental increase
in average daily trips is not expected to result
in perceptible increases to the human ear in
noise levels over existing conditions and is not
considered significant.
-5-
Exhibit "A"
P�solution 130. 89-142
Page 5 of 24
)J}
Mitigation J
1. The City's Noise Ordinance restricts
construction activities between the hours cf
8:00 p.m. and 7:OD a.m. seven days a week.
Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that the long-term noise
impacts of the Project are insignificant.
However, short-term construction noise impacts
are significant and cannot be fully mitigated.
Implementation of the above mitigation measure as
a condition of approval and as incorporated in
the Agreements concerning development of the
Project will partially mitigate the short-term
noise impact, but a Statement of Overriding
Considerations has been adopted. (See Statement
of Overriding Considerations below.)
6. Fire Protection
A. lmcact
The proposed development will have an incremental
impact on the level of fire service in Costa Mass
which will result in an increase in medical aid
and other types of responses and will add to the
fire inspection work. load.
Mitigation
1. The Project sponsor shall coordinate with
the City Fire Department to ensure adequate
access for fire apparatus is maintained
during construction.
2. As a condition of project approval, the
developer shall either enter into a
development agreement for the project with
the City of Costa Mesa, or shall accept
assignment from the Costa Mesa Redevelopment
Agency of a development agreement between
the Agency and the City, in which the
developer shall agree pursuant to the terms
of such agreement to contribute to a fund
for expanding the resources of City
services, including the Fire and Police
Departments. If any further funding is
needed for expanding Fire and Police
Department resources, additional funding can
be provided through one or more funding
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 6 of 24
l
mechanisms such as general or special tax
revenues, development fee programs,
Mello -Roos community facilities districts
and benefit assessment districts.
3. Fire resistant building construction shall
be required for the structure. This shall
be shown on the building plans to be checked
by the Fire and Building Departments.
4. Installation of fire protection systems
including fire sprinklers will be required
in order to tailor fire flow requirements to
water availability. This shall be shown on
the building plans to be checked by the Fire
and Building Departments.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that upon implementation
of the above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval for the Project and as incorporated in
the Agreements concerning development of the
Project, that the potential fire protection
impacts of the Project are reduced to a level of
insignificance.
7. Police Protection
A. Impact
Development of the Project will increase the
intensity of use of the Project site which, in
turn, may be expected to result in an increased
demand for police protection services. The
proposed subterranean parking structures could
provide an attractive environment for criminal
activity, which would also increase police
service.
Mitigation
Prior to submittal of working drawings to
the Building Division, the Project sponsor
shall coordinate with the Police Department
to review safety features of the Project
design, determine their adequacy, and
suggest improvements.
Exhibit "A"
Fesolution No. 89-142
Page 7 of 24
:s ;
Prior to occupancy, the Project shall be J
inspected by the City to see that all areas
of the development shall be well -lit and
easy to identify numerically, in order to
facilitate response by officers.
As a condition of project approval, the
developer shall either enter into a
development agreement for the project with
the City of Costa Mesa, or shall accept
assignment from the Costa Mesa Redevelopment
Agency of a development agreement between
the Agency and the City, in which the
developer shall agree pursuant to the terms
of such agreement to contribute to a fund
for expanding the resources of City
services, including the Fire and Police
Departments. If any further funding is
needed for expanding Fire and Police
Department resources, additional funding can
be provided through one or more funding
mechanisms such as general or special tax
revenues, development fee programs,
Mello -Roos community facilities districts
and benefit assessment districts.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that implementation of
the above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval for the Project and as incorporated in
the Agreements concerning development of the
Project, will reduce potential police protection
impacts to a level of insignificance.
Solid Waste
A. Im_ pact
The Project as proposed will increase solid waste
generation at the Project site as well as adding
to the incremental increase of solid waste
generated in the Downtown Redevelopment Area.
Mitigation
1. A recycling collection program for reusable
items such as paper, aluminum, and glass
shall be implemented. The program shall be
submitted to the Planning Division for
review prior to issuance of building permits.
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 8 of 24
393
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that implementation of
the above mitigation measure as a condition of
approval for the Project and as incorporated in
the Agreements concerning development of the
Project will mitigate the potential solid waste
generation impact of the Project to A level of
insignificance.
e. Traffic/Circulation
A. Impact
To assess the potential impacts of the Project on
the circulation system, a traffic impact analysis
was prepared by Weston Pringle and Associates
dated July 1, 1988 with an addendum dated
March 28, 1989. Under "worst case" conditions,
the proposed Project is expected to generate
8,400 new daily trips of which 660 (360 in, 300
out) will occur during the PN. peak hour. Until
such time as the Costa Mesa Freeway is complete,
Newport Boulevard will continue to carry traffic
volumes in excess of its design capacity.
Implementation of the Project will incrementally
increase the traffic volumes on the links of
Newport Boulevard. However, all affected
intersections are expected to maintain acceptable
(LOS D or better) operations.
B. Dtitivation Measures
All mitigation measures shall be completed and
inspected by Transportation Services prior to
occupancy unless otherwise noted.
1. Improvement to the Newport Boulevard
intersections at Harbor, Broadway and
19th Street shall consist of CalTrans
adjusting signal timing.
2. Improvement to the Broadway/Newport
Boulevard intersection shall consist of
upgrading the north -south split phase,
removing parking on the southbound frontage
road, and adding a separate tight -turn -only
southbound lane by restriping.
-9-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 9 of 24
3. Improvement to the 19th Street/Newport
Boulevard and Harbor/Newport Boulevard
intersections shall consist of adjusting
signal timing to provide more green time for
north -south through traffic.
4. Improve turning radius from southwest bound
Newport Boulevard to northbound Harbor
Boulevard.
S. Restrict Project access/egress on 19th
Street to right -turn in and right -turn out
only with the outbound approach limited to
one lane.
6. Seven (7) feet back of curb shall be
dedicated and constructed for public
sidewalk around the entire Project site.
7. Should any work be necessary in the State
right-of-way, the developer shall submit
plans to and obtain an encroachment permit
from Cal Trans.
B. Driveways will utilize a curb return or
widened flare design and sufficient exit
lanes to accommodate traffic volumes. At
the 19th Street right turn only access, only
one outbound lane will be permitted.
9. Streetscape plans shall provide bus
shelters, bus turnouts or irproved bus
stops, bike racks, pedestrian facilities and
other amenities to encourage transit usage,
bicycling and walking. These shall be shown
on the final building plans.
30. Adequate turning areas shall be designed to
accommodate trash trucks, delivery trucks,
and fire engines.
11. The City shall eliminate on -street parking
on northbound Harbor Boulevard between
Newport Boulevard and 19th Street.
12. Prior to issuance of building permits, the
City Transportation Services Manager will
review and approve proposed haul routes and
schedules for excavated soil. If trucks
entering and leaving the site cause
significant traffic congestion, the City
will require a change in procedures to
correct the problem.
-10-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 10 of 24
13. The City of Costa Mesa shall continue to
coordinate with the County of Orange to
achieve consistency between the City and
County Master Plan of Bikeways.
14. Prior to the issuance of building permits,
the Project proponent shall submit a transit
program to the Transportation Services
Division showing compliance with the
following concepts:
(a) Passenger amenities such as shelters,
benches and paved waiting areas;
(b) Pedestrian and handicapped access
between the project buildings and the
bus stops;
(c) Bus concrete pad turnouts, if
warranted, depending on traffic volumes
and speeds and the roadway widths;
(d) Buss pass and rideshare program for
employees;
(e) Permanent displays of transit and
rideshare information in retail centers
and rental offices; and
(f) retain the existing bus stop adjacent
to the project site on 19th Street.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that upon implementation
of the above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval and by incorporation in the Agreements
concerning development of the Project, that no
significant adverse impacts will result to
intersection operations or traffic circulation in
the Project area.
9. Land Use
A. Impact
The proposed Project will require the demolition
of 35,000 square feet of existing retail uses to
accommodate approximately 185,000 square feet of
retail, theaters and restaurant uses. The
Project has a floor area ratio of 0.95. Other
large developments near the Project site, such as
-11-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 11 of 24
aR.
the Courtyards Commercial Center and Pacific
Federal Plaza, have floor area ratios of 0.37 and
0.51, respectively. The Project will require a
zone change from C2 to PDC (Planned Development
Commercial). The Project is consistent with uses
permitted in the PDC zone and is compatible with
the commercial properties in the area.
8. Mitigation
1. The Project shall blend with the
architectural trends being established by
other recent redevelopment projects in the
area, such as the Pacific Federal Plaza and
the Costa Mesa Courtyards. It shall also
comply with the requirements of the Planned
Development Commercial District and the
Redevelopment Flan and General Plan.
Compliance will be checked during the
building plan check process.
2. The Orange County Vector Control District
should be notified at least two weeks prior
to demolition or grading on any structures
that may have the potential to harbor
rodents. This will allow the District
sufficient time to inspect or place
rodenticide bait prior to demolition and
thus reduce the potential for rodent
dispersal. The Project site should be
graded for proper runoff to avoid standing
water that could breed mosquitoes. Also,
trash should be placed in fly -proof
containers and emptied weekly or,
preferably, twice weekly.
3. During the landscape phase of the Project,
Plants that are attractive to rodents, such
as Algerian ivy, oleander, palm trees,
Yuccas, bougainvillea, etc. should be
avoided. A list of alternative types of
ground cover less attractive to rodents is
provided in Appendix E of the earlier EIR.
All landscaping shall besubject to approval
by the Planning Division.
C. Findings of Significance
This City Council finds that upon implementation
of the above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval for the Project and as incorporated into
the Agreements concerning development of the
Project, that the land use impacts of the Project
are mitigated to a level of insignificance.
-12-
Exhibit "A"
r�esolution No. 89-142
Page 12 of 24
11. Shade/Shadow
L A. Impact
The preliminary design plans for the Project
indicate a building with a height of 40-48 feet
with architectural features (i.e., cupola/towers)
that reach 78 feet. The earlier EIR assessed the
potential impacts of a 68 foot high hotel located
adjacent to Newport Boulevard. The shadows from
the hotel were contained primarily on-site and
were not expected to extend across 19th Street.
No impacts were anticipated on solar access for
energy production or for solar space and water
heating for off-site structures. As shown in the
Initial Study, impacts from the proposed building
are similar.
S. P:i ti Cati on
1. The Project site design should provide
pedestrian amenities that take advantage of
both summer shade and winter sunlight.
These shall be shown on the working drawings
which are subject to Planning Division
approval.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that upon implementatior.
of the above mitigation measure as a condition of
approval for the Project and as incorporated into
the Aoreements concerning development of the
Project, that no significant shade or shadow
impacts will result.
12. Foculation and Housing
Impact
Whereas the Project analyzed in the earlier EIR
estimated generation of a demand for 699 new
employees and 93 new housing units, the Project
as proposed will only generate a demand for 525
employees and 70 new housing units. With an
existing housing demand of 15 units, the net
increase as a result of the Project would be 55
units. This impact is offset by the recently
completed 160 -unit apartment project (Lincoln
Properties) analyzed in the earlier EIR.
Although the Project creates fewer employment
opportunities and associated housing demands than
-13-
Exhibit "A"
Pesolution No. 89-142
Page 13 of 24
3&7
the previous Project, a substantial increase over i
existing conditions does result from implemen-
tation of the Project. The Project implemen-
tation will require displacement and relocation
of businesses existing on the Project site.
Mitigation
1. In accordance with the Redevelopment Plan
for the Downtown Redevelopment Project,
existing businesses and industry within the
Project area have been and will continue to
be given preference to participate in the
redevelopment project area through
development of existing or acquired
properties or as business tenants.
Relocation advisory assistance for any
business will be made available through the
City of Costa Mesa. In the event that it
becomes necessary to relocate a business,
and the business cannot be relocated ted without
a substantial loss of patronage,
the
business is not part of a commercial
enterprise having at least one other
m
establishent engaged in the same or similar
business, the Redevelopment Agency is
authorized tc pay to such a business a
relocation payment as provided in Section
7262 of the Government Code. The Agency is
aiso authorized to pay the actual and
reasonable moving e,parses of a business as
required by State law, if the business is
rag" redto relocate as a result of the
ir..plementation of the Redevelopment Plan.
2. When possible, existing businesses in the
project area should be provided with retail
or office space in the finished Project
buildings. If this is not possible, all
bu
existing sinesses must be relocated by the
Redevelopment Agency according to applicable
State Law and the Agency's Relocation Plan
for the Downtown Redevelopment Project.
C. Finding of Significance
The resulting impact on employment and housing
demand from the Project is fully mitigated by
other redevelopment projects analysed in the
earlier EIR and implementation of the above
measures as conditions and approval and as
incorporated in the Agreements concerning
development of the Project. However, the
-14-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 14 of 24
potential impact to existing businesses of
displacement and relocation is only partially
mitigated and remains significant. Therefore,
this City Council adopts a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for this impact. (See
Statement of Overriding Considerations below.)
13. Energy/Iltilities
A. Impact
Implementation of the Project results in impacts
on energy, water supply, and sewer services. The
Project as proposed will consume 6.43 million
cubic feet of natural gas and 4.13 million
kilowatt hours of electricity each year. The
Project's daily water consumption will be
approximately 78,750 gallons per day and the
Project will generate approximately 27,752
gallons per day of sewage. Although each of
these generation figures is substantially less
than the figures exar,.ined in the earlier EIR, the
increases incrementally impact energy, water
supply, and sewer services, but these impacts do
not rise to a significant level.
B. N,itiaation
Site
Planning and Street Design
1.
Utility companies should utilize the same
trenches as much as possible when relocating
and/or upgrading their respective facilities
in the Project area, in order to r.inim>ze
the use of diesel fuel during this phase of
Project construction.
2.
Bicycle racks shall be provided close to the
proposed buildings. Racks shall be shown on
the building plans.
3.
If active solar heating systems are
incorporated into the design of proposed
buildings, site planning must ensure that
incoming solar radiation is unobstructed.
Compliance shall be demonstrated on the
building plans.
4.
Provision of pedestrian amenities (e.g.,
attractively landscaped walkways, street
furniture, etc.) would encourage greater
pedestrian activity, as an alternative to
-15-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 15 of 24
339
C;
driving. Compliance shall be demonstrated
on the building plans.
Appropriate and well-placed landscaping
shall be used to moderate temperature. For
example, deciduous trees located on south
and west exposures provide shade during
summer, yet allow light and heat to enter
during the winter months. Compliance shall
be shown on the landscape plans submitted to
the Planning Division.
Building Design
1. All buildings constructed in the Project
area shall comply with the Energy
Conservation Standards set forth in Title 24
of the California Code of Regulations.
-. .--iee solar energy systems shall be
considered for use in heating of water.
This could achieve a 50-60 percent reduction
in energy consumption for water heating.
Recent studies have indicated the
cost-effectiveness (i.e., amortization of
initial cost) of the use of solar energy for
these purposes.
3. Energy efficient lighting (e.g., high
pressure sodium outdoors and fluorescent
indoors) shall be used rather than less
efficient types of lighting. Maximum use of
natural lighting opportunities shall be made
during daylight hours.
4. Nonessential, ornamental lighting shall be
avoided.
5. The Southern California Edison and Southern
California Gas Companies have "Energy
Management Programs" which provide
assistance in selecting the most effective
application of energy conservation
techniques, which could be incorporated into
Project design during the preliminary
planning stages of development. These
energy saving alternatives are readily
available, easier to install during
construction, and will not necessarily raise
long-term costs. The developer shall submit
a list of energy conservation features to be
used in the project along with final
building plans-
_16 -
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 16 of 24
40
Water
1. New water mains sufficient to serve the
proposed site development as identified by
the Mesa Consolidated Water District shall
be constructed at the developer's expense.
2. The Mesa Consolidated Water District (the
local water purveyor) has appointed a task
force whose aim is to promote water
conservation and to reduce the demand for
potable water thereby offsetting the impacts
caused by the loss of Northern California
water. A detailed water analysis for the
Project and its landscaping shall be
submitted to MCWD for review and approval
prior to submittal of construction plans to
the City. Landscape plans shall also be
submitted to MCWD prior to their approval by
the City.
3. The following water conservation measures
shall be added;
(a) Low -flush toilets (Section 17921.3 of
the Health and Safety Code);
(b) Low -flow faucets (California Code of
Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, Article
1, T20 -1406F);
(c) Hot water lines will be insulated in
water recirculating systems (California
Energy Commission regulations);
(d) Supply -line water pressure will be
maintained at 50 pounds per square inch
or less by means of pressure -reducing
valves;
(e) Flush valve operated water closets (3
gallons per flush) shall be included;
(£) Drinking fountains will be equipped
with self-closing valves;
(g) Hot water linea will be insulated to
provide hot water faster with less
water waste, and hot lines will be
separated from cold lines;
_17_
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 17 of 24
(h) Restaurants will use water conserving
dishwasher models or retrofit
dishwasher spray emitters;
(i) Restaurants will serve drinking water
upon request only;
(j) Conservation reminders will be posted
in restrooms;
(k) Thermostatically controlled mixing
valves will be used for bath/showers.
(1) Water conserving models of washers will
be used in laundry facilities.
4. The following water conservation measures
for landscape/irrigation purposes shall be
instituted:
(a) Drought -resistant planting materials
will be used for landscaping where
possible. The Project's landscape plan
will be approved by the Planning
Division prior to the issuance of
building permits;
(b) The use of lawn will be minimized;
(c) .1Vulch will be applied extensively to
all landscaped areas;
(d) Efficient irrigation systens which
minimize runoff and evaporation will be
installed;
(e) Pervious paving materials will be used
wherever feasible to reduce surface
water runoff and facilitate ground
water recharge.
Note: Compliance with the four water
mitigation measures shall be checked by
the Mesa Consolidated Water District.
Approval from the District shall be
obtained prior to issuance of building
permits.
-18- 1
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 18 of 24
Sewer
Development of the Project site shall
require developer participation in the
cost of increasing sewer capacity
through the payment of fees and/or
upgrading off-site sewer lines. Any
off-site sewer facilities constructed
by the Project sponsor shall be
dedicated to the Costa Mesa Sanitary
District.
2. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District will
charge the Project developer a
connection fee based on a set fee
schedule.
Note: Compliance with the two sewer
mitigation measures shall be obtained
from the Costa Mese Sanitary District
prior to issuance of the cert_ficate of
occupancy.
C. Finding of Significance
The City Council finds the- upon
implementation of the above mitigation
measures as conditions of approval for the
Project and as incorporated into the
Agreements which concern development of the
Project, that the impacts of the Project on
energy, water supply and sewer services are
reduced to a level of insignificance.
14. Natural Resources
A. Fact
Development of the Project will commit building
materials to the construction of the Project.
Energy resources will be comm..fitted for short-term
construction activities and the long-term
operation of the proposed uses.
B. Mitigation
1. The energy conservation measures presented
in Section 13 will reduce both short-term
and long-term impacts on energy resources.
-19-
Exhibit "A"
Pffisolution No. 89-142
Page 19 of 24
Demolition waste from Project construction
activities shall be recycled, where
feasible. Developer shall report to the
Planning Division which materials were able
to be recycled prior to occupancy.
Finding of Significance
The City Council finds that upon implementation
of the above mitigation measures as conditions of
approval for the Project and as incorporated into
the Agreements which concern development of the
Project, that the impacts of the Project on
natural resources are reduced to a level of
insignificance.
15. Other Impacts
Based on the Initial Study and earlier EIR and the
Record before the City Council, this City Council
finds that implementation of the Project results in no
other significant adverse environmental impacts.
F IL]C I17G5 CONCERNING THE FR03ECT i;LTERNATIVES
This Citv Council has considered each of the alternatives
presented in the earlier EIR and finds those alternatives
infeasible based on economic, social and other considerations
as set forth below.
Infeasibility of the No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative would result in the Project
site remaining in an as -is condition, and would not
accomplish the goals and objectives of the
Redevelopment Plan. Adoption of the No Project
Alternative would serve only to delay the potential
adverse impacts associated with development of the
Project site (increased traffic, noise, air pollution
and natural resource/energy consumption). If private
development of the Project site does not occur in the
near future, adoption of the No Project Alternative
would result in a direct loss of revenue to the
Redevelopment Agency as well as a potential indirect
loss since the values of surrounding redevelopment
properties would be adversely affected. Uncertainty
in development of the site could make it more
difficult to generate developer interest in
redevelopment of the surrounding area. Accordingly,
this City Council finds the No Project Alternative
infeasible.
-20-
Exhibit "A"
absolution No. 89-142
Page 20 of 24
05
Infeasibility of Alternative No. 1
16 Alternative No. 1 proposes a less intense development
of the Project site. Under this alternative, 46,000
square feet of retail and office space would be
constructed on the Agency -owned, vacant portions of
the Project site, and building height would be limited
to two stories. The existing structures would remain,
and the existing businesses as well. Impacts would be
somewhat less prior to mitigation as compared with the
Proposed project, but after mitigation, two of the
three significant impacts would remain (cumulative air
quality impact and short-term construction noise).
Implementation of this alternative would retain the
existing parcelization pattern and would return the
Site to a similar level of development to that which
existed prior to Agency acquisition of the parcels for
redevelopment purposes. Some of the most important
benefits of the proposed project could not be obtained
with this alternative, such as improving the land -use
efficiency through integration of uses and structures
in a single development and by removal of obsolete
development and subdivision patterns now existing on
the Project site. Further, implementation of the
lower -intensity alternative would be contrary to the
recommendations of the Agency -sponsored ULI Study and
the J.L. Webb Study, both of which called for intense
commercial development combining a variety of daytime
and nighttime urban uses on the Project site. The
less -intense use would not create the activity center
in the core of the Redevelopment Project Area, which
has been considered essential to the overall vitality
and success of the Downtown Redevelopment Project.
Therefore, Alternative No. 1 is rejected by this City
Council as infeasible.
Infeasibility of Alternative No 2
This alternative consists of a 350 -room hotel and
6,000 square feet of retail space on the Project site
and would have a floor area ratio of 1.00 and a height
limit of six stories. Although this development,
prior to mitigation, would generate less traffic and
noise than the proposed Project, as well as less
impact on air quality, it would dramatically increase
energy and utility demands. After mitigation, all of
the unavoidable adverse impacts (cumulative air
quality, short-term construction noise and potential
displacement of existing business) are identical with
those of the proposed Project. Some benefits of the
proposed Project could be obtained with this
alternative, such as improving land -use through
-21-
Exhibit "A"
P�solution No. 89-142
Page 21 of 24
integration of uses and structures in a single
development and by removal of obsolete development and
subdivision patterns now existing on the Project
site. However, implementation of this alternative
would not be consistent with the surrounding
properties nor with the Agency's current preferences
or objectives for the site. Therefore, Alternative
No. 2 is rejected by this City Council as infeasible.
Infeasibility of Alternative No. 3
Alternative No. 3 consists of 290,000 square feet of
retail and office space on the Project site which
would result in a floor area ratio of 1.5 and a
substantial increase in adverse impacts when compared
to the proposed Project. This alternative would not
elir..inate or substantially reduce any of the adverse
impacts as compared with the proposed Project.
Therefore, Alternative No. 3 is rejected by this City
Council as infeasible.
Infeasibility of Alternative No. 4
Alternative No. 4 consists of a 150 -zoom hotel, 55,000
square feet of retail and restaurant space, and 150
residential dwelling units. This alternative would
have a floor area ratio of 1.74 and would not
eliminate or substantially reduce any adverse impacts
as compared with the proposed Project. In addition,
it would generate a much higher energy utility demand
because of the hotel and residential uses. Therefore,
Alternative No. 4 is rejected by this City Council as
infeasible.
TE+,::NT OF 0 ERRIDIN CCO1157DER11.TIONS
Based on information set forth in the earlier EIA, the
Initial Study, and these Findings of Fact, this City Council
finds that the adverse environmental impacts related to
cumulative air quality, short-term construction noise and the
potential displacement of existing businesses located on the
Project site are significant environmental impacts which cannot
be entirely mitigated or avoided if the Project is implemented.
However these unavoidable significant effects of the
Project are overridden by the benefits of the Project as
described below. Therefore, this City Council hereby approves
and adopts this Statement Of Overriding Considerations.
_22_
Exhibit "A"
Fbsolution No. 89-142
Page 22 of 24
J
1. The proposed Project site is located in the Costa Mesa
Downtown Redevelopment Project Area and implements the
adopted Redevelopment Plan for said Project Area.
2. The proposed Project will provide for a more efficient
use of land through integration of uses and structures
in a single development, and by removal of obsolete
development and subdivision patterns which now exist
on the site.
3. The proposed Project is consistent with the Commercial
Center General Plan designation and the Commercial
Redevelopment Plan designation for the site.
4. The proposed Project is an adopted policy of the
General Plan and a stated objective of the
Comprehensive Design Plan for the Redevelopment
Project Area.
S. The __ d ropcs•Project permits a more efficient use of
land through shared parking for all uses.
6. The proposed Project will introduce an activity center
in the core of the Redevelopment Project Area, which
will be a significant enhancement of the overall
vitality and success of redevelopment efforts downtown.
7. The local land use planning studies indicate that the
location of employment and shopping opportunities
downtown will have beneficial impacts on traffic.
S. The proposed Project implements the City's goal to
provide its citizens with a balanced community of
residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and
institutional uses to satisfy the needs of the social
and economic segments of the population; to meet the
competing demands for alternative developments within
each land use classification; and, to ensure the
long-term viability and productivity of the
community's natural and man-made environments.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Costa Mesa already uses a monitoring program implemented
primarily through the plan check and final inspection
processes. When a project is submitted for plan check, each
plan checker reviews the plans for compliance with the
mitigation measures that affect the project's building,
grading, and/or landscape design. Final plans will not be
approved until each mitigation measure has been incorporated.
These and other mitigation measures are later inspected before
the project can be "signed -off."
-23-
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 23 of 24
Public Resources Code Section 21051.6 may require a more
detailed system of tracking the completion of mitigation
measures, especially those that call for ongoing monitoring
such as limits on hours of operation and transportation systems
management. The applicant may be required to submit periodic
reports on the status of these conditions.
To this end, each of the proposed mitigation measures has
been reviewed and in some cases clarified to explain who is
responsible for the monitoring and when the mitigation is
required to be completed or, if the measure calls for an
ongoing program, how it will be monitored. By clarifying the
project's mitigation measures, a separate monitoring program is
not necessary.
The monitoring results for implementation of this Project's
mitigation will be summarized and filed with the Planning
Division Staff Reports so that the public, the applicant and
public officials can easily obtain information on the status of
the mitigation measures.
_24
Exhibit "A"
Resolution No. 89-142
Page 24 of 24