Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout89-188 - Revised Procedures for Calif. Environmental Quality ActRESOLUTION NO. 89-188 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ODSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REVISED IMPLE- MENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRON- MENTAL QUALITY ACT. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA. MESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: THAT, WHEREAS, the intent of the California Enviromental Quality Act ("CEPA"), California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and the CEQA Guidelines ("Guidelines"), 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., is to ensure adequate consideration and analysis of poten- tial environmental impacts anticipated from approval of discretionary actions; and WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Costa Mesa ("City") to comply with the intent of CEQA and the Guidelines by maintaining implementing procedures as required by Section 15022 of the Guidelines; and WHEREAS, it is also the policy of the City to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for review of projects requiring environ- mental assessment by a Federal agency; and WHEREAS, CEQA, the Guidelines, and/or City procedures may change periodically, necessitating an amendment to the adopted City environmental procedures only when the changes are significant; and WHEREAS, section 15022 of the Guidelines allows the City to adopt the Guidelines by reference and add specific provisions tailored to the particu- lar operation of the City; and WHEREAS, adoption of these procedures will pranote and implement the environmental goals and policies of the City of Costa Mesa General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and recanuwnded adop- tion of these revised CEQA procedures at the November 27, 1989, hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt the most current CEQA Guidelines (including any future amendments or updates), by reference, as its procedures for implementing CEQA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following procedures are added to supplement, but in no way conflict with, CEQA or the Guidelines; provided, however, that failure to comply with any of these supplemental Guidelines shall not invalidate any project approval: 1. The CEQA Process Flow Chart (Exhibit A) shall be used as the guide for environmental processing; 2. The Planning Division shall be responsible or shall be the lead division for all environmental processing; 3. The following forms (Exhibit B), which may be revised periodical- ly shall be used to provide consistency in processing: (a) Preliminary Environmental Description (b) Environmental Check List/Initial Study (c) Negative Declaration (d) Notice of Determination P_� (e) Notice of Preparation (f) Notice of Completion (g) Notice of Exemption 4. The Planning Division shall prepare environmental documents or shall contract for their preparation according to the Guidelines and the following additional procedures: (a) A fee shall be charged to the project applicant for prepara- tion of an Initial Study and N3egative Declaration according to a schedule adopted by City Council resolution; (b) The project applicant shall bear the costs incurred, includ- ing but not limited to, the cost of consultant input and/car the cost of City staff time spent on preparing and process- ing environmental documents, with the exception of Negative Declarations which are covered by 4(a) above; (c) Prior to ccmmmmencement of the environmantal documentation, the applicant shall deposit with the City an amount equal to the contract amount plus ten (10) percent, or the rate adopted and amended from time to time by the City Council. If these funds are depleted prior to completion of the processing, additional deposits shall be required of the applicant, subject to the terms of the contract. After completion of environmental processing, all unused monies shall be refunded to the applicant; (d) A fee equal to the cost of retrieving, reproducing, and refiling an environmental document shall be charged to and collected fran any parson requesting a copy of such a docu- ment; and (e) Planning staff shall maintain an updated list of qualified, environmental consultants. 5. Planning staff shall evaluate and comment on environmental docu- ments received fran other agencies; 6. The City shall comply with any new and applicable Federal legis- lation, State legislation, and amendments to CEQA and the Guide- lines; and 7. The decision-ituaking body shall have the following responsibili- ties: (a) Reviewimi and considering the environmental documentation prior to approving a project; (b) Making written findings for significant environmental effects identified in the environmental documontation, accompanied by a brief explanation of the evidence for each finding prior to approving a project; (c) Adopting a reporting or monitoring program for adopted or required changes to a project that mitigate or avoid sgnifi- cant environmental effects; (d) Preparing a written statement of overriding considerations for projects that will create unavoidable, significant envi- rormenta? effects; and (e) When an advisory body, such as the Planning Canmmmission, is required to make a reccnimndation on a project to the decision-making body, such as the City CouFzcil, the advisory body shall also review and consider the project's environ- mental. documentation. 8. Requests to the State Clearinghouse for shortened public review of envirormtental documents shall be made by the City's Environ- mental Evaluator. The decision-making body shall be notified of the request for a shortened review. LASTLY, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt a Miti- gation Monitoring Program (Exhibit C) in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of ATTEST: Cy Clerk of the City of Costa Mes STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF COSTA MESA ) Dacember, 1989. t Mayor of the Citi`, Costa Mesa I, EILEEN P. PHINNEY, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, hereby certify that the above and fore- going Resolution No. 89-188 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 4th day of December, 1989. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 5th day of December, 1989. C Clerk and ex -officio Clerk offthe City Council of the City of Cos esa MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM I PURPOSE The following Mitigation Monitoring Program is hereby established for the City of Costa Mesa in compliance with California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 which became effective January 1, 1989. This law adds a step to the CEQA process, however, it does not amend the State's CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Reg. Sec. 15000 et SN.). The law requires all State and local agencies to establish a reporting or monitoring program for projects approved by a public agency when the approval includes adoption of a mitigated negative declaration or the findings related to an environmental impact report ("EIR"). The intent of the program is to ensure the implementation of mitigation measures that are imposed to avoid or reduce the significant impacts of a project. The language of the law, attached for reference, allows each public agency the flexibility to design a program meeting its specific circumstances. The following procedures formalize those already in practice while adding a new checklist form to aid in the reporting of mitigation measure compliance. II GENERAL PROVISIONS With adoption of the City's Mitigation Monitoring Program, its provisions will apply to all project approvals which are subject to Public Resources Code 21081.6. As approvals occur, the decision maker, i.e., City Council, Planning Commission, staff, etc. will adopt the program by reference and will require the following condition of approval: In compliance with the City's Mitigation Monitoring Program, the applicant shall submit a compliance report to the Planning Division along with plans for plan check, or prior to commencement of the project's activity if no construction is involved, that lists each mitigation measure and states when and how the mitigation measures are to be met. III MITIGATION MEASURES The City imposes five types of mitigation measures in terms of monitoring requirements. A project may have one or more types. For example, a Development Review for construction of a restaurant may have measures from four of the five categories, whereas, a Conditional Use Permit for a business in an existing building may have only one category of mitigation as described below. A. Measures that must be satisfied prior to grading or building permit issuance. These measures include those to be incorporated into the design of the project such as a minimum setback, a landscape or acoustical buffer, energy efficient lighting systems, etc. Payment of certain fees may also be included. B. Measures that must be satisfied during project construction. These include measures for erosion control, hours of construction, protection of existing trees, and others. C. Measures that must be satisfied prior to occupancy. Many of these measures are the same as those in category "A" and need verification in the field. Exhibit "C" Resolution No. 89-188 Page 1 of 4 !18-A D. Measures that must be monitored over time after occupancy or commencement of the activity. These are operational measures such as TSM (traffic systems management), noise control, hours of operation, etc. The applicant may be required to submit periodic reports on the status of these measures. In some cases, monitoring will be accomplished through the City's Code Enforcement procedures. E. Measures for projects that do not require building permits. These measures are for land use approvals and might include noise attenuation or locational conditions. Compliance may be required prior to issuance of a business license, subject to a time schedule, or subject to other terms as agreed upon by the applicant and the City at the time of project approval.. IV REPORTING AND MONITORING PROCEDURES A. Each mitigation measure shall be worded to include the details of who is responsible for complying as well as when and how compliance will be completed. Mitigation recommended by responsible or other agencies shall be clearly defined and monitored by those agencies. B. The Planning Division's Environmental Evaluator(s) shall be responsible for coordinating the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. C. For construction projects, the applicant shall submit a compliance report to the Planning Division as part of the plan check package. The report shall identify all the mitigation measures and describe how and when they will be completed. The Environmental Evaluator shall verify the information in the compliance report with the aid of other departments such as Building, Engineering, Fire, or whoever is most appropriate. The Environmental Evaluator shall respond by filling in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist (see attached example), sending a copy to the applicant, and keeping one for the file. The form may be filled out in stages since there are various time frames for completion of the mitigation measures, i.e., prior to permits, prior to occupancy, etc. D. For projects not requiring construction permits, the process shall be similar to "C" above except that the compliance report and checklist form shall be completed according to the time schedule identified in the mitigation measure. E. The Environmental Evaluator shall report violations to the Development Services Director or a designee. Actions necessary to correct the deficiency may include a meeting with the applicant or a request for legal, Planning Commission, or City Council action. Attachments: 1. California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 2. Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Exhibit "C" Resolution No. 89-188 Page 2 of 4 The Text of AB 3180 113-C CHAPTER 1232 An act to add Section 21081.6 to the Public Resources Code, relat- ing to environmental quality. (Approved by Covernor September 23. 1989. Fled with Secretary of State September 27, 1988.1 LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 3180, Cortese. Environmental impact reports: mitigation findings. (1) The California Environmental Quality Act prohibits a public agency from approving or carrying out a project for which an environmental impact report identifies significant environmental effecm unless one of specified findings relative to mitigation of those effects his been made. If no significant effect on the environment would occur, a negative declaration is required to be made, which would identify potentially significant effects that would be avoided or mitigated, as specified. This bill would require the agency in malting one of those findings, or adopting a negative declaration, to adopt a reporting and monitoring program for adopted or required charges to mitigpte or avoid significant environmental effects. The bill would require an agency ha%ing junsdiction over natural resources affected by a project, if requested by a lead or responsible agency, to submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program for changes required or incorporated into the project at its request. The bill would impose a state-r:iardated local program by imposing new duties on local agencies. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain cesu mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason - ?he people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION I. Section 21081.6 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read 21081.6. When making the findings required by subdivision (a) of ' Section 21081 or when adopting a negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (.c) of Section 21080, the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of an agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of .Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sulScient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act. Exhibit "C" Resolution No. 89-188 Page 3 of 4 PROJECT ADDRESS: _ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mitigation Where Shown Verified Measure Topic/N Type On Plans Implementation FILE NUMBERS: PLANCHECK NO: Type = Pre -grading or building permit, pre -occupancy, ongoing. Where shown on plans Include page number and date. Verified Implementation When measure has been implemented, initial and date. Comments --i D -i O Z K O Z :4 O M z G) i IT! n r I