Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout33 - PH-3 - Attachment 7 - 5/6/2014ATTACHMENT 7 EIR ERRATA SHEET Administrative Draft—Subject to Change Errata May 2014 The following are text changes intended to clarify or correct information in the Draft EIR as initiated by the City of Costa Mesa. Revisions are shown below as excerpts from the Draft EIR text, with a lime through deleted text and a double underline beneath inserted text. In order to indicate the location in the Draft EIR where text has been changed, the reader is referred to the page number of the Draft EIR as published on January 12, 2012. The corrections and/or additions below do not constitute significant new information as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when "significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 10587 but before certification." New information added to the EIR is not considered significant unless "the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to implement." TEXT CHANGES TO FINAL EIR VOLUME I (DRAFT EIR) Page 2-4, new "Public Actions and Approval Required" following "Zoning Code Amendment CO -13-02" Development Agreement The City of Costa Mesa and the Developer have entered into Development Agreement DA -14-02 to fund public infrastructure improvements in the project area. The Developer has agreed to provide two hundred_ fifty thousand dollars ($250.000.00) as a public infrastructure improvement contribution payable to the City prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the proposed pro'ect. City of Costa Mesa 1 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR Red Oak Investments, LLC SCH No. 2013081051 Errata Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 Page 2-15, Table 2-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, following the end of the table Table 2-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; PS = potentially significant; SU = significant and unavoidable Impact Significance Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation RECREATION Impact 4.11-1 Implementation of the PS MM4.11.1 The City of Costa Mesa and the Developer shall enter LTS proposed proiect could result in substantial adverse physical impacts into Development Agreement DA -14-02 to fund public infrastructure improvements in the project area. The Developer associated with increased used aLaLaLQyjde $250.000 as a public infrastructure improvement existing neighborhood and regional contribution payable to the City of Costa Mesa prior to issuance parks or other recreational facilities of the first certificate of occupancy for the proposed project,J12 such that substantial physicaladdition- deterioration of the the Developer shall provide approximately 38.000 sf of common usable open space and on-site amenities. which are to occur or be accelerated. This is considered a potentially significant include recreation areas, a pool, reflective water feature - clubhouse, fitness center, dog -park, community garden. impact. However, implementation of basketball court barbecues. bike racks and walking path. mitigation would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. Page 3-15, new "Public Actions and Approval Required" following "Zoning Code Amendment CO -13-02" ■ Development Agreement The City of Costa Mesa and the Developer have entered into Development Agreement DA -14-02 to fund public infrastructure improvements in the project area. The Developer has agreed ta=provide two hundred- fifty thousand dollars ($250;000.00) as a public infrastructure improvement contribution payable to the City prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the proposed pro'ect. Page 4.8-24, "Parks" section, first paragraph Parks This section of the EIR describes park services within the City of Costa Yro`ie*s-eMesa and analyzes the potential physical environmental effects related to parks created by construction of new or additional facilities associated with implementation of the proposed project. Page 4.8-25, "Quimby Act" section, first paragraph Quimby Act The Quimby Act was established by the California legislature in 1965 to provide parks for the growing communities in California. The Act authorizes cities to adopt ordinances addressing parkland and/or in - 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 2 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC Administrative Draft—Subject to Change Errata May 2014 lieu fees for residential subdivisions for the purpose of providing parklands and recreational facilities. unless the affiettiat of e36sting neighborhood and community park area in the City exceeds that hwik, i whieh ease the City ffiay adopt a higher- standar-d not to emeeed 5 aeres per- 4,000 r-esidents. The Quiffib However_ the proposed project an apartment complex. not a residential subdivision. and is not subiect to the Citv of Costa Mesa Parkland Impact Fee Schedule. Page 4.8-28, "Effects Not Found to Be Significant" section k Effects Not Found to Be Significant The Initial Study prepared for the proposed project found that the effects of the proposed project would be patefitia4y1 h n significant since the prol2osed project would not result in the provision of new or lzh sy icallv altered government facilities_ or in the need for new or 1h s -y altered govern facilities, or in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities_ the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts_ in order to maintain acceptable service ratios_ response times_ or other performance objectivesand ar-e therefor -e analyzed belaw with iaespeet te, �for parks. Additional information and analysis is provided below to clarify potential effects to parks. Pages 4.8-29 to 4.8-30, beginning with second paragraph With Tthe addition of 346 residents, the proposed project would generate a need for approximately 1.47 acres of additional parkland and may place additional demands on the programming capability at Del Mesa Parkander ark facilities in the City. rev-�tThe proposed project would provide approximately X938.000 sf of common usable open space and on-site amenities, which include recreation areas, a pool, and a clubhouse, and would largel�v alleviate demands on Del Mesa Park and other parks. Based upon an anticipated population of 346 residents, it is anticipated that many of the recreational needs of the future residents will be met by the proposed project's on-site recreational amenities. watild generate the need for- 1.47--aer-es of parldand. 4he proposed projeef ifiell site, as well as, sports eatirts. For all the reasons noted above, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse p=hXsical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park facilities, or in the need for new or ph s�v altered facilities. The use of the on-site amenities, in addition to implementation of mitigation measure MM4.11-1 as discussed in Section 4.11 (Recreation)_ would reduce impacts to existing and/or facilities to a less-thanm!: g cantlevel. > > wid-rin the proposed subdMsion, or Wbere the subdivision eantains fifty (50) lots of fewer, the subdMde fft aeeardanee with the sehedule of fees as adopted by resolution of the City Getineil." City of Costa Mesa 3 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR Red Oak Investments, LLC SCH No. 2013081051 Errata Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 4.8.19 Cumulative Impacts—Parks Threshold Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for parks? Project development, in combination with other cumulative residential development within the City of Costa Mesa, would directly increase the population. Increases in population would generate a higher demand for recreational facilities and programs, and reduce the existing parkland per resident ratio. The Open Space and Recreation Element of the City's General Plan establishes a parkland demand factor of 5.76 acres per 1,000 residents. This standard could be provided through park fees, land dedication, or a combination of both as described in CMMC Title 13, Chapter XI, Article 5 (Park and Recreation Dedications) for residential subdivisions. Therefore, ,any cumulative projects in the City_ that are residential subdivisions_ would not likely result in impacts to recreation opportunities because such new development projects are required to eitherprovide adequate parkland on-site., or pay applicable in -lieu park fees. Because there are mechanisms in place ., through enfer-eemeiit of the to ensure that new residential subdivisions provides its—their fair -share of park and recreational opportunities for future residents, and new apartment tnroiects. which are not subiect to the Citv's bark im-Dact fee ordinance. have to mitigate for anv potential impacts through pro�pecific mitigation measures_ the cumulative impact would be less than significant. The proposed project's contribution would not be cumulatively considerable and would also be less than significant. Page 4.8-24, Section 4.8.20 (References), following last reference 4.8.20 References Costa Mesa, City of. 1974. City of Costa Mesa Municpal Code, January 1974. 2002a. City of Costa Mesa 2000 General Plan, adopted January 2002. 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 4 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC I Pill" Y_ 4.8.19 Cumulative Impacts—Parks Threshold Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for parks? Project development, in combination with other cumulative residential development within the City of Costa Mesa, would directly increase the population. Increases in population would generate a higher demand for recreational facilities and programs, and reduce the existing parkland per resident ratio. The Open Space and Recreation Element of the City's General Plan establishes a parkland demand factor of 5.76 acres per 1,000 residents. This standard could be provided through park fees, land dedication, or a combination of both as described in CMMC Title 13, Chapter XI, Article 5 (Park and Recreation Dedications) for residential subdivisions. Therefore, ,any cumulative projects in the City_ that are residential subdivisions_ would not likely result in impacts to recreation opportunities because such new development projects are required to eitherprovide adequate parkland on-site., or pay applicable in -lieu park fees. Because there are mechanisms in place ., through enfer-eemeiit of the to ensure that new residential subdivisions provides its—their fair -share of park and recreational opportunities for future residents, and new apartment tnroiects. which are not subiect to the Citv's bark im-Dact fee ordinance. have to mitigate for anv potential impacts through pro�pecific mitigation measures_ the cumulative impact would be less than significant. The proposed project's contribution would not be cumulatively considerable and would also be less than significant. Page 4.8-24, Section 4.8.20 (References), following last reference 4.8.20 References Costa Mesa, City of. 1974. City of Costa Mesa Municpal Code, January 1974. 2002a. City of Costa Mesa 2000 General Plan, adopted January 2002. 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 4 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC Administrative Draft—Subject to Change Errata May 2014 2002b. City of Costa Mesa 2000 General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Final EIR No. 1051, January. Following page 4.10-26, a new Section 4.11 (Recreation) has been added. 4.11 RECREATION This section of the EIR describes existing park facilities within the City of Costa Mesa and analyzes the potential environmental effects associated with the increased use of existinaneizhborhood and reajonal parks_ or the requirement for the construction of new or the expansion of existing recreational facilities associated with implementation of the pro osed ro'ect. Data for this section were taken from City of Costa Mesa Open Space Element. Full reference -list entries for all cited materials are provided in Section 4.11.5 (Referenced. 4.11.1 Environmental Setting The Citv of Costa Mesa's inventory of oven space and recreation opportunities includes a wide range of facilities including highly developed_ active recreation sites to low -activity, passive open spaces. Section 4.8 (Public Services) includes Figure 4.8-5 (Parks_ Recreation_ and Open Space InventogJ which depicts the existing network of open space and recreation facilities in the City of Costa Mesa. In addition_ Table 4.8-3 (Open Space Inventorv) lists the open space and nark facilities and their respective acreages in the City of Costa Mesa. Residents of the proposed project would most likely use Del Mesa Park, which is located approximately - 0.5 mile to the north. The 2.46 -acre park includes picnic tables, a playground, and volleyball and basketball facilities. 4.11.2 Regulatory Framework ■ Federal There are no federal regulatiapplicable to parkland or recreational facilities. w State Quimby Act The Ouimbv Act was established by the California legislature in 1965 to provide narks for the growin communities in California. The Act authorizes cities to adopt ordinances addressing parkland and/or in - lieu fees for residential subdivisions for the purpose rovidin"arklands and recreational facilities. However, the proposed project is an apartment complex, not a residential subdivision, and is not subject to the City of Costa Mesa Parkland Impact Fee Schedule. City of Costa Mesa 5 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR Red Oak Investments, LLC SCH No. 2013081051 Errata Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 State Public Park Preservation Act The primary instrument for protecting and preservingparkland is the state Public Park Preservation Act. Under the Public Resource Code; cities and counties may not acquire aniproper , that is in use as a public park for any non -park use unless compensation or land_ or both_ are provided to replace the parkland acquired, to avoid a net loss of parkland. alifornia Street and Highway Code The California Street and Highway Code establishes standards for pedestrian and bicycle facilities within or adjacent to the right-of-way of roads_ streets_ and highways. E Local City of Costa Mesa General Plan The City of Costa Mesa General Plan 012en Space and Recreation Element includes the following and policies that are relevant to the analysis: Goal OSR-1 Environmental Quality and Resource Conservation. It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide its citizens with a high duality environment through the development of recreation resources, and the preservation of open space. Objective OSR 1A Preserve the City's open space lands_ and provide additional community and neighborhood parkland in conjunction with future population increases to provide adequate recreational opportunities and relief from the pressures of urban development. Policy OSR-1A.1 Provide a minimum of 5.76 acres of permanent public open space (consisting- of 4.26 acres of neighborhood and community parks and 1.5 acres in school ard% for every 1,000 residents. Policy 0SR-1A.5 Encourage_ throughh development rights transfers or other incentives_ the developmentprivate permanent open ace and recreation facilities to meet the needs of the City's residents. Policy 0SR-1A.8 Continue to require; through development standards_ the integration en space and recreational uses and facilities into all muldple-family residential pro'ects. City of Costa Mesa Municipal Code Title 13, Chapter A Article 5 (Park and Recreation Dedications) The Citv's standard for permanent public open space is 5.76 acres per 1.000 residents. Citv Municinal Code Section 13-251 states; `Every residential subdivider who creates a subdivision shall be required to dedicate a portion of the land_ pay a fee in lieu thereof or do a combination of both_ as established in this article for the purpose of providing park and recreational facilities to serve future residents of the subdivision." Chapter XI_ Article 5_ establishes the development impact fees for residential development 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 6 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC Administrative Draft—Subject to Change Errata May 2014 in lieu of land dedication. CMMC Section 13-256 (Amount of Fee in Lieu of Land Dedication) specifies that "where there is no public park or recreation facility required within the proposed subdivision_ or where the subdivision contains fifty (50) lots or fewer, the subdivider shall Fav a fee in lieu of land dedication reflecting the value of land required for park and recreation purposes_ in accordance with the schedule of fees as adopted by resolution of the Citv Council." Although this City code provision does not aanly to the aronosed aroiect_ it can provide a frame of reference for the Groner provision of hark and recreational facilities. 4.11.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Analytic Method L Thresholds of Sianificance The followin thresholds of sianificance are based on the 2013 CEOA Guidelines Appendix G. For purposes of this EIR; implementation of the prol2osed project may have a significant adverse impact on neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities if it would do any of the following ■ Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated ■ Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment ■ Effects Not Found to Be Significant The Initial Studv orenared for the nronosed aroiect found that the potential effect of the tDronosed project on recreation facilities would be insignificant. Additional information and analysis is provided below to clarify potential recreation effects. Notably, the Initial Study's conclusion was based upon the incorrect assumption that Quimby Act fees, discussed above, would apply t�proposed project. Although such fees would not aaaly to the nronosed aroiect_ there are other reasons for the same onclusion, as discussed in detail belo City of Costa Mesa 7 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR Red Oak Investments, LLC SCH No. 2013081051 Errata ■ Project Impacts and Mitigation Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 Threshold Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional barks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Impact 4.11-1 Implementation of the Proposed Proiiect could result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. This is considered a Potentially significant impact. However, implementation of mitigation would reduce this impact to a less-than-sjZ ja=tlevel. The Proposed project consists of 240 residential units, which would result in the addition of approximately 346 residents to the proiecL,site. Residents of the proposed project would most likely use Del Mesa Park; located approximatel-)T 0.5 mile to the north. The 2.46 -acre park includes _picnic tables; 121a-)�ground, volleyball, and basketball facilities. With the addition of approximately 346 residents, the proposed project would a need for apl2roximately1.47 acres of additional parkland as required per General Plan Policy No. 0SR-1A.1 an may lace additional demands on the 12rogrammina capability at Del Mesa Park and other park facilities in the City of Costa Mesa. This is considered a potentiallnificant im act. However. the proposed project would provide approximately 38.000 sf of common usable open space and on-site amenities- which include recreation areas, a pool, reflective water feature, clubhouse, fitness center, dog -park. communityuarden, basketball court, barbeques, bike racks and walking path. Because these amenities are similar to those available at Del Mesa Park or other adjacent parks and recreational facilities in the City and, in fact, are more extensive than those specificalltprovided at Del Mesa Park_ residents would be reasonably likely to use on-site amenities more than Del Mesa Park or other City facilities. Therefore- the demands on Del Mesa Park and other adjacent parks from the pro osed proms are expected to be reduced due to the extensive on-site amenities to be provided artproposed project. In addition- the Applicant will contribute funds to the City_ of Costa Mesa (Development Azteement DA -14-02, for public infrastructure improvements in the project area. The Applicant has calculated thea proximate value of the on-site amenities, in addition to the Development Azreement contribution, as shown in Table 4.11-1 (Applicant Amenity Package Table 4.11-1 Applicant Amenity Package Value of On -Site Amenities $3.284,920.00 Development Agreement Contribution (Infrastructure Improvements) 1250-000.00 Total Value of Amenity Package $1534,920.00 Contribution per Unit (240 du) U4,ZM 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 8 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC Administrative Draft—Subject to Change Errata May 2014 If the nroiect were a residential subdivision it would be subiect to the Citv of Costa Mesa Parkland Impact Fee Schedule_ and the fee per multi -family dwelling unit would be 513.829. Since the pro'ect is an apartment and not a residential subdivision_ it is not subject to the Quimby Act or the City's Parkland Impact Fee Schedule. However_ it is subject to the implementation of MM4.11-1_ which would ensure that the Applicant provides a combination of on-site amenities as well as a contribution of funds to the Citv of Costa Mesa for oublic infrastructure improvements_ would reduce this impact to a less -than - significant level. MM4.11-1 The Citv of Costa Mesa and the Developer shall enter into Development Agreement DA -14-02 to fund public infrastructure improvements in the bMiect area. The Developer shall provide 5'250.000 as a public infrastructure improvement contribution payable to the City of Costa Mesa prior to issuance of the first certificate�cf occupan fc or theroosed�proiect. In addition. the Developer shall provide approximately 38.000 sf of common usable open mace and on-site amenities. which are to include recreation area& a pool. reflective water feature. clubhouse. fitness center, dohpark,. community Urden. basketball court. barbecua bike racks and svalk.ia bath• Threshold Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or xpansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Impact 4.11-2 Implementation of the proposed project would include recreational facilities, but the construction of such recreational facilities would not have an adverse physical effect on the environment. This would be a less-than- signiWicant impact. As discussed above_ the proposed project would add approximately 346 residents to the project area and would generate the need for approximately 1.47 acres of parkland as required per General Plan Policy No. OSR-1A.1. The proposed project would include the construction of on-site recreational amenities includingzapool, reflective water feature_ clubhouse_ fitness center_ dog -park, community garden, basketball court, barbeques. bike racks and walking=path that would not result in adverse impacts on the environment. As to the construction of the on-site amenities, these would be constructed at the same time and in the same manner as the proposed project itself. Therefore, there would be no different environmental effects as to construction of the on-site amenities separate and apart from construction of the proposed project itself_ which environmental effects are all analyzed in this EIR. As to the potential construction or expansion of other recreational facilities_ the proposed project is not likely to cause such construction or expansion due to the extensive on-site recreational amenities that would be hart of the The proposed project would replace a commercial/industrial development in an existinIz urbanized mmuni _ with a residential apartment complex includina recreational amenities that would help alleviate demands on Del Mesa Park and other adjacent parks. In addition_ the Applicant would contribute funds to the City of Costa Mesa for future public infrastructure improvements. Additionally_ implementation of mitigation measure MM4.11-1 (as discussed above) would ensure that the Applicant provides a combination of on-site amenities as well as a contribution of funds to the City of Costa Mesa for public infrastructure improvements. Any future public infrastructure improvements would be sub'ect to the requirements of CEOA as well as other applicable laws and regulations_ and as part of standard City of Costa Mesa 9 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR Red Oak Investments, LLC SCH No. 2013081051 Errata Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 development Procedures_ would be submitted to the Citv of Costa Mesa for review and aper Therefore; the construction or expansion of recreational facilities as a result of the proposed proal would not result in adverse impacts on the environment, and impacts would be considered less than significant. 4.11.4 CumulativeImpacts Threshold Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or Cher recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Project�pment. in combination with other cumulative residential development within the City of Costa Mesa; would directly increase the population; which would generate a higher demand for recreational facilities and programs throughout the City. Overall. this could result in or accelerate the physical deterioration of existing arks or other recreational facilities. The Open Space and Recreation Element of the City's General Plan establishes a parkland demand factor of 5.76 acres per 1.000 residents. This standard could be met through park fees, land dedication, or a combination of both as described in CMMC Title 13; Chanter XI; Article 5 (Park and Recreation Dedications) for projects that are residential subdivisions. In addition; residential projects not subject to the city nark impact fee ordinance; such as the prol2osed project, would be required to mitigat�y impacts on park and recreational uses. Therefore, similar to the proposed project, future projects in the City would notlikely result in cumulative impacts to recreation opportunities because new development projects (including apartment projects and residential subdivision projects) are required adequate parkland onsite. VU in- ark fees for improvements to existing narks and recreational facilities develop new parks and/or private recreational facilities, or provide other mitigation to address any impacts. Because there are mechanisms in place to ensure that future developments contribute park and recreational opportunities for future residents, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. The proposed nroiect's contribution to these imnacts would not be cumulativelv considerable and would also be less than significant. Threshold Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project would include the construction of on-site recreational amenities including common open space and recreation areas, a pool, reflective water feature, clubhouse, fitness center, dog- nark, communit garden. basketball court. barbedues. bike racks and walking Vath. that would not result in adverse impacts on the environment. The proposed project would replace a commercial/industrial development in an existing, urbanized community; with a residential apartment complex including recreational amenities that would help alleviate demands on Del Mesa Park and other adjacent parks. However. cumulative residential development within the City of Costa Mesa may include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that could result in adverse _physical effects on the environment. The potential for adverse effects would be reduced by adherence to city requirements and mitigation measures imposed on new development for the purpose of reducing or avoiding such effects. As the potentially adverse effects of the proposed project would be reduced to a 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 10 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 Errata less -than -significant level_ the proposed project's contribution would not be cumulatively considerably and would also be less -than -significant. 4.11.5 References Costa Mesa. Citv of. 1974. City of Costa Mesa Munigbal Code, e anuary 1974. 2002a. Citv of Costa Mesa 2000 General Plan_ adopted Tanuary 2002. 2002b. City of Costa Mesa 2000 General Plan Environmental loact KW rt. Final EIR No. 1051_ anua . City of Costa Mesa 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR Red Oak Investments, LLC SCH No. 2013081051 inn. r l Administrative Draft—Subject to Change May 2014 TEXT CHANGES TO FINAL EIR VOLUME IA (DRAFT EIR CHANGES, RESPONSES TO COMMENTS, AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORT PROGRAM) Page 11-6, Table 11-1 (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Matrix), following the end of table Table 11-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Matrix Responsible Compliance Verification Agency/ Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Phase Party Initial Date Comments RECREATION MM4.11-1 The City of Costa Mesa and the Developer shall enter into Development Project Applicant will pay Prior to issuance Citv of Costa Agreement DA -14-02 to fund public infrastructure improvements in the project area. The the $250,000 public infrastructure improvement of the first certificate of ccu�Dancv Mesa Planning Developer shall provide 250.000 as a public infrastructure improvement contribution payable Department to the City of Costa Mesa prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the contribution, and Ovide proposed project. In addition. the Developer shall provide approximately 38 000 sf of common -pr approximately 38,000 sf of sable open space and on-site amenities, which are to include recreation areas, a pool. common usable open space reflective water feature, clubhouse, fitness center, dog -park- community garden, basketball on site arbeaues. bike racks and walking path. 125 East Baker Street Apartment Project EIR 12 City of Costa Mesa SCH No. 2013081051 Red Oak Investments, LLC