Loading...
RRA - 2000-16 - Approving and Certifying Final EIR ReportRESOLUTION NO. 2000-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IN ADOPTION OF THE ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2 WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rosemead, (the "Agency") has initiated a Redevelopment Plan for Rosemead Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 (the "Redevelopment Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead has approved and forwarded to the Agency its report that the proposed Redevelopment Plan are in conformity with the General Plan of the City of Rosemead and has recommended approval of said Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report prepared on the Redevelopment Plan was sent to the Planning Commission and the Commission held a public hearing to receive public input on the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, all actions required to be taken by applicable law related to the preparation, circulation, and review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report have been taken; and WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report identified significant direct project impacts to the traffic levels of service at the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard and Valley Boulevard and potentially significant impacts to air quality from construction phase activity which cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level by conditions imposed on the project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to public notice duly given, the City Council and the Agency held a full and fair public hearing on the proposed Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report on June 13, 2000; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Final Environmental Impact Report is an adequate and complete document in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, that the Agency has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgment of the Agency. • • SECTION 2. The mitigation monitoring program has been prepared in accordance with the State government requirements contained in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. SECTION 3. The Final Environmental Impact Report determined that there would be no impacts or impacts would be less than significant without mitigation for land use, population/housing/employment, noise, geology, public health/safety/risk, police protection, and solid waste. SECTION 4. The Final Environmental Impact Report identified impacts related to the project that would be less than significant when project activities are in compliance with reasonable policies, rules and regulations related to applicable laws, but for which would be further reduced by additional recommended measures that would further benefit the air quality for non-construction activities, the community for fire protection, libraries, recreation/parks, and public utilities and infrastructure (including water, sewer, storm water, electricity and natural gas). Impacts and mitigation measures are identified in Sections 3D, Air Quality, 3H-1 Fire Protection, 3H-3 Libraries, 31 Recreation, Parks and Open Space, 3J- 1 Water, 3J-2 Sewer, 3J-3 Storm Water, 3J-5 Electricity, and 3J-6 Natural Gas of the Environmental Impact Report. SECTION 5. The Final Environmental Impact Report identified significant impacts related to the project which are potentially significantly adverse, but which will be mitigated to an insignificant level by conditions imposed upon the project in the area of public services (other government services). The public services impact and mitigation measure is identified in Section 3H-4, Government Services of the Environmental Impact Report. SECTION 6. The proposed project will have a significant adverse effect on traffic levels of service at the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard and Valley Boulevard and potentially significant impacts to air quality from construction phase activity which cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level by conditions imposed on the project (a) Adverse traffic impacts are incremental and cumulative which result from traffic generation sources that are not totally within the jurisdictional control of the City of Rosemead. To fully mitigate adverse service level impacts at the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard and Valley Boulevard would necessitate physical improvements which exceed planned configurations and could require displacement of adjacent land uses. The cost and degree of adverse impacts that could result from complete mitigation is not reasonable or feasible; however, traffic-related impacts have been incorporated to the extent reasonable to lessen the impacts. (b) Adverse air quality impacts during construction will be temporary and short- term. Complete mitigation of construction emissions would require the imposition of schedule requirements that would essentially render construction activities infeasible, especially given their temporary nature. Adherence with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113 will substantially reduce adverse construction emissions to the extent which is reasonably feasible. • • SECTION 7. All feasible mitigation measures, which are within the jurisdiction of the City of Rosemead, as identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report have been incorporated into the project and represent the fullest extent to which the project-related impacts can be reasonably avoided and/or substantially lessened. SECTION 8. Unavoidable adverse impacts are outweighed by the project benefits related to economic, social, employment and other considerations which include fulfilling goals, objectives and policies as defined in the City of Rosemead General Plan; providing infrastructure and improvements that will benefit the community; providing incentives that will encourage the elimination of the rehabilitation and revitalization of the project area and eliminate blight; expanding the commercial/industrial sector with establishments that improve the City's sales tax revenues and provide job opportunities; and, improving vehicular and pedestrian circulation, access and parking conditions in the project area. SECTION 9. The Final Environmental Impact Report did not identify project alternatives which would reduce environmental impacts while still substantially achieving the project objectives, and the proposed project was determined to be the environmentally superior alternative. SECTION 10. The Agency shall make available the Environmental Impact Report and other related materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based at the Rosemead City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. SECTION 11. When considering the whole record, there is no evidence that the project will have the potential for adverse effects on historic resources, wildlife resources or the habitat on which wildlife depends. SECTION 12. Ten days after the approval of this resolution, the City of Rosemead shall submit a fee of $25.00, required by the County of Los Angeles, for the filing of a Certificate of Fee Exemption and de minimis findings pursuant to AB 3158 and the California Code of Regulations. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency this 13th day of June 2000. Chairper on Rosemead Redevelopment Agency ATTEST: Secretary Rosemead Redevelopment Agency 0 • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF ROSEMEAD I, Nancy Valderrama, City Clerk of the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-16 being: A RESOLUTION OF THE ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IN ADOPTION OF THE ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2 was duly adopted at an Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Regular Meeting of the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency on the 13th day of June, 2000, by the following vote to wit: AYES: CLARK, BRUESCH, IMPERIAL, VASQUEZ NOES: TAYLOR ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE Agency Secretary AGENDA:CERTIFY