Resolution - 6939•
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
RESOLUTION NO. 6939
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WEST COVINA CERTIFYING THAT THE COUNCIL HAS
REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE
BARRANCA STREET/GARVEY AVENUE NORTH SITE
LOCATED WITHIN THE EASTLAND REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS REGARDING
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT; AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of West Covina ("Agency")
proposes to enter into an agreement for the sale and development of certain real
property known as the Barranca Street/Garvey Avenue North Site (the "Site") for
redevelopment pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan for the Eastland Redevelopment
Project; and
WHEREAS, a Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR"), relating to the
proposed development of the Site has been prepared and certified by the Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council and the Parking Authority of the
City of West Covina have held a duly noticed joint public hearing to consider a
proposed Disposition and Development Agreement by and between the Agency,
Dighton Incorporated N.V. and the Parking Authority of the City of West Covina for
the development of the Site; and
WHEREAS, the Agency, the City Council and the Parking Authority have
reviewed and considered the information contained in said Final Environmental Impact
Report with respect to development of the Site pursuant to said Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of West
Covina as follows:
1. The City Council hereby certifies that the information contained in
the Final Environmental Impact Report has been reviewed and considered by the
Council.
2. The City Council hereby finds with respect to the adverse
environmental impacts detailed in the Final Environmental Impact Report:
-1-
• a. That the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed
development set forth in the Final Environmental Impact Report, including those
raised in comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, have been considered
and recognized by the City Council.
b. That based on information set forth in the Final Environmental
Impact Report, the City Council finds and determines that measures have been
required in or incorporated into the project which mitigate or avoid each of the
adverse environmental impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report,
relating to land use (EIR, p. 14) and noise (EIR, p. 33).
C. That the cumulative adverse environmental impacts relating to
traffic/circulation (EIR, pp. 26-27), air quality (EIR, p. 44), energy (EIR, p. 48), and
public services and utilities (EIR, pp. 54-55) identified in the Final Environmental
Impact Report and set forth in Section I of Attachment A (attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference) cannot be entirely mitigated or avoided if the
project is implemented.
d. That no additional adverse impacts will have a significant
effect or result in a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the
environment as a result of the proposed development.
4. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all significant
environmental effects identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report have been
reduced to an acceptable level in that:
• a. All significant environmental effects that can feasibly be
avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened as determined through the
findings set forth in paragraphs 3.b and 3.c of this Resolution.
b. Based upon the Final Environmental Impact Report and the
documents in the record, and upon Section II of Attachment A, specific economic,
social or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in
said Final Environmental Impact Report.
C. Based upon the Final Environmental Impact Report and the
documents in the record, all remaining, unavoidable significant effects of the proposed
development, as set forth in paragraph 3.c of this Resolution are overridden by the
benefits of the project as described in Section III of Attachment A, and the City
Council hereby approves and adopts said Section III of said Attachment A as a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed development project and
implementing actions.
5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
resolution.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 8th day of October 1984.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Cl
..=2-
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 6939 was duly
adopted by the City Council of the City of West Covina at a regular meeting
thereof held on the 8th day of October 1984, by the following vote:
AYES: Manners, Chappell, Shearer, Tennant, Bacon
NOES: None
ABSENT:. None
ABSTAIN: None
w
s
o 1f� i09
City Cl-e-rr--7-
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
d�a� iwn.
l a C�sl�
City Att rne�
n
gency Special Counsel
• -3-
ATTACHMENT A
SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS, MITIGATION
MEASURES, INFEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, AND STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, RELATING TO THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT OF THE BARRANCA STREET GARVEY AVENUE NORTH SITE
I. SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE
ENTIRELY MITIGATED OR AVOIDED
A. Development of the Site and Other Proposed Developments
The Barranca Street/Garvey Avenue North site is proposed tobe developed with a
12-14 story office building and 4 levels of subterranean parking. Other proposed and
approved developments in the Eastland Project area include an addition to the
Eastland Shopping Center, a new office building on the southeast corner of Barranca
Street and Workman Avenue, and a new condominium on Workman Avenue east of
Barranca Street. The impacts of the development of the Barranca Street/Garvey
Avenue North site by themselves are not deemed significant. However, the
cumulative impacts of the other proposed developments together with the
development of the subject site may be significant. Accordingly, a summary of the
significant adverse environmental effects has been prepared.
• B. Traffic and Circulation [EIR, pp. 16-271
Although no significant adverse traffic and circulation impacts are anticipated,
redevelopment of the site will generate a total of 2,460 daily trips. Adequate access
to and from the site is the primary traffic -related concern. Proposed mitigation
requires the development of a cooperative agreement for several circulation studies
and/or improvements, including: further analysis of the Barranca.Street/North Garvey
Avenue eastbound left -turn phase; consideration of a separate left -turn phase for
northbound and southbound traffic at the Barrance Street/North Garvey Avenue
intersection; alignment of project access with existing primary or secondary access to
Charley Brown's restaurant; construction of a left -turn lane on Barranca Street
southbound; prohibition of outbound left turns; and completion of a parking analysis
prior to approval of building permits. Potential traffic -related impacts can be
partially mitigated, but may still be cumulatively significant, when considered in
conjunction with existing and future projects.
C. Air Quality [ pp. 34-451
1. Environmental Imapcts
The most significant air quality impact associated with development of 200,000
square feet of office space is that an additional 2,500 daily vehicle trips will be
generated. These trips, in conjunction with the almost 15,000 new trips generated by
the Eastland Shopping Center addition, the Barranca/Workman Building, and other
nearby developments, will add another 100,000 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the
isregional traffic burden. This project cumulatively contributes to the local degradation
of air quality.
-1-
Regional emission levels can be readily calculated by combining trip -making
• characteristics from the project traffic study with California -specific emissions. For
new office buildings, constructed according to California Administrative Code Title 24
for non-residential building energy conservation standards, the proposed
redevelopment project will consume about 4 million kwh of electricity and 100,000
therms of natural gas annually. If all that electrical demand is met by burning oil in
SCE power plants, the combination of offsite power plant and onsite natural gas
combination sources will generate an average annual pollution burden as shown in
Table I. When compared to vehicular sources, these emissions, particularly the
reactive organic gases that "fuel" the regional smog formation process, are seen to be
small. Any corresponding ambient air quality impacts are thus similarly less
significant.
2. Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures and compliance with measures contained in
the Energy section of the EIR will reduce project related impacts on air quality.
a. In accordance with AQMD Rule 403 (fugitive dust), the developer shall
implement a dust control program during construction of the project.
b. The developer shall encourage the use of car and vanpool programs by
employees of the building.
C. The developer shall work with the City and the RTD to provide transit
facilities (i.e., bus stops, benches, etc.) if in the opinion of the RTD such
facilities are required or appropriate.
D. Energy [EIR, pp. 46-481
1. Environmental Impacts
Redevelopment of the project site will create a significant increase in the
consumption of non-renewable energy resources to meet onsite energy demands and to
provide offsite transportation fuels. To the extent that the project accommodates a
portion of the regional demand for office space, that energy consumption has been
anticipated in utility demand planning and will not adversely affect future energy
supply.
Existing energy use from the restaurant on the site will be offset by the
relocation of the restaurant. The project -related energy demand, in conjunction with
offsite gasoline usage for the 2,460 trips generated each day, is summarized in Table
J. The 40 billion BTU of annual energy consumption represents consumption
constrained by CEC Conservation Standards (Part 2, Chapter 2-53, Section 2-5341 of
the State Building Code) and fuel efficiency standards mandated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Even with these very stringent limits, the annual
project energy cost is still almost one-half million dollars. Any additional
conservation beyond the above consumption limits can create substantial cost savings
over the life of the project, conserve non-renewable resources, and reduce air
pollutants associated with fossil fuel combustion in Southern California's already
polluted air.
• The energy budget established by the CEC represents the state-of-the-art in
energy conservation building design which leaves little potential for additional onsite
-2-
energy conservation. The project itself is self -mitigating because a large high-rise
office building in West Covina is allowed to use only 62% of the energy consumption of
. a small low-rise office building. The CEC standards require that building designers
demonstrate compliance either through a State computer model (a performance
compliance approach) or by selecting energy components from a list of various
alternatives which meet minimum conservation standards (a prescriptive compliance
approach). Under either approach, a number of mandatory features must be
incorporated into building plans in order to ensure energy efficiency. These mandatory
features include air leakage control measures, light switch control, and heating,
ventilation, and airconditioning (HVAC) design requirements.
Voluntary conservation can be encouraged through transportation control
measures. Shifts to high -occupancy vehicle modes create significant fuel use
reductions and can be encouraged by techniques such as:
. Employer -subsidized vanpools or transit passes.
. Carpool incentives (free or preferred parking) and
single -occupant vehicle disincentives (parking surcharges).
Bicycle or pedestrian access incentives.
2. Mitigation Measures
The following measures will reduce potential project -related energy impacts to
an acceptable level, with respect to this development.
a. Solar -assisted heating/cooling systems and natural heating and cooling
building design using glass, overhangs, and landscaping shall be considered
• and incorporated wherever feasible at precise site plan review.
b. Low -energy fluorescent and high-pressure sodium lighting shall be used
where possible and demonstrated at the time of precise site plan review.
Lighting for decorative purposes shall be minimized.
However, cumulatively, there may be significant impacts resulting from other
new developments in the project area, as discussed above.
E. Public Services and Utilities [EIR, pp. 51-551
The proposed project, in itself, is not expected to adversely affect the
capabilities or capacities of services and utilities. However, development of the
project will cumulatively affect the service demands of public agencies and utilities in
conjunction with existing demands and future growth in the area. Proposed mitigation
includes: incorporation of fire prevention protection and building and site design:
adherence to UBC Section 1907 regarding fire safety measures for high-rise buildings;
upgrading of the project's water system to provide sufficient fire flow capacity -
incorporation of crime prevention and security building design as feasible; review of
plans for adequate wastewater capacity; review of site drainage plans prior to
development; and consultation with RTD regarding public transportation amenities.
Impacts related to public services and utilities are partially mitigated, but significant
on a cumulative basis.
-3-
II. CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
• A. Project Alternatives Will Not Meet Objectives of Redevelopment Plan
•
The project alternatives included in the EIR are socially and economically less
desirable than the proposed development.
The objective of the Redevelopment Plan for the Eastland Redevelopment
Project is to eliminate blighted areas by replacing existing underutilized or
deteriorating land uses within the project area with land uses consistent with the
environmental, economic and social needs of the community. The redevelopment of
the Project area pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan has been determined to be
necessary to promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the City and to
effectuate the public/purposes of the California Community Redevelopment Law.
The Agency and the City desire that the Site be developed with a first class
office building with subterranean public parking facilities, and towards that end
adopted Development and Design Standards for the Site. Special consideration was
directed toward optimum use of the Site.
The proposed development will result in a contemporary office structure with
high visibility and its excellent freeway access will attract users. The development
will also provide attractive landscaping and structural subterranean parking, and will
replace the current uses, consisting of an abandoned gas station, an asphalt lot, trash,
weeds, and a free-standing older restaurant building.
Permanent employment at completion is estimated at approximately 1000
persons. In addition, several hundred construction jobs will be required to complete
the project. The assessed value of the project area will increase by approximately
$30,000,000.
B. No Project
Selection of the no -project alternative would eliminate any project -related
adverse impacts identified in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. Specifically,
incremental increases in traffic, noise, air pollution, energy consumption, and public
service and utility use would be avoided if the project were not constructed. Selection
of the no -project alternative would continue the present uses of the site indefinitely or
until such times as rehabilitation or redevelopment was undertaken by the property
owners. Selection of the no -project alternative would eliminate the positive impacts
expected to result from the proposed project. Specifically, anticipated increases in
property value, the creation of new employment opportunities, and an enhanced visual
image for the city would all be lost if the no -project alternative were selected.
C. Reduced Office Center
If a smaller regional office center were constructed, it would have reduced
impacts on air quality, traffic, noise, energy consumption, and public services and
utilities. However, due to the fact that the proposed development's impacts can be
adequately mitigated, selection of a reduced alternative does not appear to be
necessary on purely environmental grounds.
-4-
D. Commercial Alternative
• The site could be developed for local or community commercial uses. This alternative
would have less impact on air quality, traffic, and energy consumption. Selection of a
commercial use for the site might result in increased noise and land use conflicts with
nearby residential uses. In addition, selection of a commercial alternative would not
provide the expected additional property tax revenues and increased job opportunities
which are expected to result from the proposed project.
E. Residential Alternative
The site could be used for residential purposes. Residential use of the site would
result in significantly reduced air quality and traffic impacts. However, the site's
location, completely surrounded by commercial uses and located at the intersection of
two major arterials, is not well -located for residential development.
III. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The proposed development of the Barranca Street/Garvey Avenue North Site,
considered together with other development now planned for the project area, may
have significant adverse environmental impacts on the environment as discussed
hereinabove. Thus, the benefits of the proposed development have been balanced
against the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the EIR and set forth in
Section I above. Therefore the Agency, City and Parking Authority make the
following statement of overriding considerations.
• 1. The proposed development Site is located in the Eastland Redevelopment
Project and implements the Redevelopment Plan for said Project adopted July 14,
1975.
2. The Project area was selected for redevelopment because of its unusually
high accessibility from a large surrounding region via the San Bernardino Freeway and
several other major arterial roads. The area had substantial potential value for
development of commercial uses to serve the region, but was characterized by
underutilized or deteriorating land uses.
The plan is directed toward replacing such uses with land uses consistent with
the environmental, economic and social needs of the community. The proposed
development alleviates those conditions and supports the reasons for selection of the
Project area.
3. The proposed development implements the uses for the Site designated in the
Redevelopment Plan and the General Plan.
4. The proposed development implements the Development and Design Standards
for Barranca/Garvey adopted July 9, 1984 pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan.
5. The proposed development will provide approximately 700 short term
construction jobs, and in excess of 1000 new permanent employment opportunities.
6. The proposed development will develop the Site in accordance with the
• Redevelopment Plan for a higher and more productive use.
-5-
•
7. The proposed development will increase the assessed value of property in the
project area by approximately $30,000,000. Employee purchases in the community are
expected to reach an average of $1000 per year per employee, or about $1,000,000.
8. The proposed development will improve the functional and aesthetic quality
of the Site.
9. The proposed development will replace an underutilized site with a first class
office building and a large subterranean public parking facility available for use by the
general public.
-6-