CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN OF THE MUSIC BUILDING PROJECT

Transcription

1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN OF THE MUSIC BUILDING PROJECT I. APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15074, The Regents of the University of California ( UC ) hereby certifies that the Music Building ( Project ), Mitigated Negative Declaration (including the Project Initial Study), has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections et seq. ( CEQA ), that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to The Regents, and that The Regents has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, and the comments received during the public review process, prior to approving the Project. The Regents hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the University, and approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration. II. FINDINGS The following Findings are hereby adopted by The Regents pursuant to Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15074, in conjunction with the Approval of the Project, which is set forth in Section III, below. A. Environmental Review Process An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with CEQA and the University of California Procedures for Implementation of CEQA. The Initial Study for the Project is tiered from the campus 2004 Long Range Development Plan (2004 LRDP) Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No ; 2004 LRDP EIR), which was certified by The Regents in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP on September 23, The 2004 LRDP EIR analyzed the overall projected effects of campus growth and facility development through the academic year , and identified measures to mitigate the significant adverse impacts associated with that growth. The Project is consistent with the 2004 LRDP land use designations, population projections, and objectives. The tiering of the environmental analysis for the Project allowed the Project Initial Study to rely on the 2004 LRDP EIR for: (1) a discussion of general background and setting information for environmental topic areas; (2) overall growth-related issues; (3) issues that were evaluated in sufficient detail in the 2004 LRDP EIR for which there is no significant new information or change in circumstances that would require further analysis; and (4) long-term cumulative impacts. The purpose of the tiered Project Initial Study was to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the Project with respect to the existing 2004 LRDP EIR analysis to determine what level of additional environmental review, if any, is appropriate.

2 CEQA Project Findings Page 2 The Initial Study analyzes the potential Project impacts in relation to the environmental analysis in the 2004 LRDP EIR with regard to the following topic areas: (1) aesthetics; (2) agriculture resources; (3) air quality; (4) biological resources; (5) cultural resources; (6) geology/soils; (7) hazards and hazardous materials; (8) hydrology/water quality; (9) land use/planning; (10) mineral resources; (11) noise; (12) population/housing; (13) public services; (14) recreation; (15) transportation/traffic; and (16) utilities/service systems. Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study, the Project may incrementally contribute to, but will not exceed, significant environmental impacts previously identified in the 2004 LRDP EIR. Mitigation measures reported in the Initial Study will be implemented to reduce these impacts to a level where no significant impact will occur. As a result, the campus prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration that reflects these conclusions. The Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the Office of Planning and Research s State Clearinghouse and circulated for a 30-day public review period beginning on January 21, 2005, and ending on February 22, 2005 (SCH No ). During that time, the document was reviewed by various state and local agencies, as well as by interested individuals and organizations. Two comment letters were received during public review from the following agencies: (1) San Diego County Archaeological Society and (2) City of San Diego, Development Services, Land Development Review Division. The San Diego County Archaeological Society s letter indicated that they concurred with the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration determination that the Project should have no impact on cultural resources and no mitigation would be required. The City of San Diego, Development Services, Land Development Review Division s letter recommended mitigation measures for the Project s impacts to transportation/traffic and local landfills. The University s response indicated that the project is consistent with the 2004 LRDP EIR for which significant unmitigated traffic/circulation impacts were identified and overriding findings were adopted. Tying project-specific development proposals on campus to specific traffic improvements is problematic and infeasible for many reasons, and was discussed in detail in the UCSD 2004 LRDP Program EIR (pages RTC-32 through 39). Furthermore, UCSD continues to operate one of the largest alternative transportation programs in the County of San Diego, which is set forth on page of the 2004 LRDP EIR and has, to date, provided right-of-way valued at more than one million dollars for planned transportation improvements. With regard to landfill capacity, UCSD actively promotes recycling programs on campus. While UCSD is not subject to the City s municipal code requirements, campus recycling programs should accomplish the same waste reduction goals as stated in the City s comment. In addition, UCSD implements a comprehensive waste prevention and recycling program into the design of its projects and UCSD s Green Building process includes a goal of diverting a minimum of 50 percent of the construction waste from the Miramar Landfill through recycling. After consideration, all comments were determined not to raise additional environmental issues that were not previously addressed in the Initial Study or the 2004 LRDP EIR. The letters received and the campus responses are included in the Final Initial Study.

3 CEQA Project Findings Page 3 B. Relation of the Project to the 2004 LRDP EIR The Project implements a portion of the 2004 LRDP. The 2004 LRDP EIR, a Program EIR prepared pursuant to Section of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections et seq.) and Section of the Public Resources Code, identified potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of 2004 LRDP development, and included mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of such development to the extent feasible. The Project is consistent with the campus development that was anticipated and evaluated in the 2004 LRDP EIR. All significant 2004 LRDP impacts were fully addressed in the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by The Regents in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP and are reaffirmed as part of these Project findings. All mitigation measures in the 2004 LRDP EIR relevant to the Project, as identified in the Project Initial Study, as well as all Project components described in the Initial Study, are included in the Approvals and are made conditions of the Project. C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts and Related Mitigation Measures The 2004 LRDP EIR recognizes significant and unavoidable impacts that could occur from the implementation of the 2004 LRDP, and all significant and unavoidable impacts are related to cumulative development. All feasible measures to avoid or substantially lessen the significant adverse project and cumulative impacts associated with growth and facility development are identified in the LRDP EIR. The Initial Study recognized no new significant and unavoidable adverse impacts and related mitigation measures, associated with the approval of the Project, that were not already identified in the 2004 LRDP EIR. In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study used a plan approach as a framework for its cumulative impact analysis that is based upon a summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document which is designed to evaluate regional or area-wide conditions (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15130(b)). The Project implements a portion of the 2004 LRDP, the planning document that identifies general types of campus development to support campus growth anticipated through The cumulative impact analysis for the Tiered Initial Study, therefore, is contained in the 2004 LRDP EIR, which discusses analysis of campus development projected in the 2004 LRDP and related cumulative development in the campus vicinity. All significant and unavoidable impacts that were analyzed in the 2004 LRDP EIR, including the impacts discussed below, were fully addressed by the Findings and Overriding Considerations adopted by The University in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP and certification of the 2004 LRDP EIR. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts resulting from the proposed Project in combination with growth allowed under the 2004 LRDP and growth anticipated in the region are discussed below. The University finds these significant and unavoidable adverse impacts are acceptable because the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts for the reasons set forth in Section II.E of these Findings. Associated 2004 LRDP EIR mitigation measures are identified and briefly discussed below. For a detailed description of these mitigation measures, please see the text in the Initial Study.

4 CEQA Project Findings Page 4 1. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts Due to PM 10 Emissions Construction of the Project would result in increased PM 10 emissions that could contribute to cumulatively significant impacts when taken into consideration with development allowed under the 2004 LRDP and other development projects in the region. The potential emissions are within the emission projections contained in the 2004 LRDP EIR. Previously adopted LRDP Mitigation Measures Air-CA (compliance with UC Policy for Green Building Design and Clean Energy Standards, and expansion of on-site housing and retail services to reduce the need for off-site travel) and Air-CB (construction measures to reduce PM 10 air pollutant emissions) are continuing to be implemented and will aid in reducing the potential impact to air quality identified in the 2004 LRDP EIR. Because these mitigation measures may not reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level, this cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. This impact was adequately addressed in the Findings and Overriding Considerations adopted by The University in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP and certification of the 2004 LRDP EIR. The University finds the remaining significant and unavoidable impact continues to be acceptable because the benefits of the Project outweigh this and the Project s other unavoidable environmental impacts for the reasons set forth in Section II.E of these Findings. 2. Cumulative Traffic Impacts on Certain Off-Campus Roadways The Project would result in increased traffic that could contribute to cumulatively significant impacts on off-campus roadways when taken into consideration with development allowed under the 2004 LRDP and other development in the region. The potential traffic impacts are within the scope of impacts analyzed in the 2004 LRDP EIR. Previously adopted LRDP mitigation measure Tra-1C (requiring the campus to evaluate circulation needs, integrate alternative transportation features into site planning, and implement and expand its alternative transportation program) is continuing to be implemented and will aid in reducing the potential impacts to off-campus roadways identified in the 2004 LRDP EIR. Because this mitigation measure may not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level, this cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. These impacts were adequately addressed in the Findings and Overriding Considerations adopted by The University in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP and certification of the 2004 LRDP EIR. The University finds that the remaining significant and unavoidable impacts continue to be acceptable because the benefits of the Project outweigh this and the Project s other unavoidable environmental impacts for the reasons set forth in Section II.E of these Findings. D. Potentially Significant Impacts that would be Mitigated to Less-Than- Significant Levels The following discusses potentially significant impacts of the proposed Project identified in the Tiered Initial Study. Implementation of the 2004 LRDP EIR mitigation measures identified in the Tiered Initial Study would reduce all potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance.

5 CEQA Project Findings Page 5 Aesthetics 1. The proposed Project would alter the visual character of the site by removing the existing one-story temporary structures, parking, and landscaping and construction of the new Music Building. Mitigation Measure Aes-1A(i) from Section of the 2004 LRDP EIR requires that the project design undergo review and approval by the UCSD Design Review Board (DRB). Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant visual character impacts to a less than significant level (see pages 29 through 30 of the Initial Study). 2. The proposed Music Building would feature exterior lighting and thus, would increase the occurrence of night lighting in the area. Mitigation Measure Aes-2B from Section of the 2004 LRDP EIR requires that lighting plans be reviewed during the project planning process to ensure that the spillover light onto adjacent residential land uses and the UCSD Park areas would be limited by focusing additional light only on the area to be illuminated. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant night lighting impacts to a less than significant level (see pages 30through 31 of the Initial Study). Biological Resources 3. Potentially significant impacts to raptors would occur if project construction requires removal of on-site ornamental eucalyptus trees occupied by an active nest or where removal occurs during the nesting season (generally February through July) within 500 feet of an active nest. Mitigation Measure Bio-2D from Section of the 2004 LRDP EIR requires a qualified biologist perform preconstruction surveys for raptor nests, and construction activities within 500 feet of active nests shall cease during the breeding season until a qualified biologist determines that the nest is no longer active. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts to raptors to a less than significant level (see page39 of the Initial Study).

6 CEQA Project Findings Page 6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4. The proposed Project location is in the historic center of Camp Matthews (listed on DTSC s Cortese list in January 2004) where barracks, dining, and other administrative activities occurred; therefore construction in this area could result in a potentially significant impact associated with hazardous materials. Mitigation Measure Haz-4A from Section requires that any past contamination, underground storage tanks (USTs), aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), or other potentially contaminated area be identified by EH&S during a consultation during project planning. EH&S Environmental Affairs is required to consider the cases on file at the County Department of Environmental Health (DEH). If it is determined that contamination has potential to exist on a project site, Haz-4B shall be implemented. Mitigation Measure Haz-4B from Section of the 2004 LRDP EIR requires that actions be taken to remove and/or remediate contamination prior to any construction, pursuant to applicable regulations, if contamination exists on a proposed project site and if it poses a risk to human health or the environment. The removal and remediation of the contamination must be done by appropriate measures such as natural attenuation, active remediation, and engineering controls. Assessment and remediation activities shall incorporate the various conditions listed in the IS/MND. Mitigation Measure Haz-4C from Section requires that all work be discontinued until appropriate health and safety procedures are implemented, in the event that USTs, not identified in consultation with EH&S Environmental Affairs, or undocumented areas of contamination are encountered during construction or redevelopment activities. Either the DEH or the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), depending on the nature of the contamination, must be notified regarding the contamination. Each agency and program within the respective agency has its own mechanism for initiating an investigation. The appropriate program (e.g., the DEH Local Oversight Program for tank release, cases, the DEH Voluntary Assistance Program for non-tank release cases, the RWQCB for non-tank cases involving groundwater contamination) will be selected based on the nature of the contamination identified. The contamination remediation and removal activities will be conducted in accordance with pertinent regulatory guidelines, under the oversight of the appropriate regulatory agency. Implementation of the above mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts from known and unknown sources of hazardous materials to a less than significant level (see pages 48 through 49 of the Initial Study). Hydrology and Water Quality 5. The proposed Project would potentially impact water quality due to the removal of existing paving and structures, and construction of the new facility and parking, which would incrementally increase overall runoff from the site.

7 CEQA Project Findings Page 7 Mitigation Measure Hyd-2B from Section in the 2004 LRDP EIR requires the following: All new storm drain inlets and catch basins within the project site shall be stenciled with prohibitive language and/or graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. Outdoor areas for storage of materials that may contribute pollutants to the storm water conveyance system shall be covered and protected by secondary containment. All trash container areas shall be enclosed to prevent off-site transport of trash and drainage shall be directed to the sanitary sewer system or the containers shall be covered to prevent exposure of trash to precipitation. Pollutants of concern shall be minimized through the incorporation of design measures best suited to maximize the reduction of pollutant loadings in that runoff. At least one treatment control is required for new parking areas or structures, or other new uses identified by FD&C or Physical Planning to have potential to generate substantial pollutants. Treatment controls include detention basins, infiltration basins, wet ponds or wetlands, drainage inserts, filtration, and hydrodynamic separator systems. Treatment controls shall incorporate volumetric or flow-based treatment control design standards to mitigate (infiltrate, filter, or treat) storm water runoff, as appropriate. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts to water quality to a less than significant level (see pages 52 through 54 of the Initial Study). Noise 6. The proposed Project would result in potential noise impacts due to construction that would generate noise that could expose nearby receptors to elevated noise levels that may disrupt communication and routine activities. Mitigation Measure Noi-2A from Section of the 2004 LRDP EIR requires UCSD to implement measures to minimize short-term noise levels caused by construction activities. Measures to reduce construction/demolition noise to the maximum extent feasible shall be included in contractor specifications and shall include, but not be limited to, the various measures listed in the IS/MND. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce these potentially significant impacts from noise to a less than significant level (see pages 60 through 61 of the Initial Study).

8 CEQA Project Findings Page 8 Transportation/Traffic 7. As a result of temporary construction, the proposed Project has the potential to result in traffic impacts to various road segments within the proposed Project vicinity. Mitigation Measure Tra-1B from Section of the 2004 LRDP EIR requires the contractor to provide a traffic control plan for review and approval by UCSD, in the event that construction requires a lane or roadway closure, or could otherwise substantially interfere with campus traffic circulation. The traffic control plan shall ensure the various measures listed in the IS/MND. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce these potentially significant impacts to transportation/traffic to a less than significant level (see page 69 in the Initial Study). E. Statement of Overriding Considerations The University has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining that the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects. The Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by The University in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP are equally relevant to, and are adopted as a part of, this Project. All cumulative significant and unavoidable impacts were previously addressed in the Findings and Overriding Considerations adopted by The University in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP and certification of the 2004 LRDP EIR. These Findings and Overriding Considerations have been re-evaluated and are found to be current and valid Findings and Overriding Considerations today. Despite the occurrence of significant and unavoidable cumulative adverse environmental effects in the areas of criteria air pollutants and traffic, the additional reasons for the approval of the Project are as follows: 1. The Project would construct a facility that integrates with the physical characteristics of the West Campus University Center neighborhood area and surroundings. 2. The Project would create a building that symbolizes the importance of and dedication to developing music and the arts. 3. The Project would upgrade music facilities to satisfy the Department s standards and accommodate future and existing needs of students and faculty. for the site. 4. The Project would implement the land use plans of the 2004 LRDP EIR F. Additional Findings 1. These Findings incorporate by reference in their entirety the text of the Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project, the 2004 LRDP,

9 CEQA Project Findings Page 9 the 2004 LRDP EIR, and the Findings and Overriding Considerations adopted by The Regents in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP. Without limitation, this incorporation is intended to elaborate on the scope and nature of Project and cumulative development impacts, related mitigation measures, and the basis for determining the significance of such impacts. 2. CEQA requires the Lead Agency approving a project to adopt a monitoring program for changes to the Project that it adopts or makes a condition of Project approval in order to ensure compliance during Project implementation. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program which accompanies the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared to serve this purpose, and is hereby adopted by The Regents. To the extent this Project incorporates relevant 2004 LRDP EIR mitigation measures previously adopted by The Regents, implementation of these mitigation measures by this Project will be monitored pursuant to the existing 2004 LRDP EIR monitoring program previously adopted by The Regents in connection with its approval of the 2004 LRDP EIR. 3. Various documents and other materials constitute the record of proceedings upon which The Regents bases its findings and decisions contained herein. Most documents related to this Project and the custodian of the administrative record are located at the UCSD Physical Planning, Torrey Pines Center South, Suite 340, La Jolla, California G. Summary Based on the foregoing Findings and the information contained in the record, The Regents finds with respect to the Project: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Approval for the Project, which mitigate to a less than significant level or avoid the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project as identified in the Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. No significant effects would occur beyond those effects previously and adequately analyzed in the 2004 LRDP EIR. 2. There is no substantial evidence in the record that the Project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment that was not previously identified and adequately analyzed in the 2004 LRDP EIR. 3. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the University s independent judgment and analysis. 4. Any significant cumulative impacts to which the Project contributes and that are found to be unavoidable were fully analyzed in the 2004 LRDP EIR and are acceptable due to the factors described in the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section II.E, above. III. APPROVALS

10 CEQA Project Findings Page 10 The Regents hereby takes the following actions: A. Adopts the Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project as described in Section I, above. B. Approves, incorporates, and makes a condition of the Project all Project elements, relevant 2004 LRDP EIR mitigation measures, and the Project-specific monitoring program identified in the Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. Adopts the Findings in their entirety as set forth in Section II, above. D. Having approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration, independently reviewed and analyzed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Final Initial Study, conditioned the Project as described above, and adopted the Findings, The Regents hereby approves the design of the.