No. 8, with small portions of the eastern and southeastern parts of the City in Districts No. 2 and No. 3.
Wastewater is collected in Compton via an existing 143 mile long system of sewer lines maintained by the City Department of Public Works and Municipal Utilities’ Street Maintenance Division. Wastewater collected from the City is conveyed to the LACSD’s Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP), located at 24501 S Figueroa Street in the City of Carson. The JWPCP provides both primary and secondary treatment for approximately 260 million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD) and has a total permitted capacity of 400 MGD. Treated effluent is then discharged from JWPCP through an ocean outfall. 13
As discussed above, Project is an infill development that would connect to existing utility connections currently available to the site. Developing the Project site with 57 townhomes at a high density would increase City population by a negligible 0.1%. This increase is nominal and the development and future residents will be required to pay wastewater impact fees and use fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for wastewater facilities. The Project would connect to the existing wastewater line at the northern portion of the site, and would be required by the CBC to install low flow fixtures that conserve water.
Consequently, potential adverse impacts relative to wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant.
d) Would the Project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less Than Significant Impact. Solid waste services in the City are provided through a contract with Republic Services. Solid waste and recycle loads are taken to Republic’s Compton Transfer Station for processing. From the transfer station, waste loads are loaded into transfer trailers and hauled to and disposed of at Sunshine Canyon Landfill in Sylmar.
14 Other disposal facilities include the
Southeast Resource Recovery Facility in Long Beach for recycling, and the El Sobrante Landfill in Corona and Puente Hills Landfill in Industry.
Developing the Project site with 57 townhomes at a high density would increase City population by a negligible 0.1%. This increase is nominal and the development and future residents will be required to pay solid waste collection fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for solid waste services and facilities. Consequently, the Project impacts relative to solid waste generation and capacity and solid waste reduction goals would be less than significant. **
13 Compton Artesia Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, October 2019. 14 Waste Evaluation and Enforcement Branch Staff Report. Summary of the City of Compton’s Compliance Review and Consideration of the Issuance Compliance Order CO 018-002”; accessed July 31, 2020.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
e) Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. Recycling services are part of the City’s solid waste program. Typical services include collection of recyclables such as glass, metals and plastic. The City also provides contact information for e-waste and household hazardous waste. Future Project residents would be required to participate in recycling as part of the refuse collection program. Although the Project would increase City population by 0.1%, this increase is nominal and future residents would be required to pay refuse collection fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for wastewater services. Consequently, Project impacts relative to compliance with solid waste regulations would be less than significant.
6.19.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse utilities and service systems impacts, as increased demand would be offset by payment of applicable impact fees and user fee. The cumulative projects identified in Section 2.9.2 of this Initial Study would be subject to similar analysis, and applicable impact and user fees. Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts to utilities and service systems.
6.19.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.20 WILDFIRE
WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
6.20.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Compton is nearly entirely built out, and is near completely urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City but does address the potential for stationary fires. Service by the Compton Fire Department and adequate water supply and flow are discussed by the General Plan as local tools to address potential fires.
As discussed in Section 6.9.f of this Initial Study, entrance to the Project would be gated, and gates would be fit with Knox Box or similar apparatus per County Fire Department standards to allow for emergency vehicles to quickly access the site. In addition, a fire apparatus turnaround would be provided, consistent with the 2019 Fire Code, as shown previously in Figure 13, Project Emergency Access Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Features. The Project would provide adequate emergency access, and the Project would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. Compton is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City. The Project would redevelop the site with new residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. Consequently, the Project would not exacerbate wildfire risks. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact. As discussed above, Compton is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City.
The Project would redevelop the site with new residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. The Project would be located on an infill site surrounded by urban development. Consequently, the Project would not require installation or maintenance of roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities that could exacerbate fire risk. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. As discussed above, Compton is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City.
The Project would redevelop the site with new residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. The Project would be located on an infill site surrounded by urban development. process grading plan review and permit issuance. In addition, Project construction must comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report. Consequently, the Project is not expected to expose people or structures to significant risks related to flooding or landslides.
6.20.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse impacts relative to wildfire. Neither the Project or cumulative projects listed in Section 2.9.2. of this Initial Study are within a designated wildfire area.
Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts related to wildfire risks.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.20.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts related to wildfire. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Does the Project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or an
endangered threatened species, or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X
b) Does the Project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
(‘Cumulatively considerable’ means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
c) Does the Project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
a) Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less Than Significant. The Project would not have substantial impacts on special status species, stream habitat, and wildlife dispersal and migration. Furthermore, the Project would not affect the local, regional, or national populations or ranges of any plant or animal species and would not threaten any plant communities.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
There is potential for inadvertent finds of archaeological and Native American archeological resources during project grading. Potential impacts to Native American resources would be mitigated by Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2 and TRC-1. The Project’s Mandatory Finding of Significance relative to degrading the quality of the environment would be less significant.
b) Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Less Than Significant. The Project would result in potential significant impacts relative to air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and emergency access. These impacts are largely site specific. Mitigation measures are added to the Project to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels.
Consequently, cumulative impacts relative to these environmental areas would also be less than significant. Consequently, the Project’s Mandatory Finding of Significance relative to contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
c) Does the Project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant. The Project could result in potential site specific significant impacts relative to air quality, hazards and hazardous materials, including emergency access, noise and traffic and transportation. Mitigation measures AQ1, AQ-2, HAZ-1, HAZ-2, NOI-1, NOI-2, NOI-3, NOI-4, and TR-1 are added to the Project to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. Consequently, the Project’s Mandatory Finding of Significance relative to a substantial adverse effect on human beings would be less than significant.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 7.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS
7.1 PREPARATION – ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
o Joann Lombardo, Comprehensive Planning Services
7.2 PREPARATION - AIR QUALITY / GHG ANALYSIS
o Bryan Estrada, AICP, RK Engineering Group, Inc.
o Darshan Shivaiah, M.S., RK Engineering Group, Inc.
7.3 PREPARATION - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
o Mohammad “Alex” Tabrizi, P.E., T.E., RK Engineering Group, Inc. o Elias Bandek, E.I.T., RK Engineering Group, Inc.
o Michael Torres, E.I.T., RK Engineering Group, Inc.
7.4 PREPARATION - NOISE ANALYSIS
o Bryan Estrada, AICP, RK Engineering Group, Inc.
o Darshan Shivaiah, M.S., RK Engineering Group, Inc.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 8.0 – LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
The following lists acronyms and technical abbreviations that appear in this document by alphabetical order:
AB – Assembly Bill
ADT – Average Daily Trips
AQMP - Air Quality Management Plan
C02e – Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
CAL REG - California Register of Historical Resources CARB - California Air Resources Board
CBC – California Building Codes
CCR - California Code of Regulations
CDFW - California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
CFCs – Chlorofluorocarbons
CGC - California Government Code
CH4 – Methane
CO - Carbon Monoxide
CO2 – Carbon Dioxide
CVC - California Vehicle Code
CWUD - Compton Water Utility District
dB – Decibels
dBA – Average (A-weighted) Decibels
DPM - Diesel Particulate Matter
DTSC – California Department of Toxic Substances Control EIR - Environmental Impact Report
FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency
GHG - Greenhouse Gas Emissions
HERO - Human and Ecological Risk Office
H20 – Water
HFCs – Hydrofluorocarbons
ITE - Institute of Traffic Engineers
JWPCP - Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
LACSD - Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
lbs – Pounds
Ldn – Quiet Time Noise Measurement
LEQ – Noise Energy Level Measurement
LID - Preliminary Low Impact Development
LOS – Level of Service
LST – Localized Significance Threshold
LUST – Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MBTA - Migratory Bird Treaty Act
mgd – Millions of gallons per day
MLD - Most Likely Descendant
Mph – Miles per Hour
MSL – Mean Sea Level
Mtons – Metric Tons
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
MWD - Metropolitan Water District of Southern California NAHC - Native American Heritage Commission
NOx - Nitrogen Oxide
NPDES - National Pollution Discharge Elimination System OCPs - Organochlorine Pesticides
PFCs – Perfluorocarbons
PM-10 - Respirable 10-Micron Diameter Particulate Matter PM-2.5 - Respirable 2.5-Micron Diameter Particulate Matter REC - Recognized Environmental Condition
RMS – Root Mean Square Vibration Velocity
ROG - Reactive Organic Gases
RSL - Regional Screening Levels
RTP/SCS - Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy RV- Recreational Vehicle
SB – Senate Bill
SCAB - South Coast Air Basin
SCAG - Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD – South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC - South Central Coastal Information Center
SCS - Sustainable Communities Strategy
SF6 - Sulfur Hexafluoride
SLF - Sacred Lands File
Sox - Oxides of Sulfur
STC – Sound Transmission Class
SWPPP - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TAC - Toxic Air Contaminants
TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
tpd – Tons per Day
TTM - Tentative Tract Map
USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency V/C – Volume to Capacity
VdB – Vibration Decibels
VMT – Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC – Volatile Organic Compounds
WQMP - Water Quality Management Plan
March 8, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 83433 TO CREATE A 57
CONDOMINIUM UNITS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 250 NORTH
CENTRAL AVENUE
SUMMARY
Adoption of the attached subdivision resolution will create a private 57-unit condominium development for the property located at 250 North Central Avenue, Compton.
BACKGROUND
The applicant is proposing to redevelop a vacant lot owned by the Housing Successor Agency into a 57-unit attached condominium development.
The site was previously developed as a restaurant along with vehicle and boat storage.
Recently the site had been taken over by vagrants illegally using the former restaurant for living space. The building was demolished by the City in June of 2021.
On December 8, 2022, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Tentative Tract Map to the City Council and adopted Resolution 4030.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The proposed condominium Tentative Tract Map 83433 is needed in order to facilitate the creation of condominiums to allow the units to be sold individually. One master lot is proposed with airspace rights for 57 dwelling units.
The proposed Tentative Tract Map would also assist the City in complying with the 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment for the City of Compton of 1004 affordable units from 2021 to 2029. This project contributes three (3) affordable units to meet the City’s RHNA compliance. The State of California may fine the City of Compton up to $10,000 per month or a maximum of $100,000, if the City does not comply with the Affordable Housing Units production requirements.
Environmental Review:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), California Public Resources Code, Division 13 §21000 et seq., an Initial Study for the project was prepared by Parker Environmental Consultants on behalf of the City. The City of Compton, in its capacity as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed project requires a Mitigated Negative Declaration and mitigation-monitoring plan, as part of its environmental review.
6. Staff Report – Tentative Tract Map 83433
March 8, 2022,
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) is a determination that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment with the implementation of the mitigation measures.
The initial study/MND environmental document was posted in the Los Angeles County Clerk’s Office in Norwalk, posted on the Compton Community Development Department’s webpage and circulated to service providers, public agencies and adjacent property owners for a twenty (20) day public review period from November 5, 2021 to November 25, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact to the General Fund that will result from the approval of Tentative Tract Map 83433. This proposed resolution establishes a private 57-unit attached condominium development. No General Fund expenditure is proposed.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 83433:
A. The proposed subdivision for condominium purposes will substantially comply with the proposed General Plan land use designation and zoning classification of General Commercial and Limited Commercial.
The Project is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs of the General Plan. With respect to land use consistency between the Project and the City General Plan, the General Plan permits the residential use at the density proposed by the Project.
The Project is also consistent with the objectives and policies of the General Plan of the City. More specifically, the Project is consistent with the following portions of the General Plan:
Land Use Goal 5. The City of Compton will work to rehabilitate and conserve the existing neighborhoods.
The Project is consistent with Land Use Goal 5 because it converts a currently vacant and previously distressed site into single family attached residential and will complement the adjacent existing neighborhoods to the north, and east.
Housing Goal 2. Provide a variety of types and an adequate supply of housing to meet the existing and future needs of City residents.
The Project is consistent with Housing Goal 2 because it provides a small condominium based single-family housing product, including three dwelling units restricted to Low Income families.
Housing Goal 3. Eliminate conflicts between residential and nonresidential uses.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 3 because it replaces a former commercial use with an attached single-family product that provides a compatible transition between the adjacent existing single-family neighborhoods to the north, and east and industrial type uses to the south.
Staff Report – Tentative Tract Map 83433
March 8, 2022,
Housing Goal 4. Increase opportunities for homeownership.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 4 because it provides for sale single-family housing units at attainable pricing, with three units at rates affordable to low incomes.
Housing Goal 5. Promote equal opportunity for all residents to reside in the housing of their choice.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 5 because it provides for sale single-family housing units at attainable pricing, with three units at rates affordable to low incomes.
Housing Goal 7. Reduce overall housing costs through programs to reduce energy costs.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 7 because it provides energy efficient housing consistent with the Green Building Code, including solar, energy star– labeled products and appliances.
Air Quality Element Goal 3. Reduce emissions associated with vehicle miles traveled by providing a balance of jobs and housing.
The Project is consistent with Air Quality Element Goal 3 because it replaces a previous commercial use with residential, in close proximity to available bus transit.
Air Quality Element Goal 4. Reduce emissions associated with energy consumption.
The Project is consistent with Air Quality Element 4 because it provides energy efficient housing consistent with the Green Building Code, including solar, electrical vehicle charging outlets, energy star–labeled products and appliances.
Air Quality Element Goal 5. Reduce air pollution emissions and impacts through site planning and building design.
The Project is consistent with Air Quality Element 5 because it is an infill development and provides energy efficient housing consistent with the Green Building Code.
The project conforms to the State Subdivision Map Act and the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act ("SHMA") of 1999 and Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code.
As set forth in detail below, the Project conforms to the Subdivision Map Act (Cal. Gov.
Code 66410 et seq.).
The Project conforms to the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act ("SHMA") of 1999.
The Newport – Inglewood Fault Zone is the only active fault zone that lies within the City of Compton. The fault zone is runs through the southwest corner of Compton, and at its closest is 2 miles southwest of the Project site. There are no designated AlquistPriolo Special Studies Zones found within the City. Furthermore, any seismic impacts Staff Report – Tentative Tract Map 83433
March 8, 2022,
would be mitigated by compliance with Building Codes. As required by the California Building Code (CBC), geotechnical and soils studies are required prior to Project grading. Project construction must then comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC.
The Project conforms to Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code because it has complied with all procedural requirements for Tentative Tract Map filing, as demonstrated in the recitals above.
B. The proposed subdivision for condominium purposes is located on a site that is physically suitable for residential development and will eliminate long term blighted property and provide greater housing opportunities.
The Project site is currently vacant, with portions of the site paved with asphalt or covered with concrete. Previously, the site contained a restaurant and vehicle storage yard. The building was demolished in June 2021. The Project will eliminate this long term blight.
The Project will provide greater housing opportunities. The Project consists of a 57 single-family, attached home community. The community will provide affordably priced homes in an area with convenient access to schools, parks, shopping and employment.
Target market for the community includes couples, families, and first time homebuyers.
Of the 57 houses, three will be designated for low income persons.
C. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
The site is physically suitable for the density proposed and is compatible with the single-family residential density existing in the surrounding vicinity. The Project proposes a density, 23 dwelling units per acre, below the maximum density allowed by zoning and provide three low-income units.
D. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
The MND identifies no significant impacts to any biological resource. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the City and the Project Site are largely urbanized. Since surrounding areas are fully urbanized, there are no species identified as endangered, or candidates for listing in the City. Special interest and sensitive species are located far away from the site in the Compton Creek area.
Staff Report – Tentative Tract Map 83433
March 8, 2022,
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Tentative Tract Map 83433 Case No. 2021-002.
ROBERT DELGADILLO, SENIOR PLANNER
PLANNING DIVISION
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPROVED FOR FORWARDING:
RONERICK D. SIMPSON
CITY MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. _________________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 83433 TO CREATE A 57
UNIT CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 250
NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE
WHEREAS, the Olson Company has made application for a Tentative Tract Map in accordance with Section 28 of the Compton Municipal Code a request to create a 57-unit condominium map for the certain real property situated in the City of Compton ("City"), legally described as follows:
APN’s 6143-011-902 and 6143-011-018; located at 250 N. Central Ave. Compton, California (the “Project Site”);
WHEREAS, an application for Tentative Tract Map 83433 (the "Project"), was filed by the project applicant, the Olson Company ("applicant"), with the City on April 8, 2021. The entitlement requests (collectively, “Entitlements”) include:
WHEREAS, the Tentative Tract Map must be processed in accordance with Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code ("CMC"), and must be approved subject to the findings required in Chapter 38 of the CMC and the Subdivision Map Act;
WHEREAS, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, "a lead agency shall prepare a proposed negative declaration or MND for a project subject to CEQA when the initial study identifies potentially significant effects, but: (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment."
The City has prepared the IS/MND 949 and Associated Mitigation Monitoring Program which was considered and adopted by the City’s Planning Commission on December 8, 2021, which found that on the basis of the whole record before it, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and the IS/MND reflects the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis, through its adoption of Planning Commission resolutions 4028 and 4030 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15074.
WHEREAS, all environmental documents were processed in accordance with CEQA; WHEREAS, the notice of intent along with the MND was posted with the Los Angeles County Clerk’s office in Norwalk, circulated for a 20 day public review period, mailed to abutting property owners and posted on the City’s website;
WHEREAS, referral, publication and written notice was provided in accordance with Sections 65090, and 65091 of the California Government Code prior to consideration of the request by the City Council;
WHEREAS, a public hearing upon said request for a Tentative Tract Map was held before the Planning Commission on December 8, 2021.
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2021 the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the MND, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and any comments provided thereon, and adopted Resolution No. 4030, which includes a recommendation that the City Council adopt MND No. 950, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and a recommendation for approval of Tentative Tract Map 83433 and;
WHEREAS, the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the CEQA determination is made are maintained in the Community Development Department located at City of Compton at 205 S. Willowbrook Avenue; WHEREAS, evidence was heard from all persons interested in effecting said Tentative Tract Map and all persons protesting same;
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
WHEREAS, at the public hearing of January 11, 2021, the City Council, adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 950 made appropriate environmental findings, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project Entitlements, including Tentative Tract Map No. 83433.
WHEREAS, a public hearing on said request to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 83433 was held before the City Council on January 11, 2021;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered all the information presented pertaining to Tentative Tract Map No. 83433; and
WHEREAS, the City Council being fully informed,
F I N D S
1. The proposed subdivision for condominium purposes will substantially comply with the proposed General Plan land use designation and zoning classification of General Commercial and Limited Commercial.
The Project is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs of the General Plan. With respect to land use consistency between the Project and the City General Plan, the General Plan permits the residential use at the density proposed by the Project.
The Project is also consistent with the objectives and policies of the General Plan of the City. More specifically, the Project is consistent with the following portions of the General Plan:
Land Use Goal 5. The City of Compton will work to rehabilitate and conserve the existing neighborhoods.
The Project is consistent with Land Use Goal 5 because it converts a currently vacant and previously distressed site into single family attached residential and will complement the adjacent existing neighborhoods to the north, and east.
Housing Goal 2. Provide a variety of types and an adequate supply of housing to meet the existing and future needs of City residents.
The Project is consistent with Housing Goal 2 because it provides a small condominium based single-family housing product, including three dwelling units restricted to Low Income families.
Housing Goal 3. Eliminate conflicts between residential and nonresidential uses.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 3 because it replaces a former commercial use with an attached single-family product that provides a compatible transition between the adjacent existing single-family neighborhoods to the north, and east and industrial type uses to the south.
Housing Goal 4. Increase opportunities for homeownership.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 4 because it provides for sale singlefamily housing units at attainable pricing, with three units at rates affordable to low incomes.
Housing Goal 5. Promote equal opportunity for all residents to reside in the housing of their choice.
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 5 because it provides for sale singlefamily housing units at attainable pricing, with three units at rates affordable to low incomes.
Housing Goal 7. Reduce overall housing costs through programs to reduce energy costs.
The Project is consistent with Housing Element Goal 7 because it provides energy efficient housing consistent with the Green Building Code, including solar, energy star– labeled products and appliances.
Air Quality Element Goal 3. Reduce emissions associated with vehicle miles traveled by providing a balance of jobs and housing.
The Project is consistent with Air Quality Element Goal 3 because it replaces a previous commercial use with residential, in close proximity to available bus transit.
Air Quality Element Goal 4. Reduce emissions associated with energy consumption.
The Project is consistent with Air Quality Element 4 because it provides energy efficient housing consistent with the Green Building Code, including solar, electrical vehicle charging outlets, energy star–labeled products and appliances.
Air Quality Element Goal 5. Reduce air pollution emissions and impacts through site planning and building design.
The Project is consistent with Air Quality Element 5 because it is an infill development and provides energy efficient housing consistent with the Green Building Code.
The project conforms to the State Subdivision Map Act and the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act ("SHMA") of 1999 and Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code.
As set forth in detail below, the Project conforms to the Subdivision Map Act (Cal. Gov.
Code 66410 et seq.).
The Project conforms to the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act ("SHMA") of 1999. The Newport – Inglewood Fault Zone is the only active fault zone that lies within the City of Compton. The fault zone is runs through the southwest corner of Compton, and at its closest is 2 miles southwest of the Project site. There are no designated Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones found within the City. Furthermore, any seismic impacts would be mitigated by compliance with Building Codes. As required by the California Building Code (CBC), geotechnical and soils studies are required prior to Project grading. Project construction must then comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC.
The Project conforms to Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code because it has complied with all procedural requirements for Tentative Tract Map filing, as demonstrated in the recitals above.
2. The proposed subdivision for condominium purposes is located on a site that is physically suitable for residential development and will eliminate long term blighted property and provide greater housing opportunities.
The Project site is currently vacant, with portions of the site paved with asphalt or covered with concrete. Previously, the site contained a restaurant and vehicle storage yard. The building was demolished in June 2021. The Project will eliminate this long term blight.
The Project will provide greater housing opportunities. The Project consists of a 57 single-family, attached home community. The community will provide affordably priced homes in an area with convenient access to schools, parks, shopping and employment. Target market for the community includes couples, families, and first time homebuyers. Of the 57 houses, three will be designated for low income persons.
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
The site is physically suitable for the density proposed and is compatible with the single-family residential density existing in the surrounding vicinity. The Project proposes a density, 23 dwelling units per acre, below the maximum density allowed by zoning and provide three low-income units.
4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
The MND identifies no significant impacts to any biological resource. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the City and the Project Site are largely urbanized. Since surrounding areas are fully urbanized, there are no species identified as endangered, or candidates for listing in the City. Special interest and sensitive species are located far away from the site in the Compton Creek area.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COMPTON RESOLVES:
Section 1. That the City Council approves Tentative Tract Map No. 83433, a request to create a 57 unit condominium map for the property located at 250 N. Central Ave, Compton, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the proposed development shall be contingent on the adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 950, approval and adoption of General Plan Amendment Case No. 2021- 001, approval, approval and recordation of Tract Map No. 83433, approval of Conditional Use Permits Case No. 2021-008, Change of Zone case No. 2021-003.
2. That in accordance with Section 28.4.23 of the Compton Municipal Code, fee in lieu of dedication of land, shall be allocated to the Department of Parks and Recreation in an amount equal to 9.7% of the fair market value of the land comprising the subdivision. That said fees shall be payable prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy for the units.
3. That the applicant and/or developer shall file with the City all deposits and bonds as the City Engineer and/or City Building Official determines as necessary to comply with Section 28-11 of the Compton Municipal Code.
4. That any required CC&R's for the subject subdivision shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney prior to approval of the Final Map.
5. That each unit shall have separate utility service individually metered (i.e. electric, water, gas, etc.).
That the applicant and/or developer shall replace and/or repair sidewalks, curbs, gutters or parkways located adjacent to the subject site along Central Ave. as required and directed by the Public Works Director.
6. That grading, drainage, and hydrology plans, as required by Public Works Department, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to submittal of Final Map.
7. That a plan for providing water service to the subdivision, including all necessary easements and meter locations, shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works and Water Departments concurrent with submission of the Final Map. Water lines, including any required upgrades shall be built to City standards.
8. That a plan for providing sewer service to the subdivision including all necessary easements and sewer line upgrades, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and that the sewer lines, including upgrades shall be built to City standards.
9. The elevations of all building pad(s) shall be above the flood level per the current L.A. CO.
Flood Control Districts requirements [LACFCD]. Submit Hydrology/Hydraulics Analysis in compliance with the L.A.C.F.C.D.’s requirements for review/approval by the City.
10. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable state or federal laws and regulations including but not limited to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPDES [LID, SUSMP, etc] requirements.
RESOLUTION NO. __________________
11. That prior to Final Map approval, the final site and circulation plan must be reviewed and approved by the City of Compton Fire Department to ensure the development conforms to the following but not limited to: fire hydrants, fire lanes, development access point, etc.
12. That the number, spacing, and location of all required fire hydrants shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire and Water Departments
13. That Tentative Parcel Map No. 83807 shall expire 24 months after City Council approval unless a Final Map is approved and recorded, except as provided under the provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6 unless extended an additional 24 months as provided for in SB 9. The subdivision proposed by Tentative Parcel Map No.83433 shall not be effective until such time that a final map is recorded.
14. That preparation and recordation of the Final Map shall meet all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and Chapter 28 inclusive of the Compton Municipal Code.
15. That the Final Map shall be approved by City Council and recorded prior to issuance of a Building permits excluding all model units. That model building and associated utilities install can occur prior to final map recordation.
16. That a copy of the Final Map and copies of all improvement plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public Works Department for inclusion in project files prior to approval of the Final Map by the City Engineer.
17. If an archaeological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 50 feet of the find must halt and a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, additional work such as data recovery excavation may be warranted.
The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site excavation activities are completed, or sooner if the archaeologist indicates that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. During monitoring, the archaeologist shall complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. Following completion of monitoring, the archaeologist shall prepare a summary memorandum of finds, their significance under CEQA and their disposition. (*Note: The California Historical Resources Information System contains a listing of qualified archaeologists at www.chrisinfo.org.)
18. The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground-disturbing activities.
If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the county coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.
19. The Project shall locate HVAC equipment behind a noise screening wall and/or shielded from line of sight of any adjacent residential property.
20. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, install stop sign, stop bar and stop legend for outbound traffic at the 151st Street driveway.
21. The limited use area (area where a clear line of sight is maintained by not installing tall landscaping over 30 inches high or monumentation, etc.) shall be used for the purpose of prohibiting or clearing obstructions to maintain adequate sight distance along Central Avenue. Limited use area to be kept clear of all obstructions over 30 inches high, including vegetation. No trees, walls, or any obstructions shall be allowed in the limited use area.
22. If potential Native American resources are uncovered during grading, the applicant shall be required to halt work within 50 feet of the find, inform the Director of Community Development or his/her designee immediately and retain a qualified professional archaeologist and an experienced and certified Native American monitor of Gabrieleño heritage to examine the material to determine whether it is a “unique cultural resource” as defined in Section 21083.2 (g) of the State CEQA Statues. If this determination is positive, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the archaeologist and Native American monitor. Work may continue outside the area of the find. However, no further work shall occur in theimmediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning same filed with the County, a designated RESOLUTION NO. _____________
23. repository as appropriate and made available to interested representatives of Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area.
24. Prior to building permit issuance, the developer shall ensure that the design of the buildings shall reduce the number of reflective surfaces used in the construction to minimize new sources of glare. Exterior building materials shall use earth tone colors with low reflectance. Any bare metallic surfaces found on infrastructures such as pipes and poles shall be painted to minimize reflectance and glare.
25. Construction shall occur during the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM.
26. Stationary construction noise sources such as generators or pumps should be located as far as feasibly possible from any existing adjacent residential units, as feasible.
27. Construction staging areas should be located as far as feasibly possible from any adjacent sensitive land uses as feasible.
28. During construction, the contactor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices.
29. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging
30. Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than track equipment), to the maximum extent feasible
31. Prior to any lane closure or detour, the developer shall submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan per the California M.U.T.C.D. for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, signing, truck routes per the City of Compton Approved Truck Route Map (Figure C-4 of the General Plan Visions 2010), and construction hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday per the Municipal Code section 17-12.22 Section 7-12. 22 – Construction or Repairing of Buildings, Pile Drivers, Hoists, Steam Shovels of the City of Compton Municipal Code.
32. Approximately six-feet of red‐curb shall be painted on both sides of the driveways and Section 3B.19 of Section 405.1 of the Highway Design Manual standards shall be applied.
33. That construction and property development shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, County, Local Codes, including but not limited to the Compton Municipal Codes, Building Codes, Fire Codes, Housing Codes, Zoning Codes, etc.
34. That a copy of these conditions of approval shall be attached to the plan-check set of plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check as a detail sheet.
35. That the applicant or property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the property in accordance with all applicable local ordinances.
36. If required by the Fire Department, a California licensed Professional Engineer must prepare a water pressure analysis for the project and shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Public Works/Municipal Utilities Department.
37. Prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the applicant and/or developer must implement all Fire Department requirements, which may include, but are not limited to, emergency access, parking prohibitions, fire sprinklers, on-site fire hydrants, fire escapes, fire alarms etc.
38. That all emergency and fire access points and fire lanes shall be maintained free of obstructions at all times.
39. That the applicant, property manager/HOA, or other responsible party shall be required to implement graffiti removal within three (3) days of notification by the City.
40. That the interior and exterior of the property shall be maintained free of trash and debris, and that suitable trash bins shall be maintained on site throughout the construction period.
41. That all conditions of this approval shall be recorded so that future owners/operators will be informed of rights and restrictions placed on the property while this approval is in force.
42. That the residents of each unit shall use their garage for onsite resident parking and shall not parking in the driveway. The onsite garage of each unit shall remain free at all times of any obstruction or materials preventing the parking of two full sized personal vehicles.
43. That failure, at any time, to exercise this use (development of 60 condominiums) for 24 consecutive months subsequent to the date of Final Map approval by the City Council, unless extended an additional 24 months as provided for in SB 9 shall render the Conditional Use Permit approval automatically null and void without benefit of public hearing or notice of action, unless extended by the Planning Commission prior to the date of expiration.
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
Section 2. The City Council adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 950, made appropriate environmental findings, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. The documents and other material that constitute the record on which this decision is based are located in Department of Community Development the and are in the custody of the Department of Community Development.
Section 3. Tentative Tract Map No. 83433, the request to create a condominium map for the property located at 250 N. Central Ave, Compton, is approved as of the date of this resolution, as set forth in Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in section
1. Section 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or place, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the final decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 5. That this resolution adopted hereby shall take immediate effect and be in full force after the date of its final passage and adoption by the City Council.
Section 6. That a copy of this Resolution shall be filed in the offices of the City Clerk, Building & Safety and Community Development Department (Planning).
Section 7. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution.
ADOPTED this _________ day of _______________, 2022.
________________________________
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF COMPTON
ATTEST:
___________________________________
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF COMPTON
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF COMPTON )
I, Alita Godwin, City Clerk of the City of Compton, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Compton, signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk at a regular meeting thereof held on the ___________ day of _______________, 2022.
That said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERSNOES: COUNCIL MEMBERSABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERSABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS- ___________________________________
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF COMPTON
EXHIBIT [A]
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 83433
N
E
ST
O
R
CENTRAL
COMPTON
BRAZIL
ARBUTUS
PALMER
150TH
149TH
A
L
B
E
RT
S
O
148TH
H
N
ILLFORD
SCHOOL
A
M
A
N
T
H
A
PALMER
HILLFO
RD
CITY OF COMPTON
F THIS MAP IS A PUBLIC RESOURCE OF GENERAL INFORMATION. THE CITY OF COMPTON MAKES
NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTY AS TO THE CONTENT, SEQUENCE, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE DATABASE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN.
THE READER SHOULD NOT RELY ON THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN FOR ANY REASON. THE CITY OF
COMPTON EXPLICITLY DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, INCLUDING,
WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE CITY OF COMPTON SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR:
1. ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED; OR
2. ANY DECISION MADE OR ACTION TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN BY READER IN RELIANCE UPON ANY INFORMATION OR DATA FURNISHED HEREUNDER.
AERIAL MAP
Legend
City Limits
parcels
General Plan Amendment Case No. 2021-002
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 2021-009
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 2021-010
Tentative Tract Map No. 83433 2021-002
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 949
250 N. Central Ave.
APN: 6143-011-902
Subject Site
MU
P
P
LR
MU
MU
LR
MU MU
MR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
MU
LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
MR
LR
MR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR LR LR
LR LR
LR
LR LR
LR LR LR LR LR LR LR
LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
MU
LR LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
MU
MU
MU
MU
LR
MU
LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR LR
MU MU
LR
MU MU MU MU MU MU MU MU
MU
MU
MU
MU
MU MU MU MU MU MU MU MU MU MU
MU MU
MU MU
MU
MU
MU
MU MU
LR
LR
LR
MU
MU
MU
MU LR
MU MU
MU
MU MU MU MU MU
MU
MU MU
MU
MU
MU
MU MU
MU MU
MU MU
MU
MU
MU MU
MU
MU
MU
LR
MU
MU
MU
LR
MU
MU
MU
LR
MU
MU
N
E
ST
O
R
CENTRAL
COMPTON
BRAZIL
ARBUTUS
PALMER
150TH
149TH
A
L
B
E
RT
S
O
148TH
H
N
ILLFORD
SCHOOL
PALMER
HILLFO
RD
CITY OF COMPTON
F THIS MAP IS A PUBLIC RESOURCE OF GENERAL INFORMATION. THE CITY OF COMPTON MAKES
NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTY AS TO THE CONTENT, SEQUENCE, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE DATABASE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN.
THE READER SHOULD NOT RELY ON THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN FOR ANY REASON. THE CITY OF
COMPTON EXPLICITLY DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, INCLUDING,
WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE CITY OF COMPTON SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR:
1. ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED; OR
2. ANY DECISION MADE OR ACTION TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN BY READER IN RELIANCE UPON ANY INFORMATION OR DATA FURNISHED HEREUNDER.
GENERAL PLAN MAP
Legend
City Limits
parcels
Low Density Residential <8.0 du/ac
Medium Density Residential 8.1-17.0 du/ac
High Density Residential 17.1-34.0 du/ac
General Commercial
Mixed Use
Industrial
Open Space/Parks
Public/Quasi-Public
Transportation
General Plan Amendment Case No. 2021-002
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 2021-009
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 2021-010
Tentative Tract Map No. 83433 2021-002
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 949
250 N. Central Ave.
APN: 6143-011-902
Subject Site MU
CL
RL
CL
CL
CL
RL
CL
CL CL
CL
RL
CL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
CL
RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL
CL
CL
CL CL
RL
RL
CL
RL RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
CL
RL
CL
RL
CL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL RL RL
RL RL
RL
RL RL
RL RL RL RL RL RL RL
RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
CL
RL
CL
RL
RL
CL
RL
RL
RL
RL
CL
RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL RL
CL CL
RL
CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL
CL
CL
CL
CL
CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL
CL
CL
CL CL CL
CL
CL
CL CL
CL
CL
CL
CL
RL
RL
RL
RL RL
RL
RL RL
RL
RL RL RL RL
RL
RL RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL RL
RL RL
RL
RL
RL RL
RL RL
RL
CL
CL RL
CL CL
RL
RM
RL
RL
CL
N
E
ST
O
R
CENTRAL
COMPTON
BRAZIL
ARBUTUS
PALMER
150TH
149TH
A
L
B
E
RT
S
O
148TH
H
N
ILLFORD
SCHOOL
PALMER
HILLFO
RD
CITY OF COMPTON
F THIS MAP IS A PUBLIC RESOURCE OF GENERAL INFORMATION. THE CITY OF COMPTON MAKES
NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTY AS TO THE CONTENT, SEQUENCE, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE DATABASE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN.
THE READER SHOULD NOT RELY ON THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN FOR ANY REASON. THE CITY OF
COMPTON EXPLICITLY DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, INCLUDING,
WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE CITY OF COMPTON SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR:
1. ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED; OR
2. ANY DECISION MADE OR ACTION TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN BY READER IN RELIANCE UPON ANY INFORMATION OR DATA FURNISHED HEREUNDER.
ZONING MAP
Legend
City Limits
parcels
RA - Residential Agriculture
RL - Low Density Residential
RM - Medium Density Residential
RH - High Density Residential
P - Parking
PRL - Parking/Low Density Residential
PRM - Parking/Medium Density Residential
PRH - Parking/High Density Residential
CL - Limited Commercial
CM - Commercial Manufacturing
ML - Limited Manufacturing
MH - Heavy Manufacturing
B - Buffer
LAC - Los Angeles County
UNZONED
General Plan Amendment Case No. 2021-002
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 2021-009
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 2021-010
Tentative Tract Map No. 83433 2021-002
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 949
250 N. Central Ave.
APN: 6143-011-902
Subject Site C-L
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
250 N. Central Avenue
Townhome Residential Project
Lead Agency:
City of Compton
Robert Delgadillo, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
205 S. Willowbrook Avenue
Compton, CA 90220
Phone: (310) 605-5526; Email: [email protected] Prepared by:
Comprehensive Planning Service
Contact: Joann Lombardo, Principal
(949)243-5274; Email: [email protected]
October 21, 2021
This page is intentionally blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................1 SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................2
1.1 INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED................................................................................................. 2
1.2 STATUTORY AUTHORITY..................................................................................................... 2
1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE.................................................................................... 3 SECTION 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION .........................................................................4
2.1 PROJECT TITLE........................................................................................................................ 4
2.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS ............................................................................. 4
2.3 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER..................................................................... 4
2.4 PROJECT LOCATION.............................................................................................................. 4
2.5 PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS............................................................... 6
2.6 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION......................................................................................... 6
2.7 ZONING...................................................................................................................................... 6
2.8 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT................................................................................................ 6
2.9 EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES............................................................. 11
2.10 OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED............................ 16
2.11 HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TRADITIONALLY AND
CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECT AREA REQUESTED CONSULTATION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.3.1? IF SO, HAS CONSULTATION BEGUN?............................................................................................................ 17 SECTION 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED............18 SECTION 4.0 – DETERMINATION: (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)...............................................................................................................................19 SECTION 5.0 – EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.............................20 SECTION 6.0 – ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...................................22
6.1 AESTHETICS........................................................................................................................... 22
6.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST SERVICES...................................................................... 25
6.3 AIR QUALITY.......................................................................................................................... 28
6.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................ 37
6.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES..................................................................................................... 41
6.6 ENERGY.................................................................................................................................... 45
6.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ........................................................................................................ 47
6.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS..................................................................................... 52
6.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS .................................................................. 56
6.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.............................................................................. 64 Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Page ii
6.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING............................................................................................... 69
6.12 MINERAL RESOURCES........................................................................................................ 73
6.13 NOISE....................................................................................................................................... 75
6.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING........................................................................................... 83
6.15 PUBLIC SERVICES................................................................................................................ 85
6.16 RECREATION.......................................................................................................................... 89
6.17 TRANSPORTATION............................................................................................................... 91
6.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES..................................................................................... 96
6.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.............................................................................. 99
6.20 WILDFIRE.............................................................................................................................. 103
6.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................ 106 SECTION 7.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS ............................................................................108
7.1 PREPARATION – ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT..................................................... 108
7.2 PREPARATION - AIR QUALITY / GHG ANALYSIS ................................................... 108
7.3 PREPARATION - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 108
7.4 PREPARATION - NOISE ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 108 SECTION 8.0 – LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS............................... 109
APPENDICES
A. Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Check and Consultation List, May 13, 2021.
B. AB52/SB18 Letters to the Gabrieleño-Tongva Tribe, Gabrieleño-Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, Gabrieleño/Tongva Nation, Gabrieleño/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh, April 30, 2021.
C. Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment, 250 North Central Avenue Compton, CA 90220, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., July 15, 2020; Additional Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 250 North Central Avenue Compton, CA 90220, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., September 22, 2020.
D. Workplan for LACFD-Directed Site Assessment, 250 North Central Avenue, Compton, California, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., August 13, 2021.
E. 149th and Central Residential Development Air Quality & Greenhouse Impact Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., June 25, 2021.
F. South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) Records Search, June 9, 2021.
G. “149th and Central Residential Development Noise Impact Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., September 16, 2021.
H. “Preliminary LID Plan: Tract No. 83433 (14904 S Central Compton Property), prepared by Advanced Civil Group, Inc., June 14, 2021.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Page iii
I. “149th and Central Residential Development Traffic Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., July 6, 2021.
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Project Regional Location Map............................................................ 5 Figure 2. Project Site Aerial Location ................................................................ 5 Figure 3. Project Conceptual Site Plan .............................................................. 7 Figure 4. Project Schematic Landscape Plan ...................................................... 7 Figure 5. Townhome Building Elevations ........................................................... 9 Figure 6. Townhome Buildings Color & Material Board......................................... 9 Figure 7. Project Site Photo Legend................................................................ 12 Figure 8. Project Site Photos (1-4) ................................................................. 13 Figure 9. Project Site Photos (5-8) ................................................................. 14 Figure 10. Project Site Photos (9-12).............................................................. 15 Figure 11. Aerial of Project Site and Surrounding Areas .................................... 16 Figure 12. Compton/Woodley Airport Noise Contours........................................ 61 Figure 13. Project Emergency Access Features................................................. 62 Figure 14. General Plan Land Use Map Existing Designations of Project Site and Surrounding Areas ....................................................................................... 70 Figure 15. Noise Monitoring Locations............................................................. 78
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Plan Summary .................................................................................. 8 Table 2: SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds.......................................... 29 Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Page iv
Table 3: Comparison of Project Construction Emissions and Daily Criteria Values . 31 Table 4: Comparison of Project Operational Emissions and Daily Criteria Values... 32 Table 5: Comparison of Project Construction and Operational Emissions to SCAQMD Localized Signficance Thresholds.................................................................... 33 Table 6: Construction Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................. 54 Table 7: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................. 54 Table 8: City of Compton Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines..................... 75 Table 9: City of Compton (County) Exterior Residential Noise Standards............. 76 Table 10: Daytime Noise Impact Analysis (dBA)............................................... 78 Table 11: Nighttime Noise Impact Analysis (dBA)............................................. 78 Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Initial Study assesses the potential environmental impacts of a proposal by The Olson Company to construct and operate the 250 N. Central Residential Project, which consists of a 57 single-family residential unit community, located at 205 S.
Willowbrook Avenue, Compton, CA 90220. This proposed Project includes the following applications through the City of Compton Community Development Department:
General Plan Amendment Case No. GPA 21-002
Conditional Use Permit 21-009
Conditional Use Permit 21-010
Tentative Tract Condominium Map 83433, Case No. 21-002 This Initial Study finds with the imposition of mitigation measures related to Cultural Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Tribal Cultural Resources and Mandatory Findings of Significance, all potentially significant impacts associated with the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels. Consequently, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared for the Project.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION
1.1 INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED
Following preliminary review of the proposed 250 N. Central Residential Project (Project), the City of Compton (City) has determined that the Project is subject to the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
This Initial Study addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects associated with the Project, as proposed.
1.2 STATUTORY AUTHORITY
This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000-21177) and pursuant to Section 15063 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR).
Consistent with the statutory authority, the purpose of this Initial Study is to provide the Lead Agency (i.e. the City) with information to determine if the proposed Project would have a significant environmental impact. Specifically, this Initial Study will:
Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of the Project; Provide the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration;
Enable the Applicant or City to modify the Project, mitigating adverse impacts, thereby enabling the Project to quality for a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration;
Provide documentation of the factual basis for the findings in a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration that the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
The environmental documentation, which is ultimately selected by the City of Compton in accordance with CEQA, is intended as an informational document undertaken to provide an environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions upon the Project. The resulting documentation is not, however, a policy document and its approval and/or certification neither presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of those agencies from whom permits and other discretionary approvals would be required.
The environmental documentation and supporting analysis is subject to a public review period. The proposed Project is not a project "of statewide, regional, or areawide significance" as prescribed in Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines because it does not meet the criteria for such projects. Furthermore, project implementation does not require any action by a State Agency (i.e., “responsible” or “trustee” Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
agency). Therefore, the document will not be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review and the review period is determined to be 20 days in accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines. Following review of any comments received, the City of Compton will consider these comments as a part of the Project’s environmental review and include them with the Initial Study documentation for consideration by the City of Compton in accordance with Section 15074(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.
1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
The information contained in this document is based, in part, on the following documents that include the Project site or provide information addressing the general project area or use:
City of Compton General Plan, December 1991 (General Plan). The General Plan is a policy document designed to provide long-range guidance for decision-making affecting the future character of Compton. It represents the official statement of the community’s physical development, as well as its economic, social, and environmental goals. The General Plan is comprised of the following nine elements: Land Use; Housing; Circulation; Conservation, Open Space and Recreation; Public Safety; Noise; Urban Design; Economic Development; and Urban Design. The General Plan was used throughout this Initial Study as the fundamental planning document governing development on the Project site.
City of Compton Housing Element 2014-2021, February 2020 (Housing Element). The Housing Element provides the identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and articulates the City’s official policies for the preservation, conservation, improvement, and production of housing within the City of Compton for the 2014-2021 planning period.
City of Compton Zoning Code. Chapter 30 of the City of Compton Municipal Code establishes the basic zoning regulations under which land is developed and utilized and by which the General Plan is systematically implemented. This includes allowable uses, building setback and height requirements, and other development standards.
The basic intent of the Zoning Code (Zoning Code) is to promote and protect the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of present and future citizens of the City.
California Building Code (CBC). The California Building Standards Code (Cal. Code Regs., Title 24) was established by the state of California, with an effective date of January 1, 2020. It incorporates all parts of the state building standards, including the Residential Code and Green Standards Code.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT TITLE
The 250 N. Central Residential Project Development Project
2.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Compton
205 S. Willowbrook Avenue
Compton, CA 90220
2.3 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Robert Delgadillo, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
205 S. Willowbrook Avenue
Compton, CA 90220
Phone: (310) 605-5526; Email: [email protected]
2.4 PROJECT LOCATION
Regionally, the Project site consists of approximately 2.55 acres located within the Los Angeles County, south of Interstate 105 (I-105), north of State Route 91 (SR91), west of Interstate 110 (I-110) and east of Interstate 710 (I-710) within the jurisdiction of the City of Compton. (Reference Figure 1, Project Regional Location Map.)
Locally, the Project site is addressed as 250 N. Central Avenue, Compton, California 90222. Assessor parcel numbers for the property are: 6143-011-903; 6143-011- 902; 6143-011-018. (Reference Figure 2, Project Site Aerial Location Map.) Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 1. Project Regional Location Map
(source: Google Maps)
Figure 2. Project Site Aerial Location
(source: Google Maps)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
2.5 PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS
The Olson Company
3010 Old Ranch Parkway, Suite 100
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Contact: Ben Johnson
Director of Development
Cell: (562) 357-5316
Office: (562) 370-2203
Email: [email protected]
2.6 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Current General Plan Land Use Map designation is Mixed Use.
2.7 ZONING
Current Zoning Map designation is Limited Commercial.
2.8 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
2.8.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Project is being developed on a site designated by the City of Compton as blighted. This designation reflects previous contamination of the site, discussed in Section 6.9 of this Initial Study, and an abandoned structure that, although recently demolished by the City, had become a site for graffiti and loitering. The site was purchased by the City’s former redevelopment agency in 2008. It has been approved to transfer to the City’s Housing Authority and for the sale to a developer for the construction of a mixed-income residential community.
Consistent with City policy for providing high-quality, accessible housing to allow improved choices for the community, the City selected The Olson Company as the preferred developer. As proposed by The Olson Company (Applicant), the community would provide affordably priced homes in an area with convenient access to schools, parks, shopping and employment. Target market for the community includes couples, families, and first time homebuyers. Of the proposed 57 townhomes, 10 will be offered at rates affordable to qualified low income households subject to the terms of the Applicant’s purchase and sale agreement for site with the City.
2.8.2 SITE PLAN
The 250 N. Central Townhome Project would develop the 2.55-acre site into a 57 single-family unit, attached townhome community. Density of the Project would be
22.4 dwelling units per acre.
The townhomes are laid out in ten buildings, eight of which are 6-plexes (containing 6 units), one which is a 5-plex (containing 5 units), and one which is a 4-plex (containing 4 units). All of the buildings are accessed from Central Avenue via a gated Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
entrance enhanced by decorative paving and landscaping. Primary circulation within the community is from a 21-foot wide Private Drive “A” that runs from the gated entrance at Central Avenue and along the northern edge of the site. Private Drive “A” has a 4’5” sidewalk on the south side adjacent to the townhomes, and a 3’ strip of landscaping along the northern side of the drive. Private Drive “A” also serves as a buffer, or separation, from about a dozen existing, single-family detached residences along the northern boundary.
A series of 20’ wide stub alleys, or drive aisles, break off of Private Drive “A”, all running north/south, providing immediate vehicular access to unit garages. This series of stub alleys alternates with a series of paseos, providing immediate pedestrian access to front doors via landscaped walkways. These walkways extend down from the main sidewalk that on Private Drive “A”. (Reference Figure 3, Project Site Plan.)
Figure 3. Project Conceptual Site Plan
(source: The Olson Company)
Within the center of the community is a 5,000 square foot recreation/open space area that consists of a common area park with picnic seating, BBQ, shade structure, landscaping and a small lawn area for residents and guests. An additional 1,000 square feet of open space is provided at the eastern edge of the site, which includes a tot lot, barbeque, shade structure, picnic table, and turf. Another 6,453 square feet of common open space is distributed throughout the site for a total project common open space of 12,454 square feet. (Reference Figure 4, Project Open Space Plan.) Figure 4. Project Open Space Plan
(source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Gross landscape coverage within the site plan is 36,271 square feet, comprising
32.68% of the site area. Buildings cover 41,533 square feet, comprising 37.42% of the site, and paving covers 33,196 square feet, comprising 29.91% of the site.
Setbacks for the Project buildings are a minimum of 15 feet to the western edge fronting Central Avenue, 25 feet to the northern edge adjacent to rear yards of existing single family homes, 15 feet to the eastern edge of the property adjacent to the rear yards of existing single family homes, and 5 feet to the rear edge adjacent to Trench Shoring Company, a construction equipment supplier.
2.8.3 UNIT TYPES AND ARCHITECTURE
Three plan types are proposed for the Project’s 57 units. Table 1 below summarizes by plan type, number of units, size of the unit and number of bedrooms:
Each townhome has a 2-car garage, and private open space within patios and decks.
Architecture for the townhome buildings is a Monterey/Spanish style with exposed wood truss details, with gable-end faces and simple shed roofs and shingle roof tiles.
The style exhibits faux gable-end vent recesses, stucco sill trim and faux wood painted headers. Exposed wood beams with braces provide ornament at porch entryways and some featured openings. Other architectural details are stucco corbel adorned details at cantilevers, faux wood bay windows are featured, and decorative shutters are expressed. (Reference Figure 5, Townhome Building Elevations.) Three color schemes are provided for the townhome buildings, each with slightly varying shades of beige, brown and green earth tones. (Reference Figure 6, Townhome Building Color & Materials Board.)
Maximum building height is 36’-7”. Masonry walls with a 6-foot height are proposed at the perimeter of the site to provide privacy between existing neighboring uses and the proposed townhomes.
Table 1: Plan Summary
Plan Type # Units Unit (square footage [s.f.]) Bedrooms P1 16 1,193 2
P2 21 1,559 3
P3 20 1,644 3
Total Units 57
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 5. Townhome Building Elevations
Figure 6. Townhome Buildings Color & Material Board
2.8.3 GRADING
The Project site is currently vacant, covered with paving and scattered shrubs.
Construction of the Project is not expected to require the import or export any Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
earthwork material during grading phase; preliminary earthwork estimates provided by the Applicant show a balanced site.
2.8.4 PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS
The Project proposes a General Plan Land Use Map Amendment, Conditional Use Permits and a Tentative Tract Map. It would require several entitlements:
General Plan Amendment Case No. GPA 21-002
Conditional Use Permit 21-009
Conditional Use Permit 21-010
Tentative Tract Condominium Map 83433, Case No. 21-002.
The current General Plan Land Use Map designation for the Project site is Mixed Use, which provides opportunities for the development of integrated, pedestrian-oriented, urban scale residential, commercial, and low intensity industrial projects. The current Zoning Map designation for the site is Limited Commercial, which allows for a mixed of commercial uses and buildings of less than 50,000 square feet in size without a conditional use permit approval.
Pursuant to Chapter 30-28 of the Zoning Code, the Applicant is requesting to change the site’s General Plan Land Use Map designation from Mixed Use to High Density Residential which permits a density between 18 and 34 units per acre. The Applicant is also requesting two Conditional Use Permits. One Conditional Use Permit is requested pursuant to Chapter 20-12.2.b of the Zoning Code, which permits multiple and single family residential uses in the Limited Commercial Zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit. The second Conditional Use Permit is requested pursuant to Chapter 30-18.3.a of the Zoning Code, which permits Planned Development (D) zoning to accommodate greater land use control for planned residential projects subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
The proposed Tentative Tract Map would reconfigure the property into common and private use parcels and allow for the sale of the units as condominiums.
Review and approval of these entitlements will require the Planning Commission to recommend and the City Council to make the following findings which are evaluated in Section 6.11 of this Initial Study:
Chapter 30-28 of the Municipal Code specifies the required findings for approval of changes of General Plan Amendments:
a) That the proposed zone and/or land use classification is substantially in conformance with the General Plan and compatible with the existing patterns of zoning, land use and development in the surrounding area; b) That the property is more suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone and/or land use classification than those permitted in the existing zone and/or land use classification; and
c) That the uses permitted in the proposed zone and/or land use classification will not be detrimental to the surrounding area.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Chapter 30-26 of the Municipal Code specifies the required findings for approval of the CUP to allow the Planned Development D zoning:
a) That the proposed use shall be in compliance with this Chapter; b) That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or the surrounding area; and
c) That the proposed use is substantially in conformance with the General Plan and compatible with the existing patterns of land use and development in the surrounding area.
Chapter 38-3 of the Municipal Code specifies the required findings for approval of the Tentative Tract Map:
a) That the proposed subdivision for condominium purposes will substantially comply with the new General Plan land use designation and zoning classification with the implementation of the conditions of approval.
b) That the project conforms to the State Subdivision Map Act and the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) of 1999 and Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code.
c) That the proposed subdivision for condominium purposes is located on a site that is physically suitable for residential development and will serve as a transition development from the heavily trafficked Rosecrans Avenue, eliminate blight and provide greater housing opportunities, and help encourage additional development in the area.
2.9 EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
2.9.1 EXISTING LAND USES
The Project site consists of approximately 2.55 acres of land previously developed with a former restaurant, and currently vacant. A former restaurant two-story building, identified through a 2020 site inventory as severely damaged and inhabited with vagrants, previously occupied the site.1 The building was demolished by the City in June 2021 to discourage vagrancy. The site also contains scattered palm trees and shrubs and an asphalt surface used as a former parking lot. (Reference Figures 7-10, Site Photo Legend and Site Photos 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.) Historical uses of the site include agricultural (i.e., row crops) until the 1950s. A building first appeared on the site in 1951 which later became a restaurant use.
Between 1960 and 2014, other uses on the site included automotive, boat and recreational vehicle (RV) storage and possible minor repair activities. **
1 Phase I and II Environmental Site Inventory, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.; July 15, 2020; contained in Appendix A of this document.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 7. Project Site Photo Legend
(Source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 8. Project Site Photos (1-4)
(Source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 9. Project Site Photos (5-8)
(Source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 10. Project Site Photos (9-12)
(Source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
2.9.2 SURROUNDING LAND USES
As shown in Figure 11, Aerial of Project Site and Surrounding Area, single-family residential is the predominant existing land use, located immediately adjacent to the Project site on the north and east. Further northeast of the site is the Tibby Elementary School. South of the site is Trench Shoring Company, and further south are single-family residential. West of the site is N. Central Avenue, then commercial uses consisting of fast food and a health clinic. Further west are single-family residential, and northwest is the Compton Adult School.
Figure 11. Aerial of Project Site and Surrounding Areas (Source: Google Maps)
2.9.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
City of Compton Community Development Department reports the following active projects in the vicinity of the Project site that could contribute to cumulative impacts. These cumulative projects are considered in cumulative impacts discussions throughout this document.
Single-Family Detached Project at 13024 Salinas Avenue: 94 Residential units KIPP Middle School Middle School at 134th and Water Way: 300 Students KIPP Elementary School Elementary School at 134th and Water Way: 500 Students
134th & Central Residential Project at 1950 North Central Avenue: 29 singlefamily unit, detached home community.
2.10 OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED
Entitlement of the Project will require approval of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration by the City of Compton City Council, acting as lead agency. The Project also requires a series of entitlements that will require review and approval by the City Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
of Compton Planning Commission and City Council. These entitlements include:
General Plan Land Use Map Amendment, Conditional Use Permit to allow a residential use in the Limited Commercial Zone, Conditional Use Permit to allow Planned Development zoning, and Tentative Tract Map.
Approval from Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) will be required to review and accept site clean-up from remaining hazardous substances left on the site from previous uses. (Reference Section 6.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.)
2.11 HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TRADITIONALLY
AND CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECT AREA
REQUESTED CONSULTATION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES
CODE SECTION 21080.3.1? If so, has Consultation Begun?
Yes. In correspondence dated May 13, 2021, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) provided the results of a Sacred Lands File check which was negative for potential Native American resources. (Reference Appendix A.) Regardless of the findings, the NAHC advises consultation with the following tribes:
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation; Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; Gabrielino /Tongva Nation; Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council; Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe; Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians.
Letters were sent to representatives of each of the NAHC listed tribes inviting each on April 30, 2021, to request formal consultation. (Reference Appendix B). This consultation process and potential Project impacts to Tribal Resources are discussed in Section 18 of this Initial Study.
NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/ Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/ Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/ Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 4.0 – DETERMINATION: (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD
AGENCY)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 5.0 – EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the Project falls outside a fault rupture zone.) A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the Project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
ordinances). Reference to a previously prepares or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
SECTION 6.0 – ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The following section the environmental topics contained in the Initial Study, Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For each environmental topic, the thresholds of significance are presented and the finding relative to each threshold is checked. An analysis supporting each finding is then presented along with an assessment of cumulative impacts and applicable mitigation requirements.
6.1 AESTHETICS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a scenic vista?
X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic
highway?
X
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site
and its surroundings? (Public views
are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If
the project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
6.1.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The City, including the Project site, is relatively flat, with an elevation of 99 feet above mean sea level. There are no designated scenic views identified in the City of Compton General Plan (General Plan).
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The Project would replace a vacant lot with an architecturally cohesive singlefamily development. Along Central Avenue, the Project proposed landscape plan includes trees and groundcover. The Project would improve the appearance of the Central Avenue along its frontage. Consequently, the Project would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista.
b) Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Scenic Highway Program protects and enhances the natural scenic beauty of California’s highways and corridors through special conservation treatment.2 Caltrans defines a scenic highway as any freeway, highway, road, or other public ROW that transverses an area of exceptional scenic quality. Caltrans designates a scenic highway by evaluating how much of the natural landscape a traveler sees and the extent that visual intrusions degrade the scenic corridor. There are no state highways and no designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the Project site.
The General Plan does not identify Scenic Corridors including Central Avenue. The Project would enhance its frontage along Central Avenue with an architecturally cohesive development and landscape. Central Avenue is not a state scenic highway. Consequently, the Project would not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
c) Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
No Impact. Figures 7 through 10, presented in Section 2.9 above, show the existing condition of the Project site. It is vacant with cracked paving, scattered vegetation and unmaintained fencing. As proposed, the Project would develop architecturally cohesive residential townhomes, including landscaping and amenities. The Project would be compatible with the existing single-family residential uses north and east of the site. Existing single family residential neighborhoods also occur across Central Avenue, west of the site, and south of the Trench Shoring Company. (Reference Figure 11. Aerial of Project Site and Surrounding Areas.) The Project would improve the visual character and quality of the site, and no significant adverse impacts to the site or surroundings would occur. d) Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. Existing light sources in the vicinity of the Project site include exterior lighting from surrounding residential uses, Trench Shoring Company and Central Avenue. The Project would develop 57 townhomes similar to the residential **
2 Scenic Highways | Caltrans; accessed January 20, 2021.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
character of existing neighborhoods immediately north and east of the site. With the new townhomes, the Project would create new exterior light sources on the structures, interior private streets and Project entry. Chapter 30-19.5 of the CMC contains lighting standards for new development. Compliance with this Municipal Code would ensure that the new light sources created by the Project would not create glare or adversely affect the surrounding uses. Consequently, the Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
6.1.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in significant adverse aesthetic impacts. By redeveloping the vacant unmaintained site with an architecturally cohesive residential community, the Project would improve the visual character of the site, and surrounding area. It would be consistent with existing residential development surrounding the site. Aesthetic impacts are generally site or area specific. The Project would positively impact the visual character of the surrounding area. Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative aesthetics impacts.
6.1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse impacts regarding aesthetics. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST SERVICES
AGRICULTURAL/FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)) or timberland (as
defined in Public Resources Code
Section 4526)
X
d) Result in loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to nonforest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X
6.2.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance?
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
No Impact. Compton is primarily an urban environment with no agricultural land under commercial cultivation. However, there are two areas of the City adjacent to Greenleaf Avenue that are zoned as residential agricultural. One is the area bounded by E. Greenleaf Avenue, Compton Community College and Tarter Lane is designated as a residential agricultural area. The second area is located north of W. Greenleaf Boulevard between Oleander Avenue and S. Wilmington Avenue, and both sides of Raymond Street on the north. This second area, with the exception of properties on S. Wilmington Avenue, are zoned residential agricultural. These residential agriculture areas in the City are used primarily as single-family homes, small child day-care centers and nurseries. Residents within these areas are allowed to own a limited number of farm animals such as poultry, rabbits, sheep, goats, aviary, horses or cows for private use. These areas are approximately 3 and 2 miles from the Project site, respectively.
Although the Project site was used for agricultural purposes until the 1950s, no agricultural uses remain on the site or surrounding areas. The state of California Department of Conservation classifies the Project site and its surrounding areas as “urban and built-up land”.3 Consequently, the Project would not convert farmland to a non-agricultural use.
b) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract?
No Impact. The Williamson Act (Cal. Govt. Code, §51200 et seq.) allows county governments to enter into contracts with private landowners who agree to restrict parcels of land to agricultural uses or uses compatible with agriculture for at least ten years. In return, landowners receive property tax assessments that are much lower than normal because they are based upon income derived from farming and open space uses as opposed to full market value of the property. Although, as noted above, there are two areas of the City zoned for residential agriculture, there are no dedicated agriculture use currently within the City and no Williamson Act contracts. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with an agricultural use or Williamson Act contract. c) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of, forest land?
No Impact. The City, inclusive of the Project site, is developed with urban land uses. There are no forest, timberlands or forest zoning in the City. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with zoning for forest land. d) Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 6.2.c of this Initial Study, above, the City, inclusive of the Project site, is developed with urban land uses. There are no **
3https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/; accessed June 23, 2021.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
forest, timberlands or forest zoning in the City. Consequently, the Project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land.
e) Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, may result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use No Impact. As discussed in Sections 6.2.a, b and c of this Initial Study, above, the City, inclusive of the Project site, is developed with urban land uses. There are no exclusive farmlands or forests in the City. Consequently, the Project would not result in the loss or conversion of farmland or forest land.
6.2.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
There are no agriculture nor forest resources within the City. Consequently, development within the City would not cause impacts to agriculture or forest resources. Similarly, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative agriculture and or forest resource impacts.
6.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on agriculture and or forest resources. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.3 AIR QUALITY
AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors)adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
6.3.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Air Quality section is based on the “149th and Central Residential Development Air Quality & Greenhouse Impact Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc.” (Air Quality Impact Study) and contained in Appendix E to this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Compton is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the south and west and mountains to the north and east. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the agencies responsible for preparing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB. The AQMP was designed to comply with State and federal requirements, reduce the high level of pollutant emissions in the SCAB, and ensure clean air for the region through various control measures.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The regional AQMP is updated periodically with the most recent SCAB AQMP adopted in March 2017 and referred to as the 2016 AQMP. According to the 2016 AQMP, the most significant air quality challenge in the SCAB is to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions sufficiently to meet the upcoming ozone standard deadlines. The 2016 AQMP suggests that total SCAB emissions of NOx must be reduced to approximately 141 tons per day (tpd) in 2023 and 96 tpd in 2050 to attain the 8-hour ozone standards. This represents an additional 45 percent reduction in NOx in 2023, and an additional 55 percent NOx reduction beyond 2050 levels.
In compliance with the 2016 AQMP, the SCAQMD establishes air quality emissions thresholds for criteria air pollutants for the purposes of determining whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment per Section 15002(g) of the Guidelines for implementing CEQA. By complying with the thresholds of significance, the Project would be in compliance with the SCAQMD AQMP as well as federal and state air quality standards.
Table 2 lists the air quality significance thresholds for the six criteria air pollutants, including NOx, that are relevant to the Project and analyzed in the Air Quality Impact Study.
Table 2: SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds
Pollutant 1 Construction
(lbs/day)
Operation
(lbs/day)
NOX 100 55
VOC 75 55
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOX 150 150
CO 550 550
1 ROG (reactive organic gases); NOx (oxides of nitrogen); CO (carbon monoxide); PM-10 (respirable 10-micron diameter particulate matter); PM-2.5 (respirable 2.5-micron diameter particulate matter; SOx (oxides of sulfur).
As discussed in Section 6.3.b, below, although Project construction and operation would emit air pollutants, these emission levels would not exceed NOx thresholds set by the 2016 AQMP or any of the other air pollutant thresholds set by the SCAQMD and listed above in Table 2. Consequently, the Project impacts relative to consistency with the goals of 2016 AQMP are less than significant.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
b) Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard Less Than Significant Impact. A violation of an air quality standard could occur over the short-term during construction, or over the long-term during its subsequent operation. Each is addressed below.
Construction Impacts: Project construction raises localized ambient pollutant concentrations. Construction air quality impacts are considered significant if they exceed any of the construction thresholds listed in Table 2.
During construction air quality impacts may occur during site preparation, and construction activities associated with the project. Major sources of emissions during construction include exhaust emissions, fugitive dust generated as a result of soil and material disturbance during site preparation, and grading activities, and painting of the structures.
Table 3 presents the calculation of daily emissions projected for site construction. The calculations presented in the Table are the results of the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2020.4.0 (CalEEMod) which applies typical construction equipment, labor, phasing and materials to the project, based on its size, location and proposed timing. The CalEEMod is not intended as an exact accounting of what equipment will ultimately be used and what emissions are produced by a project. Rather, the model represents a “yard stick” by which projects may be compared on a one-to-one basis. The methodology applied by the CalEEMod Model are based on studies performed by the SCAQMD for construction projects in the southern California. The SCAQMD recommends use of the CalEEMod Model for typical construction projects.
To assess air quality construction impacts for the Project, the Air Quality Impact Study inputted the following assumptions into the CalEEMod: Construction of the Project is assumed to begin in year 2021 and last approximately 13 months.
Construction phases are assumed to consist of site preparation, grading, building construction, paving and architectural coating. Grading for the project would require 2,250 cubic yards of cut and 2,250 cubic yards of fill, and 14,000 cubic yards of over excavation. Construction phases are not expected to overlap.
Construction impacts are estimated by construction phase: site preparation, grading, building construction, paving and architectural coating. As shown in Table 4, although Project construction would emit air pollutants, these emission levels are within their respective threshold values and the impact is less than significant.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Table 3: Comparison of Projected Construction Emissions and Daily Criteria Values (Pounds/Day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation 1.58 18.31 11.09 0.03 1.40 0.74
Grading 1.87 20.25 10.16 0.02 3.74 2.18
Building
Construction
2.30 16.92 16.98 0.03 1.52 0.98
Paving 1.20 9.37 12.29 0.02 0.66 0.50
Architectural
Coating
65.36 1.44 2.25 0.00 0.21 0.12
Maximum1 65.36 20.25 16.98 0.03 3.74 2.18
SCAQMD
Threshold
75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds
Threshold (?)
No No No No No No
Note:
1 Maximum daily emission during summer or winter; includes both on-site and off-site project emissions.
Operational Impacts: The major source of long-term air quality impacts is that associated with the emissions produced from project-generated vehicle trips. Stationary sources add only minimally to these values.
Mobile Source Emissions: To assess the traffic trips associated with the Project, CalEEMod defaults were applied, and estimated that each townhome within the Project generates an average 7.32 average daily vehicle trips (ADT) during the weekday, 8.14 ADT on Saturday, and 6.28 ADT on Sunday. Total annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) generated by the Project is 1,419,651.
Stationary Source Emissions: In addition to vehicle trips, the future Project occupants would produce emissions from on-site sources including the combustion of natural gas for space and water heating and the use other heating sources (e.g., hearths). Additionally, the structures would be maintained and this requires repainting over time, thus resulting in the release of additional emissions. Finally, the landscape would require maintenance and this equipment produces combustion emissions.
The resultant emissions are projected by the Air Quality Impact Study CalEEMod computer model and included in Table 4. As discussed above, the CalEEMod Model methodology is based on studies performed by the SCAQMD for typical projects in the southern California and represents a “yard stick” by which projects may be compared on a one-to-one basis. As shown in Table 4, although Project operation would emit air pollutants, these emission levels are within their respective threshold values and the impact is less than significant.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, the Project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Neither the construction nor the operation of the Project would exceed the recommended SCAQMD threshold levels and this impact is less than significant.
Table 4: Comparison of Projected Daily Operational Emissions and Daily Criteria Values (Pounds/day)1
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Sources 1.51 1.65 15.79 0.03 3.35 0.91
Energy Sources 0.03 0.23 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02
Area Sources 2.47 1.00 5.11 0.01 0.10 0.10
Total 4.01 2.88 21.00 0.04 3.48 1.03
SCAQMD
Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds
Threshold (?) No No No No No No
1 Maximum daily emissions during summer or winter; includes both on-site and off-site project emissions. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction and operation have the potential to raise localized ambient pollutant concentrations. This could present a significant impact to sensitive receptors if these concentrations were to exceed the State or federal ambient air quality standards at receptor locations. Sensitive receptors are considered land uses or other types of population groups that are more sensitive to air pollution exposure. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely and chronically ill, and those with cardiorespiratory diseases. For CEQA purposes, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be a location where a sensitive individual could remain for 24-hours or longer, such as residences, hospitals, and schools.
Sensitive receptors are considered vulnerable to emissions if located within 25 meters of a project site. Sensitive uses in or near this range to the Project site include:
Existing residential dwelling units located along Palmer Street adjacent to the Project site to the north.
Existing residential dwelling units located along Nestor Avenue adjacent to the Project site to the east.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Existing church use located along Central Avenue adjacent to the Project site to the north.
Existing adult school use located at the northwest corner of 149th Street and Central Avenue, approximately 130 feet to the northwest of the Project site.
Localized Significance Thresholds: SCAQMD establishes localized significance thresholds (LSTs) based on the ambient concentrations of applicable air pollutants for source receptor area. SCAQMD has divided the SCAB region into thirty-eight Source Receptor Areas (SRA) for monitoring and reporting local air quality. The SCAQMD provides daily reports of the current air quality conditions in each general forecast area and SRA, and LSTs are established for each SRA.
The Project site is located within the Metropolitan general forecasting area and South Central LA County air monitoring area (SRA-12). LSTs for SRA-12 are shown in Table 5, below.
To measure LSTs, the Air Quality Impact Study utilized SCAQMD’s significance tables which measures the approximate amount of pollutants that reach nearby properties. These calculated LST thresholds are presented in Table 5 for both construction and operational emissions. As shown in the Table, emissions would be below levels of significance for construction and operation.
Table 5: Comparison of Projected Construction and Operational Emissions to SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds1 (LST) (Pounds/day) Pollutant
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Project Construction Emissions
Project Construction Maximum Emissions 20.21 14.56 3.62 2.15 LST Construction Thresholds 46.0 231.0 4.0 3.0
Exceeds LST Construction Thresholds? No No No NO
Project Operational Emissions
Project Operation Emissions 1.31 6.00 0.3 0.2
LST Operational Thresholds 46.0 231.0 1.0 1.0
Exceeds LST Operational Thresholds? No No No No
1 : Localized Significant Thresholds for construction and operation Table C-1 through C-6; SRA 12, South Central LA County disturbance area of 1-acre and receptor distance of 25 meters.
Toxic Air Contaminants: Other potential impacts that could affect sensitive receptors are Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) is defined as air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
pose a hazard to human health, and for which there is no concentration that does not present some risk. The primary source of TACs from non-industrial land use development projects would include diesel particulate matter (DPM) generated from diesel exhaust emissions. The Project would consist of residential uses. This type of project does not include major sources of toxic air contaminants (TAC) emissions that would result in significant exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, the Project TAC impact is considered less than significant.
Toxic Hot Spot Emissions: In 1987, the California legislature adopted the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act. The goals of the Act are to collect emissions data of toxic air contaminants, identify facilities having localized impacts, to determine health risks, and to notify affected individuals. Exposure to toxic air contaminants may produce various adverse health impacts.
The Project will generate diesel particulate matter (DPM) during construction from off-road diesel equipment and trucks. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) adopted the Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (HRA Guidelines) to provide procedures for use in the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program or for the permitting of existing, new, or modified stationary sources.4 The HRA Guidelines provide risk factors based on exposure to toxic substances over a 30- year lifetime span. The Project’s construction activity is not expected to be a long-term (i.e., 30 years) source of toxic air contaminant emissions and short-term risk factors have not been developed. Due the significantly reduced risk from short-term exposure, SCAQMD does not typically require the evaluation of long-term cancer risk or chronic health impacts for construction operations from small infill project such as the one being proposed. Therefore, the Air Quality Impact Study presumes short-term exposure to DMP during Project construction to be less than significant without the need for a detailed HRA study.
To help further reduce the potential health risks associated with DPM exposure during construction, the Air Quality Impact Study recommends the following project design features which the City of Compton can incorporate as conditions of approval for the Project:
1. All diesel construction equipment should have Tier 4 low emission “clean diesel” engines (OEM or retrofit) that include diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters that meet the latest CARB best available control technology.
2. Construction equipment should be maintained in proper tune.
3. All construction vehicles should be prohibited from excessive idling.
Excessive idling is defined as five (5) minutes or longer. **
4 OEHHA. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program. Risk Assessment Guidelines. Guidance for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February 2015.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
4. Minimize the simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units, to the maximum extent feasible.
5. The use of heavy construction equipment and earthmoving activity should be suspended during Air Alerts when the Air Quality Index reaches the “Unhealthy” level.
6. Establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric powered equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment or generators, where feasible.
7. Establish staging areas for the construction equipment that as far from adjacent residential homes, as feasible.
8. Use haul trucks with on-road engines instead of off-road engines for onsite hauling. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction would involve the use of heavy equipment creating exhaust pollutants from on-site earth movement and from equipment bringing concrete and other building materials to the site. Odors associated with this exhaust would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the equipment itself. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites away from the Project site, they will be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. Additionally, some odor would be produced from the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings. Any exposure to these common odors would be of short-term duration and, while unpleasant and potentially adverse, are not associated with a specific health hazard and are less than significant. Operational odors could be produced from on-site cooking or barbeque typical of a residential use. Because these odors are common in the environment, they would not constitute a significant impact.5
6.3.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed above, in accordance with SCAQMD methodology, Projects that do not exceed or can be mitigated to less than the daily threshold values do not add significantly to a cumulative impact. Neither the construction nor the operation of the Project would exceed the recommended SCAQMD threshold levels. Consequently, the Project would not create significant cumulative impacts relative to air quality.
6.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
**
5 SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Figure 5-4, Land Uses Associated with Odor Complaints identifies potentially significant odor impacts from such uses as agriculture (farming and livestock), a wastewater treatment plant, a food processing plant, a chemical plant, a composting facility, a refinery, a landfill, or a dairy. No significant odor impacts are identified from residential uses.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant air quality impacts. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modification, on any species
identified as candidate, sensitive or
special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations,
or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Boulevard 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not
limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Conservancy Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
X
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
6.4.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project adversely impact either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The City is largely urbanized. Natural resources within the City include the Compton Creek, which is located about 0.3 to 10 miles south and east of the Project site. Compton Creek has a soft-bottom portion with a wetland habitat.
Vegetation in the creek wetland includes cattails and aquatic grasses. Animal life includes killdeer, red-winged blackbirds and great blue heron. Special interest/sensitive animal species identified as potentially occurring in the creek area is the Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus). The special interest/sensitive plant species identified as potentially occurring in the area includes the southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), the Coulte's goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri), the Parish's brittlescale (Atriplex parishii), the coastal dunes milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. titi), the Brand's phacelia (Phacelia stellaris); the spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis), the prostrate navarretia (Navarretia prostrata), and the California orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica). No rare or endangered plant species are known to currently exist in the City.
The Project site is disturbed and covered with paving and scattered non-native shrubs and trees. Surrounding areas are fully urbanized, and as noted above, there are no species identified as endangered, candidate within the City, and special interest and sensitive species are located away from the site in the Compton Creek area. Consequently, no significant impact would occur to any sensitive species designated by the resources agencies as a result of Project implementation.
b) Would the Project have a substantial impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. As noted above, the Project site is disturbed and previously developed as a restaurant. Onsite vegetation consists of weeds, and scattered non-native Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
shrubs and trees. Surrounding areas are fully urbanized. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community are known to occur on the site or surrounding area. The one natural habitat area identified in the General Plan is Compton Creek located about 1.5 miles east of the Project site. Consequently, Project implementation would not result in significant adverse impacts to riparian or other sensitive natural community.
c) Would the Project have a substantial impact on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. Wetlands are defined under the federal Clean Water Act as land that is flooded or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that normally does support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted to life in saturated soils. Wetlands include areas such as swamps, marshes, streams, lakes, and bogs. According to the USFWS National Wetlands Mapper6, there no wetlands within the vicinity of the Project site. As discussed above, the one identified wetland in the City is Compton Creek located 10 miles southeast of the Project site. Consequently, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.
d) Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory life corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less Than Significant. As discussed above, the Project site is surrounded by urban land uses and does not contain identified native or sensitive species, riparian or sensitive habitats or wetlands. There are a number of non-native trees on the site, but because they are surrounded by urban uses, the trees are unlikely to provide suitable habitat, including nesting habitat, for migratory birds under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and under Section 3513 et. seq. of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Code.7 The site is mostly paved and does not provide the large dirt fields that support burrowing owls.
Consequently, Project impacts regarding substantial interference with the movement of a species would not be significant.
e) Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances, protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. Existing vegetation on the site consists of weeds, and scattered shrubs and trees. Neither the General Plan nor Municipal Code contain policies identifying or protecting specified tree species. Consequently, the Project would **
6 http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.HTML; accessed June 23, 2020. 7 Migratory birds include all native birds in the United States, as listed in 50 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 10.13 (List of Migratory Birds).
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
not conflict with a policy that protects biological resources such as a tree preservation policy.
f) Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The City does not have any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans or other conservation plans within its corporate boundaries. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan.
6.4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The proposed Project would not involve any loss of protected habitat since no such habitat is found within the Project site’s boundaries. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts on biological resources will be associated with the proposed project’s implementation.
6.4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project would not have significant impacts relative to biological resources, and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
CULTURAL AND RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §
15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
6.5.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5 of the CEQA? No Impact. The CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5, define “historic resources” to include the following:
(1) A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.). (2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant.
8 (3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of **
8 California Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), Section 5024.1(g).
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the following:
(A) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; (B) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; (C) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or (D) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Compton is located on one of the oldest communities in Los Angeles County, dating back to 1784, when it was once a part of Rancho San Pedro. One of Compton’s first homes, the Heritage House was built in 1869 and is a State Historic Landmark, and located 2 miles southeast of the Project site. Other historical sites include the First United Method Church, which is the second oldest protestant church in Southern California and located 4 miles southeast of the Project site; Angeles Abbey Mausoleum located in the Angeles Abbey Cemetery at 1515 E. Compton Boulevard in a county unincorporated section of Compton, and 3 miles east of the Project site; and Woodlawn Cemetery located at 1715 W. Greenleaf which is the final resting place of 18 civil war veterans, and has been a Los Angeles County Historic Landmark since 1946 and located one mile south of the Project site.
To identify potential archaeological and historic resources on the Project site and its vicinity, a records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) was conducted and the results are summarized in a June 9, 2021 letter from SCCIC, contained in Appendix F of this Initial Study document. The SCCIC search included a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the SCCIC search reviewed California Points of Historical Interest (SPHI), the California Historical Landmarks (SHL), the California Register of Historical Resources (CAL REG), the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California State Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD), and the City of Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monuments (LAHCM) listings within the vicinity of the Project site. The SCCIC letter does not identify any historic resource within or adjacent to the site. Consequently the Project site is not located in close proximity to a designated historic resource.
As discussed in Section 2.9.1 of this Initial Study, the site previously contained a restaurant building that was first built in 1951, and later converted to a restaurant.
The building, which had no historic recognition, was demolished by the City in June 2021 to discourage vagrancy. Consequently, no historic resources are located on or near the Project site, and the Project would not result in an impact to a historical resource.
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. This Section discusses potential impacts to other “unique archaeological resources” which are defined by §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines as an archaeological artifact, object, or site Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
(1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. (2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.
(3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.
As summarized in the SCCIC letter (Appendix F of this Initial Study), no archaeological studies have been conducted in the Project area and as a result, no archaeological resources have been identified. SCCIC notes that buried resources could potentially be unearthed during Project grading activities, and therefore, customary caution and a halt-work condition should be in place for all grounddisturbing activities. In the event that any evidence of cultural resources is discovered, all work within the vicinity of the find should stop until a qualified archaeological consultant can assess the find and make recommendations.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1, below, is added to the Project to incorporate SCCIC’s recommendations and protect potential archaeological resources. With inclusion of these measures, potential impacts relative to archaeological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.
c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 6.5.b, above, the Project site is not within the vicinity of identified archaeological resources, has already been graded and developed, and does not include substantial excavation. There are no cemeteries within Compton. However, similar to many communities within the region, Native Americans historically occupied the region. Should human remains be encountered during Project grading and construction activities, pursuant to state of California Health and Safety Code provisions (notably § 7050.5-7055), all construction activities must cease and the Los Angeles County Coroner, City Community Development Department and Police Department be immediately contacted. Mitigation Measure CUL-2, below, is added to the Project to reduce the potential impacts related to encountering or disturbing human remains to less than significant levels.
6.5.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project, and each of the cumulative projects identified in Section 2.9.2 of the document, are infill projects. Impacts to cultural resources from infill projects are generally site specific. Each cumulative project in the vicinity of the Project site will be subject to its own environmental review, including a site specific cultural resource assessment. Consequently, no significant cumulative impacts relative to cultural resources would occur as a result of the Project.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.5.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation will be required to protect potential archaeological resources:
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources.
Timing: During Grading.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Building Division).
If an archaeological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 50 feet of the find must halt and a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, additional work such as data recovery excavation may be warranted. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site excavation activities are completed, or sooner if the archaeologist indicates that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. During monitoring, the archaeologist shall complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. Following completion of monitoring, the archaeologist shall prepare a summary memorandum of finds, their significance under CEQA and their disposition. (*Note: The California Historical Resources Information System contains a listing of qualified archaeologists at www.chrisinfo.org.) Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains.
Timing: During Grading.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Building Division)..
The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during grounddisturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the county coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.6 ENERGY
ENERGY. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X
6.6.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Impact. The Project is an infill development, replacing a vacant former commercial site with 57 townhomes. To accommodate the increased residential density, the Applicant is requesting to change the site’s General Plan Land Use Map designation from Mixed Use to Multifamily Residential which permits a density between 12.1 and 34 units per acre, and Conditional Use Permits to allow residential uses in the Limited Commercial zone and Planned Development zoning.
The Project proposes a high density residential development of 22.4 units per acre.
High density residential infill projects such as this Project are by their nature energy efficient. Higher density housing provides housing for more people on less land, and infill housing links to existing infrastructure without the added energy cost of extending roads or water and sewer lines.
In addition, as a new development, the Project would be required to comply with the CBC, including Green Building Code requirements that require energy efficient appliances, low water use plumbing and solar. The Project would incorporate required energy efficient measures such as the following:
Drip irrigation
Low flow plumbing fixtures
Water efficient irrigation and drought tolerant/native landscape Electric vehicle charging infrastructure
Energy efficient appliances and light fixtures
Net Zero 2020 (enhanced Title 24 standards)
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Solar.
Consequently, the Project would not result in the potentially significant wasteful consumption of energy resources.
b) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact. The General Plan contains a number of policies that promote energy efficiency. The energy related General Plan policies most applicable to the Project include:
Conservation/Open Space/Parks and Recreation Element Goal 1.0: Reduce air pollution through land use, transportation, and energy use planning. Conservation/Open Space/Parks and Recreation Element Policy 1.8:
Encourage the use of energy conservation devices in project design and construction to increase energy efficiency and decrease pollution emissions from off-site electrical power plants and on-site natural gas usage. Conservation/Open Space/Parks and Recreation Element Goal 3:0:
Conserve energy resources through the use of available technology and conservation practices.
Conservation/Open Space/Parks and Recreation Element Policy 3.1:
Encourage innovative site planning and building designs which minimize energy consumption by taking advantage of sun/shade patterns, prevailing winds, landscaping, and building materials.
Conservation/Open Space/Parks and Recreation Element Policy 7.4:
Encourage use of alternative energy sources including active and passive solar features, and fuel cells, in new residential construction.
As noted above, the Project would incorporate CBC and Green Building Code requirements that require energy efficient appliances, low water use plumbing and solar. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
6.6.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As an infill development built in accordance with the CBC, the Project would not have adverse impacts relative to energy. Other development projects within the City would be required to incorporate energy efficient measures consistent with the CBC and City policies. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts relative to energy will be associated with the proposed Project’s implementation.
6.6.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts relative to energy. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of
wastewater?
X
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X
6.7.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project cause exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault (as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault), ground-shaking, liquefaction, or landslides?
(i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or base on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
No Impact. The City of Compton is within the seismically active Southern California region. As discussed in the General Plan Public Safety Element, major faults in the region include the Whittier/Elsinore, Norwalk, Newport/Inglewood, Santa Monica, Sierra Madre, Palos Verdes, and San Andreas faults. The Newport – Inglewood Fault Zone is the only active fault zone that lies within the City of Compton. The fault zone is runs through the southwest corner of Compton, and at its closest is 3 miles southwest of the Project site. There are no designated Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones found within the City. Consequently, Project impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Map would not be significant.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, the site is situated in a seismically active area and near several seismically active faults that could generate ground shaking in Compton. As required by the CBC, geotechnical and soils studies are required prior to Project grading. Project construction must then comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC.
Compliance with these measures would mitigate potential adverse impacts from strong seismic ground shaking. Consequently, Project impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault would be less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction can be defined as the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to a buildup of pore-water pressure during a seismic event and is associated primarily with relatively loose, saturated fine- to mediumgrained unconsolidated soils. Seismic ground shaking of relatively loose, granular soils that are saturated or submerged can cause the soils to liquefy and temporarily behave as a dense fluid. A relatively shallow groundwater table (within approximately 40 feet or less below ground surface) or completely saturated soil conditions that contribute to liquefaction.
Historical high ground water in Compton ranges from twenty feet west of the Compton Creek, to eight feet near Compton College north to the boundaries of the City. Compton’s soil is part of alluvial fan deposits in the region which form when a fast flowing stream flattens, slows, and spreads out. Because historical ground-water levels in the City are within 40 feet of the surface where there is the presence of loose, sandy soils, these deposits are susceptible to liquefaction.
Figure PS-1 of the General Plan Public Safety Element shows that a large area of the City, including the Project site.
A “Preliminary LID Plan: Tract No. 83433 (14904 S Central Compton Property) prepared for the Project and contained in Appendix H of this Initial Study, finds that historic groundwater at the site are dropping. Active groundwater readings from wells in the vicinity of the site indicate levels in excess of 100 feet below the ground surface. The Preliminary LID Plan therefore concludes that groundwater is unlikely to rise to depths shallower than 100 feet during the life of the Project.
As discussed above, Project construction must comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC. Compliance with these measures would reduce potential adverse impacts from potential liquefaction areas.
Consequently, Project impacts related to seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction are less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. Landslides occur in areas of slope and are one of the hazards left behind by an earthquake. A potential for slope failure within the City occurs along the southern banks of the Compton Creek near Artesia Boulevard, approximately 5 miles southeast of the Project site. Project construction must comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC, and compliance with these measures would reduce potential adverse impacts from earthquakes.
Consequently, given the site’s distance from the identified area of potential slope failure, Project impacts related to landslides would not be significant. b) Would the Project cause substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact. Topsoil is generally defined as the upper, outermost layer of soil, usually the top 5–10 inches with a high concentration of organic matter and microorganisms. The Project site was previously developed with a commercial building and is currently covered by paving and scattered non-native vegetation.
The Project would remove the paving and vegetation, grade to install underground utilities, and cover the site with buildings, paving and landscaping.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Consequently, the potential Project impacts relative to soil erosion or loss of topsoil would not be significant.
c) Would the Project cause location on a geologic unit or a soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onor off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, much of the City, including the Project site is in an area susceptible to liquefaction. Project construction must comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC.
Compliance with these measures would reduce potential adverse impacts from potential unstable soils or liquefaction areas. Consequently, Project impacts related to unstable soils, including liquefaction or collapse liquefaction are less than significant.
d) Would the Project be located on expansive soil, creating substantial risks to life or property?
Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are generally defined as soils that expand when water is added, and shrink when they dry out. This continuous change in soil volume can cause homes built on this soil to move unevenly and crack. The Preliminary LID Plan found that most of the site soils are likely fined grained to a depth of 20 feet. Expansive soils on site are not identified.. As part of subsequent geotechnical and soils studies required for Project development, testing for soil expansion would be conducted. These studies would ensure that any potential for expansive soils are identified and if required the project geotechnical report would recommend remediation. Consequently, Project impacts related to expansive soils are less than significant. e) Would the Project cause soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. An existing City sanitary sewer line runs along the northern boundary of the site. The Project proposes to connect to the existing sewer line. The Project would connect to the existing public sewer line and not use septic tanks or an alternative wastewater disposal system.
f) Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
No Impact. The Project site is located within an urbanized area of Compton and the site and surrounding area have been previously graded and developed. Any near‐surface paleontological resources that may have existed at one time have likely been disturbed and/or destroyed by prior development activities. The existing condition of the site is generally flat, and Project grading would be limited to excavation as needed to lay out utility lines and flatten pads. No identified unique geologic features have been identified on or near the site. Consequently, the Project would not destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.7.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The potential cumulative impacts related to geology and soils for infill projects are site specific. Furthermore, the analysis presented above determined that the implementation of the Project would not result in impacts to geology or soils.
Consequently, no significant cumulative impacts relative to geology or soils are expected to occur as a result of the Project.
6.7.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project would not have significant impacts relative to geology and soils, and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with any applicable plan,
policy or regulation of an agency
adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
6.8.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Air Quality section is based on the “149th and Central Residential Development Air Quality & Greenhouse Impact Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc.” (Air Quality Impact Study) and contained in Appendix E to this Initial Study.
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
Less Than Significant Impact. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) comprise less than 0.1 percent of the total atmospheric composition, yet they play an essential role in influencing climate. Greenhouse gases include naturally occurring compounds such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), water vapor (H2O), and nitrous oxide (N2O), while others are synthetic. Man-made GHGs include the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), as well as sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Different GHGs have different effects on the Earth's warming. GHGs differ from each other in their ability to absorb energy (their "radiative efficiency") and how long they stay in the atmosphere, also known as the "lifetime".
To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in their CEQA documents, the SCAQMD has developed Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Thresholds, December 2008. The purpose of the SCAQMD thresholds of significance is to assist local agencies with determining the impact of a project for CEQA.
SCAQMD’s objective in providing the GHG guidelines is to establish a performance standard that will ultimately contribute to reducing GHG emissions below 1990 levels, and thus achieve the requirements of the California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32).
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The SCAQMD interim thresholds describe a five-tiered approach for determining GHG Significance Thresholds.
Tier 1 - If a project is exempt from CEQA, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant.
Tier 2 - If the project complies with a GHG emissions reduction plan or mitigation program that avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions in the project’s geographic area (i.e., city or county), project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant.
For projects that are not exempt or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD requires an assessment based on the following tiers.
Tier 3 - Consists of screening values that are intended to capture 90 percent of the GHG emissions from projects. If a project’s emissions are under the screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant. For residential projects, SCAQMD sets a screening value threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/year.
This is the threshold previously in the City of Compton.
Tier 4 - Includes three performance standard compliance options to demonstrate that a project is not significant for GHG emissions.
Tier 5 – involves implementing off-site mitigation or the purchasing of offsets to reduce GHG emissions to less than the proposed screening level. The project proponent would be required to provide offsets for the life of the project, which is defined as 30 years.
Consistent with the approach typically applied by the City of Compton, the Air Quality Impact Study applies the Tier 3 threshold for residential uses of 3,000 MTCO2e/year, and used the CalEEMod to calculate both construction and operational GHG emissions.
Construction: As presented in the Air Quality Impact Study, greenhouse gas emissions are estimated for on-site and off-site construction activity using the CalEEMod. Table 6 shows the construction greenhouse gas emissions, including equipment and worker vehicle emissions for all phases of construction. Because impacts from construction activities occur over a relatively short-term period of time, they contribute a relatively small portion of the overall lifetime project GHG emissions. By itself, the construction activities from this Project are less than significant when compared to the thresholds recommended by SCAQMD.
However, SCAQMD recommends that construction emissions be amortized over a 30-year project lifetime and added to the overall project operational emissions.
As demonstrated in the Table, total construction emissions would be 330.79 Mtons of CO2e or 11.03 Mtons averaged over 30 years. These estimated Project construction GHG emissions are added to operational GHG emissions in Table 7, below.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Table 6: Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(Mtons/year)
Activity
Emissions (MTons C02e)1
On-site OffsiteTotal
Site Preparation 3.26 0.11 3.37
Grading 5.48 0.28 5.76
Building
Construction
229.55 81.82 311.37
Paving 7.82 0.69 8.51
Architectural
Coating
1.28 0.50 1.78
Total 247.39 83.40 330.79
Amortized over 30
years2
8.25 2.78 11.03
Notes:
1 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and/or hydroflurocarbons).
2 The emissions are averaged over 30 years and added to the operational emissions, pursuant to SCAQMD recommendations.
Site Operations: During Project operation, the majority of greenhouse gas emissions, and specifically CO2, is due to vehicle travel and energy consumption.
As shown in Table 7, total operational emissions, including amortized construction emissions, would be 672.09 Mtons of CO2e, below the 3,000 Mtons threshold and therefore below a level of significance.
Table 7: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Mtons/year) Emission Source Unmitigated
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)1
Mobile Source 490.84
Energy Source 119.21
Area Source 14.75
Water 23.07
Waste 13.19
Construction (30 year average) 11.03
Total Annual Emissions 672.09
SCAQMD Tier 3 Screening Threshold2 3,000
Exceed Tier 3 Threshold? No
Notes:
1 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Table 7: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Mtons/year) Emission Source Unmitigated
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)1
2 Per South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Draft Guidance Document - Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold, October 2008 b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Less Than Significant Impact. In 2006, California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill (AB) 32; California Health and Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et seq.), which requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to design and implement emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (representing an approximate 25 percent reduction in emissions). Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include reduced building emission requirements specified in the 2013 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and California Green Building Standards Code.
Additionally, the California legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 375 to connect regional transportation planning to land use decisions made at a local level. SB 375 requires the metropolitan planning organizations to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plans to achieve the per capita GHG reduction targets. For the SCAG region, the Connect SoCal Plan functions as the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) providing a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. Infill development is included as a strategy for achieving SB375 compliance. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with policies or regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas.
6.8.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts relative to greenhouse gas emissions. It is an infill project replacing a previously commercial operation with 57 homes built to contemporary Green Building Code requirements. Consequently, no significant cumulative impacts relative to no greenhouse gas mitigation is expected to occur as a result of the Project.
6.8.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project would not have significant impacts relative to greenhouse gas emissions, and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the Project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the
Project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires?
X
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Data presented in this Hazards and Hazardous Materials section references information contained in the “Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment, 250 North Central Avenue Compton, CA 90220” and “Additional Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 250 North Central Avenue Compton, CA 90220”, both prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. and contained in Appendix C of this Initial Study.
Additional data is from “Workplan for LACFD-Directed Site Assessment, 250 North Central Avenue, Compton, California”, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and contained in Appendix D of this Initial Study. Collectively, these assessments are referred to in this document as “Environmental Site Assessments”. a. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project is a proposed residential use and would not create a significant hazard to public health.
However, past uses on the Project site may create hazards. To assess these potential hazards, Environmental Site Assessments (Appendices C and D) were prepared for the Project site. Four potential sources of hazardous substances were identified:
Historical Agricultural Use. Based on a review of historic aerial photographs, the Project site was used for agricultural purposes (i.e., row crops) until the 1950. Historical agricultural use can be a potential concern due to the possible use of pesticides and herbicides containing heavy metals. Accordingly, as part of the Environment Site Assessments, soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine if pesticides or heavy metals associated with herbicides were present at levels exceeding applicable regulatory thresholds for residential development. Former Auto/Boat Repair Activities. Based on review of historical documents including aerial photographs and City directories, the Project site was used for auto/boat/RV storage and possible minor repair activities.
Petroleum products are typically associated with motorized vehicles (autos, boats and RVs) and can taint soil, creating soil vapors containing petroleum hydrocarbons or volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Upgradient Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) site. Based on review of historical documents, the upgradient property, located south of the site and currently containing Trench Shoring, had a leaking underground storage tank listing for a gasoline release in September 1996.
Accordingly, as part of the Environment Site Assessments, soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine if either the upgradient LUST or past auto/boat/RV activities on the Project site have created soil vapor concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons or VOCs.
Petromat. Existing asphalt on the Project site could contain Petromat, which is a stress absorbing fabric sometimes used in asphalt paving operations. The tack coating often associated with this material sometimes contains asbestos.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Based on the soil tested soil samples, the Environmental Site Assessments, reached the following findings regarding potential hazardous materials on the Project site:
Very low detections of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) were found on the Project site in areas where historical agricultural activities occurred. These concentrations were below their respective United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for residential use and also below the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) residential screening levels.
Cumulative total concentration of pesticides 4,4’-DDT, 4,4’-DDE and 4,4’- DDD (known as DDM) were below the California Hazardous Waste Level of
1.0 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Therefore, the Environmental Site Assessments recommend no further assessment or action regarding OCPs. Lead and arsenic can occur naturally in southern California soils. The Environmental Site Assessments tested these chemical levels in the Project site soil samples. Levels of lead and arsenic found on the site were within naturally occurring levels, and the Environmental Site Assessments recommended no further assessment or action is for lead and arsenic. Soil samples collected on the Project site had minor detections of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and VOC. However, soil vapors from petroleum chemicals were detected above USEPA RSLs for residential use.
Soil vapor is the migration of volatile chemicals from the subsurface soil and groundwater to the surface and into the indoor air of overlying buildings. With respect to soil vapor, multiple VOCs were detected during the Environmental Site Assessments. TPH as gasoline, ethylbenzene, and tetrachloroethene (PCE) were detected at concentrations potentially above residential health risk screening criteria, and further soil sampling and testing are recommended to determine the lateral limits of soil vapor intrusion. The Environmental Site Assessments also recommends performing a vapor intrusion human health risk assessment (VIHHRA) in order to determine whether engineering controls (e.g., vapor barriers) will be warranted to reduce potential soil vapor exposure for future Project residents.
Samples of the asphalt at five locations within the existing parking lot. No Petromat was observed on the Project site. Therefore, the Environmental Site Assessments recommend no further assessment or action regarding Petromat.
To ensure potential health risks associated with soil vapors are reduced, Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 is added to the Project, below. With incorporation of HAZ-1, potential Project impacts regarding on-site hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels.
b. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As a residential development, the Project is not associated with the transport or use of hazardous materials. As discussed above, levels of VOCs in soil vapors may be above USEPA RSLs for residential uses. As discussed above, HAZ-1 is added to the Project to ensure potential health risks associated with soil vapor are reduced to USEPA acceptable levels. With inclusion of this measure, potential Project impacts regarding significant hazards from the release of hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels.
c. Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Schools near the Project site include the Tibby Elementary School and the Compton Adult School, both located less than one-quarter mile from the Project Site, As discussed above, the proposed residential Project is not associated with the transport or use of hazardous materials. Based on the Environmental Site Assessments, levels of VOCs in soil vapors may be above USEPA RSLs for residential uses. HAZ-1 is added to the Project to ensure potential health risks associated with soil vapor are reduced to USEPA acceptable levels. Although the Environmental Site Assessments do not identify a potential risk of soil vapors migrating to either school, within inclusion of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, Project impacts regarding emitting hazardous emissions, materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of a school would be reduced to less than significant levels. d. Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. The Environmental Phase I Assessment conducted for the Project site did not identify the Project site as being listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. This finding is supported by the state of California Department of Toxic Substances Envirostar website.9 Consequently, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area?
No Impact. The closest airport to the Project site is Compton/Woodley Airport which is approximately one mile southeast. The Compton/Woodley Airport is part **
9http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/mapfull.asp?global; accessed June 29, 2021.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
of the Los Angeles County airport land use plan. Current noise contours for the airport, as well as runway protection zones and airport influence areas, are on shown in Figure 12, Compton/Woodley Airport Noise Contours. The Project site is outside both the 70 and 65 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and outside the runway protection zone.
Noise impacts associated with the Project are presented in the “250 N. Central Residential Development Noise Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. (Noise Study) and summarized in Section 6.13, Noise, of this Initial Study, below. The Noise Study identified no airport noise impacts for the proposed Project residential use. Consequently, the Project would not place future residents or workers within an airport safety hazard or excessive noise area, and such impacts would not be significant.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 12. Compton/Woodley Airport Noise Contours
Source: Noise Study (Appendix G)
f. Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. Access to the Project would be from Central Avenue to a private Street “A”, which would have a 27.5-foot paved width, that includes two lanes of travel with a combined width of 21 feet, a sidewalk on its south side, and curb and gutter. Each unit would have access from a private drive with a paved width of 26 feet that includes a 20-foot travel lane and curb and gutter.
Entrance to the Project would be gated, and gates would be fit with Knox Box or similar apparatus per County Fire Department standards to allow for emergency Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
vehicles to quickly access the site. In addition, a fire apparatus turnaround would be provided, consistent with the 2019 Fire Code, as shown in Figure 13, Project Emergency Access Features, below. The Project would provide adequate emergency access, and the Project would not impair implementation or interfere with the City’s emergency response or evacuation plans.
Figure 13. Project Emergency Access Features
However Project construction activities could temporarily impact street traffic adjacent to the site due to roadway improvements and potential extension of construction activities into the right-of-way. This could reduce the number of lanes or temporarily close certain street segments. Any such impacts would be limited to the construction period and would affect only adjacent streets or intersections, but could raise potential safety concerns for nearby schools and residents. With implementation of construction traffic plan, temporary street closures would not affect emergency access in the vicinity of future developments, and potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 is added to require a construction traffic plan. Consequently, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2,
g. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
No Impact. The Project site is neither within nor adjacent to a designated wildland area and would not, therefore, be exposed to the potential for wildland fire. The Compton Fire Department provides fire protection to the City and would respond to fire and/or emergency situations occurring in the project area, including the subject site. Consequently, the Project would not expose people or structure to a significant risk from wildland fires.
6.9.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project could disturb hazardous materials that were used in the construction of the existing onsite structures. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 is added to the Project to Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
reduce potential impacts related to hazardous materials to less than significant levels. In addition, Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 is added to require a construction traffic control plan to ensure emergency access routes are not obstructed. Impacts to hazards and hazardous materials are generally site specific and each cumulative project in the City would be subject to its own environmental review, including review of hazards and hazardous materials. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts relative to hazards or hazardous materials will be associated with the proposed Project implementation.
6.9.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measures will be required to mitigate potential Project impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials to less than significant levels:
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Soil Vapor.
Timing: During and after grading activities and prior to issuance of building permits.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Planning and Building Divisions).
The Applicant shall provide additional soil testing to determine the lateral limits of soil vapor intrusion. Should the findings of the additional testing indicate a potential health risk, a vapor intrusion human health risk assessment (VIHHRA) shall be conducted to determine whether engineering controls (e.g., vapor barriers) will be warranted to reduce potential soil vapor exposure for future Project residents. The Applicant shall provide evidence to the Building Division showing the concentrations of detected soil vapors.
Where concentrations of soil vapors are detected above the established thresholds, the Applicant shall ensure placement of a vapor barrier below the residences to prevent intrusion of the soil vapor into the structure. Those structures that require vapor barriers will require a deed notification to ensure protection of the barrier over time. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for those buildings that require soil vapor barriers until these measures are completed and Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) has inspected and provided concurrence on the placement for each affected building on the Project Site.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that
the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces,
in a manner which would:
i) Result in a substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;
X
ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
X
iii) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due
to project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.10.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Hydrology and Water Quality section references information contained in the “Preliminary LID Plan: Tract No. 83433 (14904 S Central Compton Property), contained in Appendix H of this Initial Study. a) Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
No Impact. In 1972, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), with the goal of “restor[ing] and maintain[ing] the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters” (33 U.S.C. § 1251(a)). The CWA directs states to establish water quality standards for all “waters of the United States” and to review and update such standards on a triennial basis. The EPA has delegated responsibility for implementation of portions of the CWA, including water quality control planning and control programs, such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, to the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB).
Storm water discharge from development projects is regulated by the CWA and the NPDES permitting program. As required by NPDES, new developments are required to include the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the construction phase of a project, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) or Low Impact Development (“LID”) for the operation phase of a project. In the City of Compton, SWPPPs and LIDs are under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County Municipal Storm Water (MS4) NPDES Permit No. CAS004001, issued by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). As a requirement of the LARWQCB, all post development stormwater runoff shall not exceed the pre-development peak flow.
In its current condition, the Project site is approximately 44.3% impervious.
Topography within the site varies with elevations of approximately 98 to 101 feet above mean sea level. Site drainage from the east side of the concrete in the entrance (high point) drains via sheet flow directed to east towards the east side of the Property, and from the west side of the concrete to Central Avenue.
In compliance with the City NPDES requirements, the Project Applicant has submitted the Preliminary LID Plan which presents a plan to control storm water runoff from Project post-construction operations. Post construction, impervious surface of the site would be approximately 72.6% of site area. The Preliminary LID Plan proposes to collect Project runoff via a private drainage system consisting of PVC pipes and area drain inlets. Once developed, the site will generally drain to the west. Runoff from the site will drain to the common driveways which will then drain to Street “A”. Catch basins located in the south side of Street “A” will capture the majority of the site’s runoff. The catch basin and drop inlets located in Street “A” drain to a proposed underground storage system that will temporarily detain the water prior to infiltrating the ground in the deep infiltration well. The catch basin located near the entrance will drain directly into the deep infiltration well. Overflows will bypass the deep infiltration Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
well and will discharge directly to N. Central Avenue. The proposed system has been designed to detain and infiltrate runoff in accordance with County LID Design Manual requirement.
With implementation of this collection and treatment system, the Preliminary LID Plan which serves as the Project preliminary WQMP, finds that there would be no hydrologic conditions of concern from the site. The Project would also be required to submit a SWPPP for City Engineer review and approval prior to construction.
With the required preparation and implementation of the SWPPP and WQMP and the decrease in the amount of impervious surface, the Project would improve the quality water discharge from the Site. The Project would have not violate water quality standards and waste discharge requirements.
b) Would the Project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned used for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. The Project site was previously developed and is largely covered by paving. Similarly, the surrounding area is largely developed and paved. As discussed above, the Project would decrease the amount of impervious surface over existing conditions and would improve groundwater recharge conditions.
Groundwater is a primary water supply for the City, followed by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) supplies. The Project does not include installation of new groundwater wells or use of groundwater from existing wells. Therefore, development of the Project would not result in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the groundwater table. Consequently, the Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
c) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? No Impact. As discussed above, the Project site and surrounding area are largely developed and with mostly impervious surfaces. The existing site condition drains from west to east. The Project’s proposed stormwater collection and treatment system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff. Consequently, no Project impacts would occur relative to substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or substantial erosion. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
No Impact. As discussed above, the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Consequently, the Project would not increase the rate of surface runoff in a manner that would result in any flooding.
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
No Impact. As discussed above, the Project would retain the site flow and filter the runoff water in compliance with the Preliminary LID Plan. Consequently, the Project would not exceed capacity of existing stormwater drainage systems or add polluted runoff.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The Project would retain the existing drainage flow of the site. Post development, as discussed above, the Project would retain and filter the drainage flow and then convey primary overflow to the existing public storm drain.
Consequently, the Project would not impede or redirect flood flows or exceed capacity of existing stormwater drainage systems or add polluted runoff. d) Would the Project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. According to the Preliminary LID Plan, the Project site is within Flood Zone “X” which indicates an area of minimum flood hazard per the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Map. The General Plan Public Safety Element further notes that the City as a whole is in areas of minimal flood risk.
A tsunami is a tidal wave or sea wave caused by seismic activity. Compton is located inland approximately 20 miles from the Pacific Ocean and is not subject to tsunamis. A seiche involves the oscillation of a body of water in an enclosed basin, such as a reservoir, storage tank, or lake. The Whittier Narrows Dam is 19 miles upstream from the Project site and the dam’s failure would result in flood waters reaching Compton in approximately 15 hours with a depth of four feet. The Hansen Dam is 30 miles upstream from Compton, and this dam’s failure would reach Compton within twenty hours with a depth of one foot. The General Plan Public Safety Element does not identify inundation as a potential risk within the City.
As discussed above, the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff. Consequently, the Project would not result in risk of pollutant release during flood hazard, tsunami or seiche.
e) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? No Impact. As discussed above, the Preliminary LID Plan finds that the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment system would adequately control Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
the flow and quality of runoff, and would not interfere with groundwater recharge. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control or groundwater management plan.
6.10.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The required preparation and implementation of the LID would reduce potential Project impacts to stormwater runoff and water quality. Each cumulative project listed in Section 2.9.2 of this Initial Study would be subject to a preliminary and final LID similar to the Project. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts relative to hydrology and water quality will be associated with the proposed project’s implementation.
6.10.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on hydrology or water quality. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community?
X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental
effect?
X
6.11.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The Project site is currently vacant with existing single-family residential uses located adjacent to the site on the north and east. To accommodate the proposed development, the Project Applicant proposes to change the current General Plan Land Use Map designation for the Project site from Mixed Use to Multifamily Residential, and Conditional Use Permits to allow residential uses in the Limited Commercial zone and Planned Development zoning. This land use change would accommodate the site’s transition from a previously damaged building inhabited with vagrants to a cohesively developed 57 townhomes community.
As shown Figure 14, below, existing General Plan land use designations surrounding the site are largely residential. Changing the land use designation of the Project site is consistent with the redevelopment of the site and surrounding and proposed mixed uses. Consequently, the Project would not physically divide an established community.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Figure 14. General Plan Land Use Map Existing Designations of Project Site and Surrounding Areas
b) Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project requires the following entitlements:
General Plan Amendment Case No. GPA 21-002
Conditional Use Permit 21-009
Conditional Use Permit 21-010
Tentative Tract Condominium Map 83433, Case No. 21-002.
General Plan Change: As discussed in Section 2.8.4 of this Initial Study, Chapter 30-28 of the Municipal Code specifies the required findings for approval of General Plan Amendments:
a) That the proposed zone and/or land use classification is substantially in conformance with the General Plan and compatible with the existing patterns of zoning, land use and development in the surrounding area; b) That the property is more suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone and/or land use classification than those permitted in the existing zone and/or land use classification; and
c) That the uses permitted in the proposed zone and/or land use classification will not be detrimental to the surrounding area.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Chapter 30-26 of the Municipal Code specifies the required findings for approval of the two Conditional Use Permits to allow for residential in the Limited Commercial Zone and to allow the Planned Development D zoning:
a) That the proposed use shall be in compliance with this Chapter; b) That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or the surrounding area; and
c) That the proposed use is substantially in conformance with the General Plan and compatible with the existing patterns of land use and development in the surrounding area.
Changing the land use designation of the Project site to a high density residential townhome community under the proposed 250 N. Central is consistent with the proposed development of the site and existing surrounding uses. As shown in Figure 14, above, existing General Plan land use designations are predominately single family, mixed with Mix Use, Public/quasi-public and Medium Density Residential designations. The proposed Project General Plan map change and Conditional Use Permits to allow residential uses in the Limited Commercial zone and Planned Development zoning would facilitate development of the 57 architecturally cohesive residential townhomes, including landscaping and amenities, which would be beneficial to the site and surrounding area.
Tentative Tract Map. The Project proposes a Tentative Tract Condominium Map to reconfigure the property into common and private use parcels and allow for the sale of the units as condominiums. Chapter 38-3 of the Municipal Code specifies the required findings for approval of the Tentative Tract Map:
a) That the proposed subdivision for condominium purposes will substantially comply with the new General Plan land use designation and zoning classification with the implementation of the conditions of approval.
b) That the project conforms to the State Subdivision Map Act and the State Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) of 1999 and Chapter 28 of the Compton Municipal Code.
c) That the proposed subdivision for condominium purposes is located on a site that is physically suitable for residential development and will serve as a transition development from the heavily trafficked Rosecrans Avenue, eliminate blight and provide greater housing opportunities, and help encourage additional development in the area.
General Plan Conformity: As discussed above, the Project proposes a General Plan change to Multifamily and Conditional Use Permits to allow the residential use in the Limited Commercial Zone and Planned Development zoning. These proposed entitlements would facilitate development of the site in a manner consistent with the existing surrounding uses. The Tentative Tract Map application has been reviewed by the City Public Works Department and it has been found to be complete, allowing the Project to proceed to this environmental review and entitlement process.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The General Plan Land Use Element contains a number of polices that address the redevelopment of the site for high density residential purposes:
To revitalize the City through public and private redevelopment efforts; To attain a mix of land use within the City, thereby providing residents with ready access to housing, employment, and commercial services; To encourage private investment in the City;
To ensure that residents from all income levels have access to decent, affordable housing;
To stabilize and protect single-family housing resources in the community; To create a City environment which makes Compton a pleasant place to live, work, shop, and do business;
To improve Compton's built environment through design guidelines and aggressive code enforcement; and
To enhance and diversify Compton's tax base.
With the requested entitlements, the proposed Project achieves consistency with the spirit and intent of the City’s General Plan and the above listed policies. The Project is proposed on an site with a building previously identified by the City as severely damaged and inhabited with vagrants. The Project provides high density residential with a for sale housing product and an affordable housing component.
It is consistent with the General Plan policy for providing high-quality, accessible housing to allow improved choices for the community at various income levels. In these ways, the Project would facilitate stability and protection of the existing residential neighborhoods, create a pleasant place with new residents to shop and contribute to Compton’s tax base. Upon approval of the proposed Project entitlements, Project conflicts with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation would be less than significant.
6.11.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project would convert a previous commercially developed property with a residential use, consistent with its current and proposed residential General Plan land use designations, and consistent with surrounding residential uses. The development of the Project site with the proposed 57 residential units will not impact the other cumulative projects identified by the City. Consequently, cumulative impacts relative to land use and planning would not be significant.
6.11.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse impacts regarding land use and planning. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X
6.12.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? No Impact. The Project site is located in an area classified by the California Geological Survey (CGS) as Mineral Resource Zone-1 (MRZ-1). This designation indicates that there is little likelihood that significant mineral resources are present in the area (Department of Conservation 1982). Consequently, Project impacts relative to mineral resources will not be significant. b) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, proposed project, or other land use plan?
No Impact. As discussed above, there are limited mineral resources within the City. No identified mineral resources occur on or near the Project site.
Consequently, the Project would not result in the loss of a locally important mineral resource recovery site.
6.12.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse impacts to mineral resources. Consequently, no significant adverse cumulative impacts to mineral resources would occur as a result of the project.
6.12.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on mineral resources. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.13 NOISE
NOISE. Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
X
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise
levels?
X
6.13.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Noise section is based on the “149th and Central Residential Development Noise Impact Study, City of Compton”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. (Noise Study), contained in this Initial Study as Appendix G. a) Would the Project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Noise Measurements: Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to all sound frequencies within the entire auditory spectrum, human response is factored into sound descriptions by weighting sounds within the range of maximum human sensitivity more heavily in a process called “A-weighting,” written as dB(A). Any further reference in this discussion to decibels written as "dB" should be understood to be A-weighted.
Time variations in noise exposure are typically expressed in terms of a steadystate energy level equal to the energy content of the time varying period (called Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
LEQ), or alternately, as a statistical description of the sound pressure level that is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period.
Typical human hearing can detect changes in sound levels of approximately 3 dBA under normal conditions. Changes of 1 to 3 dBA are detectable under quiet, controlled conditions, and changes of less than 1 dBA are usually indiscernible.
A change of 5 dBA is discernable to most people in an exterior environment while a change of 10 dBA is perceived as a doubling of the noise. Because people are generally more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, state law requires that, for planning purposes, an artificial dB increment be added to quiet time noise levels in a 24-hour noise descriptor called the Ldn (day-night) or the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL metric has gradually replaced the Ldn factor, but the two descriptors are essentially identical.
Noise Standards: A noise level of 65 dB is the level at which ambient noise begins to interfere with one's ability to carry on a normal conversation at reasonable separation without raising one's voice. A noise exposure of 65 dB CNEL is typically recommended as the exterior noise land use compatibility guideline for new residential dwellings in California. CNEL-based standards generally apply to usable outdoor recreational space at backyards, patios or balconies. Interior exposures of noise-sensitive uses are controlled through adequate structural attenuation.
An interior CNEL of 45 dB is mandated by the State of California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR, Title 24, Part 6, Section T25-28) for multiple family dwellings and hotel and motel rooms. In 1988, the State Building Standards Commission expanded that standard to include all habitable rooms in any residential use, included single-family dwelling units. Since normal noise attenuation within residential structures with closed windows is 25-30 dB, an exterior noise exposure of 70-75 dB CNEL allows the interior standard to be met without any specialized structural attenuation (dual paned windows, etc.), but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning in order to maintain a comfortable living environment.
The General Plan Noise Element establishes planning criteria for determining a development’s noise/land use compatibility based on CNEL., which are shown in Table 8, below:
Table 8: City of Compton Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Land Use
Noise Limit (CNEL)
Clearly
Compatible1
Normally
Compatible2
Clearly
Incompatible3
Normally
Incompatible
4 Residential - Singlefamily, Duplex,
Multi Family
< 60 60 – 70 70 – 75 >75
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Table 8: City of Compton Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Land Use
Noise Limit (CNEL)
Clearly
Compatible1
Normally
Compatible2
Clearly
Incompatible3
Normally
Incompatible
4 Notes:
1 ClearlyCompatible: Ambient noise levels are not significant enough to require special construction and/or noise mitigation.
2 Normally Compatible:Most land uses will not be affected by ambient noise. Some form of design measures and/or mitigation may be required for noise sensitive land uses. 3 ClearlyIncompatible: Noise sensitive land uses should not be located in these areas unless mitigation is employed to reduce interior noise levels.
4 Normally Incompatible: Noise sensitive land uses should not be located in these areas due to excessive and continuous high ambientnoise.
The City of Compton uses the County of Los Angeles Exterior Noise Standards to regulate noise from temporary and stationary noise sources such as mechanical equipment. These noise standards are presented in Table 9.
In accordance with Section 7-12.22 of the Compton Municipal Code, construction related activities are exempt from noise regulations provided the activities take place during the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
Table 9: City of Compton (County of Los Angeles) Exterior Residential Noise Standards
Location Time Period Leq L50
(30-
min)
L25
(15-
min)
L8
(5-
min)
L2
(1-
min)
LMAX
(any
time)
Residential
Daytime
(7am - 10pm) 50 dBA 50 dBA 55 dBA 70 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
Nighttime
(10pm – 7am) 45 dBA 45 dBA 50 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 65 dBA
Baseline Noise: To determine existing noise levels in the Project area, the Noise Study included baseline noise measurements from two meters at the following locations (reference Figure 15, Noise Monitoring Locations):
Noise monitoring location one (LT-1) was taken along the southern property line approximately 20 feet from the western property line. Noise monitoring location two (LT-2) was taken along the southern property line approximately 680 feet from the western property line.
Noise measurements were collected over a four-day period from July 13-17, 2021.
At location LT-1, the average 24-hour CNEL ranged between 70.7 dBA and 75.5 dBA; and at LT-2, the average 24-hour CNEL ranged between 56.0 dBA and 58.6 dBA. Referencing the General Plan Noise/Land Use Compatibility standards shown Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
in Table 8 above, existing noise levels at the Project site are “normally compatible” for residential uses at location LT-2, meaning that “most land uses will not be affected by ambient noise. Some form of design measures and/or mitigation may be required for noise sensitive land uses”. At location LT-1, existing noise levels for residential use are “clearly incompatible” meaning that “noise sensitive land uses should not be located in these areas unless mitigation is employed to reduce interior noise levels”. The main source of ambient noise levels at the Project site includes operational noise from vehicles traveling along Central Avenue to the west, and the industrial use to the south.
Figure 15. Noise Monitoring Locations
On-Site Impacts - Operational Noise - Exterior: Noise from Project operations are expected to include mechanical noise from the townhome HVAC units, vehicle engine noise and general household conversation and noise associated with future residents. The Project is proposing several design features which would provide some noise attenuation to adjacent residents. These include a minimum of a 6-foot noise barrier wall along the northern, southern, eastern and western property lines.
Also proposed Project HVAC equipment would be generally located behind a noise screening wall and shielded from line of sight of any adjacent residential property.
Using SoundPLAN™ noise modeling software, the Noise Study calculated the addition of Project operational noise to existing baseline noise levels to the nearest sensitive use, which are the single family homes directly north and east of the site.
The Noise Study calculated noise levels both during daytime and nighttime hours, incorporating all estimated future Project noise sources operating simultaneously, and including the proposed Project design features (6-foot barrier walls and HVAC unit locations). As shown in Tables 10 and 11, below, the Noise Study found that operation of the Project would increase exterior noise by as much as 41.1 dBA during the daytime and 40.8 dBA during the nighttime. These increases do not exceed the City’s day or nighttime noise standards, as shown in Table 8, above.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
However to ensure the Project installs the 6-foot noise barrier walls and locates the HVAC units as proposed, Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 are added to the Project. With inclusion of this measure, noise impacts from the Project would be less than significant.
Table 10: Daytime Noise Impact Analysis (dBA)
Land Use Direction
Daytime Exterior Noise Level dBA
Project Noise
Contribution
(Leq)
City of
Compton
Noise Level
Criteria
(Leq)
Noise Level
Exceeds Standard
(?)
Church North 42.8 50.0 No
Commercial West 35-3 60.0 No
Residential East 43.5
50.0 No
Residential North 43.3 No
Residential North 44.1 No
Residential North 44.0 No
Table 11: Nighttime Noise Impact Analysis (dBA)
Land Use Direction
Nighttime Exterior Noise Level dBA
Project Noise
Contribution
(Leq)
City of
Compton
Noise Level
Criteria
(Leq)
Noise Level
Exceeds Standard
(?)
Church North 42.4 45.0 No
Commercial West 35.1 55.0 No
Residential East 43.4
45.0 No
Residential North 42.9 No
Residential North 43.9 No
Residential North 43.7 No
Off-Site Impacts - Operational Noise on Future Project Residential Use: As discussed above, existing ambient noise sources in the Project area includes operational noise from the industrial use to the south, traffic noise levels from Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Central Avenue and noise from typical residential activities surrounding the site to the north and east. These noise sources result in noise levels that are considered by the General Plan Noise/Land Use Compatibility standards as “normally compatible” for residential uses at location LT-1, and “clearly incompatible” for residential uses at location LT-2 unless mitigation is incorporated. Appropriate mitigation measures will demonstrate that interior noise levels due to exterior sources are reduced to a CNEL or a day-night level (LDN) of 45 dBA, in any habitable room. These measures will include:
a) Compliance with California Title 24 building insulation requirements for exterior walls, roofs and common separating assemblies; b) All units equipped with adequate fresh air ventilation, per the requirements of the California Building Standards Code, to meet the interior noise standard with a windows closed condition;
c) Upgraded windows and sliding glass doors for units facing Central Avenue and or adjacent to the existing industrial use to the south.
These above listed measures are added to the Project as Mitigation Measure NOI3.
On-Site Impacts – Construction Noise: Temporary construction noise impacts vary markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. Short-term construction noise impacts tend to occur in discrete phases dominated by large, earth-moving equipment sources for grading. During construction and paving, equipment is generally less noisy. The closest existing sensitive uses to the Project site are the single-family homes north and east of the site.
As noted previously, the City of Compton Municipal Code limits construction activities to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday. These time restrictions are expected to reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant levels.
However, because of the proximity of sensitive uses, the Noise Study recommends that the following construction design features that the City may incorporate as Project conditions of approval:
Construction-related noise activities shall comply with the requirements set forth in the City of Compton Municipal Code Noise Section 7-12.22. o Use of Heavy Equipment (dump trucks, graders, jack hammers, etc. are only permitted Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. o No work is permitted on Sundays or Federal Holidays
During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices and equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as far from the nearest residential receptors, as reasonably feasible. No impact pile driving activities are expected to occur on the project site during construction.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
With inclusion of mitigation measures NOI-1 through NOI-3, Project impacts relative to expose to noise levels in excess of established standards would be reduced to less than significant levels.
b) Would the generate excessive ground borne vibration or groundbourne noise levels?
Less Than Significant. Groundbourne vibration or noise is typically expressed as the root mean square (RMS) velocity of a vibrating object. RMS velocities are expressed in units of vibration decibels. Although the perceptibility threshold is about 65 VdB, human response to vibration is not usually significant unless the vibration exceeds 70 VdB. The range of vibration decibels (VdB) is as follows:
65 VdB - threshold of human perception
72 VdB - annoyance due to frequent events
80 VdB - annoyance due to infrequent events
94-98 VdB - minor cosmetic damage.
The Noise Study did not identify excessive vibration in the vicinity of the Project site. Project construction is not expected to require use of substantial vibration equipment or activities such as pile drivers or blasting. Consequently, Project impacts relative to excessive to groundborne vibration or noise would be less than significant.
c) For a project located with the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 6.9.e of this Initial Study, the closest airport to the Project site is Compton/Woodley Airport which is approximately 2 miles southeast. Current noise contours for the airport on shown in Figure 12, Compton/Woodley Airport Noise Contours, above. The Project site is outside both the 70 and 65 CNEL and outside the runway protection zone. There is no private airstrip within 2 miles of the Project site. Consequently, the Project would not result in significant impacts related to exposure to excessive airfield or airport related noise levels.
6.13.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Potential noise impacts associated with the Project location could affect adjacent residential uses and the future residents of the site. These impacts are site specific and not cumulative in nature. Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-4 are added to the Project to reduce potential noise impacts to Project residents and adjacent properties to less than significant levels. Consequently, no cumulative impacts relative to noise would occur from or to the Project.
6.13.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The following mitigations will be required to ensure City noise land use compatibility standards are met:
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Operational Noise - Exterior.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit for Construction of a Residential Unit, and on-going.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Building Division).
The Project shall provide plans for noise barrier walls along the northern, southern, eastern and western property lines, subject to the City review and approval. The noise barrier walls shall be CMU and a minimum of 6-feet tall, and free of decorative cutouts or line of site openings. The walls shall be constructed and maintained per the approved plans.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: Operational Noise - Exterior.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit for Construction of a Residential Unit, and on-going.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Building Division).
The Project shall locate HVAC equipment behind a noise screening wall and/or shielded from line of sight of any adjacent residential property.
Mitigation Measure NOI-3: Operational Noise – Interior.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit for Construction of a Residential Unit.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Building Division) The Project design shall demonstrate that interior noise levels due to exterior sources are reduced to a CNEL or a day-night level (LDN) of 45 dBA, in any habitable room. Measures incorporated in the Project design will include the following or equivalent subject to City Building Division approval:
a) The Project shall comply with California Title 24 building insulation requirements for exterior walls, roofs and common separating assemblies; b) All units shall be equipped with adequate fresh air ventilation, per the requirements of the California Building Standards Code, to meet the interior noise standard with a windows closed condition;
c) Units facing Central Avenue and adjacent to the existing industrial use to the south shall have upgraded windows and sliding glass doors.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth
in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads
or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X
6.14.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would convert the General Plan Land Use Map from a mixed use designation to a high density residential designation.
Assuming an average household size of 4.14 persons10, the Project’s proposed 57 units would generate 236 additional persons in the City, which represents a
0.1% increase over the City’s current 97,775 person population. This increase is nominal. As discussed in Section 6.11.1, converting the Project site to a high density residential is consistent with existing and planned uses in the vicinity of the Project site. Consequently, Project impacts relative to inducement of substantial population growth would be less than significant. b) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The Project site consists currently vacant. The Project would redevelop the site with 57 townhome residential units. Consequently, the Project would not displace existing people or housing.
**
10 State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State — January 1, 2010-2021. Sacramento, California, January 2021.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.14.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project would convert a previous commercially developed property with a residential use, consistent with its current and proposed residential General Plan land use designations, and consistent with surrounding residential uses. The development of the Project site with the proposed 57 residential units will not induce growth or displace people or housing, and would have no impact relative to the other cumulative projects identified by the City. Consequently, cumulative impacts relative to population and housing would not significant.
6.14.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on population and housing. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, 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 any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
6.15.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, 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 any of the public services:
i) Fire Protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection and other related services are provided by the Compton Fire Department. There are four fire stations in the City: Station Number 1 (Fire Headquarters) is located at 201 South Acacia Avenue; Station Number 2 is located at 1320 East Palmer Street; Station Number 3 is located at 1133 Rosecrans Avenue; and Station Number 4 is located Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
at 950 West Walnut Street. Station Number 3 is located closest to the Project site, approximately 0.9 miles northeast.
Currently, the Compton Fire Department has 84 sworn employees and five civilian employees. Its resources include four fire stations and nine front-line emergency vehicles comprised of four fire engines, one truck, two paramedic squads, and two basic life support transport ambulances.11 Its core services include fire and rescue emergency responses, emergency medical services, fire prevention, hazardous materials, and emergency preparedness and public education.
The Compton Fire Department sets its response time goals based on the National Fire Protection Association and national averages, which is between five and seven minutes. Currently, the Compton Fire Department’s response times are slightly above national averages due to a recent decrease in staffing and increase in new housing and warehouse developments in the City.12 The Project would develop a 57 unit single-family master planned community on a currently vacant property, which would increase the population of the City by negligible 0.1%. The new townhomes would be constructed to current CBC and Fire Code standards, including the installation of fire protection systems and automatic sprinkler systems. Additionally, the Project would generate annually recurring revenue to the City in the form of taxes and other miscellaneous charges (e.g., sales tax, property tax, etc.). A portion of such revenue, including direct assessments that are received by the Compton Fire Department, would be available to address costs associated with potential demands for operations and staffing. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically altered fire protection facilities would be less than significant levels.
ii) Police Protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services for the City of Compton are provided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD) under contract with the City. The local LACSD office is the Compton Station and located at 301 South Willowbrook Avenue, approximately 2 miles southeast of the Project site.
The Project would develop a 57 unit single-family master planned community on a currently vacant property, which would increase the population of the City by negligible 0.1%. The new townhomes would be constructed to current CBC and Fire Code standards, within a gated community with contemporary fencing **
11 City of Compton - Fire Dept (comptoncity.org); accessed January 21, 2021. 12 Compton Artesia Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, October 2019; CEQANet; 0naV92zQTqJdhCRn7Myf80_RMcCJTFqz72U3yJZbeROLpQkAdy91DUr0l3r44TsLfCAp73-i9oYb4QgG0; accessed January 20, 2021
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
and exterior lighting. The transition of the site to the proposed residential use is not expected to create increased demands for police services. Additionally, the Project would generate annually recurring revenue to the City in the form of taxes and other miscellaneous charges (e.g., sales tax, property tax, etc.).
A portion of such revenue would be available to address costs associated with potential demands for police services. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically altered police protection facilities would be less than significant.
iii) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Compton is served by the Compton Unified School District (CUSD). The CUSD serves nearly 26,000 students at 36 sites in the City of Compton as well as portions of the cities of Carson and Los Angeles. The CUSD includes 21 elementary schools, seven middle schools, four high schools, and four adult/alternative schools. Schools closest to the Project site include Tibby Elementary School, located 0.5 miles northeast, and the Compton Adult School located immediately west of the site across Central Avenue.
The transition of the Project site to a high density townhome community would put new but nominal demands on school services. As noted previously, the Project would increase the City’s population by a negligible 0.1%.
Per California Government Code (CGC), the Project would be subject to the payment of school impact fees (Section 53080, CGC). As authorized under Section 17620(a) of the California Education Code (CEC) and Section 65995(b) of the CGC, local school districts are authorized to impose and collect school “impact fees” for all residential and non-residential development activities that occur within their jurisdiction to off-set the additional costs associated with the new students that result directly from the construction of new homes. Payment of school impact fees constitutes full mitigation for the school impacts associated with new residential development. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically altered school facilities would be less than significant.
iv) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Compton operates 16 parks that provide approximately 56.6 acres of parkland for the community. In addition to the parkland, the Compton Creek bike path provides about five miles of biking and walking paths alongside the Compton Creek. The park closest to the Project site is Roy Campanella Park, located 0.6 miles to the west. This park, operated by the Los Angeles County Parks and Recreation Department, offers a wide variety of sport and recreational programs.
The General Plan Conservation/Open Space/ Parks and Recreation Element states that public parks in Compton are heavily used, and opportunities for providing new public open space are limited but might be realized as properties including school sites, vacant lots, and railroad rights-of-way are redeveloped.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The General Plan recognizes that private and common usable open space in multifamily courtyards and complexes can lessen the burden on the City's public parks.
With the goal of improving the City’s public parks, the General Plan identifies the amount of land required for parkland dedication at 2.55 acres per one thousand population, and recognizes the Quimby Act fees as an offset for parkland dedication. Consistent with the General Plan and Quimby Act, new development in the City is charged Quimby fees directed toward new park and recreational facilities or upgrade existing facilities for use by the residents. The Project would be required by the City to pay Quimby fees in proportion to its number of proposed dwelling units.
In addition, the Project proposes private open space within its develop, including 12,454 square feet of common open space areas. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically altered park facilities would be reduced to less than significant levels.
e) Other Public Facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. Other public facilities include library and general municipal services. The Los Angeles County Public Library System provides services to Compton, including the Compton Library, located at 240 West Compton Boulevard, approximately 1.6 miles east of the Project site.
As noted previously, the Project would increase the City population by a negligible 0.1%, and would not anticipated to result in significant adverse impacts on the existing library services and facilities and/or other public services provided by the City. These type of public services are typically funded through user fees, property tax or sales tax revenues to which the future Project residents would contribute. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically altered public facilities would be less than significant.
6.15.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse public services impacts, as increased demand would be offset by payment of school, park and user fees and property and sales tax. The cumulative projects identified in Section 2.9.2 of this Initial Study would be subject to similar fees and taxes. Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts to public services.
6.15.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on public services. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.16 RECREATION
RECREATION.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Would the Project 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?
X
b) Does the Project include recreational
facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities
that might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
X
6.16.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 6.15 of this Initial Study, new development in the City is charged Quimby fees directed toward new park and recreational facilities or upgrade existing facilities for use by the residents.
Payment of Quimby fees would off-set the Project’s incremental demand for park facilities. In addition, public park and recreational facilities are also funded through user fees, property tax or sales tax revenues to which the future Project residents would contribute. Consequently, Project impacts relative to substantial physical deterioration of parks or other recreational facilities would be less than significant.
b) Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 2.8 of this Initial Study, the Project would provide 12,454 square feet of common open space areas. The potential environmental impacts of these open space areas are evaluated within this Initial Study and are not found to have a significant effect on the environment. In addition, the Project would be required to pay the Quimby fees which offset the Project’s demand for parks and recreational facilities.
Consequently, Project impacts relative to construction or expansion of recreational Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment would be less than significant.
6.16.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse recreation impacts subject to payment of park fees. The cumulative projects identified in Section 2.9.2 of this Initial Study would be subject to similar park fees.
Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts to recreation facilities or services.
6.16.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on recreation. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.17 TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.3,subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
X
6.17.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Transportation section is based on the “149th and Central Residential Development Traffic Impact Study, City of Compton, California”, (Traffic Impact Study) prepared by RK Engineering Group Inc., contained as Appendix I to this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Transit Facilities. Transit service within the City of Compton includes light-rail and bus public transit provided by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and City of Compton Renaissance Transit System. These transit facilities with connections closest to the Project site include:
METRO BLUE LINE: This north-south light rail line provides daily regional transit service between downtown Los Angeles on the north and Long Beach on the south. The Artesia Station is located to the east of the Acacia Street/Walnut Street intersection approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the Project site.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
METRO BUS SYSTEM: Metro is a public transportation agency servicing cities including Compton within the County of Los Angeles. Metro Bus Route 53 has stops within a 0.1 mile of the Project site, at both the west and east sides of S. Central Avenue at W. Compton Boulevard. The route operates Monday – Friday from approximately 3:50 AM to 11:05 PM at roughly thirty (30) minute intervals, connecting to the California State University (CSU) Dominguez Hills Station to the Beaudry and 4th Street station and the Grand and 3rd Station.
Metro Bus Route 127 also has stops about 0.1 mile from the Project site at the north and south sides of W. Compton Boulevard at S. Central Avenue. The route operates every day from approximately 4:03 AM to 12:52 AM at roughly fifteen (15) minute intervals during peak hours, connecting to the Downey Depot, Compton Station/Martin Luther King and Figueroa and the 117th Harbor Freeway Station.
With existing transit nearby, there will be ample transit available to future Project residents, and the Project would not conflict with circulation or mobility plans related to transit.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. The General Plan Circulation Element identifies bikeways in the City by type. An existing Class 2 bikeway is located on Central Avenue, adjacent to the Project site. (A Class 2 bikeway is a designated lane, approximately 5-feet wide and adjacent to the curb.) This bike way connects to other east-west Class 2 bikeways, including those along Rosecrans Avenue and Alondra Boulevard. These east-west bikeways connect to Class 1 bikeway along Compton Creek. (A Class 1 bikeway is a paved lane completely separated from streets.) Existing sidewalks are located along Central Avenue and 149th Street, adjacent to the Project site.
With existing bikeways and sidewalks nearby and sidewalks and pedestrian areas within the proposed site plan, the Project would not conflict with circulation or mobility plans related to bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
Roadways. The General Plan Circulation Element identifies a Master Plan of Roadways and Arterial Highways that define public streets and highways in the City. Primary public streets serving the Project area include:
CENTRAL AVENUE: Central Avenue is classified as a Major Highway per the City of Compton General Plan. This four-lane roadway extends in a north-south orientation along portions of the City’s western boundary north of El Segundo Boulevard to the City’s southern boundary south of the Artesia Freeway (SR91). Parking is permitted along most of the roadway. Posted speed limit in the vicinity of the proposed project is 30 miles per hour (mph). 149th STREET: 149th Street is classified as a Local Street per the City of Compton General Plan. This two- lane roadway provides circulation within a neighborhood block. Local streets generally are 40 to 50 feet in width with pavement width between 24 to 30 feet. Posted speed limit in the vicinity of the proposed project is 30 mph.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
The Traffic Impact Study reviewed the Project’s impact on adjacent roadways.
To ensure Project vehicular access to and from Central Avenue has no conflicts with traffic flows, the Traffic Impact Study recommended the following measures:
Install stop sign, stop bar and stop legend for outbound traffic at the Central Avenue driveway.
Adequate sight distance should be provided and maintained at the Central Avenue driveway per County of Los Angeles standards:
o The limited use area (area where a clear line of sight is maintained by not installing tall landscaping over 30 inches high or monumentation, etc.) shall be used for the purpose of prohibiting or clearing obstructions to maintain adequate sight distance along Central Avenue. o Limited use area to be kept clear of all obstructions over 30 inches high, including vegetation.
o No trees, walls, or any obstructions shall be allowed in the limited use area.
These measures are added to the Project as Mitigation Measure TR-1. With inclusion of this measure, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less Than Significant. In response to Senate Bill (SB) 743, the California Natural Resource Agency certified and adopted new CEQA Guidelines in December 2018 which now identify Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project's transportation impact under CEQA (§ 15064.3).
Effective July 1, 2020, the previous CEQA metric of level of service (LOS), typically measured in terms of automobile delay, roadway capacity and congestion, generally will no longer constitute a significant environmental impact.
The City of Compton is still in the process of adopting criteria for evaluating VMT impacts under CEQA; including the preferred analysis methodology and thresholds of significance. Per Section 15064.3 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, a qualitative analysis is allowable if existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle miles traveled for the particular project being considered.
The Traffic Impact Study applied a VMT analysis methodology and significance criteria based on the requirements described in Section 21099 of the Public Resources Code and the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (OPR Advisory). The criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts is based on the following: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have been quantified and analyzed in the Air Quality Impact Study contained in Appendix E of this Initial Study. The GHG analysis found that the Project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Specific to VMT, the mobile source GHG emissions generated by Project VMT were quantified in the GHG Analysis, and it was shown that the project would generate approximately 672.09 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) annually from VMT. The mobile source GHG emissions are 77.59% below the applicable threshold of significance for GHG, indicating that the Project’s contribution to VMT, which is directly correlated to GHG emissions, would not lead to a significant impact under CEQA. In addition, the GHG analysis found that the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Consequently, based on the qualitative review presented in the Traffic Impact Study, the Project’s impact to VMT is considered less than significant. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project traffic engineer has worked with the City’s traffic engineering staff to determine the appropriate scope and study area to be evaluated as part of the Project’s traffic study. (Reference Traffic Impact Study, Appendix I.) During the scoping process, a number of intersections were identified for level of service evaluation. Based on the Traffic Impact Study and the level of service analysis contained in that report, the study intersections are all expected to continue to operate with an acceptable level of service, even with the addition of project-generated traffic and other background projects in the area.
Although the Project would result in less than significant impact traffic levels on City streets, the Traffic Impact Study recommended a measures to improve Project vehicular ingress and egress, and reduce potential conflicts with vehicular access on Central Avenue. These measures are discussed in Section 6.17.a of this Initial Study, above, and added to the Project as Mitigation Measure TR-1.
With inclusion of this mitigation, the Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. Entrance to the Project would be gated, and gates would be fit with Knox Box or similar apparatus per County Fire Department standards to allow for emergency vehicles to quickly access the site. In addition, a fire apparatus turnaround would be provided, as shown previously in Figure 13. Given the unusual configuration of the site, with limited street frontage, the proposed access with turnaround is considered by the Applicant and Project traffic engineer as the best option for providing adequate emergency access. Consequently, the Project would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.17.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed above, Mitigation Measure TR-1 will reduce potential conflict with vehicular travel on Central Avenue. Project contributions to VMT are less than significant. There are no cumulative transportation impacts associated with Project.
Consequently, no significant adverse cumulative transportation would result from the Project.
6.17.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measure will be required to mitigate potential Project transportation impacts to less than significant levels:
Mitigation Measure TR-1: Site Access.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Department Responsible: Community Development / Public Works.
Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall demonstrate that the following measures have been completed to the City’s satisfaction:
o Install stop sign, stop bar and stop legend for outbound traffic at the Central Avenue driveway.
o Adequate sight distance should be provided and maintained at the Central Avenue driveway per County of Los Angeles standards:
The limited use area (area where a clear line of sight is maintained by not installing tall landscaping over 30 inches high or monumentation, etc.) shall be used for the purpose of prohibiting or clearing obstructions to maintain adequate sight distance along Central Avenue.
Limited use area to be kept clear of all obstructions over 30 inches high, including vegetation.
No trees, walls, or any obstructions shall be allowed in the limited use area.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
a) Would the Project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of
a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code Section 21074
as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
X
6.18.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
(1)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section
6.5.b of this Initial Study, a records search by the SCCIC was conducted and the results found that no archaeological studies have been conducted in the Project area and as a result, no archaeological resources have been identified.(Reference Appendix F.) SCCIC notes that buried resources could potentially be unearthed during Project grading activities, and therefore, customary caution and a haltwork condition should be in place for all ground-disturbing activities. In the event that any evidence of cultural resources is discovered, all work within the vicinity of the find should stop until a qualified archaeological consultant can assess the find and make recommendations. Mitigation Measure CUL-1, is added to the Project to incorporate SCCIC’s recommendations and protect potential archaeological resources.
A Sacred Lands File (SLF) check of the Project area was conducted by NAHC. (Reference Appendix A.) The NAHC check searched records from the Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and available archaeological inventories. The results of the SLF check was negative.
Regardless of the findings, the NAHC advises consultation with the following tribes: Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation; Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; Gabrielino /Tongva Nation; Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council; Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe; Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. Letters were sent to representatives of each of the NAHC listed tribes inviting each on April 30, 2021, to request formal consultation. (Reference Appendix B). As described in the April 30, 2021 correspondence, under AB 52 each tribe had 30 days and under SB 18 each tribe had 90 days from the date of receipt of the correspondence to advise the City of their interest in consultation. Both the 30-day and 90-day deadlines have passed, and the City did not received a request for consultation from any of the notified tribes.
To continue to account for the possibility that tribal resources could be identified on the Project site, Mitigation Measure TCR-1, below, is added to the Project establishing procedures should tribal resources be uncovered during Project grading activities. With inclusion of this measure and CUL-1, potential impacts relative to historical archaeological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.
(2)A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. California Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1 and Assembly Bill (AB) 52 established a process to assess tribal cultural resources through consultation with the Native American Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
tribal representatives. As discussed above, pursuant to these requirements, letters from the City of Compton were sent to five tribes requesting consultation. Both the 30-day and 90-day deadlines have passed, and the City did not received a request for consultation from any of the notified tribes. However, to continue to account for the possibility that tribal resources could be identified on the Project site, Mitigation Measure TCR-1, below, is added to the Project establishing procedures should tribal resources be uncovered during Project grading activities.
In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (Section 6.5.3) addresses the potential for discovery of human remains if determined to be prehistoric, requiring notification of the NAHC and determination and notification most likely descendant (MLD).
Consequently with inclusion of Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and TCR-1, potential impacts to tribal resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.
6.18.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Mitigation Measure TRC-1 is added to the Project to protect potential tribal resources that could be found on site during excavation activities. Further Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 presented in Section 6.5.3 of this Initial Study would reduce potential impacts to potential tribal remains. Similarly, through these mitigations and the tribal consultation process required from each cumulative project, cumulative impacts relative to tribal resources would also be reduced to less than significant levels.
6.18.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measure will be required to mitigate potential Project impacts related to tribal resources to less than significant levels:
Mitigation Measure TRC-1: Native American Monitoring.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits.
Department Responsible: Community Development.
If potential Native American resources are uncovered during grading, the applicant shall be required to halt work within 50 feet of the find, inform the Director of Community Development or his/her designee immediately and retain a qualified professional archaeologist and an experienced and certified Native American monitor of Gabrieleño heritage to examine the material to determine whether it is a “unique cultural resource” as defined in Section 21083.2 (g) of the State CEQA Statues. If this determination is positive, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the archaeologist and Native American monitor. Work may continue outside the area of the find. However, no further work shall occur in theimmediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning same filed with the County, a designated repository as appropriate and made available to interested representatives of Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the project that
it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
state or local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local infrastructure,
or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid
waste?
X
6.19.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. The Project is an infill development that would connect to existing utility connections currently available to the site. As discussed in Section 6.10 of Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
this Initial Study, the quality of the wastewater that would be generated by the residential Project is not anticipated to include any materials that would cause the wastewater treatment plant that would serve the project to exceed the wastewater treatment requirements established by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. Consequently, the Project would not require or result in the relocation of new or expanded utilities.
b) Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Less Than Significant Impact. Water supply to the Project site is provided by the City of Compton Water Utility District (CWUD), which obtains its water from groundwater pumped via local municipal wells in the adjudicated Central Groundwater Basin (Central Basin), and from imported surface water contracted by the City through the MWD. The CWUD delivers water services to more than 15,000 service connections through approximately 156 miles of water mains. The distribution system consists of a pipeline system, five water tanks with a total storage capacity of 12.75 million gallons, one pressure zone, and nine ground water wells.
The Central Basin from which the City extracts groundwater is one of five adjudicated groundwater sub-basins in the Los Angeles Basin. As an adjudicated groundwater basin, the courts have assigned specific water rights to water users within the Central Basin via an Adjudication Judgement, which likewise compels the cooperation of groundwater users who might otherwise refuse to limit their pumping. The Central Basin receives additional replenishment from the San Gabriel and Rio Hondo Spreading Basins, which receive a blend of imported water and recycled water.
Developing the Project site with 57 townhomes at a high density would increase City population by a negligible 0.1%. This increase is nominal and the development and future residents will be required to pay water impact fees and water use fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for water. The Project would connect to the existing water line at the northern portion of the site, and would be required by the CBC to install low flow water fixtures that conserve water. Consequently, potential adverse impacts relative to water supplies would be less than significant.
c) Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact. Wastewater collection and treatment in the City is provided by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District (LACSD). As a public agency created under State law to manage wastewater and solid waste on a regional scale, LACSD consists of 24 independent special districts across the County of Los Angeles. Compton is located primarily in LACSD Districts No. 1 and Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
No. 8, with small portions of the eastern and southeastern parts of the City in Districts No. 2 and No. 3.
Wastewater is collected in Compton via an existing 143 mile long system of sewer lines maintained by the City Department of Public Works and Municipal Utilities’ Street Maintenance Division. Wastewater collected from the City is conveyed to the LACSD’s Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP), located at 24501 S Figueroa Street in the City of Carson. The JWPCP provides both primary and secondary treatment for approximately 260 million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD) and has a total permitted capacity of 400 MGD. Treated effluent is then discharged from JWPCP through an ocean outfall. 13
As discussed above, Project is an infill development that would connect to existing utility connections currently available to the site. Developing the Project site with 57 townhomes at a high density would increase City population by a negligible 0.1%. This increase is nominal and the development and future residents will be required to pay wastewater impact fees and use fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for wastewater facilities. The Project would connect to the existing wastewater line at the northern portion of the site, and would be required by the CBC to install low flow fixtures that conserve water.
Consequently, potential adverse impacts relative to wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant.
d) Would the Project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less Than Significant Impact. Solid waste services in the City are provided through a contract with Republic Services. Solid waste and recycle loads are taken to Republic’s Compton Transfer Station for processing. From the transfer station, waste loads are loaded into transfer trailers and hauled to and disposed of at Sunshine Canyon Landfill in Sylmar.
14 Other disposal facilities include the
Southeast Resource Recovery Facility in Long Beach for recycling, and the El Sobrante Landfill in Corona and Puente Hills Landfill in Industry.
Developing the Project site with 57 townhomes at a high density would increase City population by a negligible 0.1%. This increase is nominal and the development and future residents will be required to pay solid waste collection fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for solid waste services and facilities. Consequently, the Project impacts relative to solid waste generation and capacity and solid waste reduction goals would be less than significant. **
13 Compton Artesia Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, October 2019. 14 Waste Evaluation and Enforcement Branch Staff Report. Summary of the City of Compton’s Compliance Review and Consideration of the Issuance Compliance Order CO 018-002”; accessed July 31, 2020.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
e) Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. Recycling services are part of the City’s solid waste program. Typical services include collection of recyclables such as glass, metals and plastic. The City also provides contact information for e-waste and household hazardous waste. Future Project residents would be required to participate in recycling as part of the refuse collection program. Although the Project would increase City population by 0.1%, this increase is nominal and future residents would be required to pay refuse collection fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for wastewater services. Consequently, Project impacts relative to compliance with solid waste regulations would be less than significant.
6.19.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse utilities and service systems impacts, as increased demand would be offset by payment of applicable impact fees and user fee. The cumulative projects identified in Section 2.9.2 of this Initial Study would be subject to similar analysis, and applicable impact and user fees. Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts to utilities and service systems.
6.19.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
6.20 WILDFIRE
WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
6.20.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Compton is nearly entirely built out, and is near completely urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City but does address the potential for stationary fires. Service by the Compton Fire Department and adequate water supply and flow are discussed by the General Plan as local tools to address potential fires.
As discussed in Section 6.9.f of this Initial Study, entrance to the Project would be gated, and gates would be fit with Knox Box or similar apparatus per County Fire Department standards to allow for emergency vehicles to quickly access the site. In addition, a fire apparatus turnaround would be provided, consistent with the 2019 Fire Code, as shown previously in Figure 13, Project Emergency Access Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton
Features. The Project would provide adequate emergency access, and the Project would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. Compton is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City. The Project would redevelop the site with new residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. Consequently, the Project would not exacerbate wildfire risks. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact. As discussed above, Compton is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City.
The Project would redevelop the site with new residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. The Project would be located on an infill site surrounded by urban development. Consequently, the Project would not require installation or maintenance of roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities that could exacerbate fire risk. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. As discussed above, Compton is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City.
The Project would redevelop the site with new residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. The Project would be located on an infill site surrounded by urban development. process grading plan review and permit issuance. In addition, Project construction must comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report. Consequently, the Project is not expected to expose people or structures to significant risks related to flooding or landslides.
6.20.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant adverse impacts relative to wildfire. Neither the Project or cumulative projects listed in Section 2.9.2. of this Initial Study are within a designated wildfire area.
Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts related to wildfire risks.
Initial Study 250 N. Central Residential Project
City of Compton