CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Maria Teresa Del Rio, Mayor Pro Tem
Jesse Alvarado, Council Member
Victor Farfan, Council Member
Mike Gomez, Council Member Luis Roa, Mayor
Tuesday, October 25, 2022
Regular Meeting, 6:00 PM
Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
Pablo Rubio, City Clerk
Meeting Location: City Council Chambers, 21815 Pioneer Boulevard, Hawaiian Gardens, California. Via Zoom Link (Provided below)
ADA Information: The City of Hawaiian Gardens complies with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Anyone needing special assistance please contact the City Clerk’s Department at (562) 4202641 x 240, at least one (1) business day prior to the meeting so that we may accommodate you.
Bilingual Information: Anyone needing a Spanish bilingual interpreter for ORAL COMMUNICATION ONLY, please contact the City Clerk’s Department at (562) 4202641 x 240, at least one (1) business day prior to the meeting so that we may accommodate you.
THE MEETING WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WITH LIMITED SEATING CAPACITY TO ALLOW FOR SOCIAL DISTANCING. VIRTUAL VIEWING AND PARTICIPATION OPPORTUNITIES ARE STILL BEING PROVIDED. ALL PERSONS WHO ATTEND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE STRONGLY RECOMMENDED TO WEAR A FACE MASK/FACE SHIELD AT ALL TIMES AND PRACTICE SOCIAL DISTANCING.
PLEASE NOTE THAT IN LIGHT OF AB 361, CURRENT COUNTY CASE LEVELS, AND/OR GUIDANCE FROM STATE AND LOCAL HEALTH AUTHORITIES, THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS BEING CONDUCTED AS A HYBRID VIRTUAL MEETING AND IN PERSON MEETING. STAFF WILL PRACTICE SOCIAL DISTANCING AND WILL FOLLOW PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY GUIDELINES. THIS MEETING WILL BE A HYBRID VIRTUAL MEETING (I.E., INPERSON AND VIRTUAL MEETING OPTIONS). CITY OFFICIALS, STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SUBJECT TO SOCIAL DISTANCING REQUIREMENTS, AND/OR VIRTUALLY USING THE ZOOM PLATFORM.
The meeting can be viewed via various platforms as follows:
City of Hawaiian Gardens local cable/channel:
ATT 99
FRONTIER 16
Spectrum 36
Live Stream via City website at: www.hgcity.org.
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Maria Teresa Del Rio, Mayor Pro Tem
Jesse Alvarado, Council Member
Victor Farfan, Council Member
Mike Gomez, Council Member
Luis Roa, Mayor
Tuesday, October 25, 2022
Regular Meeting, 6:00 PM
Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
Pablo Rubio, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 Page 1
ATT 99
FRONTIER 16
Spectrum 36
Live Stream via City website at: www.hgcity.org.
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Maria Teresa Del Rio, Mayor Pro Tem
Jesse Alvarado, Council Member
Victor Farfan, Council Member
Mike Gomez, Council Member
Luis Roa, Mayor
Tuesday, October 25, 2022
Regular Meeting, 6:00 PM
Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
Pablo Rubio, City Clerk
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS AND AGENDA GENERAL COMMENTS ARE TO BE SUBMITTED AND CONDUCTED AS FOLLOWS:
VIA WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE / ECOMMENT: Members of the public who wish to comment on matters before the City should submit written correspondence to the City Hall Black Drop Box or the following email address: [email protected], or by ecomment on the City’s website, by no later than Tuesday, October 25, 2022 at 4:00pm. Note: Written correspondence will not be read into the record during the meeting; however, correspondence received by 4:00pm will be forwarded to the City Council, made a part of the official record, and made available for public review during the meeting If submitting a comment pertaining to an agenda item, please reference the agenda item.
INPERSON COMMENT the City Council shall provide members of the public the opportunity to address the City Council on any issues within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council or to speak on items on and off the agenda, except for Public Hearing items. Each speaker shall be limited to three (3) minutes of public comment at each regular meeting. The City Council shall not discuss or take action relative to any public comment unless authorized by California Government Code Section 54954.2(b). Face Masks/Face Shields are strongly recommended for all inperson comments and attendance.
ZOOM: All members of the public participating via Zoom will be placed on mute, except for during the opportunity for public comments and when recognized by the Mayor. Members of the public may participate via Zoom by logging on via the information below:
Meeting Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9643544069?
pwd=UWtQamNIaEIxYnlwdjlSUCtiNEhQdz09
Meeting ID: 964 354 4069 Passcode: HG1
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,9643544069#,,,,*260613# US (San Jose)
+14086380968,,9643544069#,,,,*260613# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
Meeting ID : 964 354 4069
Passcode (VIA PHONE ONLY): 260613
Members of the public shall have the right to observe and offer public comment at the public meeting, consistent with the public's rights of access and public comment otherwise provided for by the Brown Act, as applicable (including, but not limited to, the requirement that such right of access and public
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 Page 2
+16699006833,,9643544069#,,,,*260613# US (San Jose)
+14086380968,,9643544069#,,,,*260613# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
Meeting ID : 964 354 4069
Passcode (VIA PHONE ONLY): 260613
Members of the public shall have the right to observe and offer public comment at the public meeting, consistent with the public's rights of access and public comment otherwise provided for by the Brown Act, as applicable (including, but not limited to, the requirement that such right of access and public comment be made available in a manner consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act). The City Council will participate in a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, October 25, 2022 at 6:00pm via inperson and teleconference (Zoom).
PROCLAMATIONS AND CERTIFICATES
1. RECOGNITION OF THE RED RIBBON WEEK POSTER CONTEST WINNERS
PRESENTATIONS
1. PRESENTATION BY ANJELIQUE GRANADOS, COMMUNITY LIBRARY MANAGER, HAWAIIAN GARDENS LIBRARY
AGENDA ORGANIZATION
This is the time for the City Council to discuss any changes in the order of agenda items.
A. PUBLIC HEARING(S) / HEARING(s)
1. Recommendation to open the public hearing, receive public testimony, and close the public hearing; waive full reading and adopt on second reading by title only, Ordinance No. 2022604, amending various provisions of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code regarding Oversized Vehicle Parking and finding the Ordinance not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
2. Recommendation to:
1. Open the public hearing, receive public testimony, close the public hearing; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 0502022 which:
a. Establishes a Schedule of Civil Penalties for Oversized Vehicle Parking Violations; and
b. Finds that the adoption of the attached resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Sections 15060(c) (2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3).
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
3. Recommendation to: 1. Reopen Public Hearing and allow the public and developer to provide testimony regarding PLNG2021002, An Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Map, from General Commercial to High Density Residential (R4) for property located at 12345 Carson Street, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 7066 017127;InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration(MND)andMitigation
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 Page 3
oatos;ad
b. Finds that the adoption of the attached resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Sections 15060(c) (2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3).
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
3. Recommendation to: 1. Reopen Public Hearing and allow the public and developer to provide testimony regarding PLNG2021002, An Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Map, from General Commercial to High Density Residential (R4) for property located at 12345 Carson Street, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 7066 017127; Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) under the California Environmental Quality Act; PLNG20210025 Rezoning a property from C4 (General Commercial) to R4, and Site Plan and Architectural Design of a new 13unit apartment complex.
2. Direct Staff to prepare resolutions approving PLNG20210026, MND/MMP, PLNG20210025; and Site Plan and Architectural Design for a new 13unit apartment complex located at 12345 Carson Street, APN: 7066017127.
3. Direct Staff to prepare resolutions denying PLNG20210026, MND, and MMP PLNG20210025; and Site Plan and Architectural Design for a new 13unit apartment complex located at 12345 Carson Street, APN: 7066017127.
4. Direct Staff to request additional information from developer.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
B. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ON THE AGENDA
That the City Council waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions on the agenda and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
2. Recommendation to continue to authorize virtual and hybrid City Council meetings as well as virtual and hybrid meetings for all other City Boards, Commissions, Committees, or Agencies Pursuant to AB 361.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
3. Recommendation to receive and file the Community Development Department, Planning Division report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
4. Recommendation to receive and file the Community Development Department, Building & Safety Division report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
5. Recommendation to receive and file the Community Development Department, Code Enforcement Division report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 Page 4
Planning Division report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
4. Recommendation to receive and file the Community Development Department, Building & Safety Division report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
5. Recommendation to receive and file the Community Development Department, Code Enforcement Division report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
6. Recommendation to receive and file the Window Security Bar Removal Program updated report for the month of September 2022 as presented.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
7. Recommendation to receive and file Treasurer’s report for August and September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
8. Recommendation to receive and file warrants processed during the period of October 1 to October 14, 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
9. Recommendation to receive and file the Public Works Department Permits Report for the month of September 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
10. Recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 0512022 of the City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens, County of Los Angeles, State of California approving the exchange of FY 20222023 Proposition A funds between the City of Hawaiian Gardens and the City of La Verne, California and authorizing the City Manager to execute all necessary documents and to modify the FY 2223 budget.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
11. Recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 0532022, appointing a Member and Alternate(s) to the Governing Board of the Los Angeles Gateway Region Integrated Regional Water Management Joint Powers Authority.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
12. Recommendation to cancel the Regular City Council Meetings of Tuesday, November 22, and December 27, 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
13. Recommendation to approve the minutes for the City Council meeting of Tuesday, October 11, 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
C. DISCUSSION ITEM(S)
1 RecommendationtoauthorizetheEngineeringDivisiontoconductastudyfor
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 Page 5
12. Recommendation to cancel the Regular City Council Meetings of Tuesday, November 22, and December 27, 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
13. Recommendation to approve the minutes for the City Council meeting of Tuesday, October 11, 2022.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
C. DISCUSSION ITEM(S)
1. Recommendation to authorize the Engineering Division to conduct a study for consideration of OnStreet Parking Space Marking Program on residential streets.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
2. Recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 0522022 amending the 20222023 fiscal year budget.
SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Recommendation.
D. COMMITTEE REPORT(S)
E. NEW BUSINESS
F. ORAL STAFF REPORT(S)
G. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT(S)
H. ORAL COUNCIL REPORT(S)
I. CLOSED SESSION
J. ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the next Regular City Council meeting to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:00 PM.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 Page 6
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A1
DATE: October 25, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation to open the public hearing, receive public testimony, and close the public hearing; waive full reading and adopt on second reading by title only, Ordinance No. 2022-604, amending various provisions of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code regarding Oversized Vehicle Parking and finding the Ordinance not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND:
On September 19, 2022, the City Council introduced and conducted the first reading on Ordinance No. 2022-604, which is an ordinance amending various provisions of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (“HGMC”) to regulate oversized vehicle parking on City streets (“Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance”). The Council’s September 19th agenda report for this ordinance is attached as Attachment 1. In accordance with state law, the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance was noticed for adoption and a public hearing to be held on October 11, 2022.
Following the Council’s September 19th meeting, staff received comments from Councilmember Farfan regarding potential amendments to the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.
Council amended the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance at the October 11th meeting, introduced as first reading and set the public hearing and second reading (i.e., adoption) for October 25th (with newspaper notices running on Friday, October 14th and Friday, October 21st). The ordinance would go into effect on November 24, 2022 (i.e., 30 days after October 25th). This ordinance is attached as Attachment 3.
Agenda Item #A1
October 25, 2022
ENVIRONMENTAL:
This Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” under CEQA and because the Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines section 15060, subd. (c)(2), (3).) Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines a project as the whole of an action, which could potentially result in either a direct physical change, or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change, in the environment. Here, the Ordinance will not result in any construction or development, and it will not have any other effect that would physically change the environment. The Ordinance therefore does not qualify as a project subject to CEQA.
In the alternative, even if the Ordinance did qualify as a “project” under CEQA, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), which exempts projects from CEQA “[w]here it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Thus, even if the Ordinance could result in some physical change in the environment, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds to implement the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance are available in the current adopted budget. Minimal funds will be needed to implement the permit program and install signage. Also pending are the civil penalties (i.e., parking ticket amounts) for violations of the ordinance—the establishment of which are agendized as a separate item before the Council this evening.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
1 – September 19, 2022 Oversized Vehicle Parking Agenda Report 2 – October 11, 2022 Oversized Vehicle Parking Agenda Report 3 – Ordinance No. 2022-604 as introduced on October 11, 2022
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A1
DATE: September 19, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION:
RECOMMENDATION TO INTRODUCE FOR FIRST READING, PROCEED BY TITLE ONLY, AND WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ORDINANCE NO. 2022-604, AMENDING
VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE HAWAIIAN GARDENS MUNICIPAL CODE
REGARDING OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE
NOT SUBJECT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
A. THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A “PROJECT” UNDER CEQA AND
BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN A DIRECT OR REASONABLY FORESEEABLE INDIRECT PHYSICAL CHANGE IN THE ENVIRONMENT. (STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15060, SUBD. (C)(2), (3).)
B. THE ORDINANCE FALLS WITHIN THE “COMMON SENSE” EXEMPTION SET FORTH IN STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061, SUBDIVISION (B)(3), WHICH EXEMPTS ACTIVITY FROM CEQA WHERE “IT CAN BE SEEN WITH
CERTAINTY THAT THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY THAT THE ACTIVITY IN QUESTION MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT; AND
2. SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 AND DIRECT STAFF TO PROVIDE NOTICE THEREOF AS REQUIRED BY LAW.
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND:
The City has received numerous complaints regarding oversized vehicles parking on City streets. Currently, the City’s regulations governing oversized vehicle parking are scattered across various provisions of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (“HGMC”).
Attachment 1
Agenda Item #A1
September 19, 2022
(See e.g., HGMC, §§ 10.20.030, 10.36.020, 10.36.030). The attached Ordinance (Attachment 1) updates and streamlines the City’s oversized vehicle parking regulations as described in the following section.
ANALYSIS:
Oversized vehicle parking—especially in residential neighborhoods—continues to be an issue in the City. Continuous oversized vehicle parking contributes to numerous adverse consequences that impact the health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents and visitors. These consequences include, but are not limited to:
• Obstructions and Visibility. Oversized vehicle parking raises unique public safety concerns, including the obstruction of access to rights-of-way, reduced sight distance, and reduced visibility at intersections; and
• Damage to City Streets. Oversized vehicles are typically heavier vehicles or trailers and thus have the potential to cause excessive wear and tear on streets; and • Accessibility. Some oversized vehicles accumulate and discharge trash and debris in and around areas where vehicles are parked. The accumulation and storage of trash, debris and other personal items in an around areas where oversized vehicles are parked has caused accessibility to hazards by obstructing and/or blocking sidewalks and preventing safe passage;
• Reduced Parking. Due to their size, oversized vehicles reduce the number of available on-street parking spaces by utilizing limited space that could accommodate a number of smaller vehicles. Parking scarcity negatively impacts the City’s residents and visitors by, among other things, making the City a less attractive destination and adding trip time for drivers who are searching for parking.
The proposed Ordinance amends the HGMC by collapsing the City’s oversized vehicle parking regulations into Chapter 10.36, which will be renamed “Oversized Vehicle Parking Regulations.” Subject to limited exceptions, the new Chapter 10.36 will prohibit oversized vehicles from parking on City streets. Covered vehicles include those weighing more than 6,000 pounds, exceeding 22 feet in length or 7 feet in height, as well as camping trailers, campers, fifth wheel travel trailers, house cars, mobile homes, semi-trailers, trailer coaches, and recreational vehicles.
Certain oversized vehicles are exempt from the parking prohibition, including: (1) vehicles parked in connection with the performance of a service at a nearby property; (2) oversized vehicles belonging to a federal, state, or local authority or public utility conducting official business; and (3) vehicles belonging to residents or guests of residents that are parked in accordance with a City-issued parking permit.
Features of the oversized vehicle permit parking framework include the following:
• Obtaining a permit will allow individuals to park their oversized vehicle on public residential streets for up to 72 consecutive hours for loading and unloading purposes.
Agenda Item #A1
September 19, 2022
• After an oversized vehicle has been parked for 72 consecutive hours, the vehicle must vacate the public right-of-way and may not park on any public street for at least 72 consecutive hours.
• Oversized vehicles must park within 1/10th of a mile from the permit’s registered residential address.
• Permits will be issued to City residents only. However, residents can obtain permits on behalf of out of town guests.
• Residents can obtain up to 12 oversized vehicle parking permits each calendar year (inclusive of permits for guests and the resident’s vehicle(s)).
In addition to the above, the Ordinance prohibits electrical, water, gas, telephone or utility connections between a property and an oversized vehicle from encroaching into the public right-of-way (including across or above a street or sidewalk). The Ordinance also includes other minor amendments to the HGMC to remove overlapping standards and ensure consistency across the HGMC with regard to oversized vehicle parking.
IMPLEMENTATION
The Ordinance provides City staff and enforcement personnel with numerous enforcement options, including citing violators for an infraction and issuing a civil penalty (i.e., parking ticket). In order to issue parking tickets, the California Vehicle Code requires the City to adopt a schedule of civil penalties for parking violations. Staff will bring a proposed schedule of civil penalties for parking violations to the City Council for consideration at the September 27, 2022 meeting.
Before the Ordinance can be enforced, the Vehicle Code requires the City to place adequate signage or markings to notify motorists of the Oversized Vehicle parking regulations. The Ordinance includes a directive to staff to comply with this requirement.
The Ordinance also directs enforcement personnel to issue warnings (in lieu of citations) for the first 30 calendar days after the signage or markings have been placed. Staff is recommending this initial 30 day warning period to provide additional notice to the public and allow time for compliance before citations will be issued.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
This Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” under CEQA and because the Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines section 15060, subd. (c)(2), (3).) Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines a project as the whole of an action, which could potentially result in either a direct physical change, or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change, in the environment. Here, the Ordinance will not result in any construction or development, and it will not have any other effect that would physically change the environment. The Ordinance therefore does not qualify as a project subject to CEQA.
Agenda Item #A1
September 19, 2022
In the alternative, even if the Ordinance did qualify as a “project” under CEQA, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), which exempts projects from CEQA “[w]here it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Thus, even if the Ordinance could result in some physical change in the environment, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds to implement this Ordinance are available in the current adopted budget. Minimal funds will be needed to implement the permit program and install signage. Also pending are the penalty fees for violations of this Ordinance. These fees will be adopted by City Council at a future City Council meeting.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Ordinance No. 2022-604
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A1
DATE: October 11, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation to:
1. Open the public hearing, receive public testimony, and close the public hearing;
2. Discuss and consider the following alternatives:
OPTION 1: Waive full reading and adopt on second reading by title only Ordinance No. 2022-604 (Attachment 1B); or
OPTION 2: Provide direction to staff, waive full reading and introduce for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 2022-604 as amended by the City Council (Attachment 2).
3. If the Council proceeds via Option 2 above, then set a public hearing for adoption of the amended Ordinance No. 2022-604 on October 25, 2022 and direct staff to provide notice thereof as required by law.
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND:
On September 19, 2022, the City Council introduced and conducted the first reading on Ordinance No. 2022-604, which is an ordinance amending various provisions of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (“HGMC”) to regulate oversized vehicle parking on City streets (“Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance”). The Council’s September 19th agenda report for this ordinance is attached as Attachment 1A. In accordance with state law, the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance was noticed for adoption and a public hearing to be held on October 11, 2022.
ATTACHMENT 2
Agenda Item #A1
October 11, 2022
Following the Council’s September 19th meeting, staff received comments from Councilmember Farfan regarding potential amendments to the Oversized Vehicle Ordinance. Amending the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance at this stage will require direction from the Council and a new first reading on the amended Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance. The Council’s options regarding next steps and associated timelines are outlined below.
ANALYSIS:
Option 1 – Conduct the Second Reading and Adopt the Ordinance As-Is The Council’s first option is to conduct the second reading and adopt the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance in its current form. Proceeding under this option would result in the ordinance taking effect on November 10, 2022 (i.e., 30 days after October 11th) and enable staff to move forward with implementation (e.g., ordering signs, notifying the public). It would also provide the Council with the opportunity to observe how the ordinance operates in the community for few months. Staff could come back with an update on how implementation is going and, if it seems changes are needed, Council could direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment and return with the desired changes.
Option 2 – Amend the Ordinance, Conduct First Reading and Set Public Hearing for Adoption.
Under state law, any non-clerical changes made after first reading require a new first reading on the amended ordinance. Thus, Council may amend the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance now, but doing so will require a new first reading on the amended ordinance. Under this option, the Council would do a first reading this evening and set the public hearing and second reading (i.e., adoption) for October 25th (with newspaper notices running on Friday, October 14th and Friday, October 21st). If adopted on October 25th, the ordinance would go into effect on November 24, 2022 (i.e., 30 days after October 25th).
To enable the Council to pursue this option, staff prepared Attachment 2—which is an amended version of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance with three areas highlighted for the Council’s input:
· The number of permits residents can obtain in a calendar year.
See HGMC Section 10.36.030(C)(1) on page 6 of Attachment 2. Currently, the ordinance limits residents to 12 permits per calendar year. The Council may increase or decrease this number or leave it as-is.
· Limiting the number of permits an oversized vehicle can receive in a calendar year.
Agenda Item #A1
October 11, 2022
See HGMC Section 10.36.030(C)(1) on page 6 of Attachment 2. As noted above, the ordinance currently limits residents to 12 Oversized Vehicle Parking permits per year. If the Council desires, it can add a limit to the number of permits an oversized vehicle can obtain each year. If the Council pursues this option, staffs’ recommendation is to have the maximum number of permits a vehicle can receive match the maximum number of permits a resident can pull in a year (e.g., if a resident has an RV and can pull 10 permits a year, the resident can use all 10 for their RV if they’d like to). Staff will enforce this restriction by tracking the license plate numbers and/or the vehicle identification number (VIN) associated with each Oversized Vehicle Parking permit issued. · The proximity of an oversized vehicle to the permit’s registered residential address.
See HGMC Section 10.36.030(C)(3)(a) on p. 6 of Attachment 2. Currently, the ordinance requires oversized vehicles to park within 1/10th of a mile from the permit’s registered address. The Council may leave this as-is or adjust the required parking radius upwards or downwards. Should the Council wish to decrease this radius, staffs’ recommendation would be to set the required distance in feet from the permit’s registered residential address (e.g., the oversized vehicle must park within 100 feet of the permit’s address).
ENVIRONMENTAL:
This Ordinance—regardless of the option selected above—is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” under CEQA and because the Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines section 15060, subd. (c)(2), (3).) Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines a project as the whole of an action, which could potentially result in either a direct physical change, or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change, in the environment. Here, the Ordinance will not result in any construction or development, and it will not have any other effect that would physically change the environment. The Ordinance therefore does not qualify as a project subject to CEQA.
In the alternative, even if the Ordinance did qualify as a “project” under CEQA, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), which exempts projects from CEQA “[w]here it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Thus, even if the Ordinance could result in some physical change in the environment, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds to implement the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance are available in the current adopted budget. Minimal funds will be needed to implement the permit program and install Agenda Item #A1
October 11, 2022
signage. Also pending are the civil penalties (i.e., parking ticket amounts) for violations of the ordinance—the establishment of which are agendized as a separate item before the Council this evening.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
1A – September 19, 2022 Oversized Vehicle Parking Agenda Report 1B – Ordinance No. 2022-604 as introduced on September 19, 2022 2 – Ordinance No. 2022-604 with options to amend as identified above 65320.00001\40745261.1
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-604
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE HAWAIIAN GARDENS
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING OVERSIZED VEHICLE
PARKING AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE NOT SUBJECT
TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the City of Hawaiian Gardens (“City”) has received numerous complaints from members of the public regarding the proliferation of oversized vehicles parked on public streets; and
WHEREAS, oversized vehicle parking raises unique public safety concerns, including the obstruction of access to rights-of-way, reduced site distance, and reduced visibility at intersections; and
WHEREAS, oversized vehicles are typically heavier vehicles (often with trailers) and thus have the potential to cause excessive wear and tear on roadways; and WHEREAS, oversized vehicles have also been the source of environmental hazards in the City by discharging waste into the street. Such waste includes gas, oil, and human waste. These discharges create unsanitary conditions for members of the public and also result in downstream impacts as such waste flows into the City’s storm drains; and
WHEREAS, the discharge of waste can also cause damage to City streets by, among other things, staining portions thereof; and
WHEREAS, City staff has observed that some oversized vehicles accumulate and discharge trash and debris in and around areas where vehicles are parked. City staff has been spending an increasing amount of time on fielding complaints from residents regarding trash and debris from oversized vehicle parking; and WHEREAS, the accumulation and storage of trash, debris, and other personal items in and around areas where oversized vehicles are parked has caused accessibility hazards by obstructing and/or blocking sidewalks and preventing safe passage thereon; and
WHEREAS, due to their large storage capacities, oversized vehicles can be increased targets for criminal activity such as burglaries, vandalism and vehicle thefts; and
WHEREAS, the availability of sufficient parking in the City has been an issue of increasing concern for residents and visitors. Continuous oversized vehicle parking exacerbates this issue by further reducing the number of available parking spaces on the ATTACHMENT 3
65320.00001\40745261.1
-2-
street. Given their size, oversized vehicles utilize limited space that could accommodate a number of smaller vehicles; and
WHEREAS, parking scarcity negatively impacts the City’s residents and visitors by, among other things, making the City a less attractive destination and adding trip time for drivers who are searching for parking; and
WHEREAS, reduced parking opportunities, environmental hazards, increased wear and tear of the City’s roadways, higher probability for traffic hazards, and the increased possibility for criminal activity collectively deteriorate the safety, tranquility, aesthetics and other similar values in the City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Cal. Const. Art. XI, Sec. 7 and under the City’s general police powers, the City is empowered and charged with responsibility for the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the California Vehicle Code (“CVC”) provides the City with extensive authority to regulate parking within its boundaries. For example, CVC Section 35701 allows the City to prohibit the use of vehicles on City streets that exceed a maximum gross weight limit. CVC Section 21101(c) likewise allows the City to prohibit the use of highways by certain vehicles; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the foregoing, CVC Section 22507 authorizes the City to prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles on certain streets or highways, or portions thereof, during all or certain hours of the day; and WHEREAS, CVC Section 22507 also empowers the City to adopt parking permit programs for the benefit of residents with dwellings adjacent to the regulated public streets. CVC Section 22507.5 contains many of these same authorizations; and WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing, the City Council desires to amend the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (“HGMC”) in order to regulate the parking of oversized vehicles in the City; and
WHEREAS, subject to limited exceptions, this ordinance (“Ordinance”) prohibits oversized vehicles from parking on public streets in the City. Oversized vehicles encompassed within this Ordinance include: (1) vehicles that weigh more than 6,000 pounds or exceed 22 feet in length or 7 feet in width and 7 feet in height; and (2) camp trailers, campers, fifth wheel travel trailers, house cars, mobile homes, trailer coaches, and recreational vehicles; and
WHEREAS, various vehicles are exempt from the oversized vehicle parking restrictions, including: (1) vehicles parked in connection with the performance of a service to or on a nearby property; (2) oversized vehicles belonging to a federal, state, or local authority or public utility conducting official business; and (3) vehicles belonging to 65320.00001\40745261.1
-3-
residents or guests of residents that are parked in accordance with a City-issued parking permit; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance’s parking restrictions reflect the City Council’s desire to revise the City’s parking regulations in a manner that: (1) is reflective of and consistent with residents’ values; (2) further mitigates the aesthetic and public safety concerns associated with the parking of oversized vehicles on public streets; (3) increases the availability of parking for the City’s residents and visitors; and, (4) preserves the character of neighborhoods for the benefit of public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, prior to adoption, the City gave public notice of a City Council public hearing to consider this Ordinance as required by law; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the Recitals above are true and correct and are incorporated herein.
Section 2. Environmental. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” under CEQA and because the Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines section 15060, subd. (c)(2), (3).) Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines a project as the whole of an action, which could potentially result in either a direct physical change, or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change, in the environment.
Here, the Ordinance will not result in any construction or development, and it will not have any other effect that would physically change the environment. The Ordinance therefore does not qualify as a project subject to CEQA.
In the alternative, even if the Ordinance did qualify as a “project” under CEQA, it would be exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), which exempts projects from CEQA “[w]here it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Thus, even if the Ordinance could result in some physical change in the environment, the Ordinance is exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 3. Code Amendment. Chapter 10.36 of Title 10 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:
“Chapter 10.36 – Oversized Vehicle Parking Regulations
65320.00001\40745261.1
-4-
10.36.010 Purpose
The purpose of this Chapter is to reduce the adverse impacts associated with Oversized Vehicle parking. Such impacts include, but are not limited to, the following:
A. Oversized Vehicle parking raises unique public safety concerns, including the obstruction of access to rights-of-way, reduced sight distance, and reduced visibility at intersections.
B. Oversized Vehicles are typically heavier vehicles or trailers and thus have the potential to cause excessive wear and tear on roadways.
C. Oversized Vehicles have been the source of environmental hazards in the City by discharging waste into the street. Such waste includes gas, oil, and human waste. These discharges create unsanitary conditions for members of the public and also result in downstream impacts as such waste flows into the City’s storm drains. The discharge of waste has also caused damage to City streets by staining portions thereof.
D. Some Oversized Vehicles accumulate and discharge trash and debris in and around areas where vehicles are parked. The accumulation and storage of trash, debris, and other personal items in and around areas where oversized vehicles are parked has caused accessibility hazards by obstructing and/or blocking sidewalks and preventing safe passage thereon.
E. Oversized Vehicle parking exacerbates the City’s parking issues by further reducing the number of available parking spaces on the street. Given their size, Oversized Vehicles utilize limited space that could accommodate a number of smaller vehicles. Parking scarcity negatively impacts the City’s residents and visitors by, among other things, making the City a less attractive destination and adding trip time for drivers who are searching for parking.
10.36.020 Definitions
The following words and terms as used in this Chapter have the following meanings:
A. “Loading and Unloading” shall mean loading or unloading passengers or materials to or from an Oversized Vehicle including the activities required to prepare the vehicle for travel or storage.
B. “Oversized Vehicle: shall mean any of the following:
1. Any motorized vehicle as defined in Section 670 of the California Vehicle Code or combination of motorized vehicle(s) and/or non-motorized vehicle(s), including any attached trailers, vehicles or loads thereon, which exceeds 6,000 pounds in weight, 22 feet in length or 7 feet in width 65320.00001\40745261.1
-5-
and 7 feet in height. To determine the height, width or length of a vehicle defined in this Section, any extension to the vehicle caused by mirrors, air conditioners, or similar attachments allowed by Section 35109, 35110 or 35111 of the Vehicle Code, as the same may be amended from time to time, shall not be included.
2. Any attached or unattached camp trailer, camper, fifth wheel travel trailer, house car, mobile home, semitrailer, trailer, trailer coach, as defined in Vehicle Code Sections 242, 243, 324, 362, 396, 550, 630, 635, or successor statutes, or any recreational vehicle, as defined by California Health and Safety Code Section 18010 or successor statute.
10.36.030 Parking Prohibition; Exemptions
A. Parking Prohibition. Except as provided in subsections (B) and (C) below, no person shall stop, stand, park, or leave standing any Oversized Vehicle on any public street in the City.
B. Exemptions. Subsection (A) shall not apply to any of the following:
1. Oversized Vehicles involved in an emergency or being repaired under emergency conditions. Emergency parking may be allowed for 24 consecutive hours where an Oversized Vehicle is left parked on a City street because of mechanical breakdown or because of physical incapacity of the driver or owner.
2. Oversized Vehicles belonging to federal, state or local authorities or public utilities that are parked while the operator of the vehicle is conducting official business.
3. Oversized Vehicles actively engaged in Loading and Unloading or deliveries of person, merchandise, wares, supplies, goods or other materials in the course of construction or other work from or to an adjacent residence or building. Oversized Vehicles actively engaging in Loading and Unloading shall park at the street curb immediately adjacent to the residence or building, or within 400 feet of the residence if this area is not available for parking due to curb configuration or codified parking restrictions.
4. Oversized Vehicles that are parked while the operator is actively engaged in performing a service to or on a property in the block in which such Oversized Vehicle is parked.
5. Oversized Vehicles parked in compliance with subsection (C) below.
C. Oversized Vehicle Permit Parking.
65320.00001\40745261.1
-6-
1. The prohibitions provided in subsection (A) shall not apply to an Oversized Vehicle with a parking permit issued by the City. The City Manager or his/her designee is directed and authorized to adopt and promulgate policies and procedures governing issuance of Oversized Vehicle parking permits. Such policies and procedures shall include an application with objective requirements for granting an Oversized Vehicle parking permit. The City Manager or his/her designee shall review and approve or deny all applications. The City Council shall by resolution set the amount of any fee charged for such Oversized Vehicle parking permits. Oversized Vehicle parking permits will only be issued to residents of the City of Hawaiian Gardens. Over the course of a calendar year, a resident may obtain a maximum of 12 Oversized Vehicle parking permits (inclusive of permits for guests and the resident’s vehicle(s)). No vehicle may receive more than 12 Oversized Vehicle parking permits in a calendar year.
2. Residents may obtain Oversized Vehicle parking permits on behalf of out-of-town guests traveling with an Oversized Vehicle. Residents must apply for and obtain such permits on behalf of their guests. A separate permit is required for each Oversized Vehicle (e.g., a separate permit would be required for each of the resident’s own Oversized Vehicles as well as any out-of-town guest’s Oversized Vehicle).
3. Oversized Vehicles with a valid permit shall be subject to the following parking regulations, which shall be in addition to the objective requirements created by the City Manager or their designee:
a. An Oversized Vehicle must park within 100 feet from the permit’s registered residential address.
b. Parking with a permit is allowed on public residential streets for up to 72 consecutive hours for Loading and Unloading.
c. After an Oversized Vehicle has been parked for 72 consecutive hours, the Oversized Vehicle must vacate the public right-of-way and may not park on any public street in the City for at least 72 consecutive hours.
10.36.040 Utility Connections
No electrical, water, gas, telephone or other utility connection from a property to an Oversized Vehicle shall encroach into any public right-of-way, including across or above any street or sidewalk. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, electrical cords, extension cords, hoses, or cables. This Section 65320.00001\40745261.1
-7-
10.36.040 applies to all Oversized Vehicles in the City, including those covered by Section 10.36.040 (B) and (C).
10.36.050 Enforcement
A. Any violation of Section 10.36.030 or 10.36.040 may be subject to the following:
1. Prosecution by the City Attorney or authorized representative for an infraction in accordance with Section 42001 of the California Vehicle Code; or
2. A civil penalty (i.e., parking ticket) in accordance with the schedule of civil penalties for parking violations adopted by resolution of the City Council, the enforcement of which shall be governed by the civil administrative procedures set forth in Division 17, Chapter 1, Article 3 (commencing with Section 40200) of the California Vehicle Code.
B. In addition to the provisions set forth in subsection (A) above, any vehicle parked in violation of Section 10.36.030 or 10.36.040 may be removed and stored at the owner’s expense; provided, that signs are posted giving notice that vehicles so parked may be removed.
Section 4. Code Amendment. Section 10.04.020 (Los Angeles County Vehicle and Traffic Code of Title 10 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline):
“Title 15 of the County of Los Angeles Code entitled "Vehicle and Traffic" as that title currently exists, and/or as it may be amended from time to time by the County of Los Angeles, is hereby adopted by reference, as the Vehicle and Traffic Code of the City of Hawaiian Gardens. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Chapter 10.36 (Oversized Vehicle Parking Regulations) of this Code shall govern in the event of a conflict between Chapter 10.36 and any other provision set forth in Title 15 of the Los Angeles County Code.”
Section 5. Code Amendment. Section 10.20.030 (Parking of Commercial Vehicles) of Title 10 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 6. Effective Date; Parking Signs; Warnings. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days after adoption. In accordance with California Vehicle Code section 22507, this Ordinance’s parking restrictions shall not be enforced until signs or markings giving adequate notice thereof have been placed. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 10.36.050 (Enforcement), for the first 30 calendar days after said signage or markings have been placed, enforcement personnel shall issue warnings in 65320.00001\40745261.1
-8-
lieu of citations. Thereafter, enforcement personnel shall enforce this Ordinance as set forth in Section 10.36.050.
Section 7. Severability. Should any provision of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful, unenforceable or otherwise void, that determination shall have no effect on any other provision of this Ordinance or the application of this Ordinance to any other person or circumstance, and, to that end, the provisions hereof are severable.
The City Council declares that it would have adopted all the provisions of this Ordinance that remain valid if any provisions of this ordinance are declared invalid.
Section 8. Adoption, Certification, and Publication. The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same, or a summary thereof, to be published and/or posted in the manner required by law.
Section 9. Recordation of Proceedings. The documents and materials associated with this ordinance that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at 21815 Pioneer Boulevard, Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716. The City Clerk is the custodian of the record of proceedings.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens, California, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 25th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
__________________________
Luis Roa, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Pablo Rubio
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
Megan K. Garibaldi
City Attorney
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A2
DATE: October 25, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation to:
1. Open the public hearing, receive public testimony, close the public hearing; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 050-2022 which:
a. Establishes a Schedule of Civil Penalties for Oversized Vehicle Parking Violations; and
b. Finds that the adoption of the attached resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3).
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND:
The City Council is in process of adopting an ordinance that regulates oversized vehicle parking on City streets (the “Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance). This ordinance will provide City staff and enforcement personnel with numerous enforcement options, including citing violators for an infraction and issuing a civil penalty (i.e., parking ticket).
In order to issue parking tickets, the California Vehicle Code (“CVC”) requires the City to adopt a schedule of civil penalties at a noticed public hearing.
The attached resolution (Attachment 1) establishes a schedule of civil penalties (i.e., parking ticket amounts) for violations of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance. The public hearing in connection with this resolution was noticed in accordance with state law.
Agenda Item #A2
October 25, 2022
This item was noticed for adoption and a public hearing to be held on October 11, 2022.
At that meeting, the City Council opened the public hearing and continued the item to the October 25, 2022 City Council meeting.
ANALYSIS:
CVC Section 40200 et seq. authorizes cities to impose and collect civil fines and penalties (i.e., parking tickets) for violations of any local ordinance regulation pertaining to the stopping, standing, or parking of a vehicle. To do so, cities must establish a schedule of parking ticket amounts (see CVC, § 40203.5). To the extent feasible, the CVC aims for cities in the same county to have similar parking ticket amounts for similar violations. (Id.) The attached resolution (Attachment 1) establishes a schedule of civil penalties for violations of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance. If adopted by the City Council, the penalties would be as follows:
Section Description Penalty
10.36.030(A) OVERSIZE VEHICLES – FIRST
VIOLATION
$100.00
10.36.030(A) OVERSIZE VEHICLES –
SECOND VIOLATION WITHIN
12 MONTHS OF FIRST
VIOLATION
$200.00
10.36.030(A) OVERSIZE VEHICLES – THIRD
AND EACH ADDITIONAL
VIOLATION WITHIN 12
MONTHS OF THE FIRST
VIOLATION
$500.00
10.36.040 UTILITY CONNECTIONS $50
Research by City staff indicates that the Los Angeles County cities of Malibu and Hermosa Beach have oversized vehicle parking ordinances and impose civil penalties for violations. The $100, $200, and $500 amounts for violations listed in the first three rows above (and in the resolution) match the amounts imposed by those cities.
Adopting the resolution as presented will establish the parking ticket amounts listed above and align the City’s fines with the amounts imposed by Malibu and Hermosa Beach. The Agenda Item #A2
October 25, 2022
Council may also, at its discretion, change the parking ticket amounts imposed. If the Council pursues this option, staffs’ recommendation is to not exceed the amounts provided above.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Adoption of the attached resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) because the activity, which involves establishing the City’s schedule of penalties for parking violations and related charges, will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and Section 15060(c)(3) because the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
FISCAL IMPACT
To be determined based on compliance with Oversized Vehicle Ordinance.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 050-2022 Establishing a Schedule of Civil Penalties for Oversized Vehicle Parking Violations
65320.00001\40659654.3
RESOLUTION NO. 050-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A
SCHEDULE OF CIVIL PENALTIES FOR OVERSIZED
VEHICLE PARKING VIOLATIONS
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code (“CVC”) Section 40200 et seq. authorizes cities to impose and collect civil fines and penalties (i.e., parking tickets) for violations of any local ordinance regulation pertaining to the stopping, standing, or parking of a vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is in process of adopting an ordinance which amends Chapter 10.36 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (“HGMC”) to establish new regulations governing the stopping, standing, or parking of specified oversized vehicles (the “Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance”); and
WHEREAS, violations of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance are subject to various penalties, including civil penalties (i.e., parking tickets) in accordance with the CVC; and
WHEREAS, civil penalties issued in accordance with the CVC are subject to various CVC-specific notice, hearing, and collection procedures; and WHEREAS, among the CVC’s collection procedures is a requirement that individuals pay all outstanding parking tickets before renewing their vehicle registration.
This requirement encourages compliance by those who keep their registration current; and
WHEREAS, to issue civil penalties under the CVC, Section 40203.5 thereof requires the City to establish a schedule of penalties for violations; and WHEREAS, as required by CVC Section 40203.5, this resolution (“Resolution”) establishes a schedule of civil penalties for violations of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 66018, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing in connection with its adoption of this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN
GARDENS, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, FIND, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals provided above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into this Resolution.
ATTACHMENT 1
65320.00001\40659654.3
Section 2. CEQA. This Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) because the activity, which involves establishing the City’s schedule of penalties for parking violations and related charges, will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and Section 15060(c)(3) because the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
Section 3. Establishment of Civil Penalties. The City Council hereby establishes a schedule of civil penalties for violations of Sections 10.36.030 and 10.36.040 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code, which are as follows:
Section Description Penalty
10.36.030(A) OVERSIZE VEHICLES – FIRST
VIOLATION
$100.00
10.36.030(A) OVERSIZE VEHICLES –
SECOND VIOLATION WITHIN
12 MONTHS OF FIRST
VIOLATION
$200.00
10.36.030(A) OVERSIZE VEHICLES –
THIRD AND EACH
ADDITIONAL VIOLATION
WITHIN 12 MONTHS OF THE
FIRST VIOLATION
$500.00
10.36.040 UTILITY CONNECTIONS $50
Section 4. Prior Resolutions. Civil Penalties imposed for violations of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance shall be assessed in accordance with Section 3 of this Resolution. The bail and administrative citation schedules set forth in City Council Resolution Nos. 14-99 and 106-2004 shall not apply to violations of the Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance. In the event of a conflict between this Resolution and any prior City Council resolution, the provisions of this Resolution shall prevail.
Section 5. Record of Proceedings. The documents and materials associated with this Resolution that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at Hawaiian Gardens City Hall, 21815 Pioneer Blvd, Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716. The City Clerk is the custodian of the record of proceedings.
Section 6. Attestation. The City Clerk shall attest as to the adoption and execution of this Resolution and cause the same to be maintained in the permanent records of the City.
65320.00001\40659654.3
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens, California, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 25th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
________________________
Luis Roa, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Pablo Rubio
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________
Megan K. Garibaldi
City attorney
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A3
DATE: October 25, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Elise McCaleb, Community Development Director
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation to: 1. Re-open Public Hearing and allow the public and developer to provide testimony regarding PLNG2021-002, An Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Map, from General Commercial to High Density Residential (R-4) for property located at 12345 Carson Street, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 7066-017-127; Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) under the California Environmental Quality Act; PLNG2021-0025 Rezoning a property from C-4 (General Commercial) to R-4, and Site Plan and Architectural Design of a new 13-unit apartment complex.
2. Direct Staff to prepare resolutions approving PLNG2021-0026, MND/MMP, PLNG2021-0025; and Site Plan and Architectural Design for a new 13-unit apartment complex located at 12345 Carson Street, APN: 7066-017-127.
3. Direct Staff to prepare resolutions denying PLNG2021-0026, MND, and MMP PLNG2021-0025; and Site Plan and Architectural Design for a new 13-unit apartment complex located at 12345 Carson Street, APN: 7066-017-127.
4. Direct Staff to request additional information from developer.
SUMMARY
The Hawaiian Gardens Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-007 recommending to the Hawaiian Gardens City Council (“City Council”) denial of PLNG2021-0026 (General Plan Amendment), an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Map, from General Commercial to High Density Residential (HDR) and case NO. PLNG2021-0025 (Zone Change) to rezone property from C-4 (General Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Residential) for property located at 12345 Carson Street, City of Agenda Item #A3
October 25, 2022
Hawaiian Gardens, California; Assessor Parcel Number 7066-017-012 and denial of case NO. PLNG2021-0025 (Site Plan Review), a request to approve the Site Plan and Architectural Design of a new 13-unit apartment complex on property located at 12345 Carson Street, City of Hawaiian Gardens, California. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) have been prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Hawaiian Gardens Environmental Guidelines which concludes that, with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and the MMP, the Project will not have a significant impact on the environment.
The City Council held a public hearing on July 26, 2022[1] regarding PLNG2021-0026, the IS/MND and MMP, PLNG2021-0025, and Site Plan and Architectural Review (Attachment A). The City Council requested additional information for the project and the public hearing was continued 60-days until September 27, 2022. The City Council requested that the public hearing be continued until October 25, 2022 to allow staff time to review new information that was provided to the City within a week of the meeting. The vote to continue the public hearing until October 25, 2022 was unanimous.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
A General Plan Amendment is a legislative act by the City Council. For a General Plan Amendment to be approved, the following findings should be made by the City Council:
1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest;
2. The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected;
3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
4. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
CITY COUNCIL QUESTIONS
The City Council, at its July 26, 2022 meeting raised questions and concerns regarding the project. In summary, the questions and comments were related to traffic, construction impacts, environmental impacts, building height, and concerns about the lack of open space. The questions and responses from the developer are attached (Attachment B). The questions were not fully addressed by the developer. The answers provided by Urban Pacific were brief in nature and the City would have preferred a more thorough response.
TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT
Traffic is a concern raised the City Council. As part of the IS/MND, a Transportation Assessment was completed by Ganddini on October 12, 2021 and updated on August Agenda Item #A3
October 25, 2022
19, 2022. Based upon Ganddini’s traffic analysis of the proposed 13-units and using the County of Los Angeles Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, it was determined using Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) that the project will generate fewer than 500 new daily trips and fewer than 50 new AM or PM peak hour trips. For this reason, it was determined that the project was exempt from a traffic impact analysis.
The City Engineer reviewed Ganddini’s analysis and made the following findings regarding the methodology. While the City of Hawaiian Gardens generally follows the LA County guidelines, the City reserves the right to have a discussion with the traffic engineer to agree upon the scope, assumption, methodology, etc. prior to preparing a traffic assessment. In the City’s opinion, a Site Access Analysis using LA County guidelines (i.e. Level of Service traffic operational analysis, otherwise know as a traffic impact analysis) should have been completed based upon the magnitude of the project.
In terms of the project description, the project is defined under the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Land Use Code 221 (multi-family housing) which allows up to 3 bedrooms in each unit. The proposed project has 5 bedrooms in each unit and will likely be a multi-generational family. The analysis should have used ITE Land Use Code 220 (single family housing) for traffic generation rates that would have resulted in realistic traffic generation estimates for the project.
CITY OF LAKEWOOD LETTER OF PROJECT OPPOSITION
The City received a letter from the City of Lakewood in opposition to the project on October 19, 2022. The City previously received a letter from the City of Lakewood in opposition to the project on July 1, 2022. The letter dated October 19 concluded that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is inadequate and that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared for the project. Issues of concern included an inaccurate project description, lighting, air quality, potential hazards and hazardous materials; and water and sewer services for the site. Additionally, the letters states that the population estimates are inaccurate, the right-of-way and emergency access are inadequate, and the City has concerns about the impact the project will have on parking for the Lakewood neighborhood. The complete letter is attached (Attachment C).
DENSITY BONUS
The applicant has requested use of a density bonus program per State Law and HGMC §18.90.070 - Density bonuses. The developer will provide 15% or two lower income units, which allows two concessions. The developer requested a reduction in open space and a parking reduction to two cars per unit. For this reason, no additional open space or parking may be required by the City for the project.
CURRENT GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION, REQUEST FOR GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT CHANGE AND ZONE CHANGE. AND HOUSING
ELEMENT
Agenda Item #A3
October 25, 2022
The site currently has a General Land Use Map categorization of General Commercial and zoning designation of C-4 (General Commercial). As such, the project was subject to the Mixed Use option with standards found in section 18.70.100 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code. The section allows for nonresidential uses (i.e., commercial) on the ground floor and then residential uses on the floors above. However, the applicant’s proposal was to amend the General Land Use Map categorization to High Density Residential (R-4) and well as the zoning designation to R-4.
Further, this site (12345 Carson Street, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 7066-017-127) is listed on the City’s draft Housing Element[2]as an inventory site. However, the proposed change for this site is to an explicit mixed use zone; albeit one that allows greater density than is currently allowed under the City’s Municipal Code. This is consistent with the City’s desire to maintain a diversified tax base via a vibrant and thriving commercial component – along with housing units – for this site. This approach was designed to provide varied revenue sources for the City as well as address and meet the City’s obligations under State housing law and do its part in regard to the State’s housing crisis. As noted above, the current proposed project requests a change to high density residential (R-4) and has no commercial component to it. Thus, the City Council should weigh the costs and benefits of the proposed project (which proposes 13 units with no commercial component) against the above mentioned policy goals.
[1] The project applicant requested a continuance from the July 12, 2022 meeting. [2] The City had adopted and submitted its Housing Element to HCD on August 9, 2022.
The City received comments and requested clarifications and is in the process of updating said Housing Element.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will receive its share of property taxes generated from the project.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Staff report and attachments – July 26, 2022
B. Developer response to comments
C. City of Lakewood Letter Dated October 19, 2022
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A2
DATE: July 26, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Maryann Marks, AICP, Interim Community Development Director RECOMMENDATION:
RECOMMENDATION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 025-2022, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLNG2021-0026 (GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT), AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
MAP, FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 7066-017-127 CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND ADOPTION OF THE
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT;
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 026-2022, CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (ZONE CHANGE), TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING A PROPERTY FROM C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 027-2022, CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (SITE PLAN REVIEW), A REQUEST TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF A NEW 13-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS,
CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
The Hawaiian Gardens Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-007 recommending to the Hawaiian Gardens City Council (“City Council”) denial of PLNG2021-0026 (General Plan Amendment), an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Map, from General Commercial to High Density Residential (HDR) and case NO. PLNG2021-0025 (Zone Change) to rezone property from C-4 (General Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Residential) for property
ATTACHMENT A
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
located at 12345 Carson Street, City of Hawaiian Gardens, California; Assessor Parcel Number 7066-017-012
and
denial of case NO. PLNG2021-0025 (Site Plan Review), a request to approve the Site Plan and Architectural Design of a new 13-unit apartment complex on property located at 12345 Carson Street, City of Hawaiian Gardens, California. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) have been prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Hawaiian Gardens Environmental Guidelines which concludes that, with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and the MMP, the Project will not have a significant impact on the environment.
HISTORY
On May 28, 2021, Urban Pacific a submitted a request to construct a 13-unit apartment complex, in two buildings, on property located at 12345 Carson Street and submitted applications for a General Plan Amendment (PLNG2021-0026), a Zone Change and Site Plan Review (PLNG2021- 0025) proposing to re-classify the current land use designation of said property from General Commercial (GC) to High Density Residential (HD), and to rezone the property from C-4 (General Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Residential).
At the April 6, 2022 Planning Commission Hearing, the item was continued as the applicant had not received LA County Fire approval of the site plan. Members of the public were present and ask to speak on the project. Comments were heard from residents of Tilbury Street, Lakewood, CA in opposition of the project, siting concerns with the project height, orientation, trash dumpster placement and pick up, street width and parking issues. The meeting was continued to a date certain.
At the April 27th Planning Commission hearing, staff presented the project and responded to questions from the Planning Commissioners. The applicant presented their project with more detail on the design and highlighted some changes they had made in response to planning staff direction and comments heard at the previous planning commission hearing. Public comments centered on the same issues of project size, height, units fronting on Tilbury Street, and significant lack of parking.
Commissioner discussion centered on the same issues, plus a lack of open space for recreation and reducing the project in number of units or to two stories with parking being a major concern.
The project design was discussed with some commissioners feeling it was too modern. There was also discussion of the R-4 zoning being too intense and perhaps it could be zoned R-3.
Narrow streets and lack of parking is an already predominate issue throughout the City. The decision was 3 to one to not approve the project with suggestions for a reduction in number of units, size and or number of bedrooms, and an increase of open space and guest parking. The decision was to not recommend the project to City Council for approval but to recommend denial as designed. At the May 11th Planning Commission hearing, the resolution for recommendation of denial was approved three (3) to one (1). (The Planning Commission reports are Attachment F and G for reference)
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
The City received a comment letter from the City of Lakewood on July1, 2022, expressing opposition to the project. The letter is included as Attachment H.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is currently addressed as if located on the north side of Carson Street but is physically located on the corner of Claretta Avenue and Tilbury Street. The parcel is generally flat and rectangular in shape with a lot width of approximately 131 feet of frontage on Claretta Avenue and a depth of 202 feet on Tilbury Street. The site has a total land area of approximately 25,182 square feet. The site is surrounded primarily by single-family residential uses to the north and northeast, commercial uses along Carson Street to the south, with multi-family residential to the west. Much of the surrounding area outside of the General Commercial zone along Carson Street is residential in character.
General Plan and Zoning Designation: The project site is located within the GC (General Commercial) Zoning District, with a General Plan designation of "General Commercial”. The General Plan land use designation of General Commercial is intended for a broad range of commercial services and uses, including retail sales, service-related uses, entertainment, community service organizations, and professional offices.
Exhibit A. visually depicts the General Plan designations at and around the site.
Exhibit A – General Plan Map
The Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (HGMC) states the purpose of the General Commercial zone is “to designate areas for office/professional and retail businesses in the City, that support residential areas and provide jobs for area residents. These areas are intended to accommodate a variety of shops for goods and services to serve the needs of the surrounding community.” Exhibit B. visually depicts the zoning designations at and around the site.
Project site identified by star
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
Exhibit B. Zone Map
DISCUSSION
Site History
The site is situated on a .57-acre parcel currently vacant used for mobile home and miscellaneous vehicle parking. The original parcel with the 12345 Carson Street address, was split into two parcels in 2019 (APN’s 7066-017-126 and 7066-017-127) with the intention of selling the second lot. The present owners bought the site and subdivided it. They created the Enterprise rental car site, which occupied the first parcel and had a remaining parcel, which is the subject site. Urban Pacific connected with the seller approximately a year ago and presented the original designs to Hawaiian Gardens planning staff. Urban Pacific feels this is an opportunity to serve multigenerational families in Hawaiian Gardens with a quality housing product that doesn't exist in many places within the city. The large bedroom count makes the units affordable to families that would not normally have the opportunity to live together in a single apartment dwelling.
When the original parcel was divided, a new address was not assigned to this parcel (APN: 7066- 017-127). The city is researching an appropriate address. The applicant has requested 12300 Tilbury Street with unit numbers for each apartment as the apartment mailboxes will be located on Tilbury Street.
Entitlements
Request - General Plan Amendment
State law requires that all cities have and maintain a general plan to guide the orderly growth and development of the community. It contains the community vision for future growth. Required Project site identified by star
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
elements of the general plan comprise the community’s major policies some of which relate to the topics of land use, housing, traffic circulation, and safety.
As previously mentioned, the parcel has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial. The change to High Density Residential will allow for a residential development with increased unit density providing additional housing opportunities for larger families in the area.
Two of the units are designated as very low income units which allows the applicant to take advantage of state density bonus incentives. The General Plan states; High Density Residential land uses are also intended for multi-family residences, including town homes, apartments, and condominiums. Densities within this land use category allow between
17.1 and 24 dwelling units per net acre. The locations of high density land uses are in close proximity to commercial areas, for increased accessibility and convenience. Additional uses permitted consistent with zoning code requirements include:
Ancillary uses and accessory dwelling units
Small community care and day care facilities
Cultural and educational facilities
Recreational uses
Public facilities
The authority to amend the General Plan is found within the California Government Code (§65358), which states: “If it deems it to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend all or part of an adopted general plan. An amendment to the general plan shall be initiated in the manner specified by the legislative body”.
General Plan Policies Affecting the Application
The City’s General Plan has several goals and polices that should be considered with the proposal when evaluating the project’s development. The following excerpts from the General Plan Land Use Element would apply to the project:
Goal LU-1: Provide opportunity for continued revitalization of a balanced community.
Policies:
LU-1.1 Accommodate new development in accordance with the Land Use Map (Exhibit A).
LU-1.9 Ensure that unique land uses, characterized by high occupancy or intensity of activity, be sited, designed, and administered to mitigate impacts on adjacent land uses.
Goal LU-2: Preserve and enhance residential neighborhoods in Hawaiian Gardens.
Policies:
LU-2.3 Require multi-family developments to incorporate site design features, including, but not limited to, open space, landscaping, communal courtyards, and outdoor furniture.
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
LU-2.4 Require the design of all residential development to utilize notches, balconies, roof lines, open space, setbacks, landscaping and other architectural accents that add visual interest to buildings and streetscape and avoid monotonous, flat facades.
The General Plan also includes language that encourages the use of underutilized parcels and the placement of High-density projects adjacent to Commercial areas.
The locations of high density land uses are in close proximity to commercial areas, for increased accessibility and convenience.
The City’s Housing Element, includes the following:
Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available to accommodate that portion of the city’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the sites inventory.
Policies:
Facilitate the construction of the maximum feasible number of housing units for all income groups.
Implement the Land Use Element and Zoning Code to achieve adequate housing sites.
Amending the General Plan is a significant policy decision that should be carefully assessed. The need for a city to carefully weigh the benefits and impacts of changing its General Plan is reflected in State law, which limits the number of times a city may amend its General Plan in a year to four.
General Plan Amendments are fully discretionary. Projects resulting from an amendment often are expected to go above and beyond the requirements of the Code and add a superior product with benefits to the City.
Staff recognizes the need for additional housing products such as the proposed 13-unit apartment complex, in two buildings. There is not an architectural design style for the city, but rather a variety of styles which blend harmoniously together. The trend in commercial design is more modern in nature. The apartment design is modern, which blends with the surrounding commercial areas.
The developer has fronted one building to the street with porches, walks and fences to try to emulate a neighborhood feel. Staff worked with the developer to offer suggestions for improving the site plan architectural design. A revised architectural design was presented at the Planning Commission hearing by the developer. It adds additional detail, color and accents to the design.
Staff feels these changes enhance the project design and assist in creating a quality project which would be beneficial to the city. The updated project site plans and architectural design are attachment G.
Request – Zone Change
As mentioned, the requested project site zoning is High Density Residential. Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code §18.40.050 states as follows:
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
The purpose of the high density residential (R-4) zone is to provide areas for multiple family residential developments where adequate services, traffic circulation, and the existence of open space and recreation areas are available. These are found in areas that provide a transition to non-residential zones and are primarily intended for apartments, condominiums and other highdensity multi-family developments.
Per California Government Code (§65860), a city's zoning ordinance is required to be consistent with the general plan. The proposed High Density Residential zone is consistent with the proposed General Plan designation of High Density Residential.
The proposed High Density Residential zone is acceptable for this type of residential development where a commercial parcel no longer fronts on the main commercial corridor. It is a much more acceptable use for the parcel than many of the permitted uses in the general commercial zone which could potentially present issues such as noise and air quality. It would serve as a buffer for the existing single family residential homes on the north side of Tilbury.
There is a similar apartment project to the west making it compatible with the neighborhood.
Staff does recognize that the city has narrow streets and parking is an increasing issue. Five bedroom units with two car garage parking would create the need for additional street parking in the area.
Request – Density Bonus
The applicant has requested use of a density bonus program per State Law and HGMC §18.90.070 - Density bonuses.
Density bonuses are mandated in part by the State's Density Bonus Law (California Government Code §65915 and 65917) and provide incentives for the development of affordable housing units for very low income, lower income or senior households. This article provides regulations for the development of affordable units for low- and very low-income households, designed to meet the City's housing needs.
Project qualification. In accordance with Government Code §65915, the City shall grant a density bonus and at least one additional concession or incentive, or a financially equivalent incentive to eligible housing developments, as outlined below:
1.The eligible housing development shall consist of five or more dwelling units.
2.Affordable housing units (as defined in §65915(b) of the California Government Code) shall be provided on-site and shall include one or more of the following:
a. At least ten percent of the total units allowed by the maximum permitted density shall be provided at affordable housing costs and occupied by lower-income households.
b. At least five percent of the total units allowed by the maximum permitted density shall be provided at affordable housing costs and occupied by very low-income households.
Additionally it states:
5. When the housing development proposes at least 20 percent of the total units for lower income households or at least ten percent for very low income households or at least 20 percent of the Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
total units in a condominium project for moderate-income households, the project shall be entitled to a density bonus and two concessions or additional incentives, as outlined in subsection C. additional incentives, below.
The project proposes 20% of the units for lower income households qualifying for a 50% density bonus and for two additional concessions. The applicant has chosen the following two concessions: a reduction in open space to 156 square feet per unit and a parking reduction to two cars per unit, as shown on the tables below. There is additional parking available on Tilbury Street and Claretta Avenue.
TABLE A. Open Space
Requirement Total Reduced
Requirement
Total
Provided
Open space 500 sf p/unit 6,500sf 156 sf p/unit 2,028 sf Common open space 350 sf p/unit 4,550 sf 96 sf p/unit 1,235 sf Private usable open
space
150 sf p/unit 1,950 sf 61 sf p/unit 793
TABLE B. Parking
Requirement Total Reduced
Requirement
Total Provided
DU Parking 2 + 1 p/3 bdrm
unit
26 2 spaces p/unit 26
Guest Parking .75 p/ unit 10 7 spaces 7
Accessible Parking
Private garages 2 /per unit 26 In garages
Guest 1 1 Incl in total
Total Parking 62 33 33
Given the facts and policies stated in this report, the Council should consider the following policy question: “Is the development plan being proposed appropriate to achieve the General Plan’s intended vision, goals and policies?” Additionally, the Council‘s policy considerations should relate and affirm or reject the project based on the General Plan and references to related goals and policies as noted above in this report.
Mitigated Negative Declaration edit
Staff feels that the project description in the Mitigated Negative Declaration needs clarification in two places.
Staff suggests that this statement;
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
Therefore, the project includes a general plan amendment and zone change to High Density Residential (R-4) to permit the construction of 13 multi-family residential units.
Be amended to say:
Therefore, the project includes a general plan amendment to High Density (HD) and zone change to High Density Residential (R-4) to permit the construction of 13 multi-family residential units. Staff suggests that this statement;
The parcel is surrounded by retail uses directly to the north, south and west. The proposed project is surrounded by residential uses on all sides and Coyote Creek to the east. Melbourne (Ella P.) Elementary is located further north. Forest Lawn Cemetery is located further east of the proposed project.
Be amended to say:
The site is surrounded primarily by single-family residential uses to the north and northeast, commercial uses along Carson Street to the south and across Claretta Avenue to the east, with multi-family residential to the west. Much of the surrounding area outside of the General Commercial zone along Carson Street is residential in character. Coyote Creek and Forest Lawn Cemetery are located further east of the proposed project. Melbourne (Ella P.) Elementary is located further north.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study was prepared, as required due to fact that the proposal includes a General Plan Amendment. With assistance from Harris and Associates, Inc., the City completed an Initial Study (IS) on the project in accordance with CEQA. The Draft Initial Study concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment with inclusion of mitigation measures, and a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) have been prepared.
The Project has been reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (CEQA)), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), and the requested entitlements have been noticed and posted in accordance with the City of Hawaiian Gardens municipal code, and in accordance with the city’s CEQA project guidelines. The Draft IS/MND and MMP are included with this report as Attachments B and C. The City received one written correspondence comment regarding the Draft IS/MND. The Comment letter received and the City’s written response to the submitted comment are included with Attachment B.
FISCAL IMPACT
This project will have a small financial impact to the City. The applicant paid all application related fees and was responsible for environmental review related costs associated with the proposed project. If approved the proposed project would provide one-time revenue to the City in the form of building and development impact fees.
Agenda Item #A2
July 26, 2022
SUGGESTED ACTION
City Council is to carefully weigh the benefits and impacts of changing its General Plan and make a decision on the pros and cons of the project benefits and impacts to the city. Give direction to staff to approve or deny the attached resolutions and to revise the identified text in the MND for clarification as suggested above.
ATTACHMENTS
A. RESOLUTION NO. 025-2022 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HAWAIIAN GARDENS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLNG2021-0026 (GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT), AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
ELEMENT MAP, FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (HDR), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 7066-017-127 CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND ADOPTION OF THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
THE PROJECT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT B. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
C. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
D. RESOLUTION NO. 026-2022 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (ZONE
CHANGE), TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING A PROPERTY FROM C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA and EXHIBIT A – ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE
E. RESOLUTION NO. 027-2022 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (SITE PLAN
REVIEW), A REQUEST TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF A NEW 13-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA PROJECT SITE PLANS.
F. Planning Commission Staff Report May11, 2022
G. Planning Commission Staff Report April 27, 2022
H. Letter from City of Lakewood
RESOLUTION NO. 025-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLNG2021-0026 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), AN AMENDMENT TO THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT MAP, FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HD), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 7066-017-127 CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND ADOPTION OF THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE
PROJECT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, Urban Pacific filed a General Plan Map Amendment application (PLNG2021-0026) for a project to construct a residential apartment development and request approval of an amendment to change the Land Use Element Land Use Map designation from General Commercial (GC) to High Density Residential (HDR) and a zone change to rezone the property from General Commercial (C-4) to High Density Residential (R-4) for property (Project) located at 12345 Carson Street (Property); and,
WHEREAS, the Property is currently located within the C-4 (General Commercial) zoning district and is designated as General Commercial on the City of Hawaiian Gardens Land Use Map of the City’s General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, concurrent with the General Plan amendment, the corresponding property, which is presently zoned as C-4 (General Commercial), would be reclassified as R-4 (High Density Residential) for consistency with the General Plan designations; and, WHEREAS, a Site Plan Review (PLNG2021-0025) for the project is concurrently being processed to approve the site plan, grading plan, and landscape plan for the 13 midrise dwelling unit apartment project; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular Planning Commission meeting on May 11, 2022 adopted a Resolution denying the project; and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) have been prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Hawaiian Gardens Environmental Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the IS/MND relies on substantial evidence to conclude that, with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND and the MMP, the Project will not have a significant impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, the IS/MND was circulated for public review, and the City received one (1) comment from the public regarding the IS/MND during the public review period; and WHEREAS, none of the comments received by the City regarding the IS/MND raised significant environmental issues that require significant new information to be added to the IS/MND, and recirculation of the IS/MND is therefore not appropriate under State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5; and
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2022, an advertisement was published in the Los Cerritos Community News; and notices were placed at the City Hall, Lee Ware Park, and Lakewood Mobile Home Park; and notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property specifying the date, time and location of the public hearing; and, WHEREAS, Section 65300 of the California Government Code requires that each planning agency shall prepare, and the legislative body of each city shall adopt, a comprehensive, long term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to its planning; and,
WHEREAS, Section 65300 of the California Government Code requires that Cities shall prepare, adopt, and amend general plans and elements for those general plans in the manner provided for in the Government Code; and,
WHEREAS, The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on July 26, 2022, and fully considered all oral and written testimony, facts, and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals
The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, are true and correct.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review.
The City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens has considered the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received during the public review process, and the City Council finds 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, that the IS/MND has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and that the IS/MND reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.
Accordingly, the City Council hereby recommends adoption of the IS/MND and the MMP, which are included as Exhibits “B and C” of the staff report.
SECTION 3. General Plan Amendment Findings
Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearings regarding the General Plan Amendment, the City Council further finds, determines and declares that:
1. Case No. PLNG2021-0026-GPA meets the requirements of Sections 65300 and 65350, as it relates to the adoption of General Plan Amendments and conforms to and is consistent with other elements of the City of Hawaiian Gardens General Plan.
2. The proposed location of the development and proposed conditions under which it will be operated or maintained is consistent with the goals and polices embodied in the General Plan and other applicable plans and policies adopted by the Council. The proposed use would be consistent with high density residential uses located adjacent to the west side of the subject site.
This amendment will allow the construction of a multi-family housing project with 13 mid-rise dwelling units which is compatible with surrounding residential properties and acts a buffer between single family homes and commercial properties. The proposed project will not only upgrade the site by eliminating the unsightly site but will serve to upgrade the surrounding properties, by enhancing the streetscape.
3. The amendment to the current General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is necessary and desirable for the continual development of the community. A review of the area has shown that the surrounding area to the west, and north are developed with residential properties. The city has limited land remaining for residential development to meet state requirements. This property is well situated for multi-family residential use.
SECTION 4. Reliance on Record
Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council’s decision is based are located at 21815 Pioneer Boulevard, Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716. The custodian of these documents and materials is Pablo Rubio.
SECTION 5. Summaries of Information
All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 6. The Mayor of the City of Hawaiian Gardens is hereby authorized to affix his signature to this resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council. The City Clerk is directed to attest thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Hawaiian Gardens City Council Commission on this 26
th day of July, 2022.
__________________________
LUIS ROA
MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________
PABLO RUBIO
CITY CLERK
FINAL
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration
Tilbury Village
April 2022
Prepared for:
City of Hawaiian Gardens
21815 Pioneer Boulevard
Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716
Contact: Kevin Nguyen
Prepared by:
22 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92614
(949) 655-3900
Contact: William Halligan, Esq., Senior Director/Senior Environmental Counsel This page intentionally left blank.
Tilbury Village IS/MND i April 2022
Table of Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................. iii Document Overview................................................................................................................vii Section 1 Project Description............................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Location ............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 1
1.2.1 Surrounding Land Uses ............................................................................. 1
1.2.2 Existing General Plan and Zoning............................................................. 1
1.3 Project Description......................................................................................... 1
1.3.1 Project Phasing.......................................................................................... 2
1.4 Project Approvals and Permits ....................................................................... 2 Section 2 Initial Study Checklist.........................................................................................21
2.1 Project Information.......................................................................................21
2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ..................................................23
2.3 Lead Agency Determination .........................................................................24
2.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ...........................................................25
2.4.1 Aesthetics................................................................................................. 26
2.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ........................................................30
2.4.3 Air Quality................................................................................................. 32
2.4.4 Biological Resources ...............................................................................38
2.4.5 Cultural Resources...................................................................................41
2.4.6 Energy ......................................................................................................43
2.4.7 Geology and Soils....................................................................................46
2.4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions....................................................................51
2.4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..........................................................54
2.4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality...................................................................59
2.4.11 Land Use and Planning............................................................................63
2.4.12 Mineral Resources ...................................................................................64
2.4.13 Noise ........................................................................................................65
2.4.14 Population and Housing...........................................................................67
2.4.15 Public Services.........................................................................................68
2.4.16 Recreation................................................................................................70
2.4.17 Transportation..........................................................................................71
2.4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................74
2.4.19 Utilities and Service Systems...................................................................79
2.4.20 Wildfire......................................................................................................83
2.4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance.........................................................85 Tilbury Village IS/MND ii April 2022
Section 3 List of Preparers ................................................................................................. 87
3.1 Lead Agency ................................................................................................87
3.2 Consultants..................................................................................................87 Section 4 References ..........................................................................................................89 Figures
Figure 1. Regional Location ........................................................................................................ 5 Figure 2. Project Site................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. Site Plan ...................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4. Grading Plan..............................................................................................................11 Figure 5. Typical Unit Floor Plans .............................................................................................13 Figure 6. Building 1, Exterior Elevations....................................................................................15 Figure 7. Building 2, Exterior Elevations....................................................................................17 Figure 8. Landscape Plan .........................................................................................................19 Tables
Table 1. Anticipated Discretionary Actions/Approvals.................................................................. 3 Table 2. SCAQMD Air Quality Mass Daily Thresholds ..............................................................34 Table 3. Project Trip Generation ...............................................................................................72 Appendices
Appendix A. Transportation Study Screening Analysis
Appendix B. Mitigation Monitoring Program
Appendix C. Response to Comments
Tilbury Village IS/MND iii April 2022
Acronyms and Abbreviations
°F degrees Fahrenheit
µg/kg micrograms per kilogram
µg/L micrograms per liter
AB Assembly Bill
ADT average daily traffic
Alquist-Priolo Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act AMSL above mean sea level
AST aboveground storage tank
bgs below ground surface
BMP best management practice
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP climate action plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFC chlorofluorocarbon
CFG Code California Fish and Game Code
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CH4 methane
CNDDB California Rare Plant Rank
CNEL community noise equivalent level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
cy cubic yard
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DPM diesel particulate matter
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR environmental impact report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA federal Endangered Species Act
Tilbury Village IS/MND iv April 2022
GHG greenhouse gas
GIS geographic information system
gpm gallons per minute
GPS Global Positioning System
GSF gross square feet
GWP global warming potential
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
HRA health risk assessment
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
I- Interstate
IS initial study
Ldn day-night average sound level
Leq equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax maximum sound level
Lmin minimum sound level
LOS level of service
LUST leaking underground storage tank
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
mg/L milligrams per liter
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMT millions of metric tons
mpg miles per gallon
mph miles per hour
MSCP Multiple Species Conservation Program
MT metric ton
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP natural community conservation plan
ND negative declaration
NO nitric oxide
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOx nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
O&M operations and maintenance
O3 ozone
OEHHA California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PFC perfluorocarbon
PM particulate matter
PM10 particulate matter measuring no more than 10 microns in diameter Tilbury Village IS/MND v April 2022
PM2.5 fine particulate matter measuring no more than 2.5 microns in diameter Porter-Cologne Act Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
PPV peak particle velocity
PRC California Public Resources Code
project Tilbury Village
RAQS Regional Air Quality Strategy
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
ROG reactive organic gas
ROW right-of-way
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAA streambed alteration agreement
SB Senate Bill
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SIP State Implementation Plan
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOx sulfur oxides
SR- State Route
SVOC semivolatile organic compound
SWPPP stormwater pollutant prevention plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC toxic air contaminant
TCR tribal cultural resource
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
UST underground storage tank
v/c volume to capacity
VdB vibration decibel
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound
Tilbury Village IS/MND vi April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Tilbury Village IS/MND vii April 2022
Document Overview
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines for the proposed Tilbury Village (project). The primary intent of this document is to determine whether project implementation would result in potentially significant impacts to the environment.
In accordance with CEQA, projects that have the potential to result in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment must undergo analysis to disclose potential significant effects. The provisions of CEQA apply to California governmental agencies at all levels, including local agencies, regional agencies, state agencies, boards, commissions, and special districts. CEQA requires preparation of an IS for a discretionary project to determine the range of potential environmental impacts of that project and to define the scope of the environment review document. As specified in Section 15064(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, the lead agency may prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration if, in the course of the IS analysis, it is recognized that the project may have a significant impact on the environment but that implementation of specific mitigation measures would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. As the lead agency for the Proposed Project, the City of Hawaiian Gardens has the principal responsibility for conducting the CEQA environmental review to analyze the potential environmental effects associated with project implementation. During the review process, it was determined that no potentially significant impacts would occur. Therefore, an IS/MND has been prepared for the Proposed Project.
This IS/MND is organized as follows:
• Section 1: Project Description.This section introduces the document and discusses the project description including location, setting, and specifics of the lead agency and contacts. • Section 2: Initial Study Checklist. This section discusses the CEQA environmental topics and checklist questions and identifies the potential for impacts. • Section 3: List of Preparers. This section lists the organizations and individuals who were consulted and/or prepared this IS/MND.
• Section 4: References. This section presents a list of reference materials consulted during preparation of this IS/MND.
Tilbury Village IS/MND viii April 2022
Public Review
The IS/MND will be circulated for a 30-day public review period from February 11, 2022, to March 11, 2022
Comments regarding this IS/MND must be made in writing and submitted to:
City of Hawaiian Gardens
Community Development Department
21815 Pioneer Boulevard
Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716
Attn: Kevin Nguyen, Associate Planner II
or by email to [email protected].
Comments should focus on the proposed finding that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment because revisions or mitigation measures have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. If the commenter believes that the project may have a significant environmental effect, it would be helpful for the commenter to identify the specific effect and explain why the effect would occur and why it would be significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 1 April 2022
Section 1 Project Description
The following Initial Study (IS) and Environmental Checklist presents information on the project and an evaluation of the probable environmental effects anticipated by the Tilbury Village Project (Proposed Project). This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended, and the CEQA Guidelines.
1.1 Project Location
The Proposed Project is at 12345 Carson Street in the City of Hawaiian Gardens (City). The .57 acre (25,182 square foot) Project Site is on the corner of Tilbury Street and Claretta Avenue, approximately one mile east of Interstate 605. Figure 1, Regional Location, shows the project regional location, while Figure 2, Project Site, depicts the Project Site and the surrounding vicinity.
1.2 Environmental Setting
The City of Hawaiian Gardens is the smallest city in the County of Los Angeles (County). The Project Site is in an urban area of the southeast region of the County and is currently occupied by a manufactured/modular home company. Generally, the City is an urbanized community.
Commercial uses are concentrated along Norwalk Boulevard and Carson Street. The City is surrounded by the City of Long Beach to the west and south, the City of Lakewood to the north, and the Orange County City of Cypress is adjacent to the east. The City is directly accessible from Interstate (I) 605, which is located on the west side of the City. Additionally, the City is regionally accessible from I-405 located approximately 2.8 miles to the south, and Highway 91 approximately
2.3 miles to the north.
1.2.1 Surrounding Land Uses
The parcel is surrounded by commercial retail uses directly to the north, south and west. The Proposed Project is surrounded by residential uses on all sides and Coyote Creek to the east.
Melbourne (Ella P.) Elementary is located further north. Forest Lawn Cemetery is located further east of the Proposed Project.
1.2.2 Existing General Plan and Zoning
The Project Site is currently designated as General Commercial (GC) by the City of Hawaiian Gardens General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned as General Commercial (C-4).
1.3 Project Description
As shown on Figure 3, Site Plan, the project proposes to redevelop the .57-acre site with 13 multifamily housing (mid-rise) dwelling units within two buildings. The maximum lot coverage would be 10,605 square feet (42%) of the 25,182 square foot lot area that makes up the Project Tilbury Village IS/MND 2 April 2022
Site. The buildings would be 3 stories at a height of 33 feet and 8 inches. The Proposed Project would include 156 square feet of open space per unit, including 95 square feet per unit of common open space and 61 square feet per unit of private useable open space. The Proposed Project would provide 33 total parking spaces. The project also includes outdoor seating in the form of a picnic table and benches.
A grading plan has also been prepared for the Proposed Project (see Figure 4, Grading Plan). This plan indicates that the slope at the concrete or paver walkway should not exceed 4.9% and cross slope should not exceed 2% at walkways only. Additionally, as part of the Proposed Project’s exterior improvements, the slope finish grade would be 5% for 10 feet away from structures all around.
The Project Site is currently designated for General Commercial (GC), which does not allow residential development. Therefore, the project includes a general plan amendment and zone change to High Density Residential (R-4) to permit the construction of 13 multi-family residential units.
Figure 5, Typical Unit Floor Plans, illustrates the square footage per unit in addition to the amount of private open space in the form of balconies. Figure 6, Building 1, Exterior Elevations, and Figure 7, Building 2, Exterior Elevations, show the building elevations for the two proposed buildings with associated material and color schedules. Figure 8, Landscape Plan, illustrates the proposed landscape plan for the Proposed Project including a plant palette and tree and shrubbery details.
The Proposed Project also includes a full access driveway to Claretta Avenue. Each unit is proposed to provide two parking spaces and seven guest parking spaces are proposed on site. Additionally, Tilbury Street and Claretta Avenue provide on-street parking adjacent to the Project Site.
1.3.1 Project Phasing
The Proposed Project would be implemented in one phase upon approval of necessary discretionary actions and permits. The construction is tentatively scheduled to start in 2022 and take approximately two years to complete.
1.4 Project Approvals and Permits
The City is the lead agency under CEQA and has the principal approval authority over the Proposed Project. A responsible agency is a public agency other than the lead agency that has responsibility for carrying out or approving a project (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15381, and California Public Resources Code, Section 21069). The following discretionary actions would be required to implement the project (Table 1, Anticipated Discretionary Actions/Approvals).
Tilbury Village IS/MND 3 April 2022
Table 1. Anticipated Discretionary Actions/Approvals
Lead Agency Action
City of Hawaiian Gardens PLNG2021-0026 General Plan Amendment PLNG2021-0025 Zone Change
PLNG2021-0027 Design Review Board
PLNG2021-0028 Plot Plan Review
PLNG2021-0029 Landscaping
Responsible Agencies Action
None.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 4 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Date: 10/29/2021 - Last saved by: Randy.Deodat - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Hawaiian Gardens\Map Docs\IS_ND\Figure1_Regional.mxd Dana
Point
San Juan
Capistrano
Laguna
Beach
Laguna
Hills Coto De
Caza
Newport
Beach
Mission
Viejo
Trabuco
Highlands
Costa
Mesa
Irvine
Huntington
Beach
Tustin
Seal
Beach
Garden
Grove
Orange
Anaheim
Placentia Yorba Linda
Fullerton
Perris
Corona
March
Woodcrest AFB
Norco Moreno
Valley
Riverside
Rubidoux
Wildomar
Lake
Elsinore
Sun
City
Torrance
Carson
Long
Beach
Redondo Cerritos
Beach
Gardena Bellflower Compton
El Segundo
Downey
Culver
City Diamond
Bar
Industry
Walnut
Beverly
Hills
Covina Alhambra
Pomona
Claremont
Glendora
San Fernando
Valley
Lake
Los
Angeles
Lancaster
Irwindale
Burbank Monrovia
Altadena
Pasadena Glendale
Acton
Palmdale
Quartz
Hill
Chino
Hills
Chino
Loma
Linda
Ontario Bloomington ColtonRedlands
Upland Fontana Rialto Highland
Crestline
Lake
Arrowhead
Hesperia
Apple
Valley
Victorville
Adelanto
Rosamond
Edwards
AFB
Cypress
Inglewood
Whittier
Commerce
Montebello
Rosemead
Arcadia
Los Angeles County
Orange County
San Bernardino County
Kern County
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles County
Riverside County
Orange County
Orange County
P a c i f i c O c e a n
£¤101
£¤395
ÄÆ90
ÄÆ48
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ47
ÄÆ57
ÄÆ170
ÄÆ14
ÄÆ39
118 ÄÆ
ÄÆ91
ÄÆ259
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ57
ÄÆ91
ÄÆ103
ÄÆ39
ÄÆ55
ÄÆ73
ÄÆ159
ÄÆ189
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ142
ÄÆ107
ÄÆ187
ÄÆ206
ÄÆ126
ÄÆ134
ÄÆ213
ÄÆ133
ÄÆ173
ÄÆ71
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ22
ÄÆ72
ÄÆ2
ÄÆ90
ÄÆ83
ÄÆ27
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ58
ÄÆ19
ÄÆ66
ÄÆ138
ÄÆ1
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ74
ÄÆ14
ÄÆ2
ÄÆ138
§¨¦405
§¨¦405
§¨¦5
§¨¦5
§¨¦710
§¨¦10
§¨¦605
§¨¦215
§¨¦605
§¨¦210
§¨¦5
§¨¦105
§¨¦210
§¨¦10
§¨¦15
Tilbury Village
Incorporated Areas
Planning Area !(^
Regional Location
Source: ESRI 2020.
Figure 1 ± 0 5 10
Miles
Tilbury Village IS/MND 6 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
215th St
Wilder Ave
Ely Ave
Belshire Ave
Civic Center Dr
Carson St
Verne Ave
Claretta Ave
Bloomfield Ave
Norwalk Blvd
216th St
Tilbury St E Tilbury St
214th St
Horst Ave
North Ln
Wardham Ave
Farlow St
Mid Ln
Ibex Ave
Dartmoor Ave
Lakewood Park Ln
East Ln
Hawaiian Ave
Melmour Ln
West Ln
Date: 10/29/2021 - Last saved by: Randy.Deodat - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Hawaiian Gardens\Map Docs\IS_ND\PDFs\Figure2_ProjectSite.mxd Project Site
Source: Maxar Imagery 2020.
± 0 200 400 Figure 2
Feet
Project Site
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 8 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Source: S Squared Architecture Inc. 2021.
Path: C:\Users\Randy.Deodat\Desktop\Projects_Clone\Fanita\Map Docs\EIR\4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Feet
0 20 40 Figure 3
Site Plan
N
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 10 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Source: S Squared Architecture Inc. 2021.
Path: C:\Users\Randy.Deodat\Desktop\Projects_Clone\Fanita\Map Docs\EIR\4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Feet
0 12 24 Figure 4
Grading Plan
N
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 12 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Source: S Squared Architecture Inc. 2021.
Path: C:\Users\Randy.Deodat\Desktop\Projects_Clone\Fanita\Map Docs\EIR\4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Feet
0 5 10 Figure 5
Typical Unit Floor Plans
N
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 14 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Source: S Squared Architecture Inc. 2021.
Path: C:\Users\Randy.Deodat\Desktop\Projects_Clone\Fanita\Map Docs\EIR\4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Figure 6
Building 1, Exterior Elevations
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 16 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Source: S Squared Architecture Inc. 2021.
Path: C:\Users\Randy.Deodat\Desktop\Projects_Clone\Fanita\Map Docs\EIR\4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Figure 7
Building 2, Exterior Elevations
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 18 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Source: S Squared Architecture Inc. 2021.
Path: C:\Users\Randy.Deodat\Desktop\Projects_Clone\Fanita\Map Docs\EIR\4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis Figure 8
Landscape Plan
Tilbury Village
Tilbury Village IS/MND 20 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 21 April 2022
Section 2 Initial Study Checklist
The following discussion of potential environmental effects was completed in accordance with Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines to determine if the Proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment.
2.1 Project Information
1. Project title: Tilbury Village
2. Lead agency name and address: City of Hawaiian Gardens Community Development Department
21815 Pioneer Boulevard
Hawaiian Gardens, California 90716
3. Contact person name, address, and
phone number:
Kevin Nguyen, Associate Planner II
Community Development Department
21815 Pioneer Boulevard
Hawaiian Gardens, California 90716
(562) 420-2641 ext. 246
4. Project location: 12345 Carson Street
APN 7066-017-127
5 Project sponsor’s name and address: Scott Choppin
Urban Pacific
5318 E. 2nd Street, Suite 644
Long Beach, California 90803
6. General plan designation: General Commercial (GC)
7. Zoning: C4 – General Commercial.
8. Description of project: Refer to Section 1, Project Description, of this IS/MND.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Refer to Section 1 of this IS/MND.
10. Other public agencies whose
approval is required:
None.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 22 April 2022
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, is there a plan for
consultation that includes, for
example, the determination of
significance of impacts to tribal
cultural resources, procedures
regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Tribal consultation has been completed in
accordance with Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill
52. Tilbury Village IS/MND 23 April 2022
2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by the 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 and Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
☐ Hazards and
Hazardous Materials
☐ Hydrology and
Water Quality
☐ Land Use and Planning ☐ Mineral Resources
☐ Noise ☐ Population and
Housing
☐ Public Services
☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation ☐ Tribal Cultural
Resources
☐ Utilities and
Service Systems
☐ Wildfire ☐ Mandatory Findings
of Significance
Tilbury Village IS/MND 24 April 2022
2.3 Lead Agency Determination
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 (state), including implementation of the mitigation measures identified herein. 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
Kevin M. Nguyen, Associate Planner II
City of Hawaiian Gardens
Tilbury Village IS/MND 25 April 2022
2.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
This section documents the screening process used to identify and focus on environmental impacts that could result from the project. The checklist portion of the IS begins below and includes explanations of each CEQA issue topic. CEQA requires that an explanation of all answers be provided along with this checklist, including a discussion of ways to mitigate any significant effects identified. The following terminology is used to describe the potential level of significance of impacts:
• No Impact. The analysis concludes that the project would not affect the particular resource in any way.
• Less than Significant. The analysis concludes that the project would not cause substantial adverse change to the environment without the incorporation of mitigation. • Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The analysis concludes that it would not cause substantial adverse change to the environment with the inclusion of mitigation agreed upon by the applicant.
• Potentially Significant. The analysis concludes that the project could result in a substantial adverse effect or significant effect on the environment, even if mitigation is incorporated. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 26 April 2022
2.4.1 Aesthetics
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. In non-urbanized 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The Project Site is currently occupied by a manufactured/modular home company and is visible from surrounding land uses, including surrounding roadways, commercial areas, and residential areas. The Project Site is not located within a designated scenic vista area, and there are no scenic vistas designated in the City. As such, visual changes at the Project Site would not adversely affect scenic vistas. Implementation of the Proposed Project would replace the existing lot with a three-story residential development and associated parking and landscaping. Since there are no scenic vistas in the City, the project would result in no impact to scenic vistas. 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. There are no eligible or officially designated state scenic highways located in the City (Caltrans 2019). The closest scenic highway to the Project Site is State Route (SR) 1, located in Orange County approximately 6 miles southwest of the Project Site. SR-1 is not visible from the Project Site, nor is the Project Site visible from SR-1. As such, the project would not impact scenic resources in a state-designated scenic highway. No impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 27 April 2022
c. Would the project, in non-urbanized 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? Less Than Significant Impact. California Public Resources Code Section 21071 defines an “urbanized area” as “(a) an incorporated city that meets either of the following criteria: (1) Has a population of at least 100,000 persons, or (2) Has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons.” As of January 2021, the population of Hawaiian Gardens is 14,467 persons (California Department of Finance 2021). However, the City of Long Beach borders the City to the south and has a population of 467,730 persons (California Department of Finance 2021).
Therefore, the project is in an urbanized area, and the following analysis considers whether the project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.
The Project Site is an infill site in a developed commercial and residential area and the Proposed Project would not significantly degrade the existing visual character of the surrounding area. The scale and massing of the proposed homes are consistent with surrounding uses. The Proposed Project would require a zone change from C-4 (General Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Residential). In an effort to ensure that any future changes related to visual character and quality do not result in adverse impacts, and to ensure the proposed residential structures are visually compatible with surrounding land uses, the Proposed Project would be designed in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 18.40.050, which sets forth development standards for the R-4 zone. In addition, the project would be subject to review by the zoning administrator to ensure that the design of the proposed structures is consistent with all applicable design requirements, standards, and regulations set forth in the Municipal Code.
Figure 3 illustrates the site plan and on-site circulation for the approximately .57-acre site; and Figures 6 and 7 detail the elevations of the proposed buildings. The figures also identify proposed building materials and accent features.
The project would have a maximum height of 33 feet and 8 inches, which is under the maximum allowable height of 35 feet. The Proposed Project would have a maximum lot coverage of 42 percent, under the maximum lot coverage for the R-4 zone of 65 percent. The Proposed Project would fall within the allowable setbacks as designated in the R-4 zone, in addition to the minimum distance between buildings. The Project Site is located proximate to a major commercial corridor of Norwalk Boulevard in the city. A majority of commercial development is located here and contributes to the highly urbanized nature of the area.
Commercial development along Norwalk Boulevard primarily consists of one- to two-story strip mall development and commercial shopping centers. Commercial buildings in the City vary in Tilbury Village IS/MND 28 April 2022
color; however, the majority consist of off-white, tans, and greys to yellows and reds. Residential development near the Project Site, includes residential neighborhoods consisting of one- to twostory single-family homes, as well as up to three-story multi-family apartment complexes. The Proposed Project would be consistent with the visual character of the area and impacts would be less than significant.
d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site is located in an urbanized area along a main commercial corridor with many surrounding existing sources of light and glare, including streetlights, interior and exterior commercial and residential building lighting, signage lighting, landscape lighting, and security lighting. Nearby sensitive receptors include the residential uses on all sides of the Project Site.
Construction of the project would normally occur Monday through Saturday between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction activities would typically occur during daylight hours, and nighttime lighting on the Project Site would not typically be required during the construction phase.
However, security lighting would be temporarily installed onsite during construction and temporary lighting may be brought to the Project Site and operate if after-hours or weekend work is determined to be necessary for specific activities. Temporary security lighting would be fully shielded and directed downward, and would not direct light or glare onto adjacent structures or lots or into vehicular traffic on off-site adjacent roadways. After-hours or weekend work would not be typical during the construction phase, and during sporadic use, mobile lighting sources would be fully shielded and directed downward to minimize skyglow and light trespass onto adjacent properties. Because use of nighttime lighting during construction would be irregular, and mobile lighting sources and temporary security lighting would be fully shielded and directed downward, construction lighting would not adversely affect nighttime views in the area or create substantial glare. Therefore, impacts associated with the occasional use of mobile lighting during construction and temporary security lighting would be less than significant.
Existing sources of light on the Project Site include street lights, vehicle headlights, building and security lights, and parking lot lights. Surrounding uses also include a variety of urban and residential uses. Implementation of the Proposed Project would introduce new light sources; however, the lighting would be consistent with existing lighting on site and in the area. The Proposed Project would be consistent with Section 18.70.050 of the City of Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code, which establishes lighting and security standards. Additionally, all proposed light fixtures would be consistent with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) and the California Administrative Code standards for illumination, which set forth minimum requirements based on Lighting Zones, as defined in Chapter 10 of the California Administrative Code. These requirements are designed to minimize light pollution in an effort to maintain dark Tilbury Village IS/MND 29 April 2022
skies and ensure new development reduces backlight, uplight, and glare (BUG) from exterior light sources (CALGreen 2019). The Project Site is located within Lighting Zone 3, which establishes ambient illumination standards for urban areas (California Administrative Code 2016). The project would be required to comply with the maximum allowable BUG rating for Lighting Zone 3, as defined in Table 5.106.8 [N] of CALGreen.
With adherence to the above standards for illumination and implementation of the previously outlined design considerations, operational lighting would not adversely affect nighttime views in the area, or result in a new source of substantial light and impacts would be less than significant.
Glare is caused by light reflections from pavement, vehicles, and building materials, such as reflective glass and polished surfaces. During daylight hours, the amount of glare depends on intensity and direction of sunlight. Glare can create hazards to motorists and can be a nuisance for pedestrians and other viewers. Proposed exterior building materials primarily include, metal trim, cement plaster, fiber cement lap siding cedamill texture, and white vinyl. Although metallic materials and glass have been incorporated into project design, the façades of the new buildings would not create substantial glare that would affect daytime views. Metallic materials would typically be finished and display a dull veneer. Selected glass would have a low exterior reflectance percentage to maximize daylighting opportunities to interior building spaces. Therefore, building materials would not create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime views in the area. With adherence to the above design standards and regulations, proposed building materials and lighting would not result in substantial glare that would be received by offsite receptors. Further, the project would be required to comply with the California Green Building Code, which establishes maximum allowable BUG ratings, which include backlight, uplight, and glare. Therefore, glare impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 30 April 2022
2.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry 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
Impact 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources
Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project 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? No Impact. The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area. According to the California Department of Conservation’s (DOC) California Important Farmland Finder, most of the County—including the City—is not mapped under the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, and, thus, does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Tilbury Village IS/MND 31 April 2022
Importance (collectively Important Farmland) (DOC 2019a). Therefore, no impacts associated with conversion of Important Farmland would occur.
b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. According the California Department of Conservation’s Williamson Act Parcel map for Los Angeles County, the Project Site is not located on or adjacent to any lands under a Williamson Act contract. The Project Site is not zoned for agricultural use, and no Williamson Act contract exists for the site (DOC 2017). In addition, the Project Site and surrounding area are not zoned for agricultural uses, but instead for residential, commercial, industrial, and public facility uses (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2011). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or with a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, no impact would occur. c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The Project Site is located within a highly urbanized area. According to the City’s Zoning Map, the Project Site is not located on or adjacent to forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2011). Therefore, no impact would occur. d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area. The Project Site is not located on or adjacent to forest land. No forest land, private timberlands or public lands with forests are located in the City. Therefore, no impact would occur.
e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. See Section 2.4.2(a). The Project Site is not located on or adjacent to any parcels identified as Important Farmland or forestland. In addition, the project would not involve changes to the existing environment that would result in the indirect conversion of Important Farmland or forestland located away from the Project Site. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 32 April 2022
2.4.3 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
Impact No Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. 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)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County. It is within the jurisdictional boundaries of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
SCAQMD administers SCAB’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is a comprehensive document outlining an air pollution control program for attaining all California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
The most recent adopted AQMP for the SCAB is the 2016 AQMP (SCAQMD 2017), which was adopted by SCAQMD’s Governing Board in March 2017. The 2016 AQMP focuses on available, proven, and cost-effective alternatives to traditional strategies while seeking to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities seeking to promote reductions in greenhouse gases (GHGs) and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement (SCAQMD 2017). An update to the AQMP to address ozone nonattainment, the 2022 AQMP, is currently underway but a public review draft is not yet available.
The purpose of a consistency finding with regard to the AQMP is to determine if a project is consistent with the assumptions and objectives of the regional air quality plans and if it would interfere with the region’s ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. SCAQMD has established criteria for determining consistency with the currently applicable AQMP in Tilbury Village IS/MND 33 April 2022
Chapter 12, Sections 12.2 and 12.3 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD 1993). These criteria are:
• Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of the ambient air quality standards or interim emission reductions in the AQMP. • Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.
To address the first criterion, project-generated criteria air pollutant emissions have been d analyzed for significance and are addressed under Section 2.4.3(b). As presented in Section
2.3.4(b), construction and operation of the project would not generate criteria air pollutant emissions that exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds.
The second criterion regarding the project’s potential to exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase is primarily assessed by determining consistency between the project’s land use designations and its potential to generate population growth. In general, projects are considered consistent with, and not in conflict with or obstructing implementation of, the AQMP if the growth in socioeconomic factors is consistent with the underlying regional plans used to develop the AQMP (per Consistency Criterion No. 2 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook). SCAQMD primarily uses demographic growth forecasts for various socioeconomic categories (e.g., population, housing, employment by industry) developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for its Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) (SCAG 2016). This document, which is based on general plans for cities and counties in the SCAB, is used by SCAQMD to develop the AQMP emissions inventory (SCAQMD 2017). The SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS and the associated Regional Growth Forecast are generally consistent with the local plans; therefore, the 2016 AQMP is generally consistent with local government plans.
The Project Site is currently designated as General Commercial (GC) by the City of Hawaiian Gardens General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned as General Commercial (C-4), which does not allow residential development. Therefore, the project includes a general plan amendment and zone change to High Density Residential (R-4) to permit the construction of 13 multi-family residential units. Based on the maximum allowable lot coverage of 70 percent and the maximum building height of 45 feet (two stories assumed) for the existing C-4 General Commercial zone, the commercial capacity of the site is approximately 50,000 sf. The main source of emissions from the land use development would be vehicle trips. A commercial development of this size would generate over 1,000 average daily trips (LADOT 2016). The project would only generate approximately 60 daily trips (Appendix A, Transportation Study Screening Analysis). Because anticipated daily trips would be higher, development of the site as-zoned for commercial purposes would be expected to have a greater contribution of criteria pollutant emissions than the proposed Tilbury Village IS/MND 34 April 2022
project. Therefore, emissions from development of the proposed project can be assumed to have been accounted for in the AQMP. The incremental increase in units would not conflict with the AQMP. Therefore, impacts relating to the project’s potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable AQMP would be less than significant. 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. Air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development, and SCAQMD develops and implements plans for future attainment of ambient air quality standards. Based on these considerations, project-level thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are relevant in the determination of whether a project’s individual emissions would have a cumulatively significant impact on air quality.
In considering cumulative impacts from the project, the analysis must specifically evaluate a project’s contribution to the cumulative increase in pollutants for which the SCAB is designated as nonattainment for the CAAQS and NAAQS. If a project’s emissions would exceed SCAQMD’s significance thresholds, it would be considered to have a cumulatively considerable contribution to nonattainment status in the SCAB. If a project does not exceed thresholds and is determined to have less than significant project-specific impacts, it may still contribute to a significant cumulative impact on air quality. The basis for analyzing the project’s cumulatively considerable contribution is if the project’s contribution accounts for a significant proportion of the cumulative total emissions (i.e., it represents a “cumulatively considerable contribution” to the cumulative air quality impact) and consistency with SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP, which addresses cumulative emissions in the SCAB. Table 2, SCAQMD Air Quality Mass Daily Thresholds, details the SCAQMD construction and operation significance thresholds for a project.
Table 2. SCAQMD Air Quality Mass Daily Thresholds
Pollutants 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
Lead 3 3
Air quality impacts can result from the construction and operation of the project. Construction emissions are finite and include fugitive dust, equipment exhaust, and indirect mobile source Tilbury Village IS/MND 35 April 2022
emissions associated with construction workers commuting, material hauling, and deliveries.
Operational impacts are primarily due to emissions from mobile sources associated with the vehicular travel along roadways and area sources, such as natural gas use for space and water heating.
The project would result in a net increase in criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation. However, the development of 13 units would be considered a relatively small project and the net increase in pollutants would not be anticipated to exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds. Similar to SCAB, the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), under the jurisdiction of the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD), is considered non-attainment for ozone (1 hour and 8 hour), PM10, and PM2.5. The SDAPCD has established screening level thresholds that may be used to determine the potential for projects to result in cumulatively considerable pollutant emissions that are similar to SCAQMD thresholds for all pollutants. The City of Escondido, located in the SDAB, has established a screening guide for projects not expected to exceed SDAPCD thresholds or have significant air quality impacts. According to the guide, a project that proposes less than 200 units is not anticipated to exceed the thresholds or result in cumulatively considerable emissions of any criteria pollutant (City of Escondido 2021). The proposed project consists of the development of 13 residential units and can therefore be reasonably assumed to result in a less than significant impact during for both construction and operation. c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are those individuals more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the population at large. People most likely to be affected by air pollution include children, the elderly, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. According to SCAQMD, sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, long-term healthcare facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes (SCAQMD 1993). Impacts to sensitive receptors are typically analyzed for CO hotspots and exposure to toxic air contaminants (TACs). An analysis of the project’s potential to expose sensitive receptors to these pollutants is provided below.
CO Hotspots
Vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. In an urban setting, the highest CO concentrations are generally found within close proximity to congested intersections. Under typical meteorological conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as distance from the emissions source (i.e., congested intersection) increases. Project‐generated traffic may have the potential of contributing to localized hotspots of CO off site. A CO hotspot is a localized concentration of CO that is above the state or national one-hour or eight-hour CO ambient air standards.
Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with severely congested intersections operating at an unacceptable level of service (LOS) (LOS E or worse is unacceptable). Projects contributing to adverse traffic impacts may result in the formation of a CO hotspot. Additional analysis of CO Tilbury Village IS/MND 36 April 2022
hotspot impacts would be conducted if a project would result in a significant impact or contribute to an adverse traffic impact at a signalized intersection that would potentially subject sensitive receptors to CO hotspots.
To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the CO standard, a screening evaluation of the potential for CO hotspots was conducted for project operation. The potential for CO hotspots was evaluated based on the results of the Transportation Study Screening Analysis prepared by Ganddini Group (2021) (Appendix A) for the proposed project.
According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Institute of Transportation Studies Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (1997), for projects located within an area designated as attainment or unclassified under the CAAQS or NAAQS, the CO Protocol identifies screening criteria for consideration. The first screening criteria focuses on projects that are likely to worsen air quality, which would occur if (1) the project significantly increases the percentage of vehicles operating in cold start mode (greater than 2%), (2) the project significantly increases traffic volumes (greater than 5%), and/or (3) the project worsens traffic flow. In addition to consideration of whether the project would worsen air quality, CO hotspots are typically evaluated when (1) the LOS of an intersection or roadway decreases to LOS E or worse; (2) signalization and/or channelization is added to an intersection; and (3) sensitive receptors, such as residences, schools, and hospitals, are located in the vicinity of the affected intersection or roadway segment.
Because the project would generate fewer than 500 new daily trips and fewer than 50 new AM or PM peak hour trips, which is the screening-level criteria established by the County of Los Angeles Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines (2013), an LOS analysis was not required for the project and it can be presumed to not cause an impact on study area intersections (Appendix A). Sensitive receptors are located in the project vicinity; however, the project would only generate approximately 60 daily trips, would not significantly increase vehicle operation or volumes, would not worsen traffic flow, and would not decrease LOS in the study area. Additionally, it would not add signalization and/or channelization to any intersection. Therefore, the project would not cause an intersection to exceed the screening thresholds to necessitate a quantitative CO hotspots analysis.
Based on these considerations, the project would result in a less-than significant impact to air quality with regard to potential CO hotspots.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Construction
Construction activities would result in short-term, project-generated emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment. CARB identified DPM as a TAC in 1998. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Thus, the risks estimated for a maximally exposed Tilbury Village IS/MND 37 April 2022
individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer time period. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Health Risk Assessments (HRAs), which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 30-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the project.
There would be relatively few pieces of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment used during construction, and the construction period would be relatively short, especially compared to 30 years. Combined with the highly dispersive properties of DPM and additional reductions in exhaust emissions from improved equipment, construction-related emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of DPM. Therefore, impacts from construction emissions of TACs would be less than significant.
Operation
HRAs are typically conducted for substantial sources of diesel particulate emissions (e.g., truck stops, bus stations, and warehouse distribution facilities). In addition, typical sources of acutely and chronically hazardous TACs include industrial manufacturing processes, automotive repair facilities, and dry-cleaning facilities. Since the proposed project would not contain such uses, it does not warrant a health risk assessment. Residences are not a typical source of substantial TACs.
As such, the proposed residential uses would not generate substantial TACs, and impacts would be less than significant.
d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction associated with the proposed project could result in minor amounts of odor compounds associated with diesel-heavy equipment exhaust. In addition, the project could produce objectionable odors during construction from paving, painting, and equipment operation; however, these substances, if present, would be minimal and temporary.
Impacts associated with odors during construction would not result in nuisance odors that would result in a significant impact.
Land uses and industrial operations associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food-processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities (SCAQMD 1993). The project would consist of a residential development and would not create any new sources of substantial odor during operation. Therefore, there would be no long-term operational impacts associated with odors.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 38 April 2022
2.4.4 Biological Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, 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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Have a substantial adverse effect 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 Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, 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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site is located in a developed part of the City and is surrounded by an urban mix of land uses including residential and commercial. The nearest open space area as identified by the City’s General Plan is Lee Ware Park, which is located approximately 0.5 miles south of the Project Site (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). No native habitat is located on the Project Site or in the immediately surrounding area. The Project Site consists of a flat, mostly undeveloped lot. Plant species surrounding the Project Site are limited to Tilbury Village IS/MND 39 April 2022
non-native, ornamental species located within the public right-of-way. These non-native, ornamental plant species form a non-cohesive plant community that is not known to support any candidate, sensitive or special-status plant species.
As previously mentioned, ornamental landscape trees are found within the public right-of-way.
Pursuant to Chapter 12.19.060 of the City’s Municipal Code, removal of a City tree would require the applicant to obtain a written permit from the City prior to removing a tree located on public property (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2018). However, according to the Project Site plan (see Figure 2), trees would not be removed from the public right-of-way. Therefore, the project would result in no impact to 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 Service.
b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect 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 Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The Project Site is located in a predominantly urbanized area, and consists of a flat, mostly undeveloped lot. Surrounding land uses primarily include residential and commercial uses.
The Project Site does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community.
Sensitive natural communities are natural communities that are considered rare in the region by regulatory agencies, that are known to provide habitat for sensitive wildlife or plant species, or that are known to be important wildlife corridors. Riparian habitats are those occurring along the banks of rivers and streams. No sensitive natural community or riparian habitat are on site. No impact would occur.
c. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (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, and bogs. There are no state or federally protected wetlands located on or near the Project Site. Further, no federally defined waters of the United States or state occur within the Project Site. This includes the absence of federally defined wetlands and other waters (e.g., drainages) and state-defined waters (e.g., streams and riparian extent) (USFWS 2021). No impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 40 April 2022
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 wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. Wildlife movement corridors facilitate movement of species between large patches of natural habitat. The Project Site is already fully developed except for non-native landscaping materials and, therefore, lacks suitable habitat for wildlife species and is not a native wildlife nursery site. However, several ornamental trees and other vegetation are on site that require removal, and these may be used for nesting by migratory birds, which are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (USC 16 703–712). The Migratory Bird Treaty Act governs the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests. It prohibits the take, possession, import, export, transport, sale, purchase, barter, or offering of these activities, except under a valid permit or as permitted in the implementing regulations. If removal of the vegetation occurs during nesting season (typically between February 1 and September 1), the project applicant is required to conduct nesting bird surveys in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife requirements prior to removal of the trees.
Compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act would ensure that no significant impacts to migratory birds occur. Additionally, the Project Site is located within a highly urbanized area and would not interfere with the movement of any native residents, migratory fish, or wildlife species.
Therefore, no impact would occur.
e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The City does not have any local policies or ordinances protecting trees located on private property. Additionally, the City is located in a highly urbanized and dense area. The City is nearly entirely developed, with the exception of a few vacant infill parcels throughout the community. There are no expansive open space areas, natural features or sensitive natural plant communities, or riparian habitats for which to consider conservation (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Therefore, no impact would occur.
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 Project Site is not located within any habitat conservation plan; natural community conservation plan; or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan area.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted conservation plan, and no impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 41 April 2022
2.4.5 Cultural Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. Section 15064.5 defines historic resources as resources listed or determined to be eligible for listing by the State Historical Resources Commission, a local register of historical resources, or the lead agency. Generally, a resource is considered “historically significant” if it meets one of the following criteria:
1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage
2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past
3. 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
4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history The Project Site exists in an urbanized area and is occupied by a manufactured/modular home company. The existing development is not on federal, state, or local lists of designated historic resources and is not eligible for listing. The development is not historically significant, and therefore, the redevelopment would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site has previously been disturbed. Any archaeological resources, which may have existed at one time (on or beneath the site), have likely been previously disturbed or destroyed. Nonetheless, construction activities associated with project implementation have the potential to unearth undocumented resources. In the event that Tilbury Village IS/MND 42 April 2022
archaeological resources are discovered during project subsurface activities, all earth-disturbing work within a 100-meter radius must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Professional Qualification Standards has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. With implementation of this standard requirement, a less than significant impact would occur. Additionally, as discussed in Section 2.4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation has requested that a Tribal monitor be present during ground disturbances, as well as other mitigation measures to protect tribal cultural resources.
c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Impact. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, requires that in the event that human remains are discovered on a Project Site, disturbance of the site shall halt and remain halted until the County Coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation or to their authorized representative. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to their authority and if the County Coroner has reason to believe the human remains are those of a Native American, they shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission by telephone within 24 hours. The Proposed Project would comply with existing law, and potential impacts to human remains would be less than significant. Additionally, as discussed in Section 2.4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation has requested that a Tribal monitor be present during ground disturbances, as well as other mitigation measures to protect tribal cultural resources, including human remains.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 43 April 2022
2.4.6 Energy
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project, like all development, would be responsible for an incremental increase in the consumption of energy resources during construction due to on-site use of construction equipment and vehicle and truck trips. Construction activities that include the use of natural gas, petroleum, or electricity would be temporary and negligible and would not have an adverse effect. Construction equipment would be required to comply with CARB emissions requirements for construction equipment, which includes measures to reduce fuel-consumption, such as imposing limits on idling and requiring older engines and equipment to be retired, replaced, or repowered. In addition, the project would be required to comply with goals and policies in the City’s General Plan aimed at reducing energy impacts. The Conservations Element specifically includes a goal to conserve energy resources through energy efficiency and available Technologies (Goal CON-1). Policies include educating residents regarding energy conservation (Policy CON-1.1), encouraging use of passive solar design for new projects (Policy CON-1.2), encouraging use of green building techniques (Policy CON-1.3), and promoting transportation alternatives (Policy CON-1.4).
The project would involve minimal new street and pathway lighting, and residential energy use.
Indirect energy use would include wastewater treatment from the proposed residences and solid waste removal at off-site facilities. Nominal impacts are expected from project implementation. The project does not include any features that would encourage the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of utilities. The project would result in an increase in vehicle trips to and from the site but would generate less than 500 new daily trips and would be below the screening-level criteria established by the County of Los Angeles Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines (2013), as discussed in Section 2.4.3, Air Quality. Therefore, operation of the project would not substantially increase fuel use.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 44 April 2022
The project would be subject to the Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which apply to new construction and regulate energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting, as further discussed below. Compliance with the most recent applicable Building Energy Efficiency Standards would ensure that the energy efficiency of the proposed buildings is maximized to the extent feasible. The most recent adopted standards, the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, include requirements for photovoltaic systems and features such as insulation requirements to reduce electricity demand from the energy grid. Therefore, the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project would include the development of 13 multifamily dwelling units within two buildings. The proposed project would be subject to state regulations for energy efficiency, namely, California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen, both of which are set forth in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24. California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards were established in 1978 and serve to enhance and regulate California’s building standards. These standards include regulations for residential and nonresidential buildings constructed in California to reduce energy demand and consumption. The Building Energy Efficiency Standards are updated periodically (every 3 years) to incorporate and consider new energy efficiency technologies and methodologies. CALGreen institutes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential, and state-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals. The 2019 CALGreen standards became effective on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards also became effective on January 1, 2020. The proposed project would meet Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen standards as required to reduce energy demand and increase energy efficiency.
At a regional level, the proposed project would be subject to the policies set forth in SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS. The RTP/SCS is a regional growth-management strategy that targets per-capita GHG reduction from passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks in the Southern California region pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. In addition to demonstrating the region’s ability to attain and exceed the GHG emission-reduction targets set forth by CARB, the 2016 RTP/SCS outlines a series of actions and strategies for integrating the transportation network with an overall land use pattern that responds to projected growth, housing needs, changing demographics, and transportation demands. Thus, successful implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS would result in more complete communities with a variety of transportation and housing choices, while reducing automobile use.
With regard to individual developments, such as the project, the strategies and policies set forth in the 2016 RTP/SCS include improved energy efficiency. The 2016 RTP/SCS goal is to actively Tilbury Village IS/MND 45 April 2022
encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible. As discussed previously, the project would comply with the 2019 CALGreen standards and the Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. For these reasons, the proposed project would be consistent with the SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS.
The proposed project would follow applicable energy standards and regulations during construction. In addition, the proposed project would be built and operated in accordance with all existing, applicable regulations at the time of construction. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with existing energy standards and regulations; therefore, impacts during construction and operation of the proposed project would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 46 April 2022
2.4.7 Geology and Soils
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact 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.
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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 on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project 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.
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the City’s General Plan, no active faults have been identified within the City. According to the General Plan Safety Element, the closest faults in the Tilbury Village IS/MND 47 April 2022
broader project region include the Norwalk Fault, the Newport-Inglewood Fault, and the Los Alamitos Fault (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The Los Alamitos Fault is the closest fault and is located approximately 5 miles southwest of the Project Site. None of these faults underlies either the City or the Project Site. Thus, although the project could experience strong seismic ground shaking (see Section 2.4.7(a)(ii)), the Project Site is not susceptible to surface rupture. Therefore, the possibility of significant fault rupture on the site is considered to be low. Therefore, there is no potential for the rupture of a known earthquake fault at the Project Site. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. Similar to other areas located in the seismically active Southern California region, the City is susceptible to ground shaking during an earthquake. Numerous faults considered active or potentially active have been mapped in Southern California, including in the vicinity of the City. However, as addressed in Section 2.4.7(a)(i), the project is not located within an active fault zone, and the site would not be affected by ground shaking more than any other area in the seismically active region. The Proposed Project is required to be constructed in compliance with the 2019 California Building Code (effective January 1, 2020), which contains standards for building design to minimize the impacts from ground shaking. Therefore, impacts from strong ground shaking would be considered less than significant. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction refers to loose, saturated sand or gravel deposits that lose their load supporting capability when subjected to intense shaking. Any buildings or structures on these sediments may float, sink, or tilt as if on a body of water. According to Exhibit 6-3 in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the entire City is located in a liquefaction zone. The liquefaction risk is no greater for the Project Site than it is for the surrounding areas and cities.
Additionally, the project would be designed in accordance with all applicable provisions established in the current California Building Code, which sets forth specific engineering requirements to ensure structural integrity, regardless of the specific geotechnical characteristics of a particular site. Therefore, impacts associated with liquefaction would be less than significant. iv. Landslides?
No Impact. Susceptibility of slopes to landslides and other forms of slope failure depend on several factors, which are usually present in combination—steep slopes, condition of rock and soil materials, presence of water, formational contacts, geologic shear zones, and seismic activity.
According to the General Plan Safety Element, the City does not have any known landslide zones (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The Project Site and surrounding area are predominantly flat and lack any substantial topographical variations. No hillsides are located on or adjacent to the Project Site. Therefore, no impacts associated with landslides would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 48 April 2022
b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact.
Construction Impacts
The project would involve earthwork and other construction activities that would disturb surface soils and temporarily leave exposed soil on the ground’s surface. Common causes of soil erosion from construction sites include stormwater, wind, and soil being tracked off site by vehicles.
However, construction activities are short-term in nature and would comply with all applicable state and local regulations for erosion control and grading. The Proposed Project would be required to comply with standard regulations, including SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, which would reduce construction erosion impacts. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that it does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emissions source (SCAQMD 2005). Rule 402 requires dust suppression techniques be implemented to prevent dust and soil erosion from creating a nuisance off site (SCAQMD 1976).
The Proposed Project would also incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that potential water quality impacts from water-driven erosion during construction would be reduced to less than significant.
Operational Impacts
Once operational, the Project Site would be developed with a 13-unit residential development, and associated paved parking areas. Collectively, these on-site areas would reduce the potential for soil erosion and topsoil loss. The structural and paved improvements would be impervious areas lacking any exposed soils. Therefore, impacts associated with soil erosion and topsoil loss would be less than significant.
c. Would the project 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 on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impact. See responses to Section 2.4.7(a)(iii) for liquefaction and (iv) for landslide impacts. Lateral spreading refers to lateral displacement of large, surficial blocks of soil as a result of pore pressure buildup or liquefaction in a subsurface layer. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the City is comprised primarily of alluvial soil, containing sand, silt, and clay silts (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The Project Site soil is classified as Urban landHueneme, drained-San Emigdio complex, which is described as discontinuous human-transported material over mixed alluvium derived from granite and/or sedimentary rock (USDA 2019).
As addressed in Section 2.4.7(a)(iii), the entire City has been identified as being located in a liquefaction hazard zone. However, the liquefaction risk is no greater for the Project Site than it is for the surrounding areas and cities. As previously discussed, the Proposed Project would be Tilbury Village IS/MND 49 April 2022
designed in accordance with all applicable provisions established in the current California Building Code, which sets forth specific engineering requirements to ensure structural integrity, regardless of the specific geotechnical characteristics of a particular site. Additionally, the City has relatively flat topography and is not known to have any landslide zones. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. As described in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the City is comprised primarily of alluvial soil, containing sand, silt, and clay silts (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Web Soil Survey does not identify the Project Site or surrounding areas as clay soils, which are typically expansive. The Project Site is classified as Urban land-Hueneme, drained-San Emigdio complex, which is described as discontinuous humantransported material over mixed alluvium derived from granite and/or sedimentary rock (USDA 2021). The Proposed Project would involve excavation of existing soil and import of materials.
The imported soil materials would meet the California Building Code standards and would be required to have an expansion index of 20 or less. Such imported materials are anticipated to contain sufficient fines (binder material) to result in a stable subgrade when compacted, and are required to be approved by the geotechnical engineer of record before being transported to the Project Site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not be on expansive soil, and substantial risks to life or property due to expansive geologic unit would be less than significant. e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. Development of the Proposed Project would not require the installation of a septic tank or alternative wastewater disposal system. The project would use the existing local sewer system.
Therefore, no impact would result from septic tanks or other on-site wastewater disposal systems. f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site has been previously disturbed. Further, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Web Soil Survey, the Project Site is underlain by Urban land-Hueneme, drained-San Emigdio complex, which is described as discontinuous humantransported material over mixed alluvium derived from granite and/or sedimentary rock (USDA 2021). Human-transported fill materials generally do not contain significant paleontological resources on or very near the surface immediately underlying the Project Site. Therefore, the likelihood of affecting paleontological resources within the Project Site is considered low.
Nonetheless, it is always possible that intact paleontological resources are present at subsurface depths that were not impacted by previous grading activities. For instance, at depths below human- Tilbury Village IS/MND 50 April 2022
transported fill materials, there is a greater likelihood of encountering sediments that are old enough to contain significant paleontological resources. Given these factors, the likelihood of impacting paleontological resources within the Project Site is considered low above the original ground surface, increasing with depth. Nonetheless, paleontological resources may possibly exist at deep levels and could be unearthed with implementation of the project. In the event that paleontological resources are unearthed during the project-related subsurface activities, all earthdisturbing work within a 100-meter radius must be temporarily suspended or redirected until a paleontologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. With implementation of this standard requirement, less than significant impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 51 April 2022
2.4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth, including changes in temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms.
Global warming, a related concept, is the observed increase in average temperature of Earth’s surface and atmosphere. One identified cause of global warming is an increase of GHGs in the atmosphere. The GHGs defined under California’s Assembly Bill 32 include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).
The City has not adopted a qualified Climate Action Plan (CAP) for guidance on determining the significance of project GHG emissions. Therefore, the analysis has been prepared in accordance with the SCAQMD guidance related to GHG emissions. To provide guidance to local agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents, the SCAQMD formed a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. In December 2008, the working group developed a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where the SCAQMD is not the lead agency.
A proposed project would be evaluated against the following tiers and a determination would be made as to which tier would be most appropriate for the individual project:
• Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption under CEQA. If the project qualifies for an exemption, no further action is required. The project is not exempt from CEQA; therefore, Tier 1 does not apply. • Tier 2 consists of determining whether or not the project is consistent with a GHG Reduction Plan that may be part of a local government plan. The GHG Reduction Plan must, at a minimum, comply with AB 32 GHG reduction goals, include an emissions inventory agreed upon by either CARB or the SCAQMD, have been analyzed under Tilbury Village IS/MND 52 April 2022
CEQA and have a certified final CEQA document, and have monitoring and enforcement components. If the proposed project is consistent with the qualifying GHG reduction plan, it is not significant for GHG emissions. The City does not have a qualified CAP, therefore, Tier 2 does not apply.
• Tier 3 includes a screening level threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year that is intended to achieve a regional emissions capture rate of 90 percent. That is, most future projects would be required to implement GHG reduction measures while excluding small projects that would contribute a relatively small fraction of the cumulative statewide GHG emissions. Consistent with the SCAQMD method, construction emissions should be amortized over a 30-year project life and added to operational emissions. The following analysis uses Tier 3. The project would result in a significant GHG emissions impact if annual project operation and amortized construction emissions would exceed the screening level threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e.
Single projects do not generate enough GHG emissions on their own to influence global climate change; therefore, the GHG impact analysis measures the project’s contribution to the cumulative environmental impact. Implementation of the project would contribute to global climate change directly through GHG emissions from construction through vehicle engine exhaust from construction equipment, on-road truck trips, and worker commuting trips. Operational sources of GHG emissions include energy use (electricity and natural gas), area sources (landscaping equipment), vehicle use, solid waste generation, and water conveyance and treatment.
The project includes the development of 13 multi-family dwelling units within two buildings. As discussed in Section 2.4.3, the project would only generate approximately 60 daily trips and would not be a substantial source of emissions. The SCAQMD screening level threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e typically excludes small projects, including the proposed project, because they are considered not to result in significant GHG emissions. In comparison, CAPCOA estimates that 50 houses or 30,000 sf of commercial space would generate approximately 900 MTCO2e (SCAQMD 2008). In addition, construction would contribute minimal emissions when amortized over 30 years. Since the project only proposes construction of 13 units, the project would not exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. The plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions that are applicable to the project include AB 32, SB 32 and the 2017 Scoping Plan, and SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS. The Scoping Plan (approved by CARB in 2008 and updated in 2014 and 2017) provides a framework for actions to reduce California’s GHG emissions and requires CARB and other state agencies to adopt regulations and other initiatives to reduce GHGs. The Scoping Plan is not directly applicable to specific projects; nor is it intended to be used Tilbury Village IS/MND 53 April 2022
for project-level evaluations. Under the Scoping Plan, however, there are several state regulatory measures aimed at the identification and reduction of GHG emissions. CARB and other state agencies have adopted many of the measures identified in the Scoping Plan. Most of these measures focus on area source emissions (e.g., energy usage, high-global warming potential (GHGs in consumer products) and changes to the vehicle fleet (i.e., hybrid, electric, and more fuelefficient vehicles) and associated fuels (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard), among others. The Scoping Plan recommends strategies for implementation at the statewide level to meet the goals of AB 32 and establishes an overall framework for the measures that will be adopted to reduce California’s GHG emissions. The project would comply with all applicable regulations adopted in furtherance of the Scoping Plan to the extent required by law and to the extent that they are applicable to the project. Applicable measures to the project would include energy efficiency measures, water efficiency measures, and green building standards.
Regionally, SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS demonstrates the region’s ability to attain and exceed the GHG emission-reduction targets set forth by CARB, and outlines a series of actions and strategies for integrating the transportation network with an overall land use pattern that responds to projected growth, housing needs, changing demographics, and transportation demands. As described in Section 2.4.6, Energy, the project would be consistent with applicable 2016 RTP/SCS goals through compliance with required building energy efficiency standards.
As discussed above, the project is a small project that would result in insignificant GHG emissions, and would comply with all applicable requirements to further minimize GHG emissions. The proposed project would not conflict with the Scoping Plan or regional measures to meet statewide GHG emissions reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 54 April 2022
2.4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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,
result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
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 Impact. Construction of the Proposed Project would likely involve the use of some hazardous materials, such as vehicle fuels, solvents, paints, oils, and grease. Operation of the Proposed Project would involve an unquantifiable, but limited, use of potentially hazardous materials typical of residential uses, including cleaning fluids, detergents, solvents, adhesives, sealers, paints, fuels/lubricants, and fertilizers and/or pesticides for landscaping. The use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials by construction workers, tenants, and residents of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with existing regulations of several agencies, including the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, U.S. Environmental Protection Tilbury Village IS/MND 55 April 2022
Agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, California Department of Transportation, and City codes. Impacts would be less than significant. 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The term “hazardous material” can be defined in different ways. For purposes of this environmental document, the definition of “hazardous material” is the one outlined in the California Health and Safety Code, Section 25501:
Hazardous materials that, because of their quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, pose a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the unified program agency has a reasonable basis for believing that it would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.
“Hazardous waste” is a subset of hazardous materials, and the definition is essentially the same as in the California Health and Safety Code, Section 25117, and in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66261.2:
Hazardous wastes are those that, because of their quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may either cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed.
Hazardous materials can be categorized as hazardous nonradioactive chemical materials, radioactive materials, and biohazardous materials (infectious agents such as microorganisms, bacteria, molds, parasites, viruses, and medical waste).
Exposure of the public or the environment to hazardous materials could occur through the following: improper handling or use of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes, particularly by untrained personnel; transportation accident; environmentally unsound disposal methods; and/or fire, explosion, or other emergencies. The severity of potential effects varies with the activity conducted, the concentration and type of hazardous material or wastes present, and the proximity of sensitive receptors.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 56 April 2022
Following is a discussion of the Proposed Project’s potential to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during the construction and operational phases.
Project Construction
Construction activities of the Proposed Project would involve the use of small amounts of hazardous materials, such as fuels, lubricants, and greases in construction equipment. However, the materials used would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a significant safety hazard. These activities would also be short term or one time in nature, and construction workers would be trained in safe handling and hazardous materials use. Additionally, the use, storage, transport, and disposal of construction-related hazardous materials and waste would be required to conform to existing laws and regulations of the federal, state, and local agencies.
Compliance with applicable laws and regulations would ensure that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts to occur. Therefore, hazards to the public or the environment arising from the routine use of hazardous materials during project construction would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary.
Project Operation
The project involves construction of a three-story, 13-unit residential developmet. As such, potentially hazardous materials associated with operation of the project would include those materials typically associated with operation of the project would include those materials typically associated with cleaning and maintenance activities. Although these materials would vary, they would generally include household cleaning products, solvents, paints, fertilizers, and herbicides and pesticides. Many of these materials are considered household hazardous wastes, common wastes, and universal wastes by the EPA, which considers these types of wastes common to businesses and households and to pose a lower risk to people and the environment than other hazardous wastes when properly handled, transported, used, and disposed of (EPA 2021). Federal, state, and local regulations typically allow these types of wastes to be handled and disposed of under less-stringent standards than other hazardous wastes, and many of these wastes do not need to be managed as hazardous waste.
In addition, any potentially hazardous materials handled on the Project Site would be limited in quantity and concentration, consistent with other similar service sector uses located in the City, and any handling, transport, use, and disposal of such material would comply with applicable federal, state, and local agencies and regulations. In addition, as mandated by OSHA, all hazardous materials stored on the Project Site would be accompanied by a Materials Safety Data Sheet, which would inform on-site personnel and residents of the necessary remediation procedures in the case Tilbury Village IS/MND 57 April 2022
of accidental release (OSHA 2012). Therefore, operational impacts associated with the use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. 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 Impact. The Project Site is located approximately 0.5 miles north of Hawaiian Elementary School (12350 226th Street) and approximately 0.65 miles northeast of Venn W.
Furgeson Elementary School (22215 Elaine Avenue). The Project Site would be located within 0.25 miles of existing schools; however; once operational, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials. During project construction, potentially hazardous materials would likely be handled on the Project Site. Handling of these potentially hazardous materials would be temporary and would coincide with the short-term construction phase of the project. Any handling, transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would comply with all relevant federal, state, and local agencies and regulations, including the UEPA, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, the California OSHA, Caltrans, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the SCAQMD, and the Los Angeles County Certified Unified Program Agency. Therefore, impacts associated with the emitting or handling of hazardous materials within 0.25 miles of a school would be less than significant. 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the compiling of lists of the following types of hazardous materials sites: hazardous waste facilities; hazardous waste discharges for which the State Water Quality Control Board has issued certain types of orders; public drinking water wells containing detectable levels of organic contaminants; underground storage tanks with reported unauthorized releases; and solid waste disposal facilities from which hazardous waste has migrated.
A review of Cortese List online data resources identified one site within the project boundary (SWRCB 2021). The site references a potential release of gasoline discovered during LUST cleanup in 1993; however, the case (#I-20285) was successfully closed in 2001 and no follow-up requirements or future development constraints have been placed on the Project Site (SWRCB 2021). The site references another potential release of diesel and gasoline discovered during LUST cleanup in 2014; however, the case (#R-59685) was successfully closed in 2020 and no follow-up requirements or future development constraints have been placed on the Project Site (SWRCB 2021). There is a potential release of acetone, Stoddard solvent/mineral spirits/distillates, toluene, and xylene regulated under the SWRCB’s Site Cleanup Program discovered in 1994. The case (#0335) is currently undergoing additional investigation to determine the lateral limits of the groundwater plume. However, this site is over 500 feet away from the Proposed Project Site and Tilbury Village IS/MND 58 April 2022
therefore does not occur on site. The Proposed Project Site itself is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, impacts associated with a hazardous materials site would be less than significant. 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 Proposed Project is not located within the airport land use plans for these nearby airports (ALUC 2021). The Project Site is located outside of any airport impact zones, and as such, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing in the project area. The Project Site is located approximately 2.5 miles north of Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos (JFTB), and approximately 4.3 miles northeast of Long Beach Airport. Therefore, no impacts associated with a safety hazard or excessive noise resulting from proximity to an airport would occur. f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned in the City General Plan, the project would be required to comply with the Hawaiian Gardens Emergency Operations Plan, adopted in March 2003. The plan provides a strategy for the City’s planned response to emergency situations. The City’s General Plan Safety Element shows emergency routes for the City (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The project would be provided emergency access along Claretta Avenue. The Project Site is also provided regional access via I-605, I-405, and SR-91. Due to the Proposed Project’s local and regional connectivity, in the unlikely event of an emergency, the project-adjacent roadway facilities would be expected to serve as emergency evacuation routes for first responders and residents. The project would not adversely affect operations on the local or regional circulation system, and as such, would not influence the use of these facilities as emergency response routes.
Therefore, impacts associated with an emergency response plan would be less than significant. g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s (CAL FIRE’s) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map of the County (2020), the Proposed Projects is in a local responsibility non-Very High Fire Hazard Safety Zone. Development of the Proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk from wildland fires.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 59 April 2022
2.4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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 substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the project would include earthwork activities that could potentially result in erosion and sedimentation, which could subsequently degrade downstream receiving waters and violate water quality standards. Stormwater runoff during the construction phase may contain silt and debris, resulting in a short-term increase in the sediment load of the municipal storm drain system. Substances such as oils, fuels, paints, and solvents may be inadvertently spilled on the Project Site and subsequently conveyed via stormwater to nearby drainages, watersheds, and groundwater. The California Green Building Code (CalGreen) requires the implementation of stormwater controls and development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for projects less than one acre to minimize the amount of sediment and other Tilbury Village IS/MND 60 April 2022
pollutants from being discharged in stormwater runoff during construction, as well as various temporary BMPs designed to prevent erosion and siltation, as well as the off-site conveyance of various on-site constituents. Therefore, construction impacts associated with water quality standards would be less than significant.
Once operational, the Project Site would be developed with a 13-unit residential development, and associated parking. Collectively, these on-site areas would reduce the potential for soils erosion and topsoil loss that could affect surface water quality. The structural and paved improvements would cover impervious areas lacking any exposed soils. Therefore, operational impacts associated with water quality standards would be less than significant. b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will require the use of water for dust suppression during project demolition, grading and construction. The amount of water that will be required to control dust during grading and construction will be minimal and not significantly impact existing groundwater supplies. Once completed, the project will require potable water to serve the project residents, water the landscaping and provide required fire flow. The City’s water sources are a combination of groundwater pumped from Central Ground Basin and imported water from the Colorado River and the Bay Delta in Northern California. The Project Site would receive water service from the Golden State Water Company Region II Central District – Central Basin East Artesia System. According to the City’s General Plan, the Central Basin East Artesia System receives 40% imported and purchased water, and 60% water pumped from ground wells (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Additionally, Golden State Water Company (GSWC) has entitlement of groundwater resources in the Central Groundwater Basin. Furthermore, GSWC leases additional water rights from entities that no longer pump groundwater but have entitlements, in the attempt to meet the increase in water demand from its service area. As such, GSWC currently has no immediate concern with the availability of water supply to the City. Therefore, impacts associated with groundwater supplies would be less than significant.
The project involves the construction of a 13-unit residential development with associated parking.
As such, the project would introduce greater impervious area to the site. Under the existing conditions, the Project Site is occupied by a manufactured/modular home company with disturbed land; therefore, the Project Site is not considered an important location for groundwater recharge.
The project would not substantially impair groundwater recharge necessary to replenish the City’s water supply; thus, impacts related to groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 61 April 2022
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? Less Than Significant Impact. There are no streams or rivers located on or near the Project Site.
Project construction would involve some earth-disturbing activities, including grading, that could expose on-site soils to erosion and surface water runoff. However, the Project Site is located within a developed area, with residential and commercial land uses surrounding the Project Site; as such, the development of the project would not cause a significant change to surface bodies of water in a manner that could cause siltation or erosion. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are no natural drainage features on or near the Project Site.
The Project Site, in its existing condition, is a disturbed site occupied by a manufactured/modular home company. Construction activities would entail grading, excavation, and other grounddisturbing activities, which could temporarily alter surface drainage patterns and increase the potential for flooding, erosion, or siltation. However, the project would comply with existing local, state, and federal regulations related to drainage and runoff. As such, the project would not result in flooding on or off site. Additionally, the project would be required to comply with the NPDES Construction General Permit, which would require implementation of BMPs and erosion control measures, thereby reducing the effects of construction activities on erosion and drainage patterns.
The Proposed Project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in a flooding on or off-site. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would comply with existing local, state, and federal regulations related to drainage and runoff. Furthermore, runoff from public streets would be collected into existing gutters along East Carson Street and Claretta Avenue. As such, impacts associated with stormwater drainage system capacity would be less than significant. iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project Site does not contain any streams or rivers having the potential to be altered by the project. The Project Site has been previously graded and is located within a highly urbanized area. According the City’s General Plan, the City is located outside a Federal Management Agency 500-year floodplain, which indicates that the City has less Tilbury Village IS/MND 62 April 2022
than a 0.9% probability of flooding annually (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Therefore, no impacts associated with impeding or redirecting flood flows would occur. d. Would the project, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less Than Significant Impact. Tsunamis are seismic sea waves generated by sudden movements of the sea floor caused by submarine earthquakes, landslides, or volcanic activity. Seiches are waves that oscillate in enclosed water bodies, such as reservoirs, lakes, ponds, or semi-enclosed bodies of water.
Seiches may be triggered by moderate or large submarine earthquakes or by large onshore earthquakes.
No significant impacts from an earthquake-induced seiche would occur. Mud and debris flows are mass movements of dirt and debris that occur after intense rainfall, earthquakes, and severe wildfires.
The speed of a slide depends on the amount of precipitation and steepness of the slope.
Flooding from tsunami conditions is not expected, since the Project Site is located approximately 6 miles from the Pacific Ocean. In addition, the National Flood Insurance Program identifies the City as a Zone B area, which means the City has a minimal flood risk. However, according to the City General Plan, portions of the City are prone to urban flooding (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Urban flooding is caused by debris accumulation on storm drains and in flood control channels and basins, over-burdened pumping stations, and aged draining systems. However, the project would comply with existing local, state, and federal regulations related to drainage and runoff. Runoff from public streets would be collected into existing curb inlet catch basins and gutters along East Carson Street and Claretta Avenue. Therefore, the project would not result in flooding on or off site. The project would not risk release of pollutants due to inundation and a less than significant impact would occur.
e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site is located within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan (RWQCB 2014). Construction activities would comply with applicable requirements of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, including compliance with Stormwater Pollution Prevent Plan-mandated BMPs. Compliance with regional and local regulations related to water quality control plans would reduce potential water quality impairment of surface waters. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 63 April 2022
2.4.11 Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site is currently occupied by a manufactured/modular home company and surrounded by residential uses and commercial uses. The Project Site does not physically divide any community, and redevelopment of the Project Site would not physically divide an established community. The Proposed Project would entail the development of 13 residential units within two buildings. A less than significant impact would occur. 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 Site is currently designated as General Commercial (GC) by the City of Hawaiian Gardens General Plan and is classified as General Commercial (C-4) zone.
The Proposed Project requires a General Plan Amendment from General Commercial to HighDensity Residential. The Proposed Project also requires a change in zone classification from C-4 to H-4 (High-Density Residential).
If the applicant were to receive approval for the GPA/ZC, then the project would be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the proposed residential uses would be consistent with the existing residential uses located north and west of the Project Site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 64 April 2022
2.4.12 Mineral Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
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 not a locally important mineral resource recovery site according to maps obtained through the California Department of Conservation and California Geological Survey. The Project Site is located within a Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-1) zone, which is defined as an area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present (DOC 1981). No known mineral resources of value to the region are located in the Project Site and no impact would occur.
b. Would the project 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? No Impact. The Project Site is not a locally important mineral resource recovery site according to maps obtained through the California Department of Conservation and California Geological Survey. The Project Site is located within a Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-1) zone, which is defined as an area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present (DOC 1981). Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 65 April 2022
2.4.13 Noise
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would introduce new residential development on the project site. The project site is located in an area of primarily residential and commercial land uses and is along East Carson Street. The existing residences adjacent to the project site may be periodically subjected to noise associated with on-site and off-site noise generation. Off-site noise would be generated from increased traffic on area roadways.
On-site noise generation would be typical noise from residential development and would be consistent with nearby residential and commercial land uses. Permanent noise from the project would be generated by mechanical equipment or an increase in traffic noise and could increase noise levels at nearby residences. However, as the Proposed Project would entail the construction of 13 residential units and comprise of .57 acres, it is not anticipated that operational noise levels would adversely impact sensitive receptors or increase noise levels to a significant extent.
Mechanical equipment includes heating, ventilation, and air condition (HVAC) equipment which is typically located on the roof of a building or within an interior mechanical room. These features would substantially reduce the exposure of adjacent residences to mechanical noise from the project. On-site mechanical equipment would have a less than significant noise impact.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 66 April 2022
The project would introduce up to 13 residential units to the site, which would generate an additional 60 daily vehicle trips on area roadways. The additional trips would add a nominal amount to existing vehicle noise and would have a less than significant noise impact.
The City outlines its noise regulations and standards within the City of Hawaiian Gardens General Plan’s Noise Element (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010) and the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2018). Pursuant to Section 9.29.100(D) of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code, construction noise is exempt from the City’s noise ordinance standards, provided a permit has been obtained from the City, and provided construction activities take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or federal holidays. For residential uses, including those surrounding the project area, noise exposure up to 60 dBA CNEL and 65 dBA CNEL (for single-family and high-density residential, respectively) is “Normally Acceptable,” and up to 70 dBA CNEL (for both single-family and highdensity residential) is “Conditionally Acceptable.” Given that construction is a temporary, shortterm impact, and that the noise ordinance does not contain a specific noise limit for construction activities, impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Excessive groundborne vibration is typically associated with activities such as blasting used in mining operations, or the use of pile drivers during construction.
The primary concern associated with ground-borne vibration is annoyance; however, in extreme cases, vibration can cause damage to buildings, particularly those that are old or otherwise fragile.
Some common sources of ground-borne vibration are trains, and construction activities such as blasting, pile-driving, and heavy earth-moving equipment. The Proposed Project would be constructed using typical construction techniques and would be short-term in nature. No pile driving for construction would be necessary. Thus, significant vibration impacts would not occur.
Heavy construction equipment (e.g. bulldozer and excavator) would generate a limited amount of ground-borne vibration during construction activities at short distances away from the source. The use of equipment would most likely be limited to a few hours spread over several days during demolition/grading activities. Post-construction on-site activities would be limited to mechanical equipment (e.g., air handling unit and exhaust fans) that would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or ground-borne noise. As such, ground-borne vibration and noise levels associated with the Proposed Project would be less than significant. 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? No Impact. The Proposed Project is not located within the airport land use plans for these nearby airports (ALUC 2021). The Project Site is located outside of any airport impact zones, and as such, Tilbury Village IS/MND 67 April 2022
the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing in the project area. The Project Site is located approximately 2.5 miles north of Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos (JFTB), and approximately 4.3 miles northeast of Long Beach Airport. Therefore, no impacts associated with a safety hazard or excessive noise resulting from proximity to an airport would occur.
2.4.14 Population and Housing
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned 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)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned 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 Proposed Project would result in a population increase of approximately 51 people in the area. This is based on census data for the City, which estimated
3.86 people per household multiplied by the number of units proposed (13 residential units). As of January 2021, the population of Hawaiian Gardens is 14,467 persons (California Department of Finance 2021). The increase of 51 people would result in a .003 percent population increase.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in a negligible increase in total population for the City. Therefore, impacts 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 is currently occupied by a manufactured/modular home company. No housing units would be demolished as part of the project. Therefore, the project would not displace a substantial number of existing people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 68 April 2022
2.4.15 Public Services
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact 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:
Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Schools? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Parks? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project 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:
Fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection and emergency medical response services in the City are provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD). The LACFD provides service to over 58 cities and unincorporated areas throughout the County. The Project Site is served by Fire Station No. 34 (21207 South Norwalk Boulevard), located approximately .5 mile northwest of the site. The station is equipped with one fire truck and three personnel, including a fire captain, engineer, and firefighter (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010).
The Project Site is already within the LACFD service area, and once operational, would continue to be served by LACFD. Additionally, as discussed in Section 2.4.14(a), Population and Housing, the project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. Although the project would potentially result in a slight increase in calls for service to the Project Site in comparison to the existing conditions, this increase is expected to be nominal and not to result in the need for new LACFD facilities. Overall, it is anticipated that the project would be adequately served by existing LACFD facilities, equipment, and personnel. Impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 69 April 2022
Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services in the City are provided by the Lakewood station of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The LASD operates out of its local headquarters (5130 Clark Avenue), located roughly 4 miles northwest of the Project Site.
The Project Site is already within the LASD service area, and once operational, the project would continue to be served by LASD. As previously mentioned, the project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. Although the project would potentially result in a slight increase in calls for service to the Project Site in comparison to the existing conditions, this increase is expected to be nominal and not to result in the need for new LASD facilities. Overall, it is anticipated that the project would be adequately served by existing LASD facilities, equipment, and personnel. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. Education in the City is provided by the ABC Unified School District. As previously mentioned, the project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. As such, a significant increase in school-age children requiring public education is not expected to occur, and there would be no need for the development of additional schools. Further, the project would be subject to the payment of City fees, a portion of which are allocated toward school facilities. Per Section 15.36.030 of the City’s Municipal Code, each new development shall pay a growth requirements capital fee of four percent of the building valuation of that development.
The fees are placed in the City’s General Fund and may be used for any general government purpose (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Payment of the fees would adequately mitigate any potential impacts to school facilities associated with the project and potential student generation.
Therefore, the project would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with the construction or expansion of school facilities.
Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. As previously mentioned, the project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. As such, an increase in patronage at park facilities is not expected.
In addition, the number of residents visiting existing parks would be minimal. Further, the City requires a growth requirements capital fee, in which each new development pays a fee of four percent of the building valuation of that development. The fees are placed in the City’s General Fund and may be used for any general government purpose, which may include park and recreational facility development and rehabilitation if the City deems appropriate (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Payment of the fees would adequately mitigate any potential impacts to park facilities. Thus, the project would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with the construction or expansion of park facilities.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 70 April 2022
Other public facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. As previously mentioned, the project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. As such, a substantial increase in patronage at libraries, community centers, and other public facilities is not expected. Therefore, the project would result in less-thansignificant impacts associated with the construction or expansion of public facilities.
2.4.16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
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 2.4.14(a), the project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. As such, the project would not increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities would occur or be accelerated. Additionally, due to the anticipated limited number of construction personnel, short-term impacts to local recreational facilities would not occur.
Therefore, substantial physical deterioration of these facilities would not occur or be accelerated with implementation of the project, and the project would result in less-than-significant impacts. 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. The Proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth in the City. Thus, the project would not increase the demand for recreational facilities.
Additionally, the project would not promote or indirectly induce new development that would require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Further, as per Section 15.36.030 of the City’s Municipal Code, each new development shall pay a growth requirements capital fee of four percent of the building valuation of that development. The fees are placed in the City’s Tilbury Village IS/MND 71 April 2022
General Fund and may be used for any general government purpose, which may include park and recreational facility development and rehabilitation if the City deems appropriate (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
2.4.17 Transportation
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Conflict with 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
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
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 Impact. The following analysis was based on the Tilbury Village Transportation Study Screening Analysis prepared by Ganddini. Based on review of the ITE land use descriptions, Land Use Code 221 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) was determined to adequately represent the proposed use and was selected for the analysis. The number of trips forecast to be generated by the Proposed Project is determined by multiplying the trip generation rates and directional distributions by the land use quantity.
As shown in Table 3, Project Trip Generation, the proposed use is forecast to generate approximately 60 daily trips, including 6 trips during the AM peak hour and 5 trips during the PM peak hour.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 72 April 2022
Table 3. Project Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use Source1 Units2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily % In % Out Rate % In % Out Rate Rate
Mutlifamily Housing
(Mid-Rise) ITE 221 DU 23% 77% 0.37 61% 39% 0.39 4.54
Trips Generated
Land Use Quantity Units2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
In Out Total In Out Total Trips
Mutlifamily Housing
(Mid-Rise) 13 DU 2 4 6 3 2 5 60
1 Sources: ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021); ### = Land Use Code 2 DU=Dwelling Units
In the absence of formal traffic study guidelines established by the City of Hawaiian Gardens, the screening analysis prepared or the Proposed Project is based on the criteria outlined in the County of Los Angeles’ Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 23, 2020) (“the County TIA Guidelines”). The study established that the current County TIA Guidelines no longer include screening criteria for Level of Service analysis as the document focuses on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Previously, the County of Los Angeles’ Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines (December 2013) stated that a traffic impact analysis is generally needed when a project is expected to generate over 500 trips per day. This document also states that the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires analysis for all CMP monitored intersections, including freeway on/off-ramp intersections, where the Proposed Project will add 50 or more trips during either the AM or PM peak hour.
The Proposed Project will not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A less than significant impact would occur.
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less Than Significant Impact. A Transportation Study Screening Analysis was prepared for the Proposed Project. The project VMT impact was assessed in accordance with the County TIA Guidelines. The County TIA Guidelines establish screening thresholds for certain types of projects that may be presumed to cause a less than significant VMT impact based on substantial evidence provided in the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018). The County TIA Guidelines specify the following four screening steps: 1) Non-Retail Project Trip Generation Screening; 2) Retail Project Site Plan Screening; 3) Proximity to Transit Based Screening; and 4) Residential Land Use Based Screening. The Proposed Project satisfies the County-established screening criteria for non-retail project trip generation screening; therefore, the project is exempt from preparation of a detailed Tilbury Village IS/MND 73 April 2022
VMT analysis and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact if it generated a net increase of 110 or more daily vehicle trips. The Proposed Project generates a net increase of less than 110 daily vehicle trips as the Proposed Project is forecast to generate approximately 60 daily trips. Therefore, the Proposed Project satisfies the City-established screening criteria for non-retail project trip generation screening and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. c. Would the project 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 Impact. The Proposed Project consists of constructing two residential buildings on the project site. Vehicular access to the site would be provided by a full access driveway to Claretta Avenue. The Proposed Project would not include unusual or hazardous design features, nor would it generate incompatible uses with the surrounding commercial and residential area. The access point has been designed consistently with the City’s circulation standards and does not create a hazard for vehicles, bicycles, or pedestrians entering or exiting the site. d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project Site comprises of .57-acres in the City. During construction, surrounding roadways would continue to provide emergency access through the Project Site and to surrounding properties. Further, the project would provide emergency access in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 74 April 2022
2.4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. 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
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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 Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
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 Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. A significant impact may occur if a project were to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or in a local register of historical resources as defined in California Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).
The project site is currently occupied by a manufactured/modular home company. The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized and developed part of the City. The Project Site has been graded previously and contains disturbed soil. As such, the Project Site would not be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or CRHR, and thus, would not be considered a historical Tilbury Village IS/MND 75 April 2022
resource as defined by CEQA. Mitigation Measure TCR-1 will be implemented, however, to assure that impacts remain less than significant.
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 Resource 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. No known burial sites exist within the vicinity of the Project Site and surrounding area. Therefore, the potential for impact on known human remains or a resource determined to be significant by a California Native American tribe is low. No resources have been identified on the Project Site pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. However, Mitigation Measure TCR-2 and TCR-3 will be implemented to assure impacts remain less than significant. As required by SB 18 (Government Code §65352.3) and AB 52 (Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 et seq.), the City notified all Native American tribes provided by the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and on the City’s AB 52 tribal consultation list of the project, inviting the tribes to consult on the project. The City has received one response from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, who requested the following mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities A. The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.
C. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including but not limited to, Tilbury Village IS/MND 76 April 2022
Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.
D. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the project applicant/lead agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs.
E. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.
Mitigation Measure TCR-2: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:
Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all grounddisturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 77 April 2022
C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).) E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
Mitigation Measure TCR-3: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:
Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains
A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.
B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.
C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered Tilbury Village IS/MND 78 April 2022
as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.
D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected.
If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.
F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.
G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recoveryrelated forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does not authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 79 April 2022
2.4.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities for the reasons discussed below.
Water Facilities
The project involves the construction of a 13-unit residential development, which would increase demand for water supply on the Project Site. However, as discussed in Section 2.4.14, Population and Housing, the increase of 51 people would result in a .003 percent population increase for the City.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in a negligible increase in total population for the City.
The Proposed Project’s nominal contribution to the total water demand could be served by existing water facilities serving the project area without requiring new or expanded facilities. Thus, impacts associated with the construction or expansion of water facilities would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 80 April 2022
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Wastewater generated at the Project Site would be treated at the Long Beach Water Reclamation Plant (LBWRP), which is owned and operated by Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County.
LBWRP provides primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment for an estimated 25 million gallons per day (Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) 2021). Wastewater generated by the project would represent only a nominal percentage of the LBWRP average dry-weather flow capacity and average wastewater flow. Thus, the project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new wastewater treatment facilities. Impacts would be less than significant impacts.
Stormwater Drainage Facilities
The Proposed Project is located on level or gently sloping topography and is surrounded by urban land uses, the project is not anticipated to substantially modify existing topography or runoff patterns.
Therefore, impacts associated with stormwater drainage facilities would be less than significant.
Electric Power Facilities
Electrical energy is accessed by transmission and distribution lines from substations owned by SCE. At full buildout, the project’s operational phase would require electricity for building operation (appliances, lighting, etc.). In addition, the project would be required to comply with the 2019 Title 24 standards or the most recent standards at the time of building permit issuance. The energy-using fixtures within the project would likely be newer technologies, using less electrical power. Therefore, impacts associated with electrical power facilities would be less than significant.
Natural Gas Facilities
Natural gas is provided to the City by Southern California Gas Company, Pacific Region. As mentioned in the General Plan, natural gas is imported by the Southern California Gas Company from its interstate system. (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Although the project would require natural gas for building heating, the project would comply with 2019 Title 24 building energy efficiency standards, reducing energy used in the state. Based on compliance with Title 24, the project would generate a need for natural gas that is consistent with hotels. Therefore, impacts associated with natural gas facilities would be less than significant.
Telecommunications Facilities
The City of Hawaiian Gardens is served by multiple telephone service providers. Since the Project Site is in an urbanized area and is surrounded by residential and commercial uses, there are existing telecommunication facilities that would be able to serve the Project Site. Once the project is completed, future visitors would be able to connect to existing telecommunication services without the need for expansion or construction of new facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 81 April 2022
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. The City’s water sources come from groundwater pumped from Central Ground Basin and imported water from the Colorado River and the Bay Delta in Northern California. The Project Site would receive water service from the GSWC Region II Central District – Central Basin East Artesia System. According to the City’s General Plan, the Central Basin East Artesia System receives 40 percent imported and purchased water, and 60 percent water pumped from ground wells (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). Additionally, GSWC has entitlement of groundwater resources in the Central Groundwater Basin. GSWC also leases additional water rights from entities that no longer pump groundwater but have entitlements, in the attempt to meet the increase in water demand from its service area. As such, GSWC currently has no immediate concern with the availability of water supply to the City.
The City’s water demands can be met under multiple-dry years, and because supply would meet projected demand due to diversified supply and conservation measures and because the Proposed Project would only result in a nominal increase in population (less than .003 percent), the project’s water demands would be served by the City’s projected current and future supplies. 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. A significant impact would occur if the wastewater treatment provider indicates that a project would increase wastewater generation to such a degree that the capacity of the facilities currently serving the Project Site would be exceeded. As mentioned in Section 2.4.19(a), wastewater generated at the Project Site would be treated at the Long Beach Water Reclamation Plant (LBWRP). The LBWRP provides primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment for an estimated 25 million gallons per day (LACSD 2021). Wastewater generated by the project would represent only a nominal percentage of the LBWRP average dry-weather flow capacity and average wastewater flow. Therefore, impacts associated with 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 disposal services for the City are provided by Consolidated Disposal Services. Waste from the City is taken to the Bel Art Transfer Station in Long Beach, with final disposal at Chiquita Canyon Disposal Facility; a 592-acre facility located in Valencia, north of Los Angeles County. Currently, the City contributes approximately 15,713 tons of waste annually. Approximately 23 percent of waste is recycled through the City’s programs. Commercial land uses are the largest producer of disposable waste, generating Tilbury Village IS/MND 82 April 2022
approximately 6,404 tons of waste and 2,823 tons of recyclable materials annually. The Proposed Project would result in a zone change from general commercial (C-4) to high density residential (H-4), residential uses create less disposable waste than commercial uses. Additionally, the Proposed Project will comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. All construction debris will be disposed of according to applicable federal, state, and local statutes. Impacts would be less than significant. e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact. See response to 2.4.19 (d) above. Additionally, collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste generated by the project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. In particular, AB 939, the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, requires that at least 50% of solid waste generated by a jurisdiction be diverted from landfill disposal through source reduction, recycling, or composting.
Regional agencies, counties, and cities are required to develop a waste management plan that would achieve a 50% diversion from landfills (California Public Resources Code, Section 40000 et seq.). Impacts would be less than significant.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 83 April 2022
2.4.20 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
Impact No Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned in the City General Plan, the project would be required to comply with the Hawaiian Gardens Emergency Operations Plan, adopted in March 2003. The plan provides a strategy for the City’s planned response to emergency situations. The City’s General Plan Safety Element shows emergency routes for the City (City of Hawaiian Gardens 2010). The project would be provided emergency routes along Claretta Avenue. The Project Site is also provided regional access via I-605, I-405, and SR-91. Due to the Proposed Project’s local and regional connectivity, in the unlikely event of an emergency, the project-adjacent roadway facilities would be expected to serve as emergency evacuation routes for first responders and residents. The project would not adversely affect operations on the local or regional circulation system, and as such, would not influence the use of these facilities as emergency response routes.
Therefore, impacts associated with an emergency response plan would be less than significant. b. Would the project, 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. The Project Site is not on a slope that would expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from wildfire. Additionally, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s (CAL FIRE’s) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map of the County (2020), the Proposed Tilbury Village IS/MND 84 April 2022
Project is in a local responsibility non-Very High Fire Hazard Safety Zone. Development of the Proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk from wildland fires. c. Would the project 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. The does not propose the installation of new infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risk. In addition, the Project Site is not in or immediately near state responsibility areas or lands classified as Very High Hazard Severity Zones according to CAL FIRE’s California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps (2021). Therefore, no impact would occur. d. Would the project 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. The Proposed Project is not in an area that is susceptible to landslides. In addition, the Project Site is not in or immediately near state responsibility areas or lands classified as Very High Hazard Severity Zones according to CAL FIRE’s California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps (2021). Therefore, no impact would occur.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 85 April 2022
2.4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Does the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. 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 self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially 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?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. 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)?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c. Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v.
County of Mendocino,(1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.
Impact Analysis
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 self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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 Impact with Mitigation. With implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR1 through TCR-3, the Proposed Project would not 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. 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 Tilbury Village IS/MND 86 April 2022
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. As determined in the analysis presented in this IS/MND, with implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 through TCR-3, the Proposed Project would not result in significant impacts in any resources area; therefore, there would be no cumulatively considerable effects.
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Impact. As determined in the analysis in this IS/MND, for all resource topics the project would have no impact or less than significant impacts. Therefore, substantial adverse impacts on human beings would not occur as a result of the project.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 87 April 2022
Section 3 List of Preparers
3.1 Lead Agency
Kevin Nguyen, Associate Planner II
Community Development Department
21815 Pioneer Boulevard
Hawaiian Gardens, California 90716
(562) 420-2641 ext. 246
3.2 Consultants
Harris & Associates
22 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92614
William Halligan, Esq., Senior Director/Senior Environmental Counsel Kelsey Hawkins, Associate
Yliana Ortega, Associate
Sharon Toland, Senior Air Quality and Noise Specialist
Lindsey Messner, Technical Editor
Randy Deodat, GIS Analyst
Tilbury Village IS/MND 88 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 89 April 2022
Section 4 References
California Department of Transportation Division of Transportation Planning. 1997. Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. Accessed November 2021. Accessed at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/coprotocol-searchable-a11y.pdf.
City of Escondido. 2021. Escondido Municipal Code, Environmental Quality Regulations, Section 33- 924. Accessed November 2021. Accessed at http://qcode.us/codes/escondido/.
County of Los Angeles, Public Works Department. 2013. County of Los Angeles Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines. Accessed November 2021. Accessed at https://dpw.lacounty. gov/traffic/trafficreportmsg.cfm.
Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT). 2016. Transportation Impact Study Memorandum of Understanding. December Accessed November 2021. Accessed at https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/90d2c25b-476a-40bc-9c14-6bb50c95aa56/ENV-2018- 1651-IS-10.pdf.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments. 2016. “Current Context – Demographics & Growth Forecast 2016 RTP/SCS Appendix.” Adopted April 2016. Accessed November 2021. http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_DemographicsGrowthForecast.pdf.
SCAQMD. 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Accessed November 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rulescompliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ceqa-airquality-handbook-(1993).
SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 2008. “Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold.” Draft. October. Accessed November 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqasignificance-thresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf.
SCAQMD. 2017. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. March 16, 2017. Accessed November 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/ 2016-airquality- management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15.
Tilbury Village IS/MND 90 April 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A. Transportation Study Screening Analysis
This page intentionally left blank.
transportation ■ noise ■ air quality | GANDDINI GROUP
555 Parkcenter Drive, Suite 225, Santa Ana, California 92705 (714) 795-3100 | ganddini.com
October 12, 2021
Mr. Scott Choppin, Founder
URBAN PACIFIC
5318 East 2nd Street, Suite 644
Long Beach, California 90803
RE: Tilbury Village Transportation Study Screening Analysis Project No. 19438
Dear Mr. Choppin:
Ganddini Group, Inc. is pleased to provide this transportation study screening analysis for the proposed Tilbury Village project in the City of Hawaiian Gardens. We trust the findings of this analysis will aid the City of Hawaiian Gardens in assessing whether preparation of a transportation study will be required for the proposed project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The approximately 25,000 square foot project site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Tilbury Street and Claretta Avenue in the City of Hawaiian Gardens, California. The project location map is shown on Figure 1. The project site is currently developed with a contractor’s yard.
The proposed project involves redevelopment of the site with 13 multifamily housing (mid-rise) dwelling units.
The project proposes a full access driveway to Claretta Avenue. Each unit is proposed to provide two parking spaces and seven guest parking spaces are proposed on-site. Tilbury Street and Claretta Avenue provide onstreet parking adjacent to the project site. The proposed site plan is illustrated on Figure 2.
TRIP GENERATION
Table 1 shows the project trip generation forecasts based upon trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). Based on review of the ITE land use descriptions, Land Use Code 221 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) was determined to adequately represent the proposed use and was selected for the analysis. The number of trips forecast to be generated by the proposed project is determined by multiplying the trip generation rates and directional distributions by the land use quantity.
As shown in Table 1, the proposed use is forecast to generate approximately 60 daily trips, including 6 trips during the AM peak hour and 5 trips during the PM peak hour.
Mr. Scott Choppin, Founder
URBAN PACIFIC
October 12, 2021
Tilbury Village
Transportation Study Screening Analysis
2 19438
CRITERIA FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSES In the absence of formal traffic study guidelines established by the City of Hawaiian Gardens, this screening analysis was prepared based on the criteria outlined in the County of Los Angeles’ Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 23, 2020) (“the County TIA Guidelines”). According to the County TIA Guidelines, certain types of projects, because of their size, nature, or location, are exempt from the requirement of preparing a traffic impact analysis.
Level of Service (LOS) Analysis Screening Criteria
The current County TIA Guidelines no longer include screening criteria for Level of Service analysis as the document focuses on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Previously, the County of Los Angeles’ Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines (December 2013) stated that a traffic impact analysis is generally needed when a project is expected to generate over 500 trips per day. This document also states that the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires analysis for all CMP monitored intersections, including freeway on/off-ramp intersections, where the proposed project will add 50 or more trips during either the AM or PM peak hour.
The proposed project is forecast to generate fewer than 500 new daily trips and fewer than 50 new AM or PM peak hour trips. Therefore, the project would generally be exempt from preparation of a traffic impact study with Level of Service analysis based on the criteria traditionally used by County of Los Angeles.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Screening Criteria The project VMT impact was assessed in accordance with the County TIA Guidelines. The County TIA Guidelines establish screening thresholds for certain types of projects that may be presumed to cause a less than significant VMT impact based on substantial evidence provided in the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018).
The County TIA Guidelines specify the following four screening steps: 1) Non-Retail Project Trip Generation Screening; 2) Retail Project Site Plan Screening; 3) Proximity to Transit Based Screening; and 4) Residential Land Use Based Screening.
Non-Retail Project Trip Generation Screening
For this screening, if the answer is no to the following question, further analysis is not required, and a less than significant determination can be made.
▪ Does the development project generate a net increase of 110 or more daily vehicle trips? The proposed project generates a net increase of less than 110 daily vehicle trips. Therefore, the proposed project satisfies the City-established screening criteria for non-retail project trip generation screening and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact.
Retail Project Trip Generation Screening
A project that contains a local serving retail use is assumed to have less than significant VMT impacts for the retail portion of the project. For this screening, if the answer is no to the following question, a less than significant determination can be made for the portion of the project that contains retail uses.
Mr. Scott Choppin, Founder
URBAN PACIFIC
October 12, 2021
Tilbury Village
Transportation Study Screening Analysis
3 19438
▪ Does the project contain retail uses that exceed 50,000 square feet of gross floor area? The proposed project is residential and therefore this screening criteria does not apply.
Proximity to Transit Based Screening
Projects located within a TPA (half mile area around an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor) may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This presumption may not be appropriate if the project:
1. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
2. Includes more parking than required by the County;
3. Is inconsistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS; or
4. Replaces residential units set aside for lower income households with a smaller number of marketrate residential units.
Since the proposed project does not meet the thresholds placed on this screening criteria (e.g., FAR less than
0.75), this screening criteria has not been assessed.
Residential Land Use Based Screening
Certain projects that further the state’s affordable housing goals are presumed to have less than significant impact on VMT. If the project requires a discretionary action and the answer is yes to the question below, further analysis is not required, and a less than significant determination can be made. ▪ Are 100% of the units, excluding manager’s units, set aside for lower income households? Two of the units are proposed as affordable units. Thus, 100% of the units are not set aside for lower income households and the proposed project does not satisfy the County-established screening criteria for affordable housing.
VMT Screening Assessment Findings
The proposed project satisfies the County-established screening criteria for non-retail project trip generation screening ; therefore, the project is exempt from preparation of a detailed VMT analysis and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact.
CONCLUSION
The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 60 daily trips, including 6 trips during the AM peak hour and 5 trips during the PM peak hour.
The project would generally be exempt from preparation of a traffic impact study with Level of Service analysis based on the criteria traditionally used by County of Los Angeles.
The proposed project satisfies the County-established screening criteria for non-retail project trip generation screening; therefore, the project is exempt from preparation of a detailed VMT analysis and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact.
Mr. Scott Choppin, Founder
URBAN PACIFIC
October 12, 2021
Tilbury Village
Transportation Study Screening Analysis
4 19438
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you on this project. Should you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call at (714) 795-3100 x 104.
Sincerely,
GANDDINI GROUP, INC.
Bryan Crawford, Senior Transportation Planner
Giancarlo Ganddini, TE, PTP, Principal
% In % Out Rate % In % Out Rate
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) ITE 221 DU 23% 77% 0.37 61% 39% 0.39 4.54 In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 13 DU 2 4 6 3 2 5 60
Notes:
Table 1
Project Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use Source1 Units2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
Rate
Trips Generated
Daily
1) Sources:
ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021); ### = Land Use Code. 2) DU = Dwelling Units
Land Use Quantity Units2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Tilbury Village
Transportation Study Screening Analysis
19438
Figure 1
Project Location Map
Tilbury Village
Transportation Study Screening Analysis
19438
N
CARSON ST
Site
TILBURY ST
FARLOW ST
FARLOW ST
215TH ST
CLARETTA AVE
Figure 2
Site Plan
Tilbury Village
Transportation Study Screening Analysis
19438
N
Appendix B. Mitigation Monitoring Program
This page intentionally left blank.
1 TILBURY VILLAGE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Terms and Definitions:
1. Property Owner/Developer – Urban Pacific
2. Environmental Equivalent/Timing – Any Mitigation Measure and timing thereof, subject to the approval of the City, which will have the same or superior result and will have the same or superior effect on the environment. The Community Development Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed “environmental equivalent/timing” and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency/timing shall be borne by the property owner/developer.
Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City’s adopted fee schedule.
3. Timing – This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is “to be shown on approved building plans” subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance.
4. Responsibility for Monitoring – Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all departments listed for each mitigation measure.
5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures – The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored “Ongoing During Construction,” the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed.
6. Building Permit – For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor additions to an existing structure or building. 2 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Prior to issuance of
grading permit
TCR-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities:
A. The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.
C. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.
D. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the project applicant/lead agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs.
E. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.
.
Community Development
Department
3 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of
grading permit
TCR-2 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:
Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.
C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)
E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
Community Development
Department
4 Prior to issuance of
grading permit
TCR-3 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:
Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains
A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.
B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.
C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.
D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24- hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.
F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.
G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall Planning Department/Building
Division
5 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery-related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does not authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.
.
6 This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix C. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Tilbury Village Mitigated Negative Declaration
Response to Comments
Response to Letter 1 from Mandy Huffman, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) Response: Comment noted. The City of Hawaiian Gardens appreciates your response and acknowledges that located within the jurisdictional boundaries of LACSD’s District No. 19. No further response required.
Response to Letter 2 from David Marlow, Resident
The applicant has requested a General Plan Amendment. At this time, it has not been approved by the City of Hawaiian Gardens decisionmakers. The potential aesthetic and traffic impacts associated with the project are addressed in the mitigated negative declaration (MND) prepared for the project. Please refer to Section 2.4.1 and 2.4.17, respectively, of the MND for information related to these topics. However, your comment is hereby noted and will be forwarded to the City of Hawaiian Gardens decisionmakers for their review and consideration.
DOC 6471040.D19
March 2, 2022
Ref. DOC 6459922
Kevin Nguyen, Associate Planner II
City of Hawaiian Gardens
Community Development Department
21815 Pioneer Boulevard
Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716
Dear Mr. Nguyen:
NOI Response to Tilbury Village Residential Project
The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (Districts) received a Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the subject project on February 11, 2022. The proposed project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of District No. 19. We offer the following comments regarding sewerage service:
1. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge to a local sewer line, which is not maintained by the Districts, for conveyance to the Districts’ Joint Outfall “C” Unit 8B Trunk Sewer, located in Belshire Avenue at 215th Street. The Districts’ 39-inch diameter trunk sewer has a capacity of
16.3 million gallons per day (mgd) and conveyed a peak flow of 7.4 mgd when last measured in 2020.
2. The expected average wastewater flow from the project site, described in the MND as 13 multi-family housing dwelling units, is 2,535 gallons per day. For a copy of the Districts’ average wastewater generation factors, go to www.lacsd.org, under Services, then Wastewater Program and Permits, select Will Serve Program, and scroll down to click on the Table 1, Loadings for Each Class of Land Use link.
3. The wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the Long Beach Water Reclamation Plant, which has a capacity of 25.0 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 15.2 mgd.
4. The Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee to connect facilities (directly or indirectly) to the Districts’ Sewerage System or to increase the strength or quantity of wastewater discharged from connected facilities. This connection fee is used by the Districts for its capital facilities. Payment of a connection fee may be required before this project is permitted to discharge to the Districts’ Sewerage System. For more information and a copy of the Connection Fee Information Sheet, go to www.lacsd.org, under Services, then Wastewater (Sewage) and select Rates & Fees. In determining the impact to the Sewerage System and applicable connection fees, the Districts will determine the user category (e.g. Condominium, Single Family home, etc.) that best represents the actual or anticipated use of the parcel(s) or facilities on the parcel(s) in the development. For more specific information regarding the connection fee application procedure and fees, the developer should contact the Districts’ Wastewater Fee Public Counter at (562) 908-4288, extension 2727.
5. In order for the Districts to conform to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the capacities of the Districts’ wastewater treatment facilities are based on the regional growth forecast adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Specific policies included in the development Mr. Kevin Nguyen 2 March 2, 2022
DOC 6471040.D19
of the SCAG regional growth forecast are incorporated into clean air plans, which are prepared by the South Coast and Antelope Valley Air Quality Management Districts in order to improve air quality in the South Coast and Mojave Desert Air Basins as mandated by the CAA. All expansions of Districts’ facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner that will be consistent with the SCAG regional growth forecast for the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The available capacity of the Districts’ treatment facilities will, therefore, be limited to levels associated with the approved growth identified by SCAG. As such, this letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to advise the developer that the Districts intend to provide this service up to the levels that are legally permitted and to inform the developer of the currently existing capacity and any proposed expansion of the Districts’ facilities.
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (562) 908-4288, extension 2743, or [email protected].
Very truly yours,
Mandy Huffman
Environmental Planner
Facilities Planning Department
MNH:mnh
1 Kevin Nguyen
From: [email protected] on behalf of Formsite <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 11:53 AM
To: Kevin Nguyen
Subject: Public Comment City Council virtual meetings Result #18465600 Reference # 18465600
Status Complete
Please Select Meeting Date 2022‐02‐15
Select from the list below who this comment is for: Planning Commission Full Name/Nombre David G Marlow
City of Residence (optional)/Ciudad de residencia
(opcional)
Lakewood
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional) 562‐405‐2646
Email Address [email protected]
Identify the Agenda Item Number(s) on the Regular
Meeting Agenda for Which You are Providing
Comment and/or Identify if your Comment Pertains
to Items Not Listed on the Agenda (for example,
Non‐Agenda Items, and Items A.1 and D.4). For
Special Meetings, Comments are limited to Items
on the Agenda Only; Identify the Agenda Item
Number(s) on the Special Meeting Agenda for
Which You are Providing Comment (for example,
Item C.2).
I am inquiring about the proposed "Tilbury Village Residential Project" planned at 12345 E. Carson Street in the city of Hawaiian Gardens. This property is zoned for GC and now has a general plan amendment for R‐4. How is this possible? I reside at 12347 Tilbury Street in the City of Lakewood and we do not want 33'+ tall structures looking out our front door much less the additional traffic/parking it will cause on our street.
Please advise when the next meeting is for this proposal so that we as a community may join for comment.
Regards,
David Marlow
Last Update 2022‐02‐15 11:52:57
Start Time 2022‐02‐15 11:43:56
Finish Time 2022‐02‐15 11:52:57
IP 12.245.214.114
Browser Chrome
Device Desktop
2 Referrer https://www.hgcity.org/
This email was sent to [email protected] as a result of a form being completed.
Click here to report unwanted email.
To help protect your
privacy, Micro so ft Office
prevented automatic
download of this picture
from the Internet.
1 TILBURY VILLAGE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Terms and Definitions:
1. Property Owner/Developer – Urban Pacific
2. Environmental Equivalent/Timing – Any Mitigation Measure and timing thereof, subject to the approval of the City, which will have the same or superior result and will have the same or superior effect on the environment. The Community Development Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed “environmental equivalent/timing” and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency/timing shall be borne by the property owner/developer.
Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City’s adopted fee schedule.
3. Timing – This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is “to be shown on approved building plans” subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance.
4. Responsibility for Monitoring – Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all departments listed for each mitigation measure.
5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures – The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored “Ongoing During Construction,” the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed.
6. Building Permit – For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor additions to an existing structure or building. 2 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Prior to issuance of
grading permit
TCR-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities:
A. The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.
C. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.
D. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the project applicant/lead agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs.
E. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.
.
Community Development
Department
3 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of
grading permit
TCR-2 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:
Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.
C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)
E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
Community Development
Department
4 Prior to issuance of
grading permit
TCR-3 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:
Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains
A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.
B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.
C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.
D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24- hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.
F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.
G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall Planning Department/Building
Division
5 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery-related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does not authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 026-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF A PROPERTY FROM C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA (APN-7066-017-127) WHEREAS, Urban Pacific filed a Zone Change application (PLNG2021-0025) for a project to construct a residential apartment development and request approval of an amendment to change the Land Use Element Land Use Map designation from General Commercial (GC) to High Density Residential (HDR) and a zone change to rezone the property from General Commercial (C-4) to High Density Residential (R-4) for property (Project) located at 12345 Carson Street (Property); and, WHEREAS, the Project is currently located within the C-4 (General Commercial) zoning district and is designated as General Commercial on the City of Hawaiian Gardens Land Use Map of the City’s General Plan (GP); and,
WHEREAS, a General Plan Map Amendment for the project is concurrently being processed (Case No PLNG2021-0026) to re-classify the General Plan Land Use designation of the property from General Commercial to High Density Residential (HDR); and,
WHEREAS, a Site Plan Review (PLNG2021-0025) for the project is concurrently being processed to approve the site plan, grading plan, and landscape plan for the 13 midrise dwelling unit apartment project: and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular Planning Commission meeting on May 11, 2022, adopted a Resolution denying the project; and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Hawaiian Gardens Environmental Guidelines, and the City Council has recommended adoption of the IS/MND and MMP; and,
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2022, an advertisement was published in the Los Cerritos Community News; and notices were placed at the City Hall, Lee Ware Park, and Lakewood Mobile Home Park; and notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property specifying the date, time and location of the public hearing; and, WHEREAS, Section 65860 of the California Government Code requires City Zoning to be consistent with the adopted General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, Sections 65854 to 65857 of the California Government Code and Section 18.100.140 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code authorize the City Council to approve or disapprove a zone change application; and,
WHEREAS, The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on July 26, 2022, and fully considered all oral and written testimony, facts, and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals
The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, are true and correct.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review.
With the adoption of Resolution No. 025-2022, the City Council of Hawaiian Gardens approved the IS/MND and MMP in compliance with CEQA.
SECTION 3. Zone Change Findings
Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearings regarding the zone change, the City Council further finds, determines and declares that:
1. The proposed zoning designation, as proposed through Case PLNG2021-0025 is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element. A General Plan Amendment application is being considered concurrently with the subject proposal, anticipating approval, the proposed zoning designation is consistent with the new General Plan Land Use Designation. The proposed project would allow the construction of a multifamily apartment project with 13 mid-rise dwelling units. Furthermore, it is in the interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare in that it will provide more housing opportunities and increase property tax revenue for the City.
2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes of Title 18 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code. The change will allow for a multi-family housing project. The change would bring the subject parcel into consistency with the adjoining R-4 properties directly to the west of the site. The proposed zoning designation allows the construction of a multi-family housing project with 13 mid-rise dwelling units which is compatible with surrounding residential properties.
SECTION 4. Recommend Adoption of an Ordinance Approving the Zone Change
The City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens HEREBY APPROVES Case Number Case Number PLNG2021-0025-ZC, an Ordinance rezoning the property located at 12345 Carson Street, APN 7066-017-127 from General Commercial (C-4) to High Density Residential (R-4). An Ordinance has been included as Exhibit “A” of Resolution 026-2022.
SECTION 5. Reliance on Record
Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
SECTION 6. Summaries of Information
All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 7. The Mayor of the City of Hawaiian Gardens is hereby authorized to affix his signature to this resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council. The City Clerk is directed to attest thereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Hawaiian Gardens City Council on this 26
th day of July, 2022.
__________________________
LUIS ROA
MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________
PABLO RUBIO
CITY CLERK
Ordinance
DRAFT ORDINANCE
FOR A ZONE CHANGE
“EXHIBIT A"
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA (PROJECT NUMBER: PLNG2021-0025)
THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Hawaiian Gardens,
California
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, Urban Pacific filed an application requesting approval of amendments to the Hawaiian Gardens General Plan Map as well as rezoning a property to develop a multi-family housing project with 13 mid-rise dwelling units on property (Project) at 12345 Carson Street (Property), Hawaiian Gardens, California (Project No. PLNG2021-0025); and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code § 18.40.050 - R-4—High density residential zone: The purpose of the high density residential (R-4) zone is to provide areas for multiple family residential developments where adequate services, traffic circulation, and the existence of open space and recreation areas are available. These are found in areas that provide a transition to non-residential zones and are primarily intended for apartments, condominiums and other high-density multi-family developments.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Hawaiian Gardens on April 6, 2022, after due notice was given as required by law, at which time oral and documentary evidence was introduced along with the written analysis of the Planning Division of the City of Hawaiian Gardens, and the Planning Commission recommended denial of Project No.
PLN2021-0025 to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on 26th day of July, 2022, after due notice was given as required by law, at which time oral and documentary evidence was introduced along with the recommendation of the Planning Commission of the City of Hawaiian Gardens.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated by reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council is concurrently adopting or has adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 3. The City Council is concurrently adopting a General Plan amendment to the site’s land use designation and the corresponding properties within the project area as Ordinance
described as follows and shown on Exhibit A, which are presently zoned as C-4 (general commercial) and that they would be reclassified as R-4 (high density residential), for consistency with the General Plan designations.
EXHIBIT A
Zone Change – Location Map
Zone Change (PLN2021-0025)
Assessor Parcel
No.
Address Current Land Use
Zoning
New Land Use
Zoning
7066-017-127 12345 Carson Street C-4 (General
Commercial)
R-4 (High Density
Residential)
SECTION 4. Zone Change Findings
Project Site: 12345 Carson
St.
Ordinance
Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearings regarding the zone change, the Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares that:
1. The proposed zoning designation, as proposed through Case PLNG2021-0025 is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element. A General Plan Amendment application is being considered concurrently with the subject proposal, anticipating approval, the proposed zoning designation is consistent with the new General Plan Land Use Designation. The proposed project would allow the construction of a multi-family housing project with 13 midrise dwelling units. Furthermore, it is in the interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare in that it will provide more housing opportunities and increase property tax revenue for the City.
2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes of Title 18 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code. The change will allow for a multi-family housing project. The change would bring the subject parcel into consistency with the adjoining R-4 properties directly to the west of the site. The proposed zoning designation allows the construction of a multi-family housing project with 13 mid-rise dwelling units which is compatible with surrounding residential properties.
SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Ordinance shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. The people of the City of Hawaiian Gardens hereby declare that they would have adopted each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of this Ordinance be declared invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 6. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof and cause same to be published at least once in the San Gabriel Valley Examiner, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published in the City of Hawaiian Gardens, which newspaper is hereby designated for that purpose; and thereupon, and thirty (30) days after its passage, this ordinance shall take effect and be in force.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26
th day of July, 2022.
City Council of Hawaiian Gardens, California
__________________________
BY: Luis Roa
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Megan Garibaldi
City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 027-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (SITE PLAN REVIEW), A REQUEST TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF A NEW 13-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET CITY
OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, Urban Pacific filed a Site Plan Review and Architectural Review application (PLNG2021-0025) for a project to construct a residential apartment development and request approval of an amendment to change the Land Use Element Land Use Map designation from General Commercial (GC) to High Density Residential (HDR) and a zone change to rezone the property from General Commercial (C-4) to High Density Residential (R4) for property (Project) located at 12345 Carson Street (Property); and, WHEREAS, the Site Plan Review for the project is being processed to approve the site plan, grading plan, and landscape plan for the 13 mid-rise dwelling unit apartment project; and,
WHEREAS, a General Plan Map Amendment for the project is concurrently being processed (Case No PLNG2021-0026) to re-classify the General Plan Land Use designation of the property from General Commercial (GC) to High Density Residential (HDR); and, WHEREAS, the Property is currently located within the C-4 (General Commercial) zoning district and is designated as General Commercial on the City of Hawaiian Gardens Land Use Map of the City’s General Plan (GP); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular Planning Commission meeting on May 11, 2022 adopted a Resolution denying the project; and, WHEREAS, the Mayor called the Site Plan Review (PLNG2021-0025) up to City Council for review with the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change; and, WHEREAS, concurrent with the Site Plan Review, the corresponding property, which is presently zoned as C-4 (General Commercial), would be reclassified as R-4 (High Density Residential) for consistency with the General Plan designations; and, WHEREAS, the property at 12345 Carson Street, Hawaiian Gardens, California, is located in an established urban neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, HGMC §18.100.030 - Site plan review and approval provides that the purpose of a site plan review is to ensure that:
1. Development in the City is consistent with the general plan, this title, and other regulations, plans and policies of the City;
2. Development in the City contributes to the long-term attractiveness of the City;
3. Development in the City contributes to the economic vitality of the community by ensuring compatibility of development throughout the community; and
4. Development in the City contributes to the public safety, health, and general welfare.
WHEREAS, HGMC provides that the reviewing body (in this case, the City Council) may impose such conditions as it deems necessary to ensure that the project will meet the purpose, intent and development standards of the zone; and.
WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Hawaiian Gardens Environmental Guidelines, and the City Council has recommended adoption of the IS/MND and MMP; and,
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2022, an advertisement was published in the Los Cerritos Community News; and notices were placed at the City Hall, Lee Ware Park, and Lakewood Mobile Home Park; and notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property specifying the date, time and location of the public hearing; and, WHEREAS, The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on July 26, 2022, and fully considered all oral and written testimony, facts, and opinions offered at the aforesaid public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hawaiian Gardens as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals
The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, are true and correct.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review.
With the adoption of Resolution No. 025-2022, the City Council of Hawaiian Gardens approved the IS/MND and MMP in compliance with CEQA.
SECTION 3. Site Plan Review Findings
Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said public hearings regarding the General Plan Amendment, the City Council further finds, determines and declares that:
1. Case No. PLNG2021-0025-Site Plan Review meets the requirements of HGZC Section 18.100.020, as it relates to the approval a Site Plan Review and is consistent with the City of Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code and General Plan.
2. The proposed use would be consistent with high density residential uses located adjacent to the west side of the subject site. The proposed project will not only upgrade the site by eliminating the unsightly current use but will serve to upgrade the surrounding properties, by enhancing the streetscape and as such is compatible with adjacent development and development in the area.
3. The building design and landscape materials presented are consistent with the design standards and guidelines in the HGZC and;
4. The project is situated on one lot.
SECTION 4. Reliance on Record
Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council’s decision is based are located at 21815 Pioneer Boulevard, Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716. The custodian of these documents and materials is Pablo Rubio.
SECTION 5. Summaries of Information
All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 6. The City Council hereby approves a Site Plan Review for a new multifamily apartment project with 13 mid-rise dwelling units in 2 buildings as described by the report and depicted on project plans attached to the City Council Agenda Report for PLNG2021-0025, and after determining that the project meets the requirements of HGMC §18.100.020, it is subject to the attached Conditions of Approval:
SECTION 7. The Mayor of the City of Hawaiian Gardens is hereby authorized to affix his signature to this resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council. The City Clerk is directed to attest thereto.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the Hawaiian Gardens City Council on this 26 th day of
July, 2022.
__________________________
LUIS ROA
MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________
PABLO RUBIO
CITY CLERK
ATTACHMENT ‘A’
Conditions of Approval
Resolution 2022-004 (General Plan Amendment, IS/MND)
Resolution 2022-005 (Zone Change)
Resolution 2022-006 (Site Plan Review – Design Review)
The Planning Commission hereby approves the above cases for the development of a 13-unit apartment (Tilbury Village) project on property located at 12345 Carson Street, subject to the following conditions necessary to protect the public’s health, safety, and general welfare.
Planning Division:
1. All of the conditions listed in the Standard List of Conditions and below shall be complied with by the applicant and all property owners of the subject property, including any heirs, successors or assigns of or to the applicant or property owners, respectively (collectively, the “Owner/Applicant/Developer”) prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit and/or business license.
2. The owner/applicant/operator shall comply with all mitigation measures, as established by the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. The mitigation measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
3. Approval of the General Plan Amendment allows the re-classification of the current General Plan land use element map of a property from General Commercial to High Density Residential; and adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) for the project.
4. Approval of the Zone Change allows the subject property to rezone from C-4 (General Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Residential).
5. The Site Plan Review - Design Review Board approves the site plan and architectural design, color and building materials of a proposed 13-unit apartment project.
6. The approval of PLNG2021-0026-GPA, PLNG2021-0025-ZC, and PLNG2021-0027-DR shall not be valid until all entitlements are approved by the Hawaiian Gardens City Council. The denial of GPA and ZC by the Hawaiian Gardens City Council shall be deemed a denial of the entire project.
7. The owner/applicant/developer shall provide a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total units for low-income households at affordable housing costs.
8. Postal delivery receptacles shall be located in accordance with the United States Postal Service standards.
9. The owner/applicant/developer shall re-construct a six-foot high block wall along the southerly and westerly property lines of the site. Said new block wall shall have architectural features and color that match the apartment building.
10. The owner/applicant/developer shall not permit any loitering on the subject site and adjacent parking lot.
11. Approval of the above listed entitlements shall not be construed to mean any waiver of applicable and appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County, and City laws and regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code shall apply.
12. All fire department related equipment, valves and apparatuses shall be screened and approved by the Planning Division prior to installation.
13. All roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view. The working drawings shall include a cross-section detail to illustrate that the height of the building parapet is sufficient to screen all roof-mounted equipment from the view of adjoining streets and neighboring properties.
14. The owner/applicant/developer has submitted a color rendering for the subject proposal.
Plans shall be in substantial compliance with the subject rendering to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, including, but not limited to, colors of the building, architectural details, building elevations, and landscaping.
15. Prior to issuance of the occupancy permit, the applicant shall request for an inspection by the Planning Division to determine the condition and height of the existing wall located at the north (street) side of the property. Should the wall be found structurally deficient, the owner/applicant/developer shall construct a new block wall that meets current’s standards. Said block wall shall be stucco and located entirely on the subject site.
16. The new trash enclosure shall meet all City and Commercial Waste requirements. The design, colors and materials of trash enclosure shall match the apartment building.
Trash must be picked up as necessary to ensure that the trash enclosure has adequate space to accommodate the needs of the site. No trash storage/disposal shall be placed in the public right-of-way. The applicant shall make every effort to secure the proposed enclosures to prevent dumping.
17. No parking allowed in the front yard area fronting Claretta Ave, except for temporary parking of emergency vehicles.
18. Prior to submittal to the Building and Safety Division the applicant shall provide final architectural plans to the City Planning Division with all applicable conditions of approval incorporated.
19. The owner/applicant/developer shall include a copy of all conditions of approval within the final approved plans.
20. All proposed transformer and utility equipment shall be located beyond the front setback of Claretta Avenue and Tilbury Street. The owner/applicant/developer shall work with Southern California Edison to find a suitable location with final locations subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. The ground level transformer shall be screened from public view by using live planter materials.
21. No sales or advertising is permitted at the property and from public sidewalk.
22. All vehicles including guests at the apartment complex shall be parked at the designed spaces and shall not otherwise be parked in a manner which hampers vehicular circulation on the subject site or the public right-of-way.
23. No outdoor storage of any kind is permitted at the subject site. Storage of all materials shall be located entirely within the enclosed building.
24. There shall be no permanent storage of motor vehicles, boats, trailers, equipment, or personal goods on the parking lot area adjacent to the apartment building.
25. No hazardous materials (i.e., motor oils, gasoline, transmission fluids, household cleaning, gardening/landscaping products, etc.) shall be stored within the parking lot or trash enclosure area.
26. All fire department related equipment, valves and apparatuses shall be screened and approved by the Planning Division prior to installation.
27. The owner/applicant shall incorporate graffiti resistant materials to the maximum extent feasible with all materials to be approved by City Staff.
28. All vehicular ingress and egress shall be taken from Claretta Avenue in compliance with the traffic study prepared by the Ganddini Group dated 10/12/2021. At no time shall public access be granted through the property from Tilbury Street.
29. The owner/applicant/developer shall—at his, her, or its own expense— enter into an Indemnity Agreement with the City which shall provide at the City’s sole and absolute discretion, amongst other things, that:
A. Owner/Applicant/Developer shall fully indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City of Hawaiian Gardens (City) and the City’s agents, officers, employees, and attorneys (collectively, “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all actual or alleged claims, actions and/or proceedings against the Indemnified Parties by thirdparties that relate to or arise from any approval of the Project or any related approvals, including but not limited to (i) any California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) approvals, findings, and/or determinations, (ii) the approval of any permits (including any conditional use permits), variances, plot plans, design plans, maps (including any tentative parcel maps), licenses, or amendments, (iii) any challenge to the reasonableness, legality or validity of any of the conditions set forth herein, and (iv) any other approvals or actions taken by the Indemnified Parties relating to the project (collectively, “Approvals”). The owner/applicant’s indemnification obligation shall include, but shall not be limited to, any and all future third-party claims, actions, and/or proceedings against the Indemnified Parties (i) which seek to attack, set aside, void, or annul any of the Approvals; and/or (ii) which seek damages (including, without limitation, special and consequential damages and punitive damages) allegedly related to or arising from the Approvals (collectively, “Claims”). The owner/applicant’s indemnification obligation shall further include, but shall not be limited to, any damages, fees (including attorney’s fees), and or/costs either awarded against and/or incurred by the Indemnified Parties in connection with the Claims.
B. The Indemnified Parties shall each have the absolute right to retain such legal counsel as they deem necessary and appropriate to defend against or otherwise address any Claims. While Indemnified Parties may, in its or their sole discretion, participate in the defense of any Claims, such participation shall not relieve Applicant of his, her, or its obligations under this condition. The owner/applicant shall reimburse each Indemnified Party for any and all reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by the Indemnified Party as a result of any Claims. The owner/applicant shall reimburse each Indemnified Party for one hundred percent (100%) of the costs and expenditures incurred by the Indemnified Party relating to or arising from any of the Approvals, including all attorneys’ fees, other legal fees (including costs and related expenses), and consultants’ costs.
C. The Owner, Applicant, and Developer shall be jointly and severally liable for all obligations set forth herein.
30. Except building’s address number, no signs of any kind or advertising shall be placed on the subject property and/or building without first obtaining approval of the City.
Building & Safety Division:
1. Contractor specifications for dust-generating activities (such as fine grading and trenching) shall include watering of earth-disturbing areas at least twice per day, as necessary, to prevent visible dust from leaving the project site. Implementation of this measure shall be performed in compliance with the recommended control measures and regulations of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), as applicable to the project.
2. Prior to issuance of grading permits or building permits, whichever occurs first, a Construction Noise Management Plan shall be prepared by the project proponent and submitted for review and approval by the Director of Community Development. This Plan shall include the following requirements, in addition to any additional measures required by the Director of Community Development:
A. Stationary equipment (such as generators and air compressors) shall be located as far from local residences as feasible;
B. Equipment maintenance and staging areas shall be located in the as far from local residences as feasible; and
C. Construction equipment shall be fitted with manufacturer’s standard, or better, noise shielding and muffling devices to reduce noise levels to the maximum extent feasible.
3. If potential archaeological materials are uncovered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find, and to retain a professional archaeologist to examine the materials to determine whether it is a “unique archaeological resource” as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g). If this determination is positive, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the archaeologist. Work may continue outside of the area of the find; however, no further work shall occur in the immediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning it filed with the Community Development Department.
4. Prior to permit issuance the applicant shall provide a construction management plan which requires full compliance with AQMD Rule 403.
5. If applicable, prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall submit a confirmation report by a qualified environmental professional to the Community Development Department indicating that the site does not contain underground storage tank(s) or that the tank(s) have been removed; and that no soil contamination was present as a result of the tank(s), or all potential contamination has been remediated.
6. In accordance with Chapter 15.36 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code, for each new development, the applicant shall pay a growth requirements capital fee of four (4%) percent of the proposed project evaluation for the entire proposed development.
Payment of said fee shall be a condition precedent to issuance of building permits.
Los Angeles County Fire Department:
1. Fire Department access shall comply with Section 503 of the Fire Code, which requires all weather access. All weather access may require paving.
2. A uniform access system (e.g., Knox box) shall be provided to permit access to the subject hotel facility by safety personnel (e.g., Los Angeles County Fire Department, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, etc.). Location and type of system shall be coordinated through these agencies.
3. Provide Fire Department or City approved street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy.
4. If applicable, the owner/applicant/developer shall provide waters, fire hydrants, and fire flows as required by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department.
Drainage and Grading:
1. The project shall comply with the City’s Stormwater Program and the Regional Water Board’s NPDES permit, including the project complying with Low Impact Development standard and regulations.
2. Surface water generated from the project site shall not drain over the sidewalk or driveway into the gutter on Tilbury St and Claretta Ave. A parkway drain is required for the street. All NPDES permit requirements need to be shown on final plans.
3. Historical or existing storm water flow from adjacent lots must be received and directed by gravity to the street, a public drainage facility, or an approved drainage easement.
The applicant shall demonstrate that storm water flow will not impact the existing storm water drainage system to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Road:
1. The owner/applicant/developer shall remove and alter the driveway approach along Claretta Avenue and shall replace with new driveway approach, full curb, gutter and sidewalk in compliance with ADA standards.
2. The owner/applicant/developer shall repair any displaced, broken, or damaged curb, gutter, and pavement on streets fronting this project and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
3. If a section of streets (Tilbury St and Claretta Ave) in front of the project site is damaged during construction, the owner/applicant/developer shall slurry seal the entire section of street fronting the project site. The area of removal and replacement of any damage or service cut shall be determined and approved by the Community Development Director.
4. The owner/applicant/developer shall submit a copy of the sewer plans to the City and to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works for review. Approval of flow capacity must be confirmed by L.A.C.P.W. prior to issuance of permits.
5. The owner/applicant shall consult with the City Engineer to determine the sewer location and design requirements; the Owner/Applicant/Developer shall also show sewer connections on site plan.
6. The owner/applicant/developer shall pay all sewer connection fees prior to permit issuance and all other applicable fees per Chapter 13.08 of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code.
7. If applicable, the Owner/Applicant/Developer shall furnish and install sanitary sewer lateral(s) and associated facilities within the public right-of-way in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer.
Utilities:
1. If applicable, all existing above grade utilities at the property, including but not limited to power poles, overhead wires, telephone, television, and Wi-Fi cable service shall be undergrounded or removed from the property.
2. Any utilities that are in conflict with the development shall be relocated at the owner/ applicant/developer's expense.
Water:
1. Plans and specifications for the water system facilities shall be submitted for approval to the water company serving this land division. The Owner/Applicant/Developer shall submit an agreement and other evidence, satisfactory to the City Engineer, indicating that the applicant has entered into a contract with the servicing water purveyor guaranteeing payment and installation of the water improvements.
2. The water mains shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flow required for the land division. Domestic flows required are to be determined by the City Engineer. Fire flows required are to be determined by the Fire Chief.
3. The owner/applicant/developer shall comply with Section 6.47.010 (Water Runoff Control Findings) of the Hawaiian Gardens Municipal Code.
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A1
DATE: May 11, 2022
TO: Honorable Chairmember and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Maryann Marks, Interim Community Development Director RECOMMENDATION:
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2022-007, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF PLNG2021-0026 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL
PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT MAP, FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) AND CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (ZONE CHANGE) REZONE PROPERTY FROM C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 7066-017-012 CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (SITE PLAN REVIEW), A REQUEST TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF A NEW 13-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS,
CALIFORNIA AND FINDING THE SAME STATUTORILY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
SUMMARY
RESOLUTION OF DENIAL OF PLNG2021-0026 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) AND CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (SITE PLAN REVIEW), BASED ON THE ACTION TAKEN AT THE APRIL 27, 2022, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve Recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution No. 2022-007
CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item #A2
DATE: April 27, 2022
TO: Honorable Chairmember and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Ernesto Marquez, City Manager
BY: Maryann Marks, Interim Community Development Director RECOMMENDATION:
RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION INTO THE RECORD, CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARING;
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2022-004, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLNG2021- 0026 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE ELEMENT MAP, FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 7066-017-012 CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND ADOPTION OF THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT;
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2022-005 CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (ZONE CHANGE), TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING A PROPERTY FROM C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET, CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS, CALIFORNIA; AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2022-006 CONSIDERING CASE NO. PLNG2021-0025 (SITE PLAN REVIEW), A REQUEST TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF A NEW 13-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 CARSON STREET CITY OF HAWAIIAN GARDENS,
CALIFORNIA
Agenda Item #A2
April 27, 2022