Agenda packet — Lancaster City Council, January 24, 2023 (part 1 of 9)

Tuesday, January 24, 2023
Regular Meeting – 5:00 PM
The City Clerk/Agency/Authority Secretary hereby declares the agenda was posted by 5:00 p.m. on January 20, 2023
at the entrance to the Lancaster City Hall Council Chambers 44933 Fern Avenue, Lancaster, CA 93534

LEGISLATIVE BODY
City Council/Successor Agency/Financing/Power/California Choice Energy Authority Mayor/Chair R. Rex Parris
Vice Mayor/Vice Chair Marvin Crist
Council Member/Agency Director/Authority Darrell Dorris Council Member/Agency Director/Authority Member Raj Malhi Council Member/Agency Director/Authority Member Ken Mann CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023

COUNCIL ACTIONS

CONSENT CALENDAR

AGENDA ITEMS TO BE REMOVED
Sometimes it is necessary to remove items from the agenda. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you.

PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR - AGENDIZED ITEMS
Any person who would like to address the Legislative Bodies on any agendized item is requested to complete a speaker card for the City Clerk/Agency/Authority Secretary and identify the agenda item you would like to discuss. Each person will be given an opportunity to address the Legislative Body at the time such item is discussed. Speaker cards are available at the rear of the Council Chambers and your speaker card must be filled out prior to the agenda item being called. We respectfully request that you fill the cards out completely and print as clearly as possible. Following this procedure will allow for a smooth and timely process for the meeting and we appreciate your cooperation. Individual speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.

Consent Calendar items under the Legislative Body may be acted upon with one motion, a second and the vote. If you desire to speak on an item or items on the Consent Calendar, you may fill out one speaker card for the Consent Calendar.You will be given three minutes, unless a different time limit is announced, to address your concerns before the Legislative Body takes action on the Consent Calendar.

CALL TO ORDER
City Council/Successor Agency/Financing/Power/California Choice Energy Authority

ROLL CALL
City Council Members /Agency Directors /Authority Members: Dorris, Malhi, Mann; Vice Mayor/ Vice Chair Crist, Mayor/Chair Parris

INVOCATION
Jeremy Johnson, Grace Resources

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CC 1. Waive further reading of any proposed ordinance. (This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text.)
CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023
CC 2. Approve the City Council/Successor Agency/Housing/Financing/Power/California Choice Energy Authority Regular Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2023.

CC 3. Check Registers – December 25, 2022, through January 7, 2022 Recommendation(s):

1. Approve the Check and Wire Registers for December 25, 2022, through January 7, 2022, in the amount of $4,360,455.36 as presented.

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

Claims are paid via checks, Automated Clearing House (ACH) payments, or federal wires.

The justifying backup information for each expenditure is available in the Finance Department.

CC 4. Monthly Report of Investments – December 2022
Recommendation(s):

1. Accept and approve the December 2022 Monthly Report of Investments as submitted

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

Each month, the Finance Department prepares a report listing the investments for all separate entities under the jurisdiction of the City as identified in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

CC 5. Final Map Approval – Tract Map No. 062120-01 (Located at the Southwest Corner of 35th Street West and Lancaster Boulevard)
Recommendation(s):

1. Approve the map and accept the dedications as offered on Tract Map No. 062120-01 located at the southwest corner of 35th Street West and Lancaster Blvd; make findings that this project will not violate any of the provisions of Sections 66473.5, 66474.1 and 66474.6 of the Subdivision Map Act; and instruct the City Clerk to endorse on the face of the map the certificate which embodies the approval of said map and the dedications shown thereon.

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. An Initial Study/Mititgated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and a Notice of Determination was filed and posted on June 6, 2006.

The Final Parcel Map is in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map. Tract Map No. 062120-01 has been examined by the City Surveyor, and is ready for Council approval. In addition, a Lien Agreement and improvement securities have been submitted to guarantee the installation of improvements.
th
CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023
CC 6. SPR 17-01 - Acceptance of Improvements (Streets)
Recommendation(s):

1. Approve the developer-constructed streets on the following project. In addition, accept the streets for maintenance by the City and for public use.

Project Location/Owner
Site Plan Review No. 17-01 846 West Avenue L-6
Owner: SEG Opportunity Properties, LLC

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. A notice of Exemption dated November 26, 2019, was filed and posted.

The streets have been constructed and completed by the developer according to the approved plans and specifications. The work has been inspected and found to be satisfactory to the Senior Director - Development Services.

CC 7. SPR 17-01 - Acceptance of Improvements (Water)
Recommendation(s):

1. Approve the completed water system installed by the developer for the following project:

Project Location/Owner
Site Plan Review No. 17-01 824 West Avenue L-6
Owner: SEG Opportunity Properties, LLC

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. A Notice of Exemption dated November 26, 2019, was filed and posted.

Water system improvements are accepted by the City in order to exonerate the Developer’s Undertaking Agreement and release of improvement securities. The water system for this project has been constructed and completed to the satisfaction of the local water purveyor, Los Angeles County Waterworks District 40-04, Antelope Valley, and was constructed according to the approved plans and specifications. Additionally, the work has been inspected and found to be satisfactory to the Senior Director - Development Services.

CC 8. Acquisition of Property
Recommendation(s):

1. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate, finalize, and execute an Agreement to Purchase Los Angeles County Tax Defaulted Property for APN 3137-010-017, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

2. Adopt Resolution No. _______, approving the acquisition of APN 3137-010-017 through Los Angeles County’s Chapter 8 Agreement Sale Program.

3. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate, finalize, and execute an agreement to purchase APN 3137-010-032 from a private seller, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

4. Appropriate $3,276,332.00 from Account No. 109-4240-912 to Account No. 109-2900-000 to fund this purchase.

CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023

PUBLIC HEARING

5. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

6. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute all related documents.

The purchase of these properties will help pave the way for Lancaster’s renewable hydrogen energy future, with the intent of generating revenue for the City over the long term.

CC 9. Amendment to Title 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code relating to the Regulation of Collection/Donation Bins
Recommendation(s):

1. Adopt Ordinance No. ____, amending Title 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by amending Chapter 17.12 (Commercial Zones), and by adding a new Chapter 17.45, relating to the regulation of collection/donation bins.

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

PH 1. Public Hearing on the Resolution of Formation to Establish Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Public Services)
Recommendation(s):

1. Conduct a public hearing pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 53318-53329.6) (the “Act”) and Resolution No. 22-54 concerning the City’s intent to establish Community Facilities District (“CFD”) No. 2021-1.

2. Adopt Resolution No.______, a resolution of formation establishing Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (“ROF”).

3. Adopt Resolution No. ______, a resolution calling special landowner election (“Election Resolution”).

4. Adopt Resolution No. ______, a resolution declaring election results.

5. Adopt Ordinance Levying Special Tax

6. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

The City of Lancaster has identified the need to fund the continuing expansion of demand for public services (fire and police) of public facilities associated with new development and population growth in the City. In April of 2020, the City began talks with the owner and a special tax consultant to assist in the establishment of a CFD to levy a special tax to fund public services serving the new development. The City has received a petition from Hatzlacha Development LLC (the “Owner”), the owner and developer of APN: 3153-005- 024 (Parcel 1), 3153-005-025 (Parcel 2), 3153-005-078 (Parcel 3), and 3153-005-088 (Parcel 4) (collectively, the “Property”) requesting the formation of the proposed CFD, encompassing the Property, to finance: parks and recreation; public safety; and public works (“CFD No. 2021-1 Public Services”).

PH 2. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023

COUNCIL AGENDA
Recommendation(s):

1. Adopt Resolution No. _____, approving the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program, certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Program, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

2. Introduce Ordinance No. ______, amending Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67 related to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program.

In September 2013, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law, starting a process that changed the way transportation impacts are analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with SB 743, the City adopted its VMT Guidelines at the June 15, 2020 City Council meeting. The required implementation of SB 743 has created challenges for many development projects in Lancaster as feasible and/or sufficient mitigation is not always available to offset the impacts of individual projects.

PH 3. Avanti North Specific Plan (SP No. 15-01) Amendment Recommendation(s):

1. Adopt Resolution No. ______, approving an amendment to Specific Plan (SP) No. 15-01 to modify the development standards allowing for an increase in residential lots to a maximum of 873 single-family residential lots in the SP 15-01 zone generally bounded by Avenue K, Avenue K-8, 62 Street West, and 70 Street West (APN: 3204-002-126)

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project on August, 8, 2017, with the Addndum to the EIR certified by the Planning Commission on December 12, 2022.

The applicant, CV Communities, LLC, is proposing to modify the development standards in the Specific Plan, including the minimum lot size and lot width, in order to add an additional 120 residential lots for a maximum of 873 residential lots. The resulting lots would range from a minimum of 5,000 square feet to a minimum of 6,600 square feet depending upon the Planning Area. Additionally, they are proposing to make minor modifications to the size of the two parks, basin areas and roadway configurations. These revisions have also been reflected in the amendment to Tentative Tract Map No. 73507. nd th
CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023

COUNCIL REPORTS
CA1. 1. Consider a recommendation of a City Council Member to the North County Transportation Coalition’s Call For Candidates to serve as the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Council District #43 Representative.

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

CR1. Council Reports

CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER HOUSING AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER FINANCING AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER POWER AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER SUCCESSOR AGENCY
No action required at this time.

CITY MANAGER / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ANNOUNCEMENTS

CITY CLERK/AGENCY/AUTHORITY SECRETARY ANNOUNCEMENT
CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023

PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS
This portion of the agenda allows an individual the opportunity to address the Legislative Bodies on any item NOT ON THE AGENDA regarding City/Agency/Authority business and speaker cards must be submitted prior to the beginning of this portion of the Agenda. Please complete a speaker card for the City Clerk/Agency/Authority Secretary and identify the subject you would like to address. We respectfully request that you fill the cards out completely and print as clearly as possible. Following this procedure will allow for a smooth and timely process for the meeting and we appreciate your cooperation. State law prohibits the Legislative Body from taking action on items not on the agenda and your matter may be referred to the City Manager/Executive Director. Individual Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each unless a different time limit is announced.

CITY COUNCIL / AGENCY/ AUTHORITY COMMENTS

CLOSED SESSION

1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation: significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d) (2) - two potential cases.

2. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation: consideration of initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d) (4) - two potential cases.

3. Antelope Valley Groundwater Cases Included Action:

Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 40 v. Diamond Farming Co. Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC325201;
Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 40 v. Diamond Farming Co. Superior Court of California, County of Kern, Case No. S-1500-CV-254-348; Wm. Bolthouse Farms, Inc. v. City of Lancaster, Diamond Farming Co. v. City of Lancaster, Diamond Farming Co. v. Palmdale Water District
Superior Court of California County of Riverside, consolidated actions; Case Nos.

RIC 353 840, RIC 344 436, RIC 344 668

4. Ramos v Patino, LASC Case No. MC027974

5. Rahier v. City of Lancaster, LASC Case No. 19AVCV00163

6. Brisa Mahoney, et al. v. City of Lancaster, et al., LASC Case No. 2OSTCV02556

7. Manzo v. Beazer Homes Holdings, LLC et al., LASC Case No. 20AVCV00297

8. Hernandez v. County of Los Angeles, et al., LASC Case No. 20AVCV00318

9. Romines v. City of Lancaster, et al,, LASC Case No. 20AVCV00345

10. Moujan v. City of Lancaster et al., LASC Case No. 20AVCV00205

11. Davis v. State of California, LASC Case No. 19AVCV00805

12. Lancaster v. Netflix, et al., LASC 21STCV01881
CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023

13. Butts v. Lancaster, LASC 21STCP00389

14. Lancaster v. Rives

15. Myesha Lopez, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et al. CDCA Case No. 5:21-cv-00290- JGB(SHKx)

16. Ortiz v. Lancaster, LASC Case No. 21AVCV00001

17. Aijala v. Lancaster, LASC Case No. 21STCV07841

18. Gardner v. Dominoids, LASC Case No. 21AVCV00186

19. Evans v. Lancaster, LASC Case No. 21AVCV00145

20. Bojorquez v. Lancaster, LASC Case No. 20AVCV00894

21. Arkey v. Lancaster, LASC Case No.20AVCV00816

22. Perez v. Lancaster, LASC Case No. 20AVCV00589

23. Serrano v. Los Angeles County et al. LASC Case No. 21AVCV00562

24. Jackson v. RE Schultz Construction et al. LASC Case No. 21AVCV00863

25. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: 3123-009-029
Agency negotiators: Allison Burns, Mike Livingston
Negotiating parties: Roger W. Pannier, Trustee of the Roger W. Pannier Revocable Trust, established April 25, 1988 as to an undivided ½ interest and Lorraine Prater, Trustee of the Prater Family Trust dated February 23, 1987, Lorraine Prater, Trustee of the Lorraine Alice Prater Survivors Trust dated October 8, 1993, Brian Lee Prater, Niel Howard Prater and Lloyd Bruce Prater, as their respective interest appear of record as to the remaining 1/2 interest
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: 3123-009-035
Agency negotiators: Allison Burns, Mike Livingston
Negotiating parties: Gholwan Mechammil and Insaf Mechammil, husband and wife as joint tenants
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: 3125-021-002
Agency negotiators: Allison Burns, Mike Livingston
Negotiating parties: Ukani Enterprise Inc., a California Corporation Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment

ADJOURNMENT
Next Regular Meeting:

February 14, 2023 at 5:00 PM

MEETING ASSISTANCE INFORMATION
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this meeting will be held at a location accessible to persons with disabilities; if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (661)723-6020. Services such as American Sign Language interpreters, a reader during the meeting, and/or large print copies of the agenda are available. To CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023
ensure availability, you are advised to make your request at least 72 hours prior to the meeting/event you wish to attend. Due to difficulties in securing sign language interpreters, five or more business days notice is strongly recommended. For additional information, please contact the City Clerk at (661)723-6020.

AGENDA ADDENDUM INFORMATION
On occasion items may be added after the agenda has been mailed to subscribers. Copies of the agenda addendum item will be available at the City Clerk Department and are posted with the agenda on the windows of the City Council Chambers. For more information, please call the City Clerk Department at (661) 723-6020.

All documents available for public review are on file with the City Clerk Department.

CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, 01/24/2023
CC 2

01/24/23
JC
Tuesday, January 10, 2023

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Parris called the meeting of the Lancaster City Council/Successor Agency/ Housing/Financing/ Power/California Choice Energy Authority to order at 5:01 p.m.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT: City Council Members /Agency Directors /Authority Members: Dorris, Malhi, Mann; Vice Mayor/Vice Chair Crist; Mayor/Chair Parris
STAFF MEMBERS:

City Manager/Executive Director; Assistant City Manager/Deputy Executive Director; City Attorney/Agency/Authority Counsel; City Clerk/Agency/Authority Secretary; Assistant to the City Manager, Finance and Technology Director; Parks, Recreation and Arts Director; Development Services Director; Chief of Police/Public Safety Director; Community Development Senior Manager; Real Estate & Economic Development Senior Manager

INVOCATION
Rodrick Armalin, Public Safety Director

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Ken Mann
ED 1. COVID-19 PANDEMIC UPDATES AND ACTIONS
Deputy Mayor Dr. Troung provided a presentation on this item.

Discussion among Council included researching hospitalizations and deaths related to fentanyl overdoes.

Deputy Mayor Dr. Stock provided background on fentanyl addictions.

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
2 Mayor Parris directed staff to provide a plan/playbook and research protocols to manage drug overdoses and prevention.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Mann, the City Council approved item number ED 1 as comprised, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES:

Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None Recommendation(s):

1. Received update from staff and/or deputy mayors regarding COVID-19 pandemic status.

2. Directed staff to take actions in response to updated COVID-19 information.

3. Authorized the City Manager to take actions, execute documents and/or expend funds in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

4. Authorized and/or directed the City Attorney, with the concurrence of the City Manager, to take actions, execute documents and expend funds in response to legal issues pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic.

5. Found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Vice Mayor Crist stated that he needed to recuse himself from item number CC 8.

Andrea Alexander, City Clerk provided clarification regarding the amount listed in item number CC 7 stating the amount listed should be $72,997.22 consistent with the staff report, instead of $40,000 as listed on the agenda.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Malhi, the City Council approved the Consent Calendar as comprised pulling item number CC 7 and item number CC 8 for separate discussion, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES: Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None Jason Caudle, City Manager presented the staff report on item number CC 7.

Addressing the Council at this time:

Shawn Cannon- spoke in support of item number CC 7.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Mann, the City Council approved item number CC 7 as comprised, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES:

Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None Vice Mayor Crist stated that he needed to recuse himself from item number CC 8 due to campaign funds received.

Allison Burns, City Attorney advised Vice Mayor Crist regarding timeframe for the new law regarding campaign contribution funds received in the previous year of 2022 as it

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
3 relates to conflicts of interests. The City Attorney further advised that Vice Mayor Crist does not need to recuse himself if the contribution was received during the year 2022.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Mann, the City Council approved item number CC 8 as comprised, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES:

Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None CC 1. ORDINANCE WAIVER
Waived further reading of any proposed ordinances. (This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text.)
CC 2. MEETING MINUTES
Approved the City Council/Successor Agency/Housing/Financing/Power/California Choice Energy Authority Regular Meeting Minutes of December 13, 2022.

CC 3. CHECK REGISTERS – DECEMBER 2, 2022, THROUGH DECEMBER 24, 2022 Approved the Check and Wire Registers for December 2, 2022, through December 24, 2022.

CC 4. MONTHLY REPORT OF INVESTMENTS – NOVEMBER 2022

Accepted and approved the November 2022 Monthly Report of Investments as submitted.

CC 5. AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION AGREEMENT NUMBER C5611122 - INMATE

COMMUNITY SERVICE WORK CREWS
Recommendation(s):

1. Approved the agreement with the California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation (CDCR) for inmate community service work crews.

2. Authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to sign all documents.

3. Found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

CC 6. TASK ORDER FOR MULTI-YEAR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (SERVICE GROUP CATEGORY 12 – ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING DESIGN – ONSITE FACILITIES) FOR EL DORADO PARK IMPROVEMENTS (REFERENCE PWCP 24-008)

Recommendation(s):

1. Approved Task Order No. 1 with IDS Group, of Irvine, California, in accordance with the Multi-Year Professional Services Agreement, Service Group Category (SGC) 12 –

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
4 Architectural and Engineering Design – On-Site Facilities, to provide Architectural and Engineering (A & E) services for El Dorado Park Improvements in the amount of $337,740.00 plus a 10% contingency; and authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to sign all documents.

CC 7. APPROVE AMENDMENT OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF LANCASTER AND RONALD CHATTERS, III,

CONSULTANT
Recommendation(s):

1. Approved an amendment of Professional Services Agreement between the City of Lancaster and Ronald Chatters, III to increase contract amount by $40,000 to complete implementation of the Administrative Citation Program.

2. Found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

CC 8. ZONE CHANGE NO. 21-04 LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 55TH STREET WEST AND AVENUE K (APNS: 3203-016-035, -036, -037)

Recommendation(s):

1. Adopted Ordinance No. 1096, amending the City Zoning Plan for approximately 38.9 gross acres of land located at the northeast corner of 55th Street West and Avenue K (APNs: 3203-016-035, -036, -037) from Single-Family Residential, minimum lot size 10,000 square feet (R-10,000), and Single-Family Residential, minimum lot size 15,000 square feet (R-15,000) to Single-Family Residential, minimum lot size 7,000 square feet (R-7,000), known as Zone Change No. 21-04.

2. Found that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. An initial study (SCH #2022090101) was prepared for the proposed project and circulated for a 30-day public review period in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The public review period started on September 9, 2022 and ended on October 11, 2022. The Notice of Determination was filed on November 1, 2022.

CC 9. ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE

PROVISIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS
Recommendation(s):

1. Adopted Ordinance No. 1097 amending Titles 1, 5, 8, 9, and 12 of the Lancaster Municipal Code relating to administrative citations for misdemeanor and civil offenses, the implementation of a process for fee reduction and appeal for administrative citations, and giving the city manager discretion to create policies and procedures to further implement each Title.

2. Found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

PH 1. MIDDLE INCOME HOUSING PROGRAM

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
5 Mayor Parris opened the public hearing.

Chris Aune, Housing Manager-Real Estate & Economic Development presented the staff report on this item.

Ben Barker, California Municipal Finance Authority representative also discussed the fundamentals of the Middle-Income Housing Program.

Discussion among Council included focusing on individuals in danger of losing their housing. Council also discussed the current market that affects minimum wage income.

Council discussed the Middle-Income Housing program as a solution for entry level and the working class.

Mayor Parris requested that staff provide a report within ninety (90) days.

Mayor Parris closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Mann, the City Council:

1. Adopted Resolution No. 23-01, approving, authorizing, and directing execution of a joint exercise of powers agreement relating to the CMFA Special Finance Agency (the “Agency”) supporting the Agency’s issuance of bonds for the production, preservation, and protection of essential middle-income rental housing (“Middle-Income Housing Program”).

2. Authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a Public Benefit Agreement, substantially in the form attached, with the Agency, which may result in the City receiving surplus revenue from the future sale of the Project;

3. Authorized the City Manager, or his designee to execute related documents and take any additional actions that may be required to implement the Middle-Income Housing Program.

4. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES: Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None
PH 2. 2021 APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION PROGRAM AND 5-YEAR PLAN AMENDMENT

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
6 Mayor Parris opened the public hearing.

Council waived the staff report seeing no public comment.

Mayor Parris closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Malhi, the City Council:

1. Adopted Resolution 23-02, authorizing the application and adopting a plan for the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Program; and

2. Submission of an amended Permanent Local Housing Allocation 5-Year Plan; and

3. Appropriation of 2021 PLHA funds to General Ledger account fund 349-4792-770; and

4. Authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to execute all related documents.

5. Found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0 AYES: Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None
PH 3. HOME-ARP ALLOCATION PLAN
Mayor Parris opened the public hearing.

Araxie, Khramanian, Analyst-Real Estate & Economic Development presented the staff report on this item.

David Munoz, MDG representative also provided a presentation regarding this item.

Discussion among Council included plans for spending allocated funds. Council also discussed ensuring that the individuals receiving the rent isn’t the same to implement the program.

Addressing the Council at this time:

Shawn Cannon spoke in support of Home-ARP Allocation Plan.

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
7 Mayor Parris closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Dorris, the City Council:

1. Adopted Resolution No. 23-03, approving the HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan (HOME-ARP) Allocation Plan.

2. Authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to execute all related documents.

3. Found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item, by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES: Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None
Discussion among Council included homelessness issues. Council also discussed the Antelope Valley Transit Authority potentially providing bus services to shelters during severe weather conditions.

Mayor Parris directed the City Attorney to research ability of the City to aid during severe weather conditions.

PH 4. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 17 OF THE LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE

RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF COLLECTION/DONIATION BINS Mayor Parris opened the public hearing.

The City Council waived the staff report on this item seeing no public comment.

Mayor Parris closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Vice Mayor Crist and seconded by Council Member Mann, the City Council, introduced Ordinance No. 1098, amending Title 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by amending Chapter 17.12 (Commercial Zones), and by adding a new Chapter

17.45, relating to the regulation of collection/donation bins; found that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item; by the following vote: 5-0-0-0; AYES: Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Crist, Parris; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT:

None
CA 1. CONSIDERATION OF NOMINATION AND APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIR TO THE SOCIAL EQUITY COMMISSION.

Addressing the Council at this time.

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
8 Shawn Cannon- spoke in support of nomination and appointment of Giovanni Pope as Chair of the Social Equity Commission.

Mayor Parris appointed Giovanni Pope as chair of the Social Equity Commission.

CR 1. COUNCIL REPORTS
Vice Mayor Crist reported on the Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA), the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD), and the Sanitation District moving forward with objectives.

Rodrick Armalin, Public Safety Director provided an update on hiring process and response times. The Public Safety Director also discussed upcoming training regarding the FLOCK camera system and the graffiti tracker system.

Council discussed issues with graffiti and the expenses associated with graffiti issues.

Ronald Chatters, III, Consultant advised Council regarding law around the sale of spray paint.

Council discussed initiatives taken to halt illegal business operations.

CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER HOUSING AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER FINANCING AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER POWER AUTHORITY
No action required at this time.

LANCASTER SUCCESSOR AGENCY
No action required at this time.

CITY MANAGER / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ANNOUNCEMENTS
Jason Caudle provided a video recap of the year 2022. The City Manager also announced upcoming events such as Justice Sunday on January 15, 2023.

Givoanni Pope, Social Equity Chair provided background on Justice Sunday.

The City Manager also announced various programs provided at the Lancaster Community Center.

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
9 CITY CLERK /AGENCY/AUTHORITY SECRETARY ANNOUNCEMENT
The City Clerk provided the public with the procedure to address the City Council/Successor Agency/Authority regarding non-agendized items.

PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS
Addressing the City Council at this time:

David Paul-discussed graffiti issues and support for Council taking measures to assist with housing issues.

Martha Tarlton- spoke in opposition of increased vendor fees for the Magical Boulevard event.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Parris adjourned the meeting at 6:36 p.m. Mayor Parris stated that the next City Council/Successor Agency/Financing/Power/California Choice Energy Authority meeting will be held on Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 5:00 p.m.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 24th day of January, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________ ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS

CITY CLERK MAYOR/CHAIRMAN

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

FINANCING/POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTHORITY

MINUTES
January 10, 2023
10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES }ss
CITY OF LANCASTER }

CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/FINANCING/ POWER/CALIFORNIA CHOICE

ENERGY AUTHORITY
I, ___________________________, ___________________________ of the City of Lancaster, CA, do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of the original City Council/Successor Agency/Financing/ Power/California Choice Energy Authority Minutes, for which the original is on file in my office.

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, CA on this _______________ day of ______________________, ____________. (seal)
_____________________________________

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: George N. Harris II, Finance Director
Subject: Check Registers – December 25, 2022, through January 7, 2022 Recommendation:

1. Approve the Check and Wire Registers for December 25, 2022, through January 7, 2022, in the amount of $4,360,455.36 as presented.

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

Fiscal Impact:
$4,360,455.36 as detailed in the Check Registers.

Background:

At each regular City Council Meeting, the City Council is presented with a check and ACH/wire registers listing the financial claims (invoices) against the City for the purchase of materials, supplies, services, and capital projects issued the prior three to four weeks. This process provides the City Council the opportunity to review the expenditures of the City. Claims are paid via checks, Automated Clearing House (ACH) payments, or federal wires. The justifying backup information for each expenditure is available in the Finance Department.

Check Nos.: 7430854-7430958 $ 4,356,074.86
ACH/Wire Check Nos.: 101011804-101011804 $ 4,380.50
$ 4,360,455.36
Voided Check No.: N/A
Voided ACH/Wire No.: N/A

CC 3
01/24/23
JC
Staff Report
Monthly Report of Investments
September 26, 2006

Page 2 ends

GH:sp
Attachments:

Check Register
ACH/Wire Register
City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 7430854 11350 ANDREWS, HEATHER PR DM-MONTEREY-01/7-12/23 407.00 111 4753200 135.00 203 4754200 135.00
483 4754200 137.00
407.00 407.00
7430855 C2060 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 11/10/22-12/12/22 WATER SVC 756.99 482 4636654 756.99 7430856 11336 GEODESIC MANAGEMENT, LLC MAYHEM POETS DEPOSIT 3,000.00 101 4650318 3,000.00 7430857 D2578 JONES, NICOLE NJ-PR DM-MONTERY-01/7-11/23 333.00 203 4752201 333.00 7430858 1215 L A CO WATERWORKS 09/21/22-12/20/22 WATER SVC 48,655.61 101 4620654 317.52 101 4622654 58.79
101 4631654 5,119.02
101 4633654 804.82
101 4634654 13,663.03
203 4636654 7,596.00
482 4636654 21,096.43
48,655.61 48,655.61
7430859 11366 NORMAN, LAURA PR DM-MONTEREY-01/07-22/23 333.00 101 4220256 333.00 7430860 03154 SO CA EDISON 11/21/22-12/20/22 ELECTRIC SVC 125.07 482 4636652 125.07 7430861 03154 SO CA EDISON 11/09/22-12/16/22 ELECTRIC SVC 227.65 203 4754652 47.57 483 4754660 180.08
227.65 227.65
7430862 03154 SO CA EDISON 11/08/22-12/19/22 ELECTRIC SVC 5,016.93 101 4600603 33.81 101 4633652 3,847.92
101 4636402 41.01
203 4754652 84.63
482 4636652 107.29
483 4754660 902.27
5,016.93 5,016.93
7430863 1907 SO CA GAS COMPANY 10/20/22-12/20/22 GAS SVC 9,290.63 101 4620655 490.33 101 4631655 121.37
101 4632655 4,198.57
101 4633655 1,686.78
101 4634655 925.10
101 4635655 1,868.48
9,290.63 9,290.63
7430864 C8775 WORRELL, JULIE PR DM-MONTEREY-01/7-11/23 333.00 101 4220256 333.00 7430865 10209 1000BULBS.COM AHP-LIGHTS LED 652.89 212 11BS036924 652.89

Page 1 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount PBP-PROP A PARK & RIDE LIGHT 11,998.21 207 12AC009924 11,998.21 LUC-PROP A PARK & RIDE LIGHTS 3,686.86 207 12AC009924 3,686.86 16,337.96 16,337.96
7430866 A3973 A V COMMUNITY THEATRE ACCNT STLMNT-CST A CHRSTMS CRL 16,996.05 101 2107000 26,816.50 101 3405127 (7,047.00)
101 3405302 (887.50)
101 3405303 (1,885.95)
16,996.05 16,996.05
7430867 C0077 A V E K BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTS 20.00 101 4635301 20.00 7430868 08979 A V PEST CONTROL LNSC-PEST CONTROL 185.00 101 4635301 185.00 7430869 00107 A V PRESS 11/22-LEGAL ADS 4,945.77 101 4210263 570.08 101 4210263 719.05
101 4210263 738.99
101 4210263 789.43
101 4210263 977.11
101 4770263 359.72
101 4770263 385.53
101 4770263 405.86
10/22-ADS-SHOWCASE-JAZZ HORIZN 283.88 101 4650205 283.88 10/22-ADS-NIC-SPACE STEVIE 94.62 101 4650205 94.62
10/22-ADS NIC-SPACE, STEVIE 283.88 101 4650205 283.88
10/22-ADS MATT-AIR HASTA 94.62 101 4650205 94.62
10/22-ADS MATT- AIR, HASTA 283.88 101 4650205 283.88
11/22-ADS-MATT FRASER 94.62 101 4650205 94.62
11/22-ADS-MATT FRASER 283.88 101 4650205 283.88
11/22-ADS-RICKY NELSON 94.62 101 4650205 94.62
11/22-ADS-RICKY NELSON 283.88 101 4650205 283.88
11/22-ADS-A1 LONESTAR 94.62 101 4650205 94.62
11/22-ADS LONESTAR 283.88 101 4650205 283.88
11/22-ADS-SORM LARGE 94.62 101 4650205 94.62
7,216.77 7,216.77
7430870 05445 ADELMAN BROADCASTING, INC PAC-11/22 ADS-LESTER BARRIE 300.00 101 4650205 300.00 PAC-11/22 ADS-LONESTAR 300.00 101 4650205 300.00
PAC-11/22 ADS-RICKY NELSON 300.00 101 4650205 300.00
PAC-11/22 ADS-RICKY NELSON 300.00 101 4650205 300.00
1,200.00 1,200.00
7430871 03312 ALCORN FENCE CO AVE L & 4TH ST E-GUARDRAIL RPR 13,750.00 203 4752463 13,750.00 7430872 D3147 AMERICAN PLUMBING SERVICES,INC LNSC-WEST AC DRAIN 241.75 101 4635402 241.75 OMP-1-4 LINE & TOILET REPAIR 983.00 101 4634404 983.00
OMP-WOMENS TOILET REPAIR 165.00 101 4634402 165.00
1,389.75 1,389.75
7430873 02693 ANDY GUMP, INC OMP-FENCE RENTAL 44.98 101 4634602 44.98 7430874 09850 ARENA, AMY T FALL 2022 YOGA #9415 72.00 101 4643308 72.00

Page 2 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 7430875 09751 ARMSTRONG, ALVIN JR 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 164.00 101 4641308 164.00 7430876 C9805 ARROW TRANSIT MIX INC READY MIX CONCRETE 765.42 203 4752410 765.42 7430877 04446 AUTO PROS EQ3306 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ2308 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ1715 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ2300 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ5707 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ2386 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ1510 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ1509 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ3306 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ2309 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ4360 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ1747 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ1746 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ5825 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ0004 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ6818 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ5709 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ5708 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ1550 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ5856 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
EQ3831 50.00 111 4753207 50.00
1,050.00 1,050.00
7430878 11357 AV VAN & STORAGE CO. CH-MAYORS MOVES 1,802.04 101 4100251 1,802.04 7430879 03485 BAKERSFIELD TRUCK CENTER EQ3826 68.25 111 4753207 68.25 EQ3779 68.25 111 4753207 68.25
136.50 136.50
7430880 08902 BUILDERS UNLIMITED CONSTRUCTRS LUC-PARK & RIDE LIGHT POLE PRJ 13,000.00 207 12AC009924 13,000.00 7430881 11365 CAFE CON LECHE IMMGRTN & ED SV RADIO INTERVIEW-S.PATTERSON 450.00 101 4207205 450.00 RADIO INTERVIEW-M.FLORES 450.00 101 4207205 450.00
900.00 900.00
7430882 06020 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC MONTHLY COPIER CHARGES 452.47 101 4410253 445.42 101 4410254 7.05
452.47 452.47
7430883 04636 CAYENTA/N HARRIS COMPUTER CORPCCC CUS DEP-JAN 2023 CMS 5,840.00 112 4315302 5,840.00 7430884 05938 CENTERSTAGING LLC PAC-BACKLNE EQPMNT 2,154.50 101 4650602 2,154.50 PAC-BACKLINE EQUIPMENT 941.00 101 4650602 941.00
3,095.50 3,095.50
7430885 08516 CODY, RAYMOND 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 96.00 101 4641308 96.00

Page 3 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 7430886 05830 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS CP22004-SUMMER PAVEMENT MNGMNT 440.00 701 12ST048924 440.00 7430887 10983 COOKSEY'S LIFEGRD AND SWIM LLC 10/16-23/22-LIFEGUARD HOURS 1,525.50 101 4642301 1,525.50 11/1-8/22-LIFEGUARD HOURS 1,366.25 101 4642301 1,366.25 11/16-22/22-LIFEGUARD HOURS 1,579.25 101 4642301 1,579.25 11/23-30/22-LIFEGUARD HOURS 1,579.25 101 4642301 1,579.25 6,050.25 6,050.25
7430888 05789 CORE & MAIN LP EDP-VANDALISM-ELECTRICAL LID 789.39 101 4630460 789.39 OMP-QUANTUM COUPLING 434.59 101 4634404 434.59
1,223.98 1,223.98
7430889 00794 CORRALES, RUDY 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 138.00 101 4641308 138.00 7430890 C7625 DAPEER,ROSENBLIT & LITVAK, LLP 11/22-MUNICIPAL CODE ENFRCMNT 281.40 101 4230301 281.40 11/22-SPECIALIZED LGAL SVCS 45.00 101 4230301 45.00
11/22-SPECIALIZED LGAL SVCS-CL 4,393.04 101 4230301 4,393.04 11/22-SPECIALIZED LGAL SVC-DMD 886.60 101 4230301 886.60 10/22-SPECIALIZED LGAL SVCS-HW 630.53 101 4230301 630.53 10/22-SPECIALIZED LGAL-J,S,D 112.50 101 4230301 112.50
10/22-SPECIALIZED LGAL SVCS-WR 382.50 101 4230301 382.50 6,731.57 6,731.57
7430891 00414 DESERT LOCK COMPANY RDP-DOOR REPAIRS 125.10 101 4634402 125.10 PAC-SRVC TRIP 50.00 101 4650402 50.00
175.10 175.10
7430892 09191 DESIGNERS TOUCH LANDSCAPE INC LNSC-BOULDERS 1,950.00 101 4635404 1,950.00 7430893 07159 DIAZ, BRANDON FALL 22-EXCEL TENNIS #9424 119.70 101 4643308 119.70 FALL 22-EXCEL TENNIS #9422 79.80 101 4643308 79.80
FALL 22-EXCEL TENNIS #9423 239.40 101 4643308 239.40
438.90 438.90
7430894 04450 DISPENSING TECHNOLOGY CORP BEAD DISPENSER FOR LINELAZER 7,991.22 203 4754454 7,991.22 7430895 05665 EGGERTH, DARRELL 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 161.00 101 4641308 161.00 7430896 10871 ELA LIGHTING BLVD-CUSTOM CLAMSHELL POLE BS - 19,944.23 483 4754460 19,944.23 7430897 11150 EXZETTA, WILLIS FALL 22-ZUMBA WITH ZETTA 174.00 101 4643308 174.00 7430898 00617 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION EXPRESS MAILINGS 96.92 101 4770212 96.92 EXPRESS MAILINGS 90.04 101 4410212 32.80
101 4650212 57.24
186.96 186.96
7430899 09588 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES LLC #1350 MULTI PLUS DUAL V-BELT 19.10 101 4650403 19.10 7430900 D1793 FISH WINDOW CLEANING CH-WINDOW CLEANING 328.00 101 4633301 328.00 CH-WINDOW CLEANING 303.00 101 4620403 303.00

Page 4 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 631.00 631.00
7430901 08441 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS INC EQ3769 65.44 111 4753207 65.44 EQ3770 545.74 111 4753207 545.74
EQ8007 10.54 111 4753207 10.54
621.72 621.72
7430902 11354 GILLESPIE, ALEXIS MARY FALL 22-ACRYLIC PAINT PR #9502 63.00 101 4643308 63.00 7430903 08245 GOLDEN STATE LABOR COMPLIANCE CP22004-2022 SUMMER PVMNT MGMT 4,322.55 701 12ST048924 4,322.55 CP22010 LPAC IMPROVEMENTS 1,322.36 101 11BS022924 1,322.36 5,644.91 5,644.91
7430904 10888 GONZALEZ PROPERTY SVCS STP-GRAFFITI 585.00 101 4630460 585.00 MOAH-PIGEON WIRE 485.00 101 4651402 485.00
STP-GRAFFITI 1,360.00 101 4630460 1,360.00
MOAH-LIGHT MATERIALS 438.00 101 4651402 438.00
MOAH-LIGHT INSTAL SRVCS 1,275.00 101 4651402 1,275.00
4,143.00 4,143.00
7430905 03430 GRAINGER QUICK CONNECTION PLUG 1,769.91 484 4752405 1,769.91 7430906 11041 GUANDIQUE, JORGE MARIO 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 483.00 101 4641308 483.00 7430907 05822 H & H AUTO PARTS WHOLESALE EQ5709 83.15 111 4753207 83.15 EQ3990 330.92 111 4753207 330.92
414.07 414.07
7430908 02585 HARRELL, BARON 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 123.00 101 4641308 123.00 7430909 11266 HUNT, TERELL 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 299.00 101 4641308 299.00 7430910 05750 I S C O MACHINERY 350KW-GENERATOR 7,142.00 101 4633402 7,142.00 350KW GENERATOR 6,942.00 101 4633402 6,942.00
350KW GENERATOR 6,942.00 101 4633402 6,942.00
21,026.00 21,026.00
7430911 09083 INT'L BUSINESS MACHINES CORP INNOVATION PLATFORM-OPS/MAINT 348.71 490 4791301 348.71 7430912 A2594 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYS OF A V VARIOUS 916.47 111 4753207 916.47 EQ4999 68.30 111 4753207 68.30
EQ5503 511.03 111 4753207 511.03
1,495.80 1,495.80
7430913 D4004 J P POOLS ESP-ANCHOR RELOCATION 3,500.00 101 4631670 3,500.00 LNSC-MONTHLY CHECKS 1,600.00 101 4635301 1,600.00
LNSC-MONTHLY CHECKS 800.00 101 4635301 800.00
STP-PUMP REPAIRS 150.00 101 4635402 150.00
LNSC-CLORATEL MAINTENANCE 1,400.00 101 4635402 1,400.00 ESP-CHLORINE GEN CLEANING 1,200.00 101 4631670 1,200.00 8,650.00 8,650.00

Page 5 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 7430914 A8656 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC LANCASTER HEALTH DISTRICT 17,890.38 209 15ST058924 10,609.00 321 15ST058924 7,281.38
AVE L PA & ED 3,265.00 210 15BR008924 3,265.00
21,155.38 21,155.38
7430915 C8919 KOCUREK, PHILLIP FALL 22 BASIC PHOTO FNDMN#9368 135.00 101 4643308 135.00 7430916 D2426 L A CO DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH LNSC-YEARLY PERMIT 37.00 101 4635311 37.00 LNSC-YEARLY PERMIT 185.00 101 4635311 185.00
TBP-YEARLY PERMIT 37.00 101 4631311 37.00
259.00 259.00
7430917 C5820 LANCASTER COMMUNITY ORCHESTRAREFUND-PERMIT CHARGES 420.00 101 2182001 420.00 7430918 10875 LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES INC WHIT CARTER PARK PLAYGRND RPLC 14,324.30 101 4630753 14,324.30 7430919 11139 LINE-X OF ANTELOPE VALLEY, INC EQ7511 412.34 111 4753207 412.34 7430920 10643 LOGICALIS INC MOAH RELOCATION - PORT SWITCHE 20,951.79 112 4315291 7,903.78 112 4315302 13,048.01
20,951.79 20,951.79
7430921 10729 MAINE ELECTRIC LUC-PARK & RIDE LIGHT CNTRL 1,250.00 207 12AC009924 1,250.00 7430922 1385 MC CORMICK DIESEL & BRAKE EQ3775 100.00 111 4753207 100.00 EQ3828 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ5507 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3776 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3826 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3783 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3982 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3770 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3384 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ4373 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3830 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3836 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3981 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3980 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3790 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3769 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ4359 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ8007 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3782 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3988 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3998 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
EQ3779 100.00 111 4753207 100.00
2,200.00 2,200.00
7430923 05773 MORRISON WELL MAINTENANCE LNSC-MONTHLY TEST 200.00 101 4635301 200.00 7430924 08562 NAPA AUTO PARTS EQ5709 201.32 111 4753207 201.32

Page 6 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount EQ5709 38.26 111 4753207 38.26
EQ3763 95.24 111 4753207 95.24
EQ5664 26.79 111 4753207 26.79
EQ5825 135.10 111 4753207 135.10
EQ3831 37.83 111 4753207 37.83
534.54 534.54
7430925 06636 P & J ELECTRIC INC LPAC-EMERGENCY GNRTR SRVCS 601.55 101 4633403 601.55 7430926 05509 P A R S 10/22-REP FEES 5,580.92 101 4220301 5,580.92 7430927 07249 PATRIOT PLUMBING LNSC-MAIN LINE SEWER WEST BLDN 303.75 101 4635402 303.75 7430928 09664 PROMO DOG, INC MOAH STAFF UNIFORMS 4,954.07 101 2175000 (482.68) 101 4653209 5,436.75
4,954.07 4,954.07
7430929 05864 QUINN COMPANY EQ3779 588.46 111 4753207 588.46 7430930 C3064 SANTOS, RENALDO 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 483.00 101 4641308 483.00 7430931 07139 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC LNSC-SEED 19,026.34 101 4634404 7,414.68 101 4635404 11,611.66
PARK FERTILIZER 4,196.98 101 4634404 4,196.98
23,223.32 23,223.32
7430932 01816 SMITH PIPE & SUPPLY INC LNSC-FLAGS 62.84 101 4635404 62.84 7430933 10297 SOLAR ART STP-VANDALISM REPAIR-WND FILM 996.00 101 4630460 996.00 7430934 04688 SPARKLETTS WATER(5-24PKS) 524.98 101 4220301 524.98 7430935 06963 SURFACE DESIGN OMP-KLIENER BUILDING GATE 3,100.00 104 4631402 3,100.00 7430936 08177 TEKWERKS TEKWERKS INCUBATOR HOOKUP 9,270.38 112 4315651 9,270.38 7430937 09316 TEKWERKS INTERNET 12/23-INTERNET/FIBER SVC 4,664.19 112 4315651 4,664.19 7430938 09665 TERRACARE ASSOCIATES, LLC STP-MAINLINE REPAIRS 745.00 101 4631404 745.00 12/22-MONTHLY MAINTENANCE 47,489.01 101 4620402 118.07
101 4622301 2,677.50
101 4631402 19,220.47
101 4632402 1,106.69
101 4633402 217.35
101 4634402 11,162.97
101 4635402 11,719.80
101 4636402 439.30
207 4633404 688.42
207 4634402 138.44
A V UNION HIGH-LANDSCAPE MAINT 640.00 101 4633402 640.00 48,874.01 48,874.01

Page 7 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 7430939 C5522 THOMSON REUTERS-WEST PMT CENTR12/22-ONLINE SFTWR SBSCRPTN 1,214.40 101 4245301 1,214.40 7430940 04239 TIM WELLS MOBILE TIRE SERVICE EQ5668 255.94 111 4753207 255.94 EQ1746 512.19 111 4753207 512.19
EQ5709 1,195.74 111 4753207 1,195.74
EQ0004 1,138.41 111 4753207 1,138.41
EQ3982 40.00 111 4753207 40.00
EQ7613 25.00 111 4753207 25.00
EQ3982 40.00 111 4753207 40.00
3,207.28 3,207.28
7430941 09947 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC ERP PROJECT IMPLMNTN & LIC 6,180.45 112 4315301 6,180.45 7430942 08783 UNIFIRST CORPORATION UNIFORM CLEANINGS 77.57 101 4754209 34.48 111 4753209 43.09
UNIFORM CLEANINGS 77.57 101 4754209 34.48
111 4753209 43.09
UNIFORM CLEANINGS 115.50 480 4755209 115.50
UNIFORM CLEANINGS 77.57 101 4754209 34.48
111 4753209 43.09
348.21 348.21
7430943 C4011 UNITED RENTALS CITY HALL TREE LIGHTS 1,437.45 101 4633602 1,437.45 GENERATOR 40-44 KVA TIER 4 2,158.91 101 4649565 2,158.91 GENERATOR 19-29 KVA TIER 967.18 101 4649577 967.18
UTV 4WD DSL 4 SEAT ROPS 919.58 101 4649565 919.58
UTV 4WD DSL 4SEAT ROPS 180.81 101 4649565 180.81
5,663.93 5,663.93
7430944 C5428 VOLTZ COMMERCIAL REALTY ADVSRSAPPRAISAL REPORT 3,500.00 101 4790301 3,500.00 7430945 04496 VULCAN MATERIAL WESTERN DIV ENV/ FEE-AGG & ASPHALT 1,104.86 203 4752410 1,104.86 7430946 06209 WAGEWORKS 12/22-FSA ADMIN FEES 510.94 101 2170213 510.94 7430947 10249 WE THE CREATIVE IMPACT BRAND-2022 738.75 101 4205301 738.75 7430948 11299 WELLS, KEEGAN VAC TRUCK-COAT/WASH/POLISH 2,800.00 480 4755405 2,800.00 7430949 06713 WILSON, SIEDAH 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 128.00 101 4641308 128.00 7430950 09197 WINE RESOURCES LLC FOD-WINE POURED 1,633.00 101 4649563 1,633.00 7430951 09201 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 10/27-11/26/22 LEASE PAYMENT 770.85 101 4410254 770.85 7430952 D3242 ZIMMER, DANIEL 12/22-SPORTS OFFICIAL 368.00 101 4641308 368.00 7430953 05449 ACCELA, INC ACCELA ANNUAL AGREEMENT 148,296.38 112 4315302 148,296.38 7430954 08839 DUKE ENGINEERING AND ASSOCS CH-RENOVATION & MODERNIZATION 110,880.00 701 11BS019924 110,880.00

Page 8 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 7430854 - To Check No.: 7430958
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:07 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 7430955 1214 L A CO SHERIFF'S DEPT LCS-SPECIAL INVSTGT 10,834.68 101 4820355 10,031.87 101 4820357 802.81
LCS-TRAFFIC ENFORCMNT 17,154.89 101 4820355 15,545.16
101 4820357 1,609.73
LCS-TRAFFIC TRAINING/BACKFILL 1,537.66 101 4820355 1,385.28 101 4820357 152.38
10/22-SPECIAL EVENT-AV WALLS 2,473,500.82 101 4820354 2,232,994.81 101 4820357 240,506.01
LCS-SPECIAL INV-EVENT 764.04 101 4820355 688.32
101 4820357 75.72
LCS-PARTY CAR-SPECIAL EVENT 1,675.30 101 4820355 1,509.28 101 4820357 166.02
LCS-HAUNT EVENT 7,968.01 101 4820355 7,358.98
101 4820357 609.03
LCS-TRAFFIC ENFORCMNT 16,817.64 101 4820355 15,331.62
101 4820357 1,486.02
2,530,253.04 2,530,253.04
7430956 10162 LANDSCAPE CONNECTION GROUP OMP-FIELD 1 & 2 INFLD RENOVATN 41,700.00 101 4630404 41,700.00 KLEINER PARK & RIDE TRASH ENCL 17,250.00 207 12AC009924 17,250.00 JRP-GRAFFITI RMVL & PN -VNDLSM 1,850.00 101 4630460 1,850.00 JRP-GRAFFITI RMVL-VANDALISM 350.00 101 4630460 350.00
61,150.00 61,150.00
7430957 10830 MARINA LANDSCAPE INC (ORANGE) CP21023-2021 LANDSCAPE RSTRTN 916,461.71 101 11ZZ005924 936,030.10 150 2100003 (48,234.83)
207 11FW005924 28,666.44
916,461.71 916,461.71
7430958 06220 T R C SOLUTIONS, INC AVE K INTERCHANGE 151,464.49 210 15BR004924 151,464.49 Chk Count 105 Check Report Total 4,356,074.86

Page 9 of 9 ends

City of Lancaster Check Register
From Check No.: 101011804 - To Check No.: 101011804
Printed: 1/9/2023 10:10 From Check Date: 12/25/23 - To Check Date: 01/07/23 Check No Supplier Supplier Name Invoice Description Invoice Amt Charge Code GL Amount 101011804 C9785 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON HUD SECTION 108 DEBT SRVC PMTS 4,380.50 361 4342908 1,428.00 361 4342908 2,952.50
4,380.50 4,380.50
Chk Count 1 Check Report Total 4,380.50

Page 1 of 1 ends

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: George N. Harris II, Finance Director
Subject: Monthly Report of Investments – December 2022
Recommendation:

1. Accept and approve the December 2022 Monthly Report of Investments as submitted.

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

Fiscal Impact:

None
Background:

Portfolio Recap
Yield:

December 2022 November 2022
Total Portfolio 2.38% 2.56%
Cal CLASS 4.19% 3.80%
Local Agency Investment Fund 2.17% 2.01%
Total Portfolio Balance: $149,035,344 $135,882,670
The portfolio balance increased from November to December by $13,152,674 or 9.7%. Significant revenues for December included $15,517,714 in Property Taxes, $2,244,169 in Sales & Use Tax, and $1,910,251 in Measure LC Sales Tax. The largest City expenditures were $3,523,687 for Payroll & Benefits and $3,064,464 for Capital Projects.

The City’s temporary idle cash, those funds not immediately needed to pay current bills and not governed by bond indentures or bond resolutions, is invested by the City’s adopted Investment Policy. The City Council reviewed this policy regularly, with the latest policy adopted on February 13, 2018, by Resolution No. 18-06.

CC 4
01/24/23
JC
The City's cash management system is designed to accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and revenues, thus enabling the City to invest funds to the fullest extent possible within the guidelines of this Investment Policy. The City attempts to achieve the highest yield obtainable through a diversified portfolio only after meeting the criteria established for safety and liquidity in that order. The principal investment objectives of the City are:

1. Preservation of capital and protection of investment principal;

2. Maintenance of sufficient liquidity to meet anticipated cash flows;

3. Attainment of a market rate of return;

4. Diversification to avoid incurring unreasonable market risks, and;

5. Compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and with all applicable City resolutions, California statutes, and Federal regulations.

The City’s portfolio is a short-term and intermediate-term fixed-income portfolio. The maximum maturity of any investment is 5 years, with consideration of anticipated cash flow requirements and known future liabilities. The City contracts with an investment advisory service (Insight Investment) to assist in the effort to maximize the returns of the City portfolio. The City’s investments include publicly-traded Treasury notes, Treasury Bills, Federal Agency Investments, Time Deposits, and Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) under the auspices of the State Treasurer for investment. Funds invested in LAIF are available within 24 hours, and other investments are available upon maturity at full face value. These investments enable the City to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months, as required by state law.

The City’s investment procedures are governed by Sections 53600 et. seq. of the California Government Code. Additional requirements have been placed on the City’s authorized investments by the Investment Policy (a copy is available in the Finance Department or from the City Clerk), and all investments listed on the attached report adhere to these requirements.

GH: ma
Attachment:

Monthly Report of Investments
Interest Rate Amount Total
City of Lancaster
Wells Fargo Bank $23,465,370
City of Lancaster Account 0.00% $23,465,370
U S Bank - Safekeeping $42,504,080
US Treasury Notes 2.20% $17,645,024
Federal Government Agencies 1.82% $11,942,240
Corporate Securities 3.08% $10,151,169
Municipal/Provincial Bonds 0.46% $2,701,452
Cash & Equivalents 0.00% $64,195
Chase Bank $150,980
Certificate of Deposit 0.01% $150,980
California Class $30,373,853
City of Lancaster 4.19% $30,373,853
Local Agency Investment Fund (L.A.I.F.) 2.17% $42,075,376 $42,075,376 Total City of Lancaster $138,569,659
Successor Agency for the Lancaster Redevelopment Agency California CLASS 4.19% $10,030,322 $10,030,322
Local Agency Investment Fund (L.A.I.F.) 2.17% $435,363 $435,363 Total Lancaster Successor Agency $10,465,685
Total Pooled Portfolio $149,035,344
Weighted Average 2.38%
Interest Rate Amount Total
River City Bank $3,313,663
Lancaster Choice Energy LockBox Account 0.00% $1,541,914 CCEA Operating Account 0.00% $1,771,749
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. $1,483,822 LRA & LA County Escrow Account - Government Bonds 0.00% $1,483,822 US Bank $17,329,358
LRA Combined 2004 Fire Protection Facilities Project Bonds 4.06% $838,212 LRA Combined 2004 Sheriff Facilities Project Refunding Bonds 4.06% $1,832,992 LPA Solar Renewable Energy Issue of 2021 3.64% $937
SA Combined Project Areas Refunding Bonds 2015A & B 4.06% $2,473 SA Combined Project Areas Refunding Bonds 2016 A-1 & A-2 4.06% $1,773 SA Combined Project Areas Refunding Bonds 2016B 4.03% $125 LFA 2016 Assessment Revenue Bonds (Streetlights Acquisition) 4.06% $659 SA 2017 Tax Allocation Revenue Bonds (TARB) 1.49% $2
LFA LRB 2018 Construction and Improvements 4.06% $2,421,872 LFA 2018 Lease Revenue Bonds 4.06% $331
LFA LRB 2019 Street Improvements 4.06% $12,229,982
Total Restricted Cash/Investments Held in Trust $17,329,358 Total Restricted Cash/Investments Held in Trust (note 4) $22,126,843 All investments are authorized pursuant to and consistent with the investment policy of the City of Lancaster. Policy adopted 02/13/18 under resolution number 18-06.

George N. Harris II
Finance Director

ATTACHMENT A

CITY OF LANCASTER

MONTHLY REPORT OF INVESTMENTS
31-Dec-22
City of Lancaster
Cash Balances by Fund
December 31, 2022
Fund No. Fund Name Ending Balance Fund No. Fund Name Ending Balance 101 GENERAL FUND 102,394,111 $ 323 STATE GRANT - STPL (26,900) $ 104 CAPITAL REPLACEMENT FUND (2,199) $ 324 STATE GRANT - OTS (0) $ 106 COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION 116,950 $ 330 STATE GRANT RECYCLING 407,082 $ 109 CITY SPECIAL RESERVES FUND 11,362,286 $ 331 STATE GRANT - OIL RECYCLING 3,499 $ 111 FLEET INTERNAL SERVICE FUND 862,641 $ 349 MISC STATE GRANTS (704,964) $ 112 IT INTERNAL SERVICE FUND (1,955,014) $ 361 CDBG (513,764) $ 113 GEN LIAB INTERNAL SERVICE FUND 1,977,476 $ 363 NBRHD STABILIZATION PRGM 2,635,983 $ 139 FIXED ASSETS ACOUNT GROUP (4,451,605) $ 364 HPRP-HOMELESS PREV & RAPID REH - $ 150 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND - CITY (32,927,719) $ 391 LANCASTER HOME PROGRAM 1,251,037 $ 203 GAS TAX (4,017,386) $ 399 FEDERAL MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS (1,462,435) $ 204 AQMD (167,951) $ 401 AGENCY FUND 238,617 $
205 PROP 1B 5,985 $ 402 PERFORMING ARTS CENTER - $
206 TDA ARTICLE 8 FUND (4,215,852) $ 404 GRANTS FUND - $ 207 PROP "A" TRANSIT FUND 5,992,525 $ 408 X-AEROSPACE GRANTS FUND - $ 208 TDA ARTICLE 3 BIKEWAY FUND (7,618) $ 456 STILL MEADOW LN SWR ASSMNT DST 28,603 $ 209 PROPOSITION "C" FUND 10,126,708 $ 480 SEWER MAINT FUND 5,165,744 $ 210 MEASURE R FUND 3,371,756 $ 482 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 979,001 $ 211 MEASURE M FUND 2,864,778 $ 483 LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 4,805,126 $ 212 MEASURE A FUND - $ 484 DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2,159,721 $ 213 PARKS DEVELOPMENT FUND 930,943 $ 485 RECYCLED WATER FUND (2,182) $ 217 SIGNALS - DEVELOPER FEES FUND 2,764,169 $ 486 LANCASTER POWER AUTHORITY 4,150,208 $ 220 DRAINAGE - DEVELOPER FEES FUND 10,589,477 $ 490 LANCASTER CHOICE ENERGY (11,471,706) $ 224 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FEE FUND 897,006 $ 491 CALIFORNIA CHOICE ENERGY AUTH 89,751 $ 226 USP - OPERATION 2,487 $ 701 LANCASTER FINANCING AUTHORITY (33,389,344) $ 227 USP - PARKS 2,194,378 $ 810 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FUND 154,596 $ 228 USP - ADMIN 74,523 $ 811 AD 93-3 - $
229 USP - CORP YARD 200,611 $ 812 AD 92-101 202 $
230 MARIPOSA LILY FUND 62,733 $ 830 CFD 89-1 EASTSIDE WATER FUND 23,835 $ 232 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES FUND 1,533,122 $ 831 CFD 90-1 (BELLE TIERRA) (207) $ 233 DEVELOPER IN LIEU 106,700 $ 832 CFD 91-1 (QUARTZ HILL) 13,201 $ 248 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 408,183 $ 833 CFD 91-2 (LANC BUSINESS PARK) - $ 251 ENGINEERING FEES 97 $ 991 REDEV OBLIGATION RETIREMENT FD 44,871,319 $ 252 PROP 42 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT 46,543 $ 992 DEBT SERVICE - SUCCESSOR AGENCY 22,198,985 $ 261 LOS ANGELES COUNTY REIMB 240,419 $ 993 DEBT SERVICE - COUNTY 2,495,126 $ 301 LANCASTER HOUSING AUTH. OPS. 1,862,660 $ 994 DEBT SERVICE - COUNTY (24,921,783) $ 306 LOW & MOD INCOME HOUSING 13,616,353 $ 996 SCHOOLS SUBORDINATE P/T FUND 30 $ 321 MTA GRANT - LOCAL 1,909,246 $ Total Cash Balance 147,947,900 $ Historical Cost Amortized Cost Fair Value
Unrealized Gain
(Loss)
Weighted
Average Effective
% Portfolio/
Segment
Weighted
Average Market
Cash and Equivalents $106,595,459 $106,595,459 $106,595,459 $0 1 71.52% 0.00 Corporate Bonds $10,151,169 $9,909,315 $9,548,937 ($360,379) 580 6.81% 1.49Government Agencies $11,942,240 $11,720,571 $11,189,092 ($531,479) 539 8.01% 1.40Government Bonds $17,645,024 $17,503,514 $17,113,134 ($390,380) 720 11.84% 1.85Municipal/Provincial Bonds $2,701,452 $2,700,562 $2,536,343 ($164,220) 553 1.81% 1.46 $149,035,344 $148,429,422 $146,982,965 ($1,446,457) 624 100.00% 1.61 Recap of Securities Held
December 31, 2022
Cit
y of Lancaster

71.52%

6.81%

8.01%

11.84% 1.81%
Portfolio Diversification
Cash and EquivalentsCorporate BondsGovernment AgenciesGovernment BondsMunicipal/Provincial Bonds City of Lancaster
Maturity Distribution
December 31, 2022
Maturity Historical Cost PercentUnder 90 Days $111,356,625 74.72%90 to 179 Days 90 180 $1,774,474 1.19% 180 Days to 1 Year 180 365 $8,088,357 5.43%1 to 2 Years 365 730 $11,079,443 7.43% 2 to 3 Years 730 1095 $11,244,930 7.55%3 to 4 Years 1095 1460 $3,003,467 2.02% 4 to 5 Years 1460 1825 $2,488,048 1.67%Over 5 Years $0 0.00% $149,035,344 100.00%
$0
$20$40$60$80
$100$120
Under 90 Days 90 to 179
Days
180 Days to 1
Year
1 to 2 Years 2 to 3 Years 3 to 4 Years 4 to 5 Years Over 5 Years Historical Cost
(Millions) Maturity Distribution

ATTACHMENT A

CITY OF LANCASTER

MONTHLY REPORT OF INVESTMENTS
January 24, 2023
(1) This is the actual City bank account balance as of 12/31/2022. It only reflects checks that have been presented for payment and deposits received by the bank.

The balance on deposit per the City books would reflect reductions for all checks and warrants issued and all deposits transmitted.
(2) This is the safekeeping account utilized for investing City funds pursuant to and consistent with the investment policy adopted on 02/13/2018. The current portfolio consists of treasury notes, government agencies, corporates, and CDs. (3) Pooled Portfolio:

% of Portfolio Policy Limit
Cash 15.79% None
CDs 0.10% 25% of total portfolio
Commercial Paper 0.00% 25% of total portfolio
US Treasury 11.84% None
Federal Securities 8.01% None
Corporate Securities 6.81% 30% of total portfolio
Municipal/Provincial 1.81% None
California CLASS 27.11% None
LAIF 28.53% None

(4) These are restricted cash and investments are held in trust by the banks indicated.

These amounts cannot be pooled for other investments.

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
CC 5
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Jeff Hogan, Senior Director - Development Services Marissa Diaz, Assistant Director – Capital Programs
Subject: Final Map Approval – Tract Map No. 062120-01 (Located at the Southwest Corner of 35th Street West and Lancaster Boulevard)
Recommendations:

1. Approve the map and accept the dedications as offered on Tract Map No. 062120-01 located at the southwest corner of 35thth Street West and Lancaster Boulevard; make findings that this project will not violate any of the provisions of Sections 66473.5, 66474.1 and 66474.6 of the Subdivision Map Act; and instruct the City Clerk to endorse on the face of the map the certificate which embodies the approval of said map and the dedications shown thereon.

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and a Notice of Determination was filed and posted on June 6, 2006.

Fiscal Impact:

None.

Background:

On April 17, 2017, the City of Lancaster Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map No. 062120, and approved revision for Phasing on May 21, 2018.

EW/km
Attachment:

Vicinity Map

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
CC 6
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Jeff Hogan, Senior Director - Development Services Marissa Diaz, Assistant Director – Capital Programs
Subject: SPR 17-01 - Acceptance of Improvements (Streets) Recommendations:

1. Approve the developer-constructed streets on the following project. In addition, accept the streets for maintenance by the City and for public use.

Project Location/Owner
Site Plan Review No. 17-01 846 West Avenue L-6
Owner: SEG Opportunity Properties, LLC

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. A Notice of Exemption dated November 26, 2019, was filed and posted.

Fiscal Impact:

Estimated value of Capital assets accepted is $92,781.28.

Background:

TL:km
Attachment:

Vicinity Map
SPR 17-01

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
CC 7
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Jeff Hogan, Senior Director - Development Services Marissa Diaz, Assistant Director - Capital Programs
Subject: SPR 17-01 - Acceptance of Improvements (Water) Recommendations:

1. Approve the completed water system installed by the developer for the following project:

Project Location/Owner
Site Plan Review No. 17-01 824 West Avenue L-6
Owner: SEG Opportunity Properties, LLC

2. Find that the City has complied with the California Environmental Quality Act. A Notice of Exemption dated November 26, 2019, was filed and posted.

Fiscal Impact:

None. These improvements are not maintained by the City.

Background:

TL:km
Attachment:

Vicinity Map
SPR 17-01

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
CC 8
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Jeff Hogan, Senior Director - Development Services Chenin Dow, Assistant Director - Real Estate & Economic Development Subject: Acquisition of Property
Recommendations:

1. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate, finalize, and execute an Agreement to purchase Los Angeles County tax-defaulted property for APN 3137-010-017, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

2. Adopt Resolution No. , authorizing purchase of tax-defaulted property (APN 3137- 010-017).

3. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate, finalize, and execute an agreement to purchase APN 3137-010-032 from a private seller, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

4. Appropriate $3,276,332.00 from Account No. 109-4240-912 to Account No. 109-2900-000 to fund this purchase.

5. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

6. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute all related documents.

Fiscal Impact:

Up to $3,276,332.00 in economic opportunity reserve funds. These funds are expected to be recouped over the long term through revenue generated by the proposed project.

Background:

Under the leadership of the City Council and Mayor R. Rex Parris, the City of Lancaster has pursued a number of initiatives designed to protect the environment and generate sustainable revenue for the City over the long term. The proposed property acquisition has the potential to further both of these goals.

Lancaster’s recent efforts to combat climate change have been focused primarily on hydrogen. Recognizing the possibilities hydrogen represents in terms of a renewable, versatile energy source, staff has investigated and begun the implementation of a wide range of hydrogen projects. Through this process, Lancaster has emerged as a leader in the adoption of hydrogen energy, attracting still more companies and projects to our burgeoning hydrogen ecosystem.

With this growth comes opportunity. A number of firms have expressed interest in the creation of an inland port to allow for the efficient transportation of hydrogen produced by the various production plans currently proposed in the City. Lancaster owns a parcel ideally zoned for this purpose and situated adjacent to a rail spur. However, its size is not sufficient to accommodate the proposed vision.

This item would approve the acquisition of two adjacent parcels: APN 3137-010-017, which has been in tax default for more than a decade, and would be acquired through Los Angeles County’s Chapter 8 Agreement Sale Program; and APN 3137-010-032, which is currently listed by a private seller. If approved, this item would authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate two separate agreements – one for each property – and engage in any other activities needed to complete the property acquisitions, up to the authorized acquisition cost.

The purchase of these properties will help pave the way for Lancaster’s renewable hydrogen energy future, with the intent of generating revenue for the City over the long term.

CD/sm
Attachment:

Resolution No.

RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF
TAX-DEFAULTED PROPERTY (APN 3137-010-017)
WHEREAS, the California Revenue and Taxation Code (“R&TC”), Chapter 8 of Part 6 of Division 1 (“Chapter 8”), beginning with Section 3791, allows public agencies, taxing agencies and nonprofit organizations to enter into Chapter 8 agreements to purchase tax-defaulted property; and
WHEREAS, for more than a decade, real property known as APN 3137-010-017 (the “Property”) has annually defaulted in the payment of property taxes, penalties and administrative fees. The Property is more fully depicted in the aerial photo and parcel map attached hereto as Exhibits “A” and “B”; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to purchase the Property, subject to the “Power to Sell” held by the Los Angeles County Treasurer and Tax Collector (“TTC”), for a price not to exceed One Million, Three Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand, Three Hundred and Thirty-Two Dollars ($1,326,332.00).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council does hereby authorize the City Manager or his designee to enter into a Chapter 8 “Agreement to Purchase Los Angeles County Tax Defaulted Property,” in a form approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, with a price not to exceed $1,326,332.00.

Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution which shall be effective upon its adoption.

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
______________________________ ______________________________ ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION

CITY COUNCIL
I, _____________________________, _________________________ City of Lancaster, California, do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of the original Resolution No._____________, for which the original is on file in my office.

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this ____________ day of _____________________, _________.
(seal)
___________________________________

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT B

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
CC 9
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Andrea Alexander, City Clerk
Subject: Amendment to Title 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code relating to the Regulation of Collection/Donation Bins
Recommendation:

1. Adopt Ordinance No. , amending Title 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by amending Chapter 17.12 (Commercial Zones), and by adding a new Chapter 17.45, relating to the regulation of collection/donation bins.

2. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

Fiscal Impact:

There may be minimal fiscal impact as a result of the enforcement of the ordinance, however, some of the enforcement costs may be recovered through the nuisance abatement process.

Background:

Donation bins, or collection bins, are generally intended for people to give or donate unwanted personal property such as clothing, shoes, books and small miscellaneous household items.

However, many bins are not regularly maintained or monitored. Unattended bins are a magnet for graffiti and illegal dumping around the bin area, provide a harborage for vermin, and create a visual blight, a detriment to the community, and a hazard to public health and safety.

Worse, unregulated bins often end up encroaching on public-right-of-way, including alleys and driveways, which poses a serious hazard to pedestrian and vehicular safety.

Staff has drafted an ordinance that will establish content-neutral and narrowly tailored regulations and operating standards for the safe and sanitary operation of collection bins on private property. The regulations apply to all donation/collection bins, regardless of whether they are owned by a charitable organization or a for-profit entity.

The proposed ordinance would provide that collection bins may be present on commercially zoned property on which at least one currently licensed business is operating. A Development Services Director’s review and approval is required prior to placing a bin on private property. A person who currently has a collection bin on their property must either obtain Director’s review and approval or remove the bin from the premises within 60 days from the effective date of the ordinance.

The ordinance establishes location and distance requirements, to ensure that bins will not encroach on public rights-of-way or impede pedestrian and vehicle access onto the property and into the business on the premises. It also establishes minimum maintenance requirements, including regular collection of donated items from the bin, and the timely removal of graffiti, junk, trash and discarded items around the bin area.

In accordance with state law, the ordinance provides that a collection bin that does not fully comply with the ordinance constitutes a public nuisance subject to abatement. It further expressly establishes that a bin that has encroached into the public right-of-way constitutes an imminent and significant public safety hazard to pedestrians and vehicles which may be summarily abated by City personnel in accordance with the emergency abatement provisions set forth in the Municipal Code.

At the Lancaster City Council meeting held on January 10, 2023, the City Council approved the introduction of Ordinance, amending Title 17 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by amending Chapter 17.12 (Commercial Zones), and by adding a new Chapter 17.45, relating to the regulation of collection/donation bins, by the following vote 5-0-0-0; Ayes: Dorris, Malhi, Mann, Vice Mayor Crist, Mayor Parris; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: None.

Attachment:

Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LANCASTER AMENDING CHAPTER 17.12 (COMMERCIAL

ZONES) OF THE LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE BY
AMENDING SECTION 17.12.050 (ACCESSORY USES) TO
ADD SUBSECTION (J), AND ADDING CHAPTER 17.45,

RELATING TO COLLECTION BINS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lancaster finds and declares that the unregulated presence of collection bins, sometimes called donation bins, on private property often leads to bins encroaching on public rights-of-way, posing a hazard to vehicular and pedestrian safety, and
WHEREAS, the City Council further finds and declares that many collection bins located in the City are not maintained or monitored regularly, which results in the overflow of donations and the illegal dumping of junk and trash, that such bins are a magnet for graffiti and further create a harborage for vermin and pests, posing a hazard to public health and safety, creating a visual blight and a detriment to the community, causing harm to the general welfare of the citizens of the City, and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Welfare & Institutions Code Section 152 (relating to unattended collection boxes), the City Council finds and declares that an improperly located and/or maintained collection bin constitutes a public nuisance subject to abatement, and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that an effective way to reduce the number of unmaintained, unsightly, and potentially hazardous collection bins in the City of Lancaster is to adopt reasonable time, place and manner regulations and operating standards for owners or tenants of privately owned commercial property who desire to place a collection bin on their premises;

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lancaster hereby finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2: Lancaster Municipal Code Chapter 17.12, Section 17.12.050 (Commercial zones, accessory uses) is hereby amended by adding subsection (J), as follows:
§17.12.050 (J) Collection bins, subject to the approval process and operating requirements set forth in Chapter 17.45 of this Code.

SECTION 3. Lancaster Municipal Code Title 17 is hereby amended by adding Chapter 17.45, as set forth in Attachment A attached hereto.

Ordinance No.

Page 2 ends

SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and will see that it is published and posted in the manner required by law.

I, Andrea Alexander, City Clerk of the City of Lancaster, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading on the _____ day of _____________, 2023, and placed upon its second reading and adoption at a regular meeting of the City Council on the _____ day of __________, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF ORDINANCE

CITY COUNCIL
I, __________________________, ____________________________________ City of Lancaster, California, do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of the original Ordinance No. , for which the original is on file in my office.

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this _________ day of ________________, ________.
____________________________________
(seal)
Exhibit A
Chapter 17.45
Collection Bins

17.45.010 Title.

This Chapter shall be known as the City of Lancaster’s Collection Bins ordinance.

17.45.020 Findings and declaration.

The City Council finds and declares as follows:

A. The unregulated presence of collection bins, sometimes called donation bins, on private property often leads to bins encroaching on public rights-of-way, which poses a significant hazard to vehicular and pedestrian safety.

B. Additionally, many collection bins are not regularly maintained or monitored, which results in donated items overflowing out of the bins, creating a visual blight and providing a harborage for vermin. The presence of overflowing bins and/or a proliferation of bins in a concentrated area can create the appearance of an informal dumping area and attract unintended items such as couches, appliances, and electronics. Unattended and unmaintained bins are frequently targets for graffiti and other vandalism, which further leads to blight.

C. It is the purpose and intent of the City Council to protect public health, safety and general welfare by establishing narrowly tailored and reasonable time, place and manner regulations to ensure the proper, safe and sanitary location and maintenance of collection bins in the City.

17.45.030 Definitions.

As used in this Chapter, the following words and phrases have the meanings set forth below:
“City Manager” means the City Manager of the City of Lancaster, or his or her designee. “Code” means the Lancaster Municipal Code.
“Collection bin” or “bin” means an unattended box, receptacle or similar device used for soliciting and collecting donations of salvageable personal property, whether for charitable purposes by a non-profit organization or for profit by a for-profit entity. “Person” as used in this Chapter, means and includes any individual, partnership of any kind, corporation, limited liability company, association, joint venture or other organization or entity, however formed, as well as trustees, heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, or any combination of such persons. “Person” also includes any public entity or agency that acts as an owner in the City.
“Responsible person” means any person, whether as an owner or tenant/lessee of private property or otherwise, that allows, causes, creates, maintains, or permits a nuisance collection bin to exist on or adjacent to their premises, by any act or the omission of any act or duty. The actions or inactions of a responsible person's agent, employee, representative or property manager may be attributed to that responsible person.
“Salvageable personal property” means new or used items such as clothing, shoes, books, and miscellaneous household items.

17.45.040 Director’s review and approval required.

It is unlawful for any person to store, maintain, or allow a collection bin without having first obtained a director’s review and approval. A person must have an approval in good standing at all times a collection bin is on a person’s premises.

17.45.050 Application for director’s review; Denial, revocation, conditioning; Obtaining approval for bins currently on property.

A. A person seeking to store, maintain or allow a collection bin on his/her property shall submit an application for a director’s review in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 17.32, Article VI of this Code.

B. The application review and approval, denial, conditioning, suspension and/or revocation processes, and all administrative remedies, shall be in accordance with Chapter 17.32.

An approval is also subject to modification or denial if the information submitted pursuant to Subsection C of this Section is incomplete or does not reflect that the placement or maintenance of the collection bin will comply with the standards set forth in this Chapter. Further, an approval may be denied or revoked in the event of any of the following conditions:
1) The property has contained graffiti within six months prior to the application submittal that has not been timely removed in accordance with this Code; 2) The property has had conditions or uses in violation of the Lancaster Municipal Code within six months prior to the application submittal which were not timely corrected or abated in accordance with a notice of violation, administrative citation, or compliance letter;
3) The applicant has been found to be in violation of the requirements of this Chapter within one year of the application submittal.

C. In addition to the requirements set forth in Chapter 17.32, Article VI, the applicant shall also submit the following information/documentation, which is subject to the approval, modification and/or denial of the City Manager:
1) The collection bin operator's contact information, including name, address, email, website (if available), and telephone number.
2) If the operator holds itself out as a non-profit organization, a statement that it meets the definition of nonprofit organization in Section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code or Section 150(c) of the California Welfare and Institutions Code.
3) If the operator holds itself out as a for-profit organization, a statement that it holds a valid Certificate of Good Standing issued by the California Secretary of State.
4) If the operator and the owner of the lot on which the collection bin will be located are the same person or entity, written acknowledgment that the operator understands that they are liable for violations of this subdivision. If the operator and the owner of the lot on which the collection bin will be located are different persons or entities, written acknowledgment signed by both parties that both understand that they are jointly and severally liable for violations of this subdivision.
5) A site plan identifying the following:
i. Boundaries of the parcel on which the bin will be located; ii. Location of all structures on the parcel;
iii. Proposed bin location;
iv. Distance from the proposed bin location to the lot lines and the nearest structures on the parcel;
v. Locations and dimensions of all existing and proposed driveways, landscaped areas, easements, and parking space on the parcel. 6) Diagram and/or description of the bin including the height, width, depth, and general appearance of the bin, and the materials of which the bin is fabricated. 7) Diagram and/or description of the proposed locking mechanism. 8) Description of the maintenance plan, including the pick-up schedule to be not less than weekly, and graffiti, litter and trash removal on and around the collection bin;
9) Any other information regarding time, place and manner of the collection bin’s operation, placement, and maintenance that the City Manager deems reasonably necessary to evaluate the proposal’s consistency with the requirements of this Chapter.

D. A person on whose property a collection bin is already located as of the effective date of this ordinance shall legalize the bin by applying for and obtaining director’s review and approval as set forth in this Section, or shall remove the bin from the premises, within sixty (60) calendar days from the effective date of this ordinance.

17.45.060 Location, distance requirements of collection bins.

A. Collection bins are permissible only Commercially zoned property on which at least one currently licensed business is operating.

B. No collection bin shall be located within the following distances:
1) 20 feet of any public right-of-way;
2) 10 feet of any lot line adjoining another lot;
3) 100 feet of a residentially zoned parcel.

C. No collection bin shall be located on or within the following:
1) The public right-of-way, including alleys and sidewalks; 2) Any area designated for landscaping.

D. No collection bin shall be located in, or block or impede access to any of the following:
1) Required parking or driveway areas;
2) Pedestrian routes;
3) Emergency vehicle routes;
4) Building ingress and egress;
5) Required accessibility routes;
6) Required easements;
7) Trash enclosure areas or access to trash bins or trash enclosures; 8) Any place that would impede the functioning of exhaust, ventilation or fire extinguishing systems.

E. No more than one collection bin shall be located on any lot.

17.45.070 Physical Attributes.

A. Collection bins shall be fabricated of durable and waterproof materials.

B. Bins shall be placed on a paved, non-sloping surface.

C. Bins shall have a tamper-resistant locking mechanism.

D. Bins shall not exceed dimensions of 80 inches in height, 50 inches in depth, and 60 inches in width.

E. Collection bins shall be provided a light source to provide illumination between sunset and sunrise.

F. Bins shall have the following information conspicuously displayed in at least two-inch type visible from the front of the collection bin:
1) Bin operator’s name, 24-hour telephone number, and address of the lot on which the bin is licensed to be located;
2) A statement that no material shall be left outside the collection bin; 3) A statement that either reads “this collection bin is owned and operated by a for-profit organization” and that clearly describes the charitable cause that will benefit from the donations, or “this collection bin is owned and operated by a nonprofit organization” and that clearly states “this donation is not tax deductible.”

17.45.080 Operational and maintenance standards.

A. Collection bins shall be maintained in good working order, and free from graffiti, removed or damaged requisite signs and notifications, peeling paint, rust, and broken collection operating mechanisms.

B. No overflow collection items, litter, debris or dumped materials shall be allowed to accumulate within twenty feet of any collection bin.

C. Collection bins shall be serviced not less than weekly. Servicing includes removal of the collected items, maintenance of the bin, and abatement of any graffiti, litter or other nuisance conditions in, on or around the collection bin.

D. The operator shall maintain an active email address and a telephone with 24-hour recording capability for the public to register complaints.

E. Any conditions that are in violation of this Chapter must be abated or corrected within 48 hours of being reported to bin operator and/or property owner.

17.45.090 Violation; public nuisance; penalty; administrative citations.

A. The City Council finds and declares that it is unlawful for any responsible person, as defined in this Chapter, to allow, cause, create, suffer or permit the presence of a collection bin on or around his or her property in a location or manner that is in violation of this Chapter.

B. The City Council finds and declares that a collection bin that does not fully comply with this Chapter constitutes a public nuisance subject to abatement.

C. Any person violating the provisions of this Chapter is subject to the penalty provisions set forth in Chapter 1.12.

D. A responsible person violating the provisions of this Chapter may additionally be issued an administrative citation in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 1.16.

17.45.100 Abatement; emergency abatement of an imminently hazardous collection bin.

A. The City Manager may cause a nuisance collection bin to be abated, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 8.28 of this Code.

B. The City Council finds and declares that a collection bin that has encroached into the public right-of-way, including alleys and sidewalks, constitutes a significant hazard to pedestrians and vehicles and therefore is deemed an imminent public safety hazard. The City Manager is authorized to utilize the procedures set forth in section 8.28.170 of this Code for the emergency abatement of such a bin.

17.45.110 Remedies not exclusive.

A. Any administrative citation pursuant to this Chapter shall not prejudice or adversely affect any other civil, administrative or criminal action that may be brought to abate a nuisance collection bin or to seek compensation for damages suffered. A criminal or civil action may be brought concurrently with any other process regarding the same violation.

B. A nuisance collection bin may be abated through the revocation or suspension of the director’s review approval, in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 17.32, Article VIII of this Code.

17.45.120 Severability.

If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Chapter is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Chapter. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Chapter, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
PH 1
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Jeff Hogan, Senior Director - Development Services Nicole Jones, Analyst - Public Works
Subject: Public Hearing on the Resolution of Formation to Establish Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Public Services)
Recommendations:

2. Adopt Resolution No. , a resolution of formation establishing Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (“ROF”).

3. Adopt Resolution No. , in its capacity as the legislative body of the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1, calling special landowner election.

4. Adopt Resolution No. , in its capacity as the legislative body of the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1, declaring the results of Landowner Special Election, and directing recording of notice of special tax lien.

5. Introduce Ordinance No. , levying Special Tax within Community Facilities District No. 2021-1.

6. Find that the California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to this item.

Fiscal Impact:

Initial annual special tax rates for the CFD zone types are proposed as follows:
• Public Services CFD Single Family Residential Property Outer Zone: $901.00 per unit; • Single-Family Residential Property Inner Zone: $546.00 per unit; • Multi-Family Residential Property Outer Zone: $631.00 per unit; • Multi-Family Residential Property Inner Zone: $382.00 per unit.

For each fiscal year, the maximum tax rates will be increased by an annual escalation factor. Longterm revenue projections will depend on the number, scale and progress of new developments that annex into the CFD.

Background:

The City of Lancaster has identified the need to fund the continuing expansion of demand for public services (fire and police) of public facilities associated with new development and population growth in the City. In April of 2020, the City began talks with the owner and a special tax consultant to assist in the establishment of a CFD to levy a special tax to fund public services serving the new development. The City has received a petition from Hatzlacha Development LLC (the “Owner”), the owner and developer of APN: 3153-005-024 (Parcel 1), 3153-005-025 (Parcel 2), 3153-005-078 (Parcel 3), and 3153-005-088 (Parcel 4) (collectively, the “Property”), requesting the formation of the proposed CFD, encompassing the Property, to finance parks and recreation, public safety, and public works (“CFD No. 2021-1 Public Services”).

On October 11, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-54 titled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lancaster, California, Declaring An Intention To Establish Community Facilities District No. 2021-1, and To Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes” (“ROI”), pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), in which it proposed to establish a CFD for the purpose of mitigating the financial impact of new development on maintenance and operation of public safety services, fire services, lighting, parkways, streets, roads, open space and any real property or other tangible property with an estimated useful life of five or more years that is owned by the City. The ROI, among other things, scheduled a public hearing for December 13, 2022, in compliance with Section 53322 of the Act.

If 50% or more of the registered voters, or 6 registered voters, whichever is more, residing within the territory proposed to be included in the CFD, or the owners of one-half or more of the area of the land in the territory proposed to be included in the CFD and not exempt from the special tax, file written protests against the establishment of the CFD, and protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the value of the protests to less than a majority, no further proceedings to create the CFD or to authorize the specified special tax shall be taken for a period of one year.

If at the conclusion of the public hearing a majority protest (as described above) does not exist, the City Council may adopt the Resolution of Formation (ROF).

NJ/jr
Attachments:

Resolution No.

Exhibit A: Boundary Map
Exhibit B: Services
Exhibit C: Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax Zone Map (Attachment A)
Resolution No. (Election)
Resolution No. (Results)
Ordinance No.

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF FORMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA,
ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.
2021-1
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2022, the City Council of the City of Lancaster (“City Council”) adopted Resolution No. 22-60 titled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lancaster, California, Declaring An Intention To Establish Community Facilities District No. 2021-1, and To Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes” (“ROI”), pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Act”), in which it proposed to establish a community facilities district (“CFD”) for the purpose of mitigating the financial impact of new development on maintenance and operation of public safety services, fire services, lighting, parkways, streets, roads, open space and any real property or other tangible property with an estimated useful life of five or more years that is owned by the City of Lancaster (“City”); and WHEREAS, the proposed boundaries of the CFD are shown on the boundary map designated as “PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP AND FUTURE ANNEXATION AREA OF CITY OF LANCASTER COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1”, which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and hereby incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, a description of the public facilities and services proposed to be financed by the CFD is attached hereto as Exhibit B, and hereby incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, except where funds are otherwise available to pay for the Services, a special tax sufficient to pay for such Services and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act (“Special Tax” or “Special Taxes”), secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all nonexempt real property in the CFD, will be levied annually within the boundaries of the CFD; and WHEREAS, further particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax proposed to be levied within the CFD are contained in the attached and incorporated Exhibit C, which sets forth the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax among parcels of real property in the CFD (“Rate and Method”); and
WHEREAS, the City published notice of a public hearing to be held on January 24, 2023, in compliance with Section 53322 of the Act regarding the proposed formation of the CFD; and WHEREAS, if the City Council proceeds with formation of the CFD, the Special Tax shall be submitted to a vote of the registered voters within the proposed CFD, as and to the extent required by Section 53326 of the Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a report containing a brief description of the types of Services and Facilities required to adequately meet the needs of the CFD, pursuant to Section 53321.5 of the Act, and a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER,

CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council hereby finds that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this resolution by reference.

Section 2. The City Council has determined that all proceedings undertaken in connection with the establishment of the CFD and the levy of the Special Tax are valid and in conformity with the applicable provisions of the Act. Pursuant to Section 53325.1 of the Act, the City Council’s finding in this regard is final and conclusive.

Section 3. The proposed Special Tax to be levied within the CFD has not been precluded by majority protest pursuant to Section 53324 of the Act.

Section 4. The CFD named “City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1,” is hereby established pursuant to Section 53325.1 of the Act.

Section 5. The public facilities and services proposed to be financed by the CFD are described in Exhibit B hereto.

Section 6. The office responsible for annual preparation of a current roll of special tax levy obligations by assessor’s parcel number and for estimating future Special Tax levies within the CFD shall be Nicole Jones at 44933 Fern Avenue, Lancaster, California 93534, (661) 723- 6173.

Section 7. Upon recordation of a notice of special tax lien pursuant to Section 3114.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of California, a continuing lien to secure each levy of the Special Tax shall attach to all nonexempt real property in the CFD and this lien shall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until collection of the tax by the City ceases.

Section 8. The boundary map of the proposed CFD was recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on December 29, 2022, as Document No. 20221204593 in book 196, pages 44-45 of the Book of Maps of Assessments of Community Facilities Districts.

Section 9. Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the proposition of the levy of the Special Tax shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the CFD at an election, the time, place, and conditions of which shall be as specified by a separate resolution of the City Council.

Section 10. This Resolution is effective upon passage.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this _____ day of ________, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
______________________________ ______________________________ ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this ____________ day of _____________________, _________.
(seal)
______________________________

EXHIBIT A

BOUNDARY MAP

EXHIBIT B

SERVICES
The CFD is proposed to (and if approved and formed will) finance certain types of services, which may include, without limitation, the following:
• Fire protection and suppression services;
• Ambulance and paramedic services;
• Police protection services, including, but not limited to, criminal justice services; • Maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads, and open space; • Flood and storm protection services, including, but not limited to, the operation and maintenance of storm drainage systems; and/or
• Other improvements as authorized by the Act.

EXHIBIT C

RATE AND METHOD OF

APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
For the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Public Services), County of Los Angeles, State of California
The Special Tax as hereinafter defined shall be levied on all Assessor’s Parcels within the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Public Services), (“CFD 2021-1”), other than Assessor’s Parcels classified as Exempt Property as defined herein, and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2021-22, in an amount determined by the CFD Administrator through the application of the procedures described below. All of the real property within CFD 2021-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided.

A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Communities Facilities Act of 1982 as amended, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. “Administrative Expenses” means the following actual or reasonably estimated expenses related to the administration of CFD 2021-1: the costs of determining the amount of the levy of the Special Tax, the collection of Special Taxes, including the expenses of collecting delinquencies and pursuing foreclosures, the payment of a proportional share of salaries and benefits of any City employee and City overhead whose duties are directly related to the administration of CFD 2021-1, fees and expenses for counsel, audits, costs associated with responding to public inquiries regarding CFD 2021-1, and any and all other costs incurred in connection with the administration of CFD 2021-1. “Annual Escalation Factor” means the annual percentage increase of the All-Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) or two percent (2%), whichever is greater. The annual CPI used shall be for the area of Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the twelve (12) months ending the preceding December 31, or such other replacement index as may be determined by the City.
“Assessor’s Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an assigned assessor’s parcel number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by assessor’s parcel number.
“Base Year” means Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2021, and ending June 30, 2022. “Building Permit” means a permit issued for new construction of a residential dwelling or non-residential structure. For purposes of this definition, “Building Permit” shall not include permits for construction or installation of retaining walls, grading, utility improvements, or other such improvements not intended for human habitation. “Building Square Footage” means all of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, or similar area. The determination of “Building Square Footage” for a non-residential structure will be
based on the Building Permit(s) issued for such structure and/or by reference to appropriate records kept by the City.
“CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Tax for CFD 2021-1.
“CFD 2021-1” means City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Public Services) established by the City Council under the Act. “City” means the City of Lancaster.
“City Council” means the Council of the City of Lancaster, acting as the legislative body of CFD 2021-1.
“County” means the County of Los Angeles.
“Developed Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property for which a Building Permit was issued on or before June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year for which the Special Tax is being levied.
“Exempt Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels within CFD 2021-1 that are exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to the Act or Section F herein. “Fiscal Year” means the period commencing on July 1 of any year and ending the following June 30.
“Inner Zone” means all property located within the area identified as Inner Zone in Attachment A.
“Land Use Type” means any of the land use types listed in Table 1 below. “Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax determined in accordance with Section C, which may be levied in any Fiscal Year on an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property.
“Multi-Family Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property for which a Building Permit has been issued for the purpose of constructing a building or buildings comprised of attached Residential Units available for rental by the general public, not for sale to an end user, and under common management. “Municipal Services” means those authorized services that may be funded by CFD 2021-1 pursuant to the Act, as amended including but not limited to police protection services; maintenance of streets and roadways; maintenance and operation of streetlights; maintenance of parks, parkways, and open space; and maintenance of public facilities. “Non-Residential Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel classified as Developed Property, which is not classified as any, Residential Property, Public Property and Property Owner Association Property.
“Outer Zone” means all property located within the area identified as Outer Zone in Attachment A.
“Property Owner Association Property” means for each Fiscal Year any property within the boundaries of CFD 2021-1 that was owned by, or irrevocably dedicated as indicated in an instrument recorded with the County Recorder to a property owner association, including any master or sub-association, as of June 1.
“Proportionately” means in a manner such that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels within each Land Use Class. “Public Property” means any property that is owned by, dedicated or irrevocably dedicated to a city, the federal government, the State of California, the County, or any other public agency (each, a “Public Entity”); provided, however, that any such property is leased by such a Public Entity to a private entity and is thereby subject to taxation pursuant to Section 53340.1 of the Act, such leasehold estate shall be classified and taxed according to the use thereof.
“Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within CFD 2021-1 for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more Residential Unit(s).
“Residential Unit” means any residence in which a person or persons may live, which is not considered to be used for non-residential purposes. “Single Family Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Residential Property not classified as Multi-Family Residential Property. “Special Tax” means the special tax authorized to be levied within CFD 2021-1 pursuant to the Act, to fund the Special Tax Requirement.
“Special Tax Requirement” means the amount, as determined by the CFD Administrator, for any Fiscal Year to: (i) pay the costs of providing the Municipal Services during such Fiscal Year, (ii) pay Administrative Expenses associated with the Special Tax, (iii) establish or replenish any operational reserve fund established for Municipal Services, (iv) pay incidental expenses related to the Municipal Services as authorized pursuant to the Act, (v) fund an amount equal to a reasonable estimate of delinquencies expected to occur in the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax will be levied (“Estimated Special Tax Delinquency Amount”) and (vi) fund the shortfall, if any, in the Special Tax revenues collected in the preceding Fiscal Year necessary to fund the Special Tax Requirement for such Fiscal Year where such shortfall resulted from delinquencies in the payment of the Special Tax in such Fiscal Year that exceeded the Estimated Special Tax Delinquency Amount included in the Special Tax Requirement for such Fiscal Year. “Taxable Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to the Act or Section H.
“Undeveloped Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property which is not classified as Developed Property.
“Zone” means, as the context requires, either Outer Zone or Inner Zone.

B. CLASSIFICATION OF ASSESSOR’S PARCELS
Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2021-22, using the definitions above, each Assessor’s Parcel within CFD 2021-1 shall be assigned to the Outer Zone or the Inner Zone and classified by the CFD Administrator as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each such Fiscal Year, each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property shall be further classified by the CFD Administrator as Developed Property or Undeveloped Property. Commencing with Fiscal Year 2021-22 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property shall be assigned a Land Use Type and subject to the levy of the Special Tax pursuant to Section C below.

C. SPECIAL TAX RATES

1. Developed Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2021-22, each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be subject to the Special Tax.

The Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2021-22 is shown below in Table 1.

TABLE 1
Land Use Type
Outer Zone
Maximum
Special Tax
Inner Zone
Maximum
Special Tax
Single-Family
Residential Property
$901 per
Residential Unit
$546 per
Residential Unit
Multi-Family
Residential Property
$631 per
Residential Unit
$382 per
Residential Unit
For each subsequent Fiscal Year following the Base Year, the Maximum Special Tax rates shall be increased from the Maximum Special Tax rate in effect for the prior Fiscal Year by the Annual Escalation Factor.

2. Undeveloped Property
Each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2021-22, each Assessor’s Parcel classified as Undeveloped Property shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.

3. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section F.

For each Fiscal Year, if the use or ownership of an Assessor’s Parcel or Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor’s Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in Section F, therefore making such Assessor’s Parcel no longer eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor’s Parcel shall be deemed to be Taxable Property and shall be taxed pursuant to the provisions of Section C.

D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
Commencing in Fiscal Year 2021-22 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall levy the Special Tax on all Taxable Property of CFD 2021-1 until the total amount of Special Tax levied equals the Special Tax Requirement. The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property within CFD 2021-1 up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement.

Notwithstanding any provision of this Section D to the contrary, under no circumstances will the Special Tax levied against any Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property that is classified as Residential Property be increased by more than ten percent (10%) per Fiscal Year as a consequence of delinquency or default in the payment of the Special Tax by the owner of any other Assessor’s Parcel.

E. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity for the purpose of financing ongoing authorized services and therefore may not be prepaid.

F. EXEMPTIONS
The City Council shall classify as Exempt Property: (i) Public Property, (ii) Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, including but not limited to property designated for open space, trails, pathways, parks or park and recreation related facilities, (iv) property reasonably designated by the City or CFD Administrator as affordable housing, and (v) property reasonably designated by the City or CFD Administrator as Exempt Property due to deed restrictions, conservation easement, or similar factors.

G. APPEALS
Any property owner claiming that the amounts or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the CFD Administrator not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax. The CFD Administrator shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the decision of the CFD Administrator requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s) to compensate for the overpayment of the Special Tax.

H. MANNER OF COLLECTION
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that the Special Tax may be billed and collected at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations of CFD 2021-1.

I. DURATION OF TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied in perpetuity to fund the Special Tax Requirement unless such tax is no longer required as determined by the City Council.

Attachment A – Zone Map
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LANCASTER, IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY

OF CITY OF LANCASTER COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
NO. 2021-1, CALLING SPECIAL LANDOWNER ELECTION
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, the City Council of the City of Lancaster (“City Council”) adopted pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Act”) Resolution No. _____ (“ROF”), ordering formation of the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (“CFD”), authorizing the levy of a special tax on real property within the CFD, and preliminarily establishing an appropriations limit for the CFD; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the ROF, the propositions of the levy of the special tax and the establishment of the appropriations limit shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the CFD as required by the provisions of the Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER,

CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true, correct, and constitute a substantive part of this Resolution.

Section 2. Pursuant to the Act, the issues of the levy of the special tax and the establishment of the appropriations limit shall be submitted to the qualified electors (as defined below) of the CFD at an election called therefor as provided below.

Section 3. The City Council hereby finds that fewer than 12 persons have been registered to vote within the territory of the CFD for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearings heretofore conducted and concluded by this Council for the purposes of these proceedings. Accordingly, and pursuant to Section 53326 of the Act, the City Council finds that, for these proceedings, the qualified electors are the landowners within the CFD and that the vote shall be by such landowners or their authorized representatives, each having one vote for each acre or portion thereof such landowner owns in the CFD as of the close of the public hearing.

Section 4. The City Council hereby calls a special election to consider the issues described in section 2 above, which election shall be held on January 24, 2023, and the results thereof canvassed at the meeting of this Council on January 24, 2023. The City Clerk is hereby designated as the official to conduct the election and to receive all ballots until the close of business on the election date. It is hereby acknowledged that the City Clerk has on file the ROF, a map of the boundaries of the CFD, and a sufficient description to allow the City Clerk to determine the electors of the CFD. Pursuant to Section 53327 of the Act, the election shall be conducted by messenger or mail-delivered ballot pursuant to Section 4000 of the California Elections Code, except that Sections 53326 and 53327 of the Act shall govern for purposes of determining the date of the election.

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

Section 5. As authorized by Section 53353.5 of the Act, the issues described in section 2 above shall be combined into a single ballot measure, the form of which as attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby approved. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause a ballot, in substantially the form of Exhibit A, to be delivered to each of the qualified electors of the CFD.

Each ballot shall indicate the number of votes to be voted by the respective landowner to which the ballot pertains. Each ballot shall be accompanied by all supplies and written instructions necessary for the use and return of the ballot. The envelope to be used to return the ballot shall be enclosed with the ballot, have the return postage prepaid, and contain the following: (a) the name and address of the landowner, (b) a declaration, under penalty of perjury, stating that the voter is the owner of record or authorized representative of the landowner entitled to vote and is the person whose name appears on the envelope, (c) the printed name, signature and address of the voter, (d) the date of signing and place of execution of the declaration pursuant to clause (b) above, and (e) a notice that the envelope contains an official ballot.

Section 6. The City Council hereby further finds that the provisions of Section 53326 of the Act requiring a minimum of 90 days following the adoption of the ROF to elapse before the special election are for the protection of the qualified electors of the CFD. There is on file with the City Clerk a written waiver executed by all of the qualified electors of the CFD allowing for a shortening of the time for the special election to expedite the process of formation of the CFD and waiving any requirement for notice, analysis and arguments in connection with the election.

Accordingly, the City Council finds and determines that the qualified electors have been fully apprised of and have agreed to the shortened time for the election and waiver of analysis and arguments, and have thereby been fully protected in these proceedings. This Council also finds and determines that the City Clerk has concurred in the shortened time for the election. Analysis and arguments with respect to the ballot measures are hereby waived, as provided in Section 53327 of the Act.

Section 7. Under Section 50075.1 of the Government Code, the following accountability provisions shall apply to the special taxes: (a) the provision of the Services and the incidental costs thereof, all as defined in the ROF, shall constitute the specific single purpose; (b) the proceeds shall be applied only to the specific purposes identified in (a) above; (c) there shall be created special account(s) or funds(s) into which the proceeds shall be deposited; and (d) there shall be caused to be prepared an annual report if required by Section 50075.3 of the Government Code.

Section 8. This Resolution is effective upon passage.

Resolution No.

Page 3 ends

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this _____ day of ______, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
______________________________ ______________________________ ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this ____________ day of _____________________, _________.
(seal)
______________________________
4873-4462-8806v1/022283-0546

EXHIBIT A

OFFICIAL BALLOT

CITY OF LANCASTER
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1

SPECIAL TAX ELECTION
January 24, 2023
This ballot represents ___ votes.

To vote, write or stamp a cross (“+” or “X”) in the voting square after the word “YES” or after the word “NO”. All marks otherwise made are forbidden. All distinguishing marks are forbidden and make the ballot void.

If you wrongly mark, tear or deface this ballot, return it to the City Clerk of the City of Lancaster and obtain another.

Shall the City of Lancaster be authorized to annually levy a special tax solely on lands within the City of Lancaster Communities Facilities District No. 2021-1 (the “CFD”) in accordance with the rate and method contained in the Resolution of Formation of the CFD adopted by the City Council of the City on January 24, 2023, commencing in the City’s fiscal year 2021-2022, to pay for the municipal services for the CFD and to pay the costs of the City in administering the CFD, and shall the annual appropriations limit of the CFD be established in the amount of $_________.

YES ______
NO ______
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA, IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE

LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF LANCASTER
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1,

DECLARING THE RESULTS OF LANDOWNER SPECIAL

ELECTION AND DIRECTING RECORDING OF NOTICE OF

SPECIAL TAX LIEN
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, the City Council of the City of Lancaster (“City Council”) adopted the following resolutions pursuant to the terms and provisions of the MelloRoos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Act”): (1) Resolution No. _____ (“ROF”), ordering formation of the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (“CFD”), authorizing the levy of a special tax on real property within the CFD, and preliminarily establishing an appropriations limit for the CFD; and (2) Resolution No. _____ (“Election Resolution”), submitting to the qualified electors of the CFD the proposition of the levy of the special tax and establishment of the appropriations limit in the form of the ballot attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Election Resolution, the special election has been held and the City Clerk has on file a Canvas and Statement of Results of Election (“Canvass”), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been informed of the results of the Canvass and now desires to complete proceedings for the CFD.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER,

CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council hereby finds that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this resolution by reference.

Section 2. The issues presented at the special election were the levy of a special tax within the CFD and the approval of an annual appropriations limit, all pursuant to the ROF.

Section 3. The City Council hereby approves the Canvass and finds that it shall be a permanent part of the record of its proceedings for the CFD. Pursuant to the Canvass, the issues presented at the special election were approved by the qualified electors of the CFD by more than two-thirds of the votes cast at the special election.

Section 4. Pursuant to the voter approval, the CFD is hereby declared to be fully formed with the authority to levy the special tax and the established appropriations limit. It is hereby found that all prior proceedings and actions taken by the City Council with respect to the CFD were valid and in conformity with the Act.

Section 5. The City Clerk is hereby directed to complete, execute and cause to be recorded in the office of the Los Angeles County Recorder a notice of special tax lien in the form Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

required by the Act, such recording to occur no later than fifteen (15) days following adoption of this Resolution by the City Council.

Section 6. This Resolution is effective upon passage.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this ____ day of ________, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

ANDREA ALEXANDER, ER
City Clerk
City of Lancaster
R. REX PARRIS
Mayor
City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

CITY OF LANCASTER
)
) ss
)

CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION

CITY COUNCIL
I, , City of Lancaster, California, do
hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of the original Resolution No. , for which the original is on file in my office.

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this ___ day of ____, 2023.
(seal)

EXHIBIT A
[INSERT SAMPLE BALLOT]
4894-7788-3462v1/022283-0546

EXHIBIT B

CANVAS AND STATEMENT OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
I, ANDREA ALEXANDER, City Clerk of the City of Lancaster, do hereby certify that I have examined the returns of the Special Election for City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1. The election was held in the chambers of the City Council at 44933 Fern Avenue, Lancaster, California 93534, on January 24, 2023. I caused to be delivered ballots to each qualified elector. _________ (__) ballots were returned.

I further certify that the results of said election and the number of votes cast for and against Propositions A is as follows:

PROPOSITION A
YES: ___________
NO: ___________
TOTAL: ___________
Dated this 24th day of January, 2023.
______________________________

ANDREA ALEXANDER
City Clerk
City of Lancaster
1 ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA, LEVYING SPECIAL TAX
WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2021-1
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, the City Council of the City of Lancaster (“City Council”) adopted the following resolutions pursuant to the terms and provisions of the MelloRoos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Act”): (1) Resolution No. _____ (“ROF”), ordering formation of the City of Lancaster Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (“CFD”), authorizing the levy of a special tax on real property within the CFD, and preliminarily establishing an appropriations limit for the CFD; and (2) Resolution No. _____ (“Election Resolution”), submitting to the qualified electors of the CFD the proposition of the levy of the special tax and establishment of the appropriations limit in the form of the ballot attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, a special election was held among landowner voters within the CFD at which such voters approved such proposition by two-thirds vote as required by the Act, all as confirmed and declared by resolution of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to authorize and levy the special tax within the CFD pursuant to the Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The above recitals are true, correct, and constitute a substantive part of this Ordinance.

Section 2. The City Council hereby authorizes and levies the special tax within the CFD pursuant to the Act, at the rate and in accordance with the rate and method of apportionment set forth in the ROF, which shall be and is incorporated herein by reference. Such special tax is hereby levied commencing in fiscal year 2024-2025 and in each fiscal year thereafter to pay for the services for the CFD, as contemplated by the ROF and all costs of administering the CFD.

Section 3. The City's Finance Director, or his or her designee, shall be and is hereby authorized and directed each fiscal year to determine the specific special tax to be levied for the next ensuing fiscal year for each parcel of real property within the CFD, in the manner and as provided in the ROF.

Section 4. Exemptions from the levy of the special tax shall be as provided in the ROF and the applicable provisions of the Act. In no event shall the special tax be levied on any parcel within the CFD in excess of the maximum special tax specified in the ROF.

Section 5. All of the collections of the special tax shall be used as provided in the Act and in the ROF, including, but not limited to, the payment of costs of the services, the payment of 2 the costs of the City in administering the CFD, and the costs of collecting and administering the special tax.

Section 6. The special tax shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem taxes are collected and shall have the same lien priority, and be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in cases of delinquency as provided for ad valorem taxes; provided, however, that the City Council may provide for other appropriate methods of collection by resolution(s) of the City Council. In addition, the provisions of Section 53356.1 of the Act shall apply to delinquent special tax payments. The City’s Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed to provide all necessary information to the auditor/tax collector of the County of Los Angeles in order to effect proper billing and collection of the special tax, so that the special tax shall be included on the secured property tax roll of the County of Los Angeles for fiscal year 2023-2024 and for each fiscal year thereafter until no longer required to pay for the Services or until otherwise terminated by the City.

Section 7. If for any reason any portion of this Ordinance is found to be invalid, or if the special tax is found inapplicable to any particular parcel within the CFD, by a court of competent jurisdiction, the balance of this Ordinance and the application of the special tax to the remaining parcels within the CFD shall not be affected.

Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of law in that regard and this Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its final passage. 3 I, Andrea Alexander, City Clerk of the City of Lancaster, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading on the _____ day of __________________, 2023, and placed upon its second reading and adoption at a regular meeting of the City Council on the _____ day of __________________, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________________ ______________________________ ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES }ss
CITY OF LANCASTER }

CERTIFICATION OF ORDINANCE

CITY COUNCIL
I, ________________________________, ___________________________________ City of Lancaster, California, do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of the original Ordinance No. , for which the original is on file in my office.

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this _________ day of ________________, ________.
(seal)
___________________________________

STAFF REPORT
City of Lancaster
PH 2
1/24/2023
JC
Date: January 24, 2023
To: Mayor Parris and City Council Members
From: Jeff Hogan, Senior Director - Development Services Larissa De La Cruz, Assistant Director - Community Development Jocelyn Swain, Senior Planner - Community Development
Subject: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program Recommendations:

1. Adopt Resolution No. , approving the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program, certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Program, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

2. Introduce Ordinance No. , amending Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67 related to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program.

Fiscal Impact:

There is no initial fiscal impact. The proposed mitigation impact fee is $150.00 per VMT, and the amount of revenue would be dependent on the amount of development utilizing the program. The Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program will generate revenue for use constructing VMT-reducing projects and implementing transportation demand management (TDM) strategies.

Background:

In September 2013, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law, starting a process that changed the way transportation impacts are analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with SB 743, the City adopted its VMT Guidelines at the June 15, 2020, City Council meeting. The required implementation of SB 743 has created challenges for many development projects in Lancaster, as feasible and/or sufficient mitigation is not always available to offset the impacts of individual projects.

The Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Program
The Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program would allow new residential and nonresidential development to mitigate their project specific VMT impacts by making a “fair share” payment to cover the cost of the identified transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects. The proposed fee would apply to new residential and nonresidential development in the City that is subject to a VMT analysis under CEQA, and is shown to generate VMT over the City’s established threshold of significance. The developer would be able to pay the fee per VMT to reduce the project’s total VMT to a less than significant level.

Developers would continue to be able to construct specific improvements to reduce their total VMT instead of paying the fee, or can do a combination of both improvements and fee. The fee would not apply to projects that screen out of a VMT analysis, are located in a VMT efficient zone, or have a project specific VMT study that shows the VMT is less than the threshold. The overall intent of the program is to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects to reduce Citywide VMT, thereby reducing the CEQA timeline.

Proposed Fee
Based on the nexus study and feedback from the development community, staff is recommending a VMT Mitigation Fee of $150.00 per vehicle mile traveled. Through payment of the fee, developers would be able to utilize the Program Environmental Impact Report and claim the project has less than significant traffic impacts with mitigation.

JH:JS/hb
Attachments:

Resolution No.

Ordinance No.

PC Staff Report dated January 9, 2023
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE VEHICLE

MILES TRAVELED (VMT) IMPACT FEE MITIGATION

PROGRAM, CERTIFYING THE FINAL PROGRAM

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE VEHICLE

MILES TRAVELED PROGRAM, AND ADOPTING THE

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM,

FINDINGS, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, Senate Bill (SB) 743 determined that the appropriate metric for analyzing traffic impacts in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents is Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT); and
WHEREAS, the City of Lancaster City Council adopted the required VMT thresholds in June 2020; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to establish a program to streamline and facilitate compliance with the requirements of SB 743; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing concerning the VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program on January 9, 2023, notice of which was published and provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program, amending Title 15 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67, as attached hereto as Exhibit A; and the Final Program Environmental Impact Report and recommended approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program, reviewed and considered the staff report prepared regarding the program, and considered testimony presented during the public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the foregoing Recitals are true, correct and a substantive part of this Resolution.

2. That the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program and amendment to Title 15 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67 are consistent with the City’s General Plan.

Resolution No.

Page 2 ends

3. That the City Council hereby certifies that it has reviewed and considered the information in the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program (SCH#2021090175) prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act prior to taking action and hereby finds, pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the Public Resources Code, that the Final Program EIR reflects the independent judgement of the City of Lancaster.

4. That the City Council hereby finds that the Final Program EIR determined that the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program could have a significant effect on the environment; however, with incorporation of the identified mitigation measures the effect would be reduced to less than significant levels with the exception of program level and cumulative traffic impacts.

5. That the City Council hereby certifies the Final Program EIR for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program, adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contained within the Final Program EIR, and adopts the associated findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

6. That the City Council hereby directs Community Development staff to file the Notice of Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk.

7. That the City Council hereby approves and adopts the Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program and associated Ordinance.

8. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.

Resolution No.

Page 3 ends

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
______________________________ ______________________________ ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this ____________ day of _____________________, _________.
(seal)
___________________________________
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LANCASTER AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND

CONSTRUCTION) OF THE LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE
BY ADDING CHAPTER 15.67, RELATING TO THE VEHICLE

MILES TRAVELED IMPACT FEE MITIGATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lancaster finds and declares that the appropriate metric for analyzing traffic impacts in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents is Vehicle Miles Traveled in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 743 and as such previously adopted the required thresholds; and
WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that implementation of the required thresholds can create challenges for some development projects within the City, and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to establish a program to streamline and facilitate compliance with the requirements of SB 743.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council of the City of Lancaster hereby finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Lancaster Municipal Code Title 15 is hereby amended by adding Chapter

15.67, as set forth in Attachment A attached hereto.

Section 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and will see that it is published and posted in the manner required by law.

Ordinance No.

Page 2 ends

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF ORDINANCE

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this _________ day of ________________, ________.
____________________________________
(seal)
Exhibit A
Chapter 15.67
Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee

15.67.010 Title.

This Chapter shall be known as the City of Lancaster’s Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee ordinance.

15.67.020 Definitions.

As used in this Chapter, the following words and phrases have the meanings set forth below:
“CEQA” means the California Environmental Quality Act and the accompanying guidelines.
“SB 743” refers to Senate Bill 743 which identified vehicle miles traveled as the most appropriate CEQA transportation metric.
“TDM Strategies” means transportation demand strategies which are identified as part of the vehicle miles traveled impact fee mitigation program. “VMT” means vehicle miles traveled.
“VMT efficient zone” means areas of the City where the vehicle miles traveled are already 15 percent or more below the adopted thresholds for the type of use.

15.67.030 Basis of impact fee.

The City Council expressly finds that the vehicle miles traveled impact fee is expressly adopted for the purpose of mitigating VMT traffic impacts identified in applicable CEQA documents. Therefore, the establishment of such fee shall be based on the project’s “fair share” of the improvements necessary to mitigate Citywide VMT growth as defined in the nexus study.

15.67.040 Adoption of the impact fee.

The City Council shall adopt the Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee by resolution. In accordance with Section 15.67.030 of this chapter, this fee shall be based on the project’s “fair share” of the improvements to mitigate Citywide VMT growth as defined in the nexus study.

15.67.050 Applicability of impact fee.

The Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee shall be applicable to all new residential and nonresidential development and payable as follows:

A. All new residential and nonresidential development shall pay the fee prior to the issuance of construction related permits (e.g., clearing and grubbing, grading, building, etc.).

B. The fee is only applicable to the vehicle miles above the thresholds established by the City Council. These vehicle miles shall be determined through a project-specific VMT study.

15.67.060 Exceptions
The Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation fee shall not be applicable in the following situations:

A. VMT Efficient Zones: The VMT fee shall not apply to development projects which are located within VMT efficient zones for the type of use (e.g., residential, commercial, etc.).

B. State Identified VMT Exempt Projects: The VMT fee shall not apply to development projects which are exempt from a VMT analysis. These exemptions are identified in the City’s VMT thresholds as adopted by the City Council.

C. Identified Improvements: The VMT fee shall not apply to development projects which choose to mitigate VMT impacts through the construction of improvements as identified in a project-specific VMT study.

15.67.070 Administration of fee and allowable uses.

All vehicle miles traveled impact fees shall be held in separate account and shall only be expended for the TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects identified in the Final Program EIR for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program and corresponding Nexus Study.

15.67.080 Severability.

I
frLAN STER
AGENDA ITEM:

DArE: 01109123

STAFF REPORT
AMENDMENT TO TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF
THE LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 15.67

RELATED TO THE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) IMPACT FEE

MITIGATION PROGRAM
DATE: January 9,2023 PC ACTIOH:

AFPROVED [fi.0-0-0.{ }
ABSEHT: lltroore
FROM: Jocelyn Swain, Senior Planner
APPLICANT: City of Lancaster
LOCATION Citywide
REQUEST: Amend the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67 to establish a Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program to facilitate compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 743
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 23-02, recommending to the City Council approval of an ordinance amending Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter

15.67 relating to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program and recommending certification of the Final Program Environmental Impact Report and adoption ofthe Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
3 TO Lancaster Planning Commission

BACKGROUND
In September2013, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law, starting a process that changed the way transportation impacts are analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Senate Bill743 identifies vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate CEQA transportation metric and eliminates auto delay, or level of service (LOS) and similar measures of vehicular roadway capacity and transportation congestion as the basis for determining significant impacts.

Staff Report
VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program
January 9, 2023

Page 2 ends

In accordance with SB 743, the City adopted its VMT Guidelines at the June 15, 2020 City Council meeting. These guidelines consist of the City Council resolution adopting VMT baselines and thresholds as required by SB 743 as well as Transportation Analysis policy updates. The required implementation of SB 743 has created challenges for many development projects in Lancaster as feasible and/or sufficient mitigation is not always available to offset the impacts of individual projects.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IMPACT FEE MITIGATION PROGRAM
In order to address the challenges of implementing VMT as the metric utilized to analyze traffic impacts in CEQA documents, staff began working with a consultant in June of 2021. The goal was to develop a program which would facilitate/streamline compliance with SB 743 for development projects in the City of Lancaster.

Program Development Process
As part of the program’s development, information from a variety of sources was sought including review of existing documents, interviews with other agencies and stakeholder meetings.

Document Review
Existing City planning documents were reviewed to identify unfunded, planned, infrastructure projects within Lancaster that could contribute towards reducing the Citywide VMT and be funded by the proposed program. These documents are listed below and identified a variety of improvements such as new and widen sidewalks, medians, multi-purpose paths, cross-walks, pedestrian refuge islands, flashing beacons, various traffic calming measures, etc. These potential improvements are located throughout the City of Lancaster. • Master Plan of Complete Streets
• Lancaster TOD Zones
• Safer Streets Action Plan
• Safe Routes to School Master Plan
• Master Plan of Trails and Bikeways
The potential improvements were quantified (e.g., 31.7 miles of sidewalks, 38 crosswalks, etc.) and the costs to construct the improvements was estimated.

Agency Interviews
Peer agencies also in the process of developing or implementing VMT mitigation programs were interviewed to obtain insight into their programs and issues that they have encountered. These included the City of Orange, City of San Diego, County of San Diego, and the City of Petaluma.

These interviews were conducted during July 2021 and identified details to various programs that had either been adopted or were under development. It also highlighted that the key to a successful program was outreach, particularly to the development community.

Staff Report
VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program
January 9, 2023

Page 3 ends

Stakeholder Meetings
A total of five stakeholder meetings were held between October 20, 2021 and November 4, 2021.

The stakeholder groups included the entities listed below. Developers invited to participate were identified based on current projects within the City. The meetings were held to obtain feedback as to how much these entities knew about VMT, how they felt it impacted them, and their opinions on a potential mitigation program.
• Development Organizations (AV Edge, Greater Antelope Valley Association of Realtors and the Antelope Valley Chamber)
• Transportation Organizations (Antelope Valley Transportation Authority, County of Los Angeles, City of Palmdale and the North County Transportation Coalition) • Developers (Richmond, DR Horton, KHovnanian, KB Homes, Pacific Communities, Pacific Land, Royal Investors, Jeff Little, Westlanc Partners, Rodney Singh, Insite Development, and Intertek)
• Recreational Groups/Local Business (Resurrection Cycle, Squeaky Wheel, High Desert Cyclists, Team Lakay, and High Desert Runners)
• Schools/Environmental Organizations (Eastside School District, Westside School District, Lancaster School District, Antelope Valley Union High School District, and Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District)
Proposed Program
Staff is proposing that the City adopt an impact fee that would allow new development to mitigate their project specific VMT impacts by making a “fair share” payment to cover the cost of the identified transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects.

The proposed fee would apply to new residential and nonresidential development in the City that is subject to a VMT analysis under CEQA and is shown to generate VMT over the City’s established threshold of significance. The developer would be able to pay the fee per VMT to reduce the project’s total VMT to a level less than significant level. The fee would not apply to projects that screen out of a VMT analysis or are located in a VMT efficient zone. VMT efficient zones are areas of the City where the VMT is already 15 perfect or more below the adopted thresholds for the type of use (e.g., residential, etc.).

The potential fee was calculated based on the cost to implement the identified VMT-reducing improvements and programs divided by the projected growth in Citywide VMT from 2021 to 2040.

The nexus study determined that the maximum allowable fee per VMT is $425. Prior to determining the proposed fee, a subsequent meeting with select developers was held on November 1, 2022 to discuss the potential fee and receive their feedback. Based on the nexus study and feedback from the development community, staff is recommending a VMT Mitigation Fee of $150 per vehicle mile traveled.

Staff Report
VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program
January 9, 2023

Page 4 ends

ANALYSIS:

Senate Bill (SB) 743 mandated that Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is the appropriate metric for determining traffic impacts within CEQA documents and required agencies to adopt thresholds by July 2020. The City adopted the appropriate thresholds in June 2020 and has been implementing them in the applicable CEQA documents. While many development projects screenout of a VMT analysis due to location in a low VMT area or through one of the State adopted exceptions (e.g., less than 110 trips per day, commercial development less than 50,000 square feet, etc.) and some projects have been able to identify improvements to mitigate their impacts; many development projects have VMT levels above the thresholds and cannot mitigate their impacts through improvements.

The proposed VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program would give developers within the City another tool to utilize in reducing their VMT impacts to a less than significant level. Specifically, the program is proposing a per VMT fee of $150 to account for a development’s “fair share” of Citywide improvements. This fee was based on the total cost of constructing the identified improvements divided by the total growth in Citywide VMT between 2021 and 2040. The nexus study determined that the maximum fee that could be adopted was $425; however, staff feels that a fee of $150 per VMT is meaningful, will allow the City to construct many of the identified improvements and would not be detrimental to the necessary growth within the City. Through payment of the fee, developers would be able to utilize the Program EIR and claim the project has less than significant traffic impacts with mitigation.

Developers could choose to pay the fee for all the VMT that is above the threshold, construct specific improvements to reduce the total VMT to below the threshold, or a combination of both.

Projects that screenout of a VMT analysis or have a project specific VMT report that shows the VMT is less than the threshold would not be subject to the fee.

General Plan Consistency
The VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program is consistent with the City’s General Plan with respect to economic development, alternative transportation and active living. Specifically, the program is consistent with the following goals, objectives and policies:

Objective 3.3: Preserve acceptable air quality by striving to attain and maintain national, State, and local air quality standards.

Policy 3.3.1: Minimize the amount of vehicular miles traveled.

Policy 3.3.2: Facilitate the development and use of public transportation and travel modes such as bicycle riding and walking.

Policy 3.3.3: Minimize air pollutant emissions generated by new and existing development.

Staff Report
VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program
January 9, 2023

Page 5 ends

Objective 3.6: Encourage efficient use of energy resources through the promotion of efficient land use patterns and the incorporation of energy conservation practices into new and existing development, and appropriate use of alternative energy.

Policy 3.6.1: Reduce energy consumption by establishing land use patterns which would decrease automobile travel and increase the use of energy efficient modes of transportation.

Goal 10: To provide a park, recreation, and open space system which enhances the livability of urban and rural areas by providing parks; establishing a comprehensive trails system and meeting the open space and recreational needs of Lancaster residents.

Objective 10.2: Through the adoption and implementation of a Master Plan of Trails, establish and maintain a hierarchical system of trails (including equestrian, bicycle, and pedestrian trails) providing recreational opportunities and an alternative means of reaching schools, parks, and natural areas, and places of employment and connecting to regional trail systems.

Policy 10.2.4: Facilitate the use of bicycles as an alternative form of transportation, as well as a form of recreation.

Goal 14: A well-balanced transportation and circulation system which provides for the efficient and safe transport of goods and people within and through the City of Lancaster; and which balances concern for mobility with concerns for safety and the quality of the City’s living environment.

Policy 14.1.1: Design the City’s street system to serve both the existing population and future residents.

Policy 14.4.2: Promote the use of alternative modes of transportation through the development of convenient and attractive facilities that support and accommodate the services.

Policy 14.4.3: Encourage bicycling as an alternative to automobile travel for the purpose of reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), fuel
consumption, traffic congestion, and air pollution by providing appropriate facilities for the bicycle riders.

Policy 14.4.4 Encourage commuters and employers to reduce vehicular trips by implementing Transportation Demand Management strategies.

Goal 16: To promote economic self-sufficiency and a fiscally solvent and Staff Report
VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program
January 9, 2023

Page 6 ends

financially stable community.

Objective 16.1: Ensure that new development pays for its fair and equitable infrastructure and public facilities costs.

Policy 16.6.1: Require new development to construct and/or pay for new on-site capital improvements necessitated by their project, consistent with performance criteria identified in Objective 15.1.

Goal 19: To achieve an attractive and unique image for the community by creating a sustainable, cohesive and enduring built environment.

Policy 19.2.5: Create a network of attractive paths and corridors that encourage a variety of modes of transportation within the City.

The proposed program would not conflict with any applicable policies within the General Plan.

The proposed project would provide an additional tool to help development projects mitigate potential traffic impacts while also ensuring that the City has the appropriate amenities to promote alternative modes of transportation and an active lifestyle for its residents.

AMENDMENT FINDING
Section 17.24.140 “Amendments—Commission findings and decision” of the Lancaster Municipal Code contains the following finding:

1. The Commission may recommend approval where the information presented at the public hearing shows that such amendment is necessary to implement the general plan and/or that the public convenience, the general welfare or good zoning practice justifies such action.

The proposed amendment to Title 15 (Building and Construction) by adding Chapter 15.67 relating to the Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. The General Plan and zoning designations within the City would not change; however, the VMT Impact Fee would facilitate the development envisioned by the City’s General Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse [SCH] #2021090175) was prepared for the proposed program in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and associated guidelines. Specific dates associated with the environmental process include the following:
• Notice of Preparation 30-day public review: September 10, 2021 – October 12, 2021 • Draft Program EIR 45-day public review: August 8, 2022 – September 22, 2022 Staff Report
VMT Impact Fee Mitigation Program
January 9, 2023

Page 7 ends

• Final Program EIR: Released December 28, 2022 and includes the responses to comments and mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

Effective January 1, 1991, applicants whose projects have the potential to result in the loss of fish, wildlife, or habitat through urbanization and/or land use conversion are required to pay filing fees as set forth under Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code. Pursuant to Section 21089(b) of the Public Resources Code, the approval of a project is not valid, and no development right is vested, until such fees are paid.

LEGAL NOTICE
A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Antelope Valley Press on Wednesday, December 28, 2022 as required by law.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 23-02 recommending approval to City Council of an amendment to Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67 relating to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impact Fee Mitigation Program and recommending certification of the Final Program Environmental Impact Report and adoption of the findings/statement of overriding considerations.

Attachments:

A. Resolution No. 23-02
B. Proposed Ordinance
C. Vehicle Miles Traveled Nexus Study
RESOLUTION NO. 23-02

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING

APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE
LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 15.67

RELATING TO THE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IMPACT FEE

MITIGATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, Senate Bill (SB) 743 determined that the appropriate metric for analyzing traffic impacts in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents is Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT); and
WHEREAS, the City of Lancaster City Council adopted the required VMT thresholds in June 2020; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to establish a program to streamline and facilitate compliance with the requirements of SB 743; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program, amending Title 15 of the Lancaster Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.67, as set forth and attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, applicable law requires the Planning Commission to notice and hold a public hearing on the amendment and, following such hearing, to render a decision in the form of a written recommendation to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing concerning the amendment on January 9, 2023, notice of which was published and provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed amendment is required for public health, safety, and general welfare, and that the amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires to recommend that the City Council certify the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program (SCH #2021090175) and adopt the associated findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission now desires to recommend that the City Council adopt the Proposed Ordinance implementing the Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4283A149-4313-4E82-8918-6F10CEA9215F PC Resolution No. 23-02
January 9, 2023

Page 2 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LANCASTER, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER, AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. That the foregoing Recitals are true, correct and a substantive part of this Resolution.

Section 2. That the Planning Commission hereby adopts the following finding pursuant to Section 17.24.150 of the LMC:

1. The commission may recommend approval where the information presented at public hearing shows that such amendment is necessary to implement the general plan and/or that the public convenience, the general welfare or good zoning practice justifies such action.

Section 3. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the City’s General Plan.

Section 4. That the Planning Commission hereby certifies that it has reviewed and considered the information in the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program (SCH #2021090175) prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act prior to taking action and hereby finds, pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the Public Resources Code, that the Final Program EIR reflects the independent judgement of the City of Lancaster.

Section 5. That the Planning Commission hereby finds that the Final Program EIR determined that the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Fee Mitigation Program could have a significant effect on the environment; however, with incorporation of the identified mitigation measures the effect would be reduced to less than significant levels with the exception of program level and cumulative traffic impacts.

Section 6. That the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council certify the Final Program EIR for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contained within the Final Program EIR, and adopt the associated findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Section 7. That the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council approve and adopt the Proposed Ordinance.

Section 8. That Community Development staff is authorized and hereby directed to transmit this Resolution to the City Council as required by Section 65855 of the Government Code.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 9th day of January 2023, by the following vote:

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4283A149-4313-4E82-8918-6F10CEA9215F JAMES D. VOSE, Chairman
Lancaster Planning Commission
PC Resolution No. 23-02 January 9, 2023

Page 2 ends

AYES: Vose, Harvey, Birden, Derryberry, Tufts, and Underwood.

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT: Moore.

ATTEST:

LARISSA DE LA CRUZ, Assistant Director – Community Development City of Lancaster
Attachments:

A. Draft Ordinance
B. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
C. Final Program Environmental Impact Report
D. Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4283A149-4313-4E82-8918-6F10CEA9215F ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LANCASTER AMENDING TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND

CONSTRUCTION) OF THE LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE
BY ADDING CHAPTER 15.67, RELATING TO THE VEHICLE

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lancaster hereby finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2. Lancaster Municipal Code Title 15 is hereby amended by adding Chapter 15.67, as set forth in Attachment A attached hereto.

SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and will see that it is published and posted in the manner required by law.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

Ordinance No.

Page 2 ends

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

ANDREA ALEXANDER R. REX PARRIS
City Clerk Mayor
City of Lancaster City of Lancaster

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

CITY OF LANCASTER )

CERTIFICATION OF ORDINANCE

WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, on this _________ day of ________________, ________.
____________________________________
(seal)

PREPARED BY

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED

MITIGATION PROGRAM

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T

PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
AUGUST 2022

PREPARED FOR

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT

PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Mitigation Program
SCH NO. 2021090175
Lead Agency:

CITY OF LANCASTER
44933 Fern Avenue
Lancaster, California 93534
Contact: Jocelyn Swain
Senior Planner
661.723.6249
[email protected]
Prepared by:

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500
Santa Ana, California 92707
Contact: Frances Yau, AICP
949.472.3505
August 2022
JN 184421
This document is designed for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 i Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1.0 Executive Summary.........................................................................................1-1

1.1 Project Location.................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 Project Summary................................................................................................... 1-1

1.3 Project Goals and Objectives.............................................................................. 1-2

1.4 Environmental Issues/Mitigation Summary..................................................... 1-2

1.5 Significant Unavoidable Impacts...................................................................... 1-18

1.6 Summary of Project Alternatives...................................................................... 1-19 Section 2.0 Introduction and Purpose ............................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Purpose of the EIR............................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Compliance with CEQA...................................................................................... 2-2

2.3 Notice of Preparation/Early Consultation (Scoping)...................................... 2-3

2.4 Format of the EIR................................................................................................ 2-4

2.5 Responsible and Trustee Agencies..................................................................... 2-5

2.6 Incorporation by Reference................................................................................. 2-5 Section 3.0 Project Description.......................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Project Location and Setting ............................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Background and History ...................................................................................... 3-4

3.3 Project Characteristics.......................................................................................... 3-5

3.4 Goals and Objectives............................................................................................ 3-8

3.5 Discretionary Approvals...................................................................................... 3-8 Section 4.0 Basis of Cumulative Analysis .......................................................................... 4-1 Section 5.0 Environmental Analysis .................................................................................. 5-1

5.1 Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................... 5.1-1

5.2 Aesthetics/Light and Glare .............................................................................. 5.2-1

5.3 Biological Resources.......................................................................................... 5.3-1

5.4 Tribal and Cultural Resources ......................................................................... 5.4-1

5.5 Geology and Soils .............................................................................................. 5.5-1

5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................................... 5.6-1

5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................... 5.7-1

5.8 Transportation.................................................................................................... 5.8-1

5.9 Air Quality........................................................................................................... 5.9-1

5.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions........................................................................... 5.10-1

5.11 Energy................................................................................................................ 5.11-1

5.12 Noise.................................................................................................................. 5.12-1 Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 ii Table of Contents

5.13 Utilities and Service Systems.......................................................................... 5.13-1 Section 6.0 Other CEQA Considerations........................................................................... 6-1

6.1 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project........................................... 6-1

6.2 Irreversible Environmental Changes That Would Be Involved In the Proposed Action Should It Be Implemented........................................ 6-1

6.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts................................................................................... 6-3 Section 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Project............................................................... 7-1

7.1 Summary of Project Objectives.......................................................................... 7-2

7.2 Summary of Significant Impacts......................................................................... 7-3

7.3 Alternatives Considered But Rejected ............................................................... 7-3

7.4 No Project Alternative ........................................................................................ 7-6

7.5 Alternative Mitigation Fee Application Alternative....................................... 7-10

7.6 “Environmentally Superior” Alternative ......................................................... 7-14 Section 8.0 Effects Found Not To Be Significant ............................................................. 8-1 Section 9.0 Organizations and Persons Consulted............................................................ 9-1 Section 10.0 Bibliography .................................................................................................. 10-1 Section 11.0 Appendices

11.1 Notice of Preparation and Comment Letters

11.2 VMT-Reducing Projects

11.3 Tribal Consultation

11.4 Noise Data
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 iii Table of Contents

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 3-1 Regional Vicinity................................................................................................................. 3-2 Exhibit 3-2 Site Vicinity.......................................................................................................................... 3-3 Exhibit 3-3 Potential VMT-Reducing Improvement Locations....................................................... 3-7 Exhibit 5.8-1 Existing and Proposed Bikeways .................................................................................. 5.8-5 Exhibit 5.8-2 Existing and Proposed Pedestrian Facilities................................................................ 5.8-6 Exhibit 5.12-1 Common Environmental Noise Levels...................................................................... 5.12-2 Exhibit 5.12-2 Existing Traffic Noise Contours................................................................................. 5.12-7 Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 iv Table of Contents

LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1 Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements ....................................................................... 3-6 Table 4-1 General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout ......... 4-3 Table 5.1-1 General Plan Consistency Analysis............................................................................... 5.1-7 Table 5.1-2 SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis.................................................. 5.1-12 Table 5.3-1 Special-Status Plant Species Recorded in the Project Vicinity.................................. 5.3-7 Table 5.3-2 Special-Status Wildlife Species within the Project Area............................................. 5.3-8 Table 5.8-1 VMT Thresholds of Significance ................................................................................ 5.8-12 Table 5.9-1 Measured Air Quality Levels.......................................................................................... 5.9-3 Table 5.9-2 National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards........................................... 5.9-9 Table 5.9-3 Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds .......... 5.9-12 Table 5.9-4 General Plan Consistency............................................................................................. 5.9-23 Table 5.10-1 Project Consistency with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS ...............................................5.10-14 Table 5.10-2 Project Consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update......................................5.10-17 Table 5.10-3 Project Consistency with the Climate Action Plan.................................................5.10-18 Table 5.11-1 Electricity Consumption in Los Angeles County, 2009-2019................................. 5.11-2 Table 5.11-2 Natural Gas Consumption in Los Angeles County, 2009-2019 ............................. 5.11-3 Table 5.11-3 Automotive Fuel Consumption in Los Angeles County, 2010-2021..................... 5.11-3 Table 5.11-4 Proposed Program General Plan Consistency Analysis.........................................5.11-11 Table 5.12-1 Noise Descriptors.......................................................................................................... 5.12-3 Table 5.12-2 Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous Vibration Levels.... 5.12-5 Table 5.12-3 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments ............................. 5.12-8 Table 5.12-4 Noise Compatible Land Use Objectives..................................................................5.12-10 Table 5.12-5 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment.........................................5.12-14 Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 v Table of Contents
Table 5.12-6 Traffic Noise Levels....................................................................................................5.12-17 Table 5.13-1 LACWD 40 Current and Projected Water Supplies................................................. 5.13-2 Table 5.13-2 LACWD Current and Projected Water Demand ..................................................... 5.13-3 Table 5.13-3 Landfills Serving the City ............................................................................................. 5.13-5 Table 7-1 No Project Alternative and Project Objectives.............................................................. 7-9 Table 7-2 Alternate Mitigation Fee Application Alternative and Project Objectives............... 7-13 Table 7-3 Comparison of Alternatives............................................................................................ 7-14 Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 vi Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-1 Executive Summary

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Lancaster (City) is located in the Antelope Valley in northern Los Angeles County (County), approximately 70 miles north of downtown Los Angeles. Unincorporated Los Angeles County surrounds the City on all sides. Additional surrounding jurisdictions include unincorporated Kern County further to the north and the City of Palmdale to the south.

The Antelope Valley Freeway (State Route 14) provides primary regional connectivity between the Antelope Valley and Greater Los Angeles area. Various arterials in the City also serve regional functions. Avenue D (State Route 138) extends west from SR-14, and connects to the Golden State Freeway (Interstate 5), and extends east from the City of Palmdale, connecting with Interstate 15.

Sierra Highway links Lancaster with the community of Rosamond to the north and the City of Palmdale to the south.

1.2 PROJECT SUMMARY
The proposed VMT Mitigation Program (from herein referred to as the “program” or “project”) aims to establish mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thresholds in the form of a mitigation impact fee. The program identifies relevant transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the impact fee. These funds would be utilized to fund active transportation infrastructure projects in the City to help the City meet its VMT reduction goals. The overall intent of the program is to streamline the Senate Bill (SB) 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects to reduce Citywide VMT.

The following existing City planning documents were reviewed to identify unfunded, planned infrastructure improvement projects within Lancaster that contribute towards reducing Citywide VMT and could be funded by the proposed program:
• Master Plan of Complete Streets (June 26, 2018);
• Lancaster TOD Zones (adopted February 10, 2015, updated January 2020); • Safer Streets Action Plan (January 2020);
• Safe Routes to School Master Plan (November 2016); and • Master Plan of Trails and Bikeways (March 2012).

The VMT-reducing improvements could potentially be constructed utilizing funds collected under the proposed VMT Mitigation Program. These projects would be subject to future CEQA analysis on a project-by-project basis as they are proposed and as the extent of impacts become known through the design process. However, these facilities may result in impacts to the environment, and thus are the subject of the programmatic analysis within this EIR.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-2 Executive Summary

1.3 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to Section 15124(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR project description must include “[a] statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project.” The proposed project objectives are outlined below:

1. Streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects by providing feasible mitigation options to reduce potentially significant VMT impacts.

2. Identify funding for future TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects within Lancaster to help reduce Citywide total VMT.

3. Contribute towards making Lancaster a pedestrian‐, bicycle‐, and transit‐oriented community with active, healthy, and livable spaces.

1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES/MITIGATION SUMMARY
The following summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and significance after mitigation analyzed in Section 5.0, Environmental Analysis, of this EIR. Refer to the appropriate EIR Section for detailed information.

EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation

5.1 Land Use and Planning
LU-1: The proposed project could conflict with
applicable General Plan policies.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

LU-2: The proposed project could conflict with
Lancaster Municipal Code standards or
regulations.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

LU-3: The proposed project could conflict with
SCAG’s 2020-2045 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy goals.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project,
combined with other related projects, could
conflict with land use plans, policies or
regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.2 Aesthetics/Light and Glare
AES-1: Project implementation could have a
substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

AES-2: Implementation of the proposed project
could conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

AES-3: Implementation of the proposed project
could create new sources of light and glare,
which could adversely affect day or nighttime
views.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The project combined
with other cumulative projects could result in
significant impacts to scenic vistas.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-3 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation Cumulative Impacts: The project combined
with other cumulative projects could conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The project combined
with other cumulative projects could create a
new source of substantial light or glare, which
could adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the City.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.3 Biological Resources
BIO-1: Future transportation improvements
in accordance with the proposed project could
potentially result in 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.

BIO-1 Transportation improvements funded
by the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation
Program subject to California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) review (meaning, subject to
discretionary action and not exempt from CEQA),
and with the potential to reduce or eliminate habitat
for native plant and wildlife species or sensitive
habitats, as determined by the City of Lancaster
Development Services Department, Community
Development Division, shall provide a Biological
Resources Assessment prepared by a qualified
biologist for review and approval by the Community
Development Division. The assessment shall
include biological field survey(s) of the project site
to characterize the extent and quality of habitat that
would be impacted by development. Surveys shall
be conducted by qualified biologists and/or
botanists in accordance with California Department
of Fish and Wildlife and/or United States Fish and
Wildlife Services survey protocols for target
species. If no special status/sensitive species,
sensitive habitats/natural communities, or
Federally protected wetlands are observed during
the field survey, then no further mitigation will be
required. If biological resources are documented
on the project site, the project proponent shall
comply with the applicable requirements of the
regulatory agencies and shall apply mitigation
determined through the agency permitting process.

Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

BIO-2: Future transportation improvements
funded by the proposed project could potentially
have a substantial adverse effect on riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.

Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

BIO-3: The project could have a substantial
adverse effect on federally protected wetlands
as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means.

Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

BIO-4: The project could interfere substantially
with the movement of native resident or
BIO-2 A pre-construction nesting bird
clearance survey shall be conducted by a qualified
Less Than Significant
Impact With
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-4 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery
sites.
biologist no more than fourteen (14) days prior to
the start of any vegetation removal or ground
disturbing activities associated with a
transportation improvement project. The survey
shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and
cover all suitable nesting habitat within the project
impact area, and areas within a biologically
defensible buffer zone surrounding the project
impact area. Further, if an active bird nest is found,
the qualified biologist should identify the specific
bird species and establish a “no-disturbance”
buffer around the active nest to avoid potential
direct and indirect impacts. It is further
recommended that the qualified biologist
periodically monitor any active bird nests to
determine if project-related activities disturb the
birds and if the “no disturbance” buffer should be
increased. Once the young have fledged and left
the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive
under natural conditions, project activities within
the “no-disturbance” buffer may occur following an
additional survey by the qualified biologist to
search for any new nests in the restricted area.

Mitigation
Incorporated.

BIO-5: The project could conflict with local
policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed program,
in conjunction with cumulative development,
could result in cumulatively considerable
impacts to 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.

Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: The project, in
conjunction with cumulative projects, could
result in cumulatively considerable impacts to
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, and regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.

Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: The project, in
conjunction with cumulative projects, could
result in cumulatively considerable impacts to
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.

Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: The project, in
conjunction with cumulative projects, could
result in cumulatively considerable impacts to
the movement of native resident or migratory
fish or wildlife species or with established native
Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-2. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-5 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation resident or migrator wildlife corridors, or impede
the use of wildlife nursery sites.

Cumulative Impacts: The project, in
conjunction with cumulative projects, could
result in cumulatively considerable impacts to
conflict with local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.4 Tribal and Cultural Resources
CUL-1: The project could cause a significant
impact to a historical resource.

CUL-1 To ensure identification and
preservation of potentially historic resources (as
defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 as a
resource listed in, eligible for listing in, or listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP),
California Register of Historical Resources
(CRHR), or local register), each transportation
improvement funded by the proposed Vehicle
Miles Traveled Mitigation Program subject to
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
review (meaning, subject to discretionary action
and non-exempt from CEQA) shall be conditioned
as follows: prior to any construction activities that
could impact potential or previously identified
historical resources, the project proponent shall
provide a historical resources assessment
performed by an architectural historian or historian
who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards for
architectural history or history (as defined in 48
Code of Federal Regulations 44716) to the City of
Lancaster Planning Department for review and
approval. The historical resources assessment
shall include a records search at the South Central
Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) and a survey
in accordance with the California Office of Historic
Preservation (OHP) guidelines to identify any
previously unrecorded potential historical
resources that may be potentially affected by the
proposed project. If a historical resource is
identified on-site, the resource shall be avoided to
the extent feasible.

If relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of a
historical resource is required, the project
proponent shall utilize the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties to the maximum extent feasible to
ensure the historical significance of the resource is
not impaired.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-6 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), or
Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS)
documentation, and shall be performed by an
architectural historian or historian who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards. Recordation shall meet
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and
Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering,
which defines the products acceptable for inclusion
in the HABS/HAER/HALS collection at the Library
of Congress. The specific scope and details of
documentation shall be developed at the project
level in coordination with the City of Lancaster
Planning Department and performed prior to the
first issuance of any demolition, building, or grading
permits.

CUL-2: The project could cause a significant
impact to an archaeological resource.

CUL-2 To ensure identification and
preservation of archaeological resources within the
City of Lancaster, each transportation
improvement funded by the proposed Vehicle
Miles Traveled Mitigation Program subject to
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
review (meaning, subject to discretionary action
and non-exempt from CEQA) shall be screened by
the City of Lancaster Planning Department to
determine whether a Cultural Resources
Assessment is required. Screening shall consider
the type of project and whether ground
disturbances will occur. Ground disturbances
include activities such as grading, excavation,
trenching, boring, or demolition that extend below
the current grade. If there will be no ground
disturbance, then a Cultural Resources
Assessment shall not be required. If there will be
ground disturbances, prior to issuance of any
permits required to conduct ground disturbing
activities, the City may require a Cultural
Resources Assessment be conducted under the
supervision of an archaeologist that meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified
Standards in either prehistoric or historic
archaeology.

The Cultural Resources Assessment shall include
a California Historical Resources Information
System (CHRIS) records search conducted
through the South Central Coastal Information
Center (SCCIC) and Sacred Land Files (SLF)
search through the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), review of historical maps,
and a Phase I (intensive) pedestrian survey to
assess the likelihood for buried archaeological
resources to occur. The Cultural Resources
Assessment shall meet or exceed standards in the
Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological
Resource Management Reports (ARMR):

Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-7 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation Recommended Contents and Format (1990) and
Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs
(1991).

CUL-3 In the event that cultural resources are
unearthed during excavation and grading activities
of any future transportation improvement project
funded by the proposed program, the construction
contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities
within a 100-meter radius of the find and the project
proponent shall retain a qualified archaeologist that
meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally
Qualified Standards in either prehistoric or historic
archaeology to evaluate the significance of the
finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage
operation requirements pursuant to Section
15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed.

After the find has been appropriately mitigated,
work in the area may resume.

CUL-3: The project could cause a significant
impact to a tribal cultural resource.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Future transportation
improvements in accordance with the proposed
project and cumulative development could result
in cumulatively considerable impacts to a
historical resource.

Refer to Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of
improvements in accordance with the project
and other cumulative projects could result in
cumulatively considerable impacts to an
archaeological resource.

Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL-3. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: Future transportation
improvements in accordance with the proposed
project and cumulative development could result
in cumulatively considerable impacts to a tribal
cultural resource.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.5 Geology and Soils
GEO-1: Future transportation improvements
funded by the proposed project could expose
people and structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving strong seismic ground
shaking.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

GEO-2: Project implementation could expose
people and structures to substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving liquefaction.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

GEO-3: Project implementation could result in
substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

GEO-4: Future transportation improvements
could be located on unstable or expansive soils
and potentially result in geologic hazards.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-8 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation GEO-5: Project implementation could directly or
indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature.

GEO-1 To ensure identification and
preservation of paleontological resources within
the City of Lancaster, each transportation
improvement funded by the proposed program
subject to California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) review (meaning, subject to discretionary
action and non-exempt from CEQA) shall be
screened by the City of Lancaster Development
Services Department, Community Development
Division to determine whether a Paleontological
Resources Assessment is required. Screening
shall consider the type of project and whether
ground disturbances will occur. Ground
disturbances include activities such as grading,
excavation, trenching, boring, or demolition that
extend below the current grade. If there will be no
ground disturbance, then a Paleontological
Resources Assessment shall not be required. If
there will be ground disturbances, prior to issuance
of any permits required to conduct ground
disturbing activities, the City may require a
Paleontological Resources Assessment be
prepared by a qualified paleontologist, defined as
a paleontologist who meets the Society of Society
of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standards for a
Principal Investigator or Project Paleontologist.

The Paleontological Resources Assessment shall
include and take into account project-specific and
local geologic mapping, geotechnical data, and
paleontological records search. The
Paleontological Resources Assessment shall
adhere to and incorporate the performance
standards and practices from the current SVP
Standard procedures for the assessment and
mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological
resources. The qualified paleontologist shall
submit the Paleontological Resources Assessment
to the City of Lancaster Development Services
Department, Community Development Division for
review and approval before issuance of a grading
permit.

Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project, in
conjunction with cumulative development, could
expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects involving geology
and soils and could impact unknown
paleontological resources.

Refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality
HWQ-1: Future improvements associated with
the proposed project could violate water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements, or
otherwise substantially degrade water quality.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

HWQ-2: Future improvements associated with
the proposed project could substantially alter the
No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-9 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation existing drainage patterns of the site or area, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff, in a manner that would result in
substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or
off-site.

Cumulative Impacts: Future improvements,
combined with other related cumulative projects,
could violate water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements, or otherwise
substantially degrade water quality.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Future improvements,
combined with other related cumulative projects,
could substantially alter the existing drainage
patterns of the site or area, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff, in
a manner that would result in substantial
erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1: Short-term construction activities
associated with future improvements could
create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment, or through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

HAZ-1 If unknown wastes or suspect materials
are discovered during construction activities
associated with improvements funded by the VMT
Mitigation Program that are believed to involve
hazardous waste or materials, the construction
contractor shall implement the following:
• Immediately cease work in the vicinity of the
suspected contaminant, and remove
workers and the public from the area;
• Notify the City of Lancaster Development
Services Director/City Engineer;
• Secure the area as directed by the
Development Services Director/City
Engineer; and
• Notify the implementing agency’s
Hazardous Waste/Materials Coordinator
(e.g., Los Angeles County Fire Department,
Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control
Board, and/or Department of Toxic
Substances Control, as applicable). The
Hazardous Waste/Materials Coordinator
shall advise the responsible party of further
actions that shall be taken, if required.

Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

HAZ-2: Long-term operational activities
associated with future improvements could
create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment, or through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

HAZ-3: Future improvements associated with
implementation of the proposed project could be
located on a hazardous material sites pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and
Refer to Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-10 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment.

Cumulative Impacts: Short-term construction
activities associated with future improvements,
combined with other related projects, could
result in cumulatively considerable hazards to
the public or environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment, or through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials.

Refer to Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: Long-term operational
activities associated with future improvements,
combined with other related projects, could
result in cumulatively considerable hazards to
the public or environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment, or through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Future improvements
could be located on a hazardous material sites
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5
and result in cumulatively considerable impacts
to the public or the environment.

Refer to Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

5.8 Transportation
TRA-1: Project implementation could conflict
with a program plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

TRA-2: Project implementation could conflict or
be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, subdivision (b).

No feasible mitigation measures are available. Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

TRA-3: Project implementation could
substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment).

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

TRA-4: Project implementation could result in
inadequate emergency access.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project, in
conjunction with cumulative development, could
conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project, in
conjunction with cumulative development, could
conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

No feasible mitigation measures are available. Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project, in
conjunction with cumulative development, could
No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-11 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or introduce
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project, in
conjunction with cumulative development, could
result in inadequate emergency access.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.9 Air Quality
AQ-1: Short-term construction activities
associated with the proposed project could
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.

AQ-1 Prior to issuance of any grading permit
for a transportation improvement funded by the
proposed program subject to California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review
(meaning, subject to discretionary action and nonexempt under CEQA), the City of Lancaster Development Services Department, Community
Development Division shall confirm that the
Grading Plan, Construction Plans, and
specifications require that ozone precursor
emissions from construction equipment vehicles
shall be controlled by maintaining equipment
engines in good condition and in proper tune per
manufacturer’s specifications.

AQ-2 Each transportation improvement
funded by the proposed program subject to
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
review (meaning, subject to discretionary action
and non-exempt under CEQA) shall submit a
Construction Management Plan to the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading permit.

To reduce traffic congestion during temporary
construction activities, a Traffic Control Plan shall
include the following, as deemed necessary by the
City Traffic Engineer: temporary traffic controls
such as a flag person during all phases of
construction to maintain smooth traffic flow,
dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction
trucks and equipment on- and off-site, scheduling
of construction activities that affect traffic flow on
the arterial system to off-peak hour, consolidating
truck deliveries, rerouting of construction trucks
away from congested streets or sensitive
receptors, and/or signal synchronization to improve
traffic flow. Traffic control devices included in the
traffic control plan shall be developed in
compliance with the requirements of the most
current standards. The Construction Management
Plan shall also include construction phasing,
personnel parking, and material storage areas to
reduce traffic congestion.

Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

AQ-2: Implementation of the proposed project
could result in increased impacts pertaining to
operational air emissions.

No mitigation measures are required. No Impact.

AQ-3: Development associated with
implementation of the proposed project could
Refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2, and: Less Than Significant Impact With
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-12 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation result in localized emissions impacts or expose
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations.

AQ-3 Prior to ground disturbance activities
associated with the VMT-reducing improvements
funded by the proposed program, the project
operator shall provide evidence to the Director of
Community Development that the project operator
and/or construction manager has developed a
“Valley Fever Training Handout” training and
schedule of sessions for education to be provided
to all construction personnel. All evidence of the
training session materials, handout(s), and
schedule shall be submitted to the Director of
Community Development within 24 hours of the
first training session. Multiple training sessions
may be conducted if different work crews come to
the site for different stages of construction;
however, all construction personnel shall be
provided training prior to beginning work. The
evidence submitted to the Director of Community
Development regarding the “Valley Fever Training
Handout” and session(s) shall include the
following:
• A sign-in sheet (to include the printed
employee names, signature, and date) for all
employees who attended the training
session.
• Distribution of a written flier or brochure that
includes educational information regarding
the health effects of exposure to criteria
pollutant emissions and Valley Fever.
• Training on methods that may help prevent
Valley Fever infection.
• A demonstration to employees on how to
use personal protective equipment, such as
respiratory equipment (masks), to reduce
exposure to pollutants and facilitate
recognition of symptoms and earlier
treatment of Valley Fever. Where respirators
are required, the equipment shall be readily
available and shall be provided to
employees for use during work. Proof that
the demonstration is included in the training
shall be submitted to the Director of
Community Development. This proof can be
via printed training materials/agenda, DVD,
digital media files, or photographs.

The project operator also shall consult with the Los
Angeles County Public Health to develop a Valley
Fever Dust Management Plan (Plan) that
addresses the potential presence of the
Coccidioides spore and mitigates for the potential
for Coccidioidomycosis (Valley Fever). Prior to
issuance of permits, the project operator shall
submit the Plan to the Los Angeles County Public
Health for review and approval. The Plan shall
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-13 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation include a program to evaluate the potential for
exposure to Valley Fever from construction
activities and to identify appropriate safety
procedures that shall be implemented, as needed,
to minimize personnel and public exposure to
potential Coccidioides spores. Measures in the
Plan shall include the following:
• Provide High Efficiency Particulate (HEP)-
filters for heavy equipment equipped with
factory enclosed cabs capable of accepting
the filters. Require contractors utilizing
applicable heavy equipment to furnish proof
of worker training on proper use of
applicable heavy equipment cabs (e.g.,
turning on the air conditioning prior to using
the equipment).
• Provide communication methods, such as
two-way radios, for use in enclosed cabs.
• Require National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved halfface respirators equipped with minimum N95 protection factor for use during worker collocation with surface disturbance
activities, as required per the hazard
assessment process.
• Require employees to be medically
evaluated, fit-tested, and properly trained on
the use of the respirators, and implement a
full respiratory protection program in
accordance with the applicable Cal/OSHA
Respiratory Protection Standard (8 CCR
5144).
• Provide separate, clean eating areas with
hand-washing facilities.
• Install equipment inspection stations at each
construction equipment access/egress
point. Examine construction vehicles and
equipment for excess soil material and
clean, as necessary, before equipment is
moved off-site.
• Train workers to recognize the symptoms of
Valley Fever, and to promptly report
suspected symptoms of work-related Valley
Fever to a supervisor.
• Work with a medical professional to develop
a protocol to medically evaluate employees
who develop symptoms of Valley Fever.
• Work with a medical professional, in
consultation with the Los Angeles County
Public Health, to develop an educational
handout for on-site workers and surrounding
residents within three miles of the project
site and include the following information on
Valley Fever: what are the potential
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-14 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation sources/causes, what are the common
symptoms, what are the options or remedies
available should someone be experiencing
these symptoms, and where testing for
exposure is available. Prior to construction
permit issuance, this handout shall have
been created by the project operator and
reviewed by the project operator and
reviewed by the Director of Community
Development. No less than 30 days prior to
any work commencing, this handout shall be
mailed to all existing residences within three
miles of the project boundaries.
• When possible, position workers upwind or
crosswind when digging a trench or
performing other soil-disturbing tasks.
• Prohibit smoking at the worksite outside of
designated smoking areas; designated
smoking areas shall be equipped with
handwashing facilities.
• Post warnings on-site and consider limiting
access to visitors, especially those without
adequate training and respiratory protection.
• Audit and enforce compliance with relevant
Cal/OSHA health and safety standards on
the job site.

AQ-4: Implementation of the proposed project
could conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan.

Refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

AQ-5: Implementation of the proposed project
could create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Short-term construction
activities associated with the proposed project
and other related cumulative projects, could
result in increased air pollutant emission
impacts or expose sensitive receptors to
increased pollutant concentrations.

Refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
proposed project and other related cumulative
projects could result in increased impacts
pertaining to operational air emissions.

No mitigation measures are required. No Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
proposed project and cumulative projects could
result in cumulatively considerable carbon
monoxide hotspot impacts.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
proposed project and related projects could
result in cumulatively considerable
inconsistencies with the applicable air quality
plan.

Refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
proposed project and related projects could
No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-15 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation result in cumulatively considerable odor
impacts.

5.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1: Greenhouse gas emissions generated
by the project could have a significant impact on
global climate change.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

GHG-2: Implementation of the proposed project
could conflict with an applicable greenhouse gas
reduction plan, policy, or regulation.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Greenhouse gas
emissions generated by the project and other
related cumulative projects could have a
significant impact on global climate change.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
proposed project and other related cumulative
projects could conflict with an applicable
greenhouse gas reduction plan, policy, or
regulation.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.11 Energy
EN-1: The project could result in wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

EN-2: The project could conflict with or obstruct
a State or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
project and other cumulative projects could
result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the
project and other cumulative projects could
conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.12 Noise
NOI-1: Construction-related activities within the
project area could result in significant temporary
noise impacts to nearby noise sensitive
receivers.

NOI-1 Each transportation improvement
funded by the proposed program subject to
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
review (meaning, subject to discretionary action
and non-exempt from CEQA) shall ensure through
contract specifications that construction best
management practices (BMPs) are implemented
by construction contractors to reduce construction
noise levels. Contract specifications shall be
included in construction documents, which shall be
reviewed and approved by the City of Lancaster
Development Services Director prior to issuance of
a grading or building permit (whichever is issued
first). BMPs to reduce construction noise levels
may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Ensure that construction equipment is
properly muffled according to industry
standards and is in good working condition.

Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-16 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation • Place noise-generating construction
equipment and construction staging areas
away from sensitive uses.
• Construction activities shall occur between
the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.

Monday through Saturday, pursuant to
Section 8.24.040, Loud, unnecessary and
unusual noises prohibited-Construction and
building, of the Lancaster Municipal Code.
• Implement noise attenuation measures, as
needed, which may include, but are not
limited to, temporary noise barriers or noise
blankets around stationary construction
noise sources.
• Use electric air compressors and similar
power tools rather than diesel equipment,
where feasible.
• Construction-related equipment, including
heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and
portable equipment, shall be turned off when
not in use for more than five minutes.
• The construction contractor shall limit haul
truck deliveries to the same hours specified
for construction equipment (between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday
through Saturday). The haul route exhibit
shall design delivery routes to minimize the
exposure of sensitive land uses or
residential dwellings to delivery truck-related
noise.
• Construction hours, allowable workdays,
and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all
construction entrances to allow surrounding
owners and residents to contact the job
superintendent. If the City or the job
superintendent receives a complaint, the
superintendent shall investigate, take
appropriate corrective action, and report the
action taken to the reporting party and the
Development Services Director.

NOI-2: Project implementation could result in
significant vibration impacts to nearby sensitive
receptors and structures.

NOI-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
each transportation improvement funded by the
proposed program subject to California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review
(meaning, subject to discretionary action and nonexempt from CEQA) with construction activities requiring operation of groundborne vibration
generating equipment (i.e., vibratory
compactor/roller, large bulldozer, caisson drilling,
loaded trucks, and jackhammer) within 25 feet of
an existing structure shall be required to prepare a
project-specific vibration impact analysis to
evaluate potential construction vibration impacts
associated with the project, and to determine any
Less Than Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-17 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation specific vibration control mechanisms that shall be
incorporated into the project’s construction bid
documents to reduce such impacts. Contract
specifications shall be included in construction
documents, which shall be reviewed and approved
by the City Engineer.

NOI-3: Future noise levels associated with
implementation of the proposed project could
result in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity and
expose persons to or generate noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Construction-related
activities within the project area could result in
significant temporary noise impacts to nearby
noise sensitive receivers.

Refer to Mitigation Measure NOI-1. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: Project implementation
could result in significant vibration impacts to
nearby sensitive receptors and structures.

Refer to Mitigation Measure NOI-2. Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated.

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project
could result in a significant increase in traffic and
long-term stationary ambient noise levels.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

5.13 Utilities and Service Systems
USS-1: Project implementation could require or
result in the construction of new water treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

USS-2: Project implementation could require or
result in the construction of new wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

USS-3: Future transportation improvements
funded by the proposed project could result in
the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or the expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

USS-4: Future transportation improvements
funded by the proposed project could be served
by existing landfills and comply with federal,
state, and local statutes and regulations related
to solid waste.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

USS-5: Future transportation improvements
funded by the proposed project could result in
the relocation or construction of new or
expanded dry utility facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
effects.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Project implementation,
in conjunction with cumulative development,
No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-18 Executive Summary EIR
Section Impact Statement Mitigation Measure SignificanceAfter Mitigation could result in cumulatively considerable
impacts to water supply and distribution.

Cumulative Impacts: Future transportation
improvements in accordance with the proposed
program and cumulative development could
result in cumulatively considerable impacts to
wastewater treatment facilities.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Future transportation
improvements in accordance with the proposed
program and cumulative development could
increase demand for stormwater drainage
facilities.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Future transportation
improvements in accordance with the proposed
program and cumulative development could
create increased demand for solid waste
generation that could cause significant
environmental impacts.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

Cumulative Impacts: Future transportation
improvements in accordance with the proposed
program and cumulative development could
create increased demand for dry utility services
that could cause significant environmental
impacts.

No mitigation measures are required. Less Than Significant Impact.

1.5 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
Project implementation would result in significant and unavoidable transportation impacts related to VMT.
• VMT Impacts. While the proposed program would fund and help implement TDM measures and VMT-reducing projects within the City at a program level, potentially significant VMT impacts could still occur. A future development project outside of the City’s VMT efficient zones could pay the required impact fee, but their required fee may not fund the full cost of what is necessary to construct/complete an identified infrastructure improvement project.

Therefore, it cannot be determined with certainty whether improvements would be implemented at the time a future project’s VMT impacts occur (e.g., at project opening), and whether those impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Additionally, the impact fee would only apply to VMT generated above the established threshold and thus, would not be able to fully fund all the identified improvements. Given the speculative timing of when the TDM measures and VMT-reducing transportation improvements would be implemented and the fact that the mitigation program cannot fully fund all identified improvements, no feasible mitigation is available at this time to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. As such, impacts in this regard would be significant and unavoidable. • Cumulative VMT Impacts. The project would contribute towards cumulatively considerable significant VMT impacts when considered in conjunction with impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan. As stated, no feasible mitigation is available given the speculative Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-19 Executive Summary timing of when the TDM measures and VMT-reducing transportation improvements would be implemented and the fact that the mitigation program cannot fully fund all identified improvements. Therefore, cumulative impacts in this regard would similarly be significant and unavoidable.

1.6 SUMMARY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

1.6.1 “NO PROJECT” ALTERNATIVE
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, “the no project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions …, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.”1 The CEQA Guidelines continue to state that “in certain instances, the no project alternative means ‘no build’ wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained.”2 The No Project Alternative includes a discussion and analysis of the existing baseline conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation was published on September 10, 2021. The No Project scenario is described and analyzed to enable the decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project.

Under the No Project Alternative, the VMT Mitigation Program would not be adopted. VMTreducing transportation improvements currently identified in existing City planning documents as planned but unfunded would continue to be unfunded under this alternative. Thus, the identified improvements would not be funded and implemented, and the City would be required to separately identify funding from another source. Additionally, given that the program would not be adopted, a mitigation mechanism would not be established to assist future development with reducing potentially significant VMT impacts under CEQA. Similar to existing conditions, future developments that trigger significant VMT impacts under CEQA would be required to prepare Environmental Impact Reports and adopt statements of overriding consideration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, Statement of Overriding Considerations.

This alternative would reduce environmental impacts related to land use and planning, aesthetics/light and glare, biological resources, tribal and cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and utilities and service systems. Impacts would be great with regards to transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy.

The No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the project’s basic objectives. Given that the VMT Mitigation Program would not be adopted, this alternative would not assist in streamlining the SB 743 process and would not provide a mitigation mechanism for development projects to reduce their potentially significant VMT related impacts (Objective No. 1). Additionally, given that the VMT Mitigation Program would not be adopted, no funds would be collected to pay for the identified TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects. Thus, this alternative would not assist the City in identifying funding for such infrastructure improvements (Objective No. 2). Further, no program would be 1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2). 2 CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-20 Executive Summary established that would contribute towards making Lancaster an active and multimodal community (Objective No. 3).

1.6.2 ALTERNATE MITIGATION FEE APPLICATION

ALTERNATIVE
The VMT Mitigation Program, as currently proposed, requires non-exempt projects to pay a cost per VMT generated above the established threshold. The Alternate Mitigation Fee Calculation Alternative would apply the cost per VMT fee on all VMT generated by non-exempt projects, rather than only the VMT generated above the established threshold. The intent of this alternative is to increase the funds generated by the mitigation program to be able to fund and guarantee the implementation of a higher number of identified capital projects and programmatic TDM measures compared to the program as currently proposed and thus, further reduce Citywide VMT.

This alternative would result in similar environmental impacts to all topical areas with the exception of transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, energy, and noise, which would be reduced under this alternative.

Similar to the proposed program, the Alternate Mitigation Fee Application Alternative would help streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects. While the fee amount would be different under this alternative, payment of the fee towards the mitigation program would be a feasible mitigation option for developers to reduce their project’s potentially significant VMT impacts. Thus, this alternative would meet Objective No. 1.

Compared to the proposed project, this alternative would theoretically provide more funding for future TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects given that the fee would apply to all VMT generated by non-exempt projects rather than only the VMT generated above the established threshold. However, it is acknowledged that requiring developers to pay for all generated VMT would strongly discourage development from occurring within the City. Thus, in reality, this alternative would disincentivize development from occurring and therefore, reduce funding generated by the mitigation program compared to the proposed project. This alternative would meet Objective No. 2 but not to the extent of the proposed project.

The Alternate Mitigation Fee Application Alternative would establish a funding mechanism for future TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects and thus, would contribute towards making Lancaster a pedestrian-, bicycle-, and transit-oriented community. However, as stated above, this alternative would likely discourage development from occurring given the high cost of the fee for non-exempt projects.

Thus, this alternative would meet Objective No. 3 but not to the extent of the proposed project.

1.6.3 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, as it would avoid or lessen most of the project’s environmental impacts. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e), “if the environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” Accordingly, the Alternate Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-21 Executive Summary Mitigation Fee Application Alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed project. The Alternate Mitigation Fee Application Alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed project for five topical areas (transportation, air quality, and greenhouse gas emissions, energy, and noise) and would result in similar environmental impacts to the remaining topical areas.

Similar to the proposed program, the Alternate Mitigation Fee Application Alternative would help streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects (Project Objective 1). While the fee amount would be different under this alternative, payment of the fee towards the mitigation program would be a feasible mitigation option for developers to reduce their project’s potentially significant VMT impacts.

However, while this alternative would theoretically increase funds generated by the mitigation program, it is the City’s understanding of its development community that the high cost of the fee would strongly discourage development from occurring within the City. Thus, in reality, by disincentivizing development from occurring, this alternative would reduce funding generated by the mitigation program compared to the proposed project and thus, would not meet Project Objectives 2 and 3 to the extent of the proposed project.

Overall, the Alternate Mitigation Fee Application Alternative would only meet one of the three project objectives.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 1-22 Executive Summary This page intentionally left blank.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 2-1 Introduction and Purpose

2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

2.1 PURPOSE OF THE EIR
The purpose of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to review the existing conditions, analyze potential environmental impacts, and identify feasible mitigation measures to avoid or lessen the project’s potentially significant effects. This EIR addresses the project’s environmental effects, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15161. As referenced in CEQA Guidelines Section 15121(a), the primary purposes of this EIR are to:
• Inform decision-makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project;
• Identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects of a project; and • Describe reasonable alternatives to a project.

The mitigation measures that are specified shall be adopted as conditions of approval to minimize the significance of impacts resulting from the project. In addition, this EIR is the primary reference document in the formulation and implementation of a mitigation monitoring program for the project.

As Lead Agency, the City of Lancaster (which has the principal responsibility of processing and approving the project) and other public (i.e., responsible and trustee) agencies that may use this EIR in the decision-making or permit process will consider the information in this EIR, along with other information that may be presented during the CEQA process. Environmental impacts are not always mitigatable to a level considered less than significant; in those cases, impacts are considered significant unavoidable impacts. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b), if a public agency approves a project that has significant impacts that are not substantially mitigated (i.e., significant unavoidable impacts), the agency must state in writing the specific reasons for approving the project, based on the Final EIR and any other information in the public record for the project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 requires a “statement of overriding considerations” where the Lead Agency specifies the findings and public benefits for the project that outweigh the impacts.

This EIR analyzes the project’s environmental effects to the degree of specificity appropriate to the current proposed actions, as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15146. The analysis considers the activities associated with the project to determine the short- and long-term effects associated with their implementation. This EIR discusses the project’s direct and indirect impacts, as well as the cumulative impacts associated with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 2-2 Introduction and Purpose

2.2 COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA

PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE DRAFT EIR
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15087 and 15105, this Draft EIR will be circulated for a 45-day public review period. Interested agencies and members of the public are invited to comment in writing on the information contained in this document. Persons and agencies commenting are encouraged to provide information that they believe is missing from the Draft EIR and to identify where the information can be obtained. All comment letters received before the close of the public review period will be responded to in writing, and the comment letters, together with the responses to those comments, will be included in the Final EIR.

Comment letters should be sent to:

Jocelyn Swain, Senior Planner
City of Lancaster
Community Development Department
44933 Fern Avenue
Lancaster, California 93534
[email protected]

CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, Contents of Final Environmental Impact Report, the Final EIR will consist of:
a) The Draft EIR or a revision of the Draft;
b) Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary; c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; d) The Lead Agency’s responses to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and
e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency.

Additionally, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, Evaluation of and Response to Comments, at least ten days prior to anticipated certification of the EIR, the City will provide responses to comments provided by all commenting agencies.

PROJECT CONSIDERATION
Upon Final EIR certification, the Lancaster City Council may consider approval of the proposed project. A decision to approve the project would be accompanied by specific, written findings, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, and if required, a specific written statement of overriding considerations, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 2-3 Introduction and Purpose

2.3 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/

EARLY CONSULTATION (SCOPING)
In compliance with the CEQA Guidelines, the City has provided opportunities for various agencies and the public to participate in the environmental review process. During EIR preparation, efforts were made to contact various Federal, State, regional, and local government agencies and other interested parties to solicit comments on the scope of the review in this document. This included the distribution of a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to various responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and interested parties. The purpose of the NOP was to formally announce the preparation of a Draft EIR for the proposed project, and that, as the Lead Agency, the City was soliciting input regarding the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the Draft EIR. The NOP provided preliminary information regarding the anticipated range of impacts to be analyzed within the Draft EIR. The NOP was distributed for a 30-day public review period from September 10, 2021 through October 12, 2021.

In addition, a public scoping meeting was conducted on September 22, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the scoping meeting was held virtually on Zoom. The scoping meeting’s purpose was to:
• Inform the public of the proposed project and the City’s intent to prepare an EIR; • Present an overview of the CEQA EIR process;
• Review the topics to be addressed in the EIR; and
• Receive public comments on issues of concern and environmental topics to be addressed in the EIR.

No participants attended the public scoping meeting or provided comments prior to or after the meeting. However, the following commenters submitted comment letters during the 30-day public review period; refer to Appendix 11.1, Notice of Preparation and Comment Letters. • Native American Heritage Commission, dated September 13, 2021; • Ken Molock, dated September 21, 2021;
• California Department of Transportation District 7, dated September 23, 2021; • Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, dated October 6, 2021; • California Department of Fish and Wildlife, dated October 6, 2021; and • Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters, dated October 11, 2021.

Relevant CEQA issues raised in the NOP comments are summarized below:
• Potential impacts to biological resources, including special-status species, jurisdictional resources, wetlands, sensitive communities, and nesting birds (refer to Section 5.3, Biological Resources);
• Potential impacts on cultural resources and compliance with tribal consultation requirements under Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52 (refer to Section 5.4, Tribal and Cultural Resources); Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 2-4 Introduction and Purpose • Project consistency with current State-level sustainable transportation policy goals, including reducing vehicular trips and associated greenhouse gas emissions and encouraging alternative modes of travel (refer to Section 5.8, Transportation); and • Potential project impacts on existing and/or proposed utility facilities (e.g., sewer and water lines) that are located and/or cross directly beneath roadways (refer to Section 5.13, Utilities and Service Systems).

2.4 FORMAT OF THE EIR
The Draft EIR is organized into the following sections:
• Section 1.0, Executive Summary, provides a brief project description and summary of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures.
• Section 2.0, Introduction and Purpose, provides CEQA compliance information. • Section 3.0, Project Description, provides a detailed project description indicating project location, background, and history; project characteristics and objectives; as well as associated discretionary actions required.
• Section 4.0, Basis of Cumulative Analysis, describes the approach and methodology for the cumulative analysis.
• Section 5.0, Environmental Analysis, contains a detailed environmental analysis of the existing conditions, existing regulatory setting, potential project impacts, potential cumulative impacts, recommended mitigation measures, and significant unavoidable impacts (if any) for the following environmental topic areas:
Land Use and Planning;
Aesthetics/Light and Glare;
Biological Resources;
Tribal and Cultural Resources;
Geology and Soils;
Hydrology and Water Quality;
Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
Transportation;
Air Quality;
Greenhouse Gas Emissions;
Energy;
Noise; and
Utilities and Service Systems.
• Section 6.0, Other CEQA Considerations, discusses long-term implications of the proposed action. Irreversible environmental changes that would be involved in the proposed action, should it be implemented, are considered. The project’s growth-inducing impacts, including the potential for population growth, is also discussed. • Section 7.0, Alternatives to the Proposed Project, describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the project or its location that could avoid or substantially lessen the project’s significant impact and still feasibly attain the basic project objectives.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 2-5 Introduction and Purpose • Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant, explains potential impacts that have been determined not to be significant.
• Section 9.0, Organizations and Persons Consulted, identifies all Federal, State, and local agencies, other organizations, and individuals consulted.
• Section 10.0, Bibliography, identifies reference sources for the EIR. • Section 11.0, Appendices, contains the project’s technical documentation.

2.5 RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES
Certain projects or actions undertaken by a Lead Agency require subsequent oversight, approvals, or permits from other public agencies in order to be implemented. Such other agencies are referred to as Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15381 and 15386, as amended, Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies are respectively defined as follows:
“Responsible Agency” means a public agency, which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which [a] Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or Negative Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term “responsible agency” includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency, which have discretionary approval power over the project. (Section 15381) “Trustee Agency” means a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project, which are held in trust for the people of the State of California. Trustee Agencies include; The California Department of Fish and Game, The State Lands Commission; The State Department of Parks and Recreation and The University of California with regard to sites within the Natural Land and Water Reserves System. (Section 15386)

2.6 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
Pertinent documents relating to this EIR have been cited in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, which encourages incorporation by reference as a means of reducing redundancy and the length of environmental reports. The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this EIR. Information contained within these documents has been utilized for each section of this EIR. These documents are available for review at the City of Lancaster Community Development Department, located at 44933 Fern Avenue, Lancaster, California 93534. • City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 (adopted July 14, 2009). The City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 (General Plan) was adopted by the Lancaster City Council on July 14, 2009 and has a horizon year of 2030. The General Plan identifies the types of development that are allowed, and the general pattern of future development within Lancaster. Additionally, the General Plan contains goals, objectives, policies and specific actions that provide the framework for achieving the community’s long-term vision. The General Plan consists of the following elements/plans: Natural Environment, Public Health and Safety, Active Living, Physical Mobility, Municipal Services and Facilities, Economic Development and Vitality, and Physical Development. The Housing Element is provided under separate cover and is currently being updated for the 2021-2029 housing cycle.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 2-6 Introduction and Purpose In June 2020, the City adopted vehicle miles traveled (VMT) baselines and thresholds as required by Senate Bill 743 and amended policies in the Plan for Physical Mobility of the General Plan relating to the identification of transportation impacts as part of CEQA compliance and modification to the methodology used to identify transportation-related significant issues associated with land development and infrastructure projects. • City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 Master Environmental Assessment (dated April 2009). The City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 Master Environmental Assessment (General Plan MEA) was prepared in conjunction with the General Plan and provides a description of existing environmental conditions within the General Plan study area. Physical, environmental, cultural, social, and economic conditions for the General Plan study area are identified in the MEA to establish existing conditions (in 2009) and help formulate goals and policies that will guide the City into the future. Topical areas included earth resources, biological resources, land use, population, transportation and circulation, air quality, noise, public services, utilities, cultural and paleontological resources, scenic resources, and fiscal resources. Additionally, information developed as part of the MEA was utilized and summarized for the existing conditions subsection of the City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 Final Environmental Impact Report described below.
• City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 Final Environmental Impact Report (certified April 2009). The City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 Final Environmental Impact Report (General Plan EIR) evaluated the environmental impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan. The General Plan EIR concluded that environmental impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of existing regulatory requirements and mitigation measures with the exception of traffic and circulation, short- and long-term air quality, shortand long-term noise, hydrology/water quality, and water supply. • Lancaster Municipal Code (current through Ordinance 1086, updated November 11, 2021). The Lancaster Municipal Code (Municipal Code) consists of all the regulatory and penal ordinances and administrative ordinances of the City of Lancaster. The Municipal Code is one of the City’s primary tools to implement control of land uses, in accordance with General Plan goals and policies. The Lancaster Zoning Code, included as Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning, provides the legislative framework to implement and enhance the General Plan by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-1 Project Description

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING

3.1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Lancaster (City) is located in the Antelope Valley in northern Los Angeles County (County), approximately 70 miles north of downtown Los Angeles; refer to Exhibit 3-1, Regional Vicinity. Unincorporated Los Angeles County surrounds the City on all sides. Additional surrounding jurisdictions include unincorporated Kern County further to the north and the City of Palmdale to the south; refer to Exhibit 3-2, Site Vicinity.

Sierra Highway links Lancaster with the community of Rosamond to the north and the City of Palmdale to the south.

3.1.2 PROJECT SETTING (EXISTING CONDITIONS)
The City is characterized by two distinct patterns of development. The first pattern is reflected in the downtown area, and is predominantly developed with a mix of existing single- and multi-family residential, commercial, public, and institutional uses organized on a closely spaced grid system. The second pattern, influenced by the growth of the aerospace industry and private automobile, is dominated by single-use zoning (i.e., shopping centers, office parks, housing tracts, etc.). Overall, Lancaster is generally characterized by a pattern of low-density land uses from 70th Street West to 40th Street East and from Avenue F to Avenue N, with isolated areas of rural development surrounding the core of the City from 110th Street West to 110th Street East. The City’s urban core is defined as 30th Street West to 20th Street East from Avenue I to Avenue L. Based on the General Plan, existing uses in the City include non-urban residential, urban residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, public facilities, and roadways.

Based on the Lancaster General Plan 2030 (General Plan) Land Use Map, land use designations in the City include Non-Urban Residential (NU; 0.4-2.0 dwelling units per acre [du/ac]), Urban Residential (UR; 2.1-6.5 du/ac), Multi-Residential (MR1; 6.6-15.0 du/ac), Multi-Residential (MR2; 15.1-30.1 du/ac); Mixed-Use (MU); Commercial (C); Office/Professional (OP); Light Industrial (LI); Heavy Industrial (HI); Health Care (H); Public Use (P); and Open Space (O).

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION PROGRAM

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Exhibit 3-1
Regional Vicinity 10/2021 JN 184421

NOT TO SCALE

P A C I F I C

O C E A N
Pyramid
Lake
Lake
Piru
Castaic
Lake
ORANGE
COUNTY

VENTURA
COUNTY

LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
KERN
COUNTY
101
101
1 1
2 1
5 5
5 126
118 118
241
142
134
261
133
138
138
138
405
405
605
710
110
110
10 10
210
210
210
10 405
23 2
14 14
18 23
23 27
55 91
90 90
57 60
60 30
71 22
Upland
Pomona
Chino
Palmdale
Lancaster
Pasadena
Alhambra
Monterey
Park
Pico
Rivera
Downey
South
Gate
Compton
Carson
Hawthorne
Inglewood
Culver
City
Santa
Monica
Beverly
Hills
Sherman
Oaks
Van
Nuys
Hollywood
Bellflower
Lakewood
Arcadia
Monrovia Azuza
Claremont
San
Dimas
West
Covina
La Habra
Heights
Brea
Walnut
Covina Baldwin
Park
Whittier
La
Mirada
Burbank
Pacoima
Glendale
Los
Angeles
Torrance
San
Pedro
Long
Beach
Huntington
Beach
Newport
Beach
Santa
Ana
Costa
Mesa
Garden
Grove
Anaheim
Tustin
Orange
Fullerton
Yorba
Linda
Irvine
Lake
Forest
Fillmore Piru
Moorpark
Thousand
Oaks
Simi
Valley
Castaic
Gorman
Lebec
Santa
Clarita
Sylmar
Agoura Hills Woodland
Hills
Canoga
Park
Chatsworth
Westlake
Village
Calabasas
Malibu
Palos
Verdes
Estates
Redondo Beach
Manhattan Beach
El Segundo
Playa Del Rey
Marina Del Rey
Project Site

PROJECT SITE
14 14
14 138
138
AVE F
AVE G
AVE H
AVE I
AVE J
AVE K
AVE L
AVE M
AVE N
AVE P
110TH ST W
90TH ST W
80TH ST W
70TH ST W
60TH ST W
50TH ST W
50TH ST E
70TH ST E90TH ST E110TH ST E
40TH ST W
40TH ST E
30TH ST W
30TH ST E
20TH ST W

DIVISION STCHALLENGE WY

SIERRA HWY

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION PROGRAM

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Exhibit 3-2
Site Vicinity
Source: Google Earth Pro, April 2022
04/2022 JN 184421
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-4 Project Description Based on the Lancaster Municipal Code (Municipal Code) and Lancaster Zoning Map (Zoning Map), several zoning designations encompass the City, including RR-2.5 (Rural Residential, 1 du/ac); RR-1 (Rural Residential 1 du/ac); SRR (Semi-Rural Residential 1-2 du/ac); R-15,000 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 15,000 square feet); R-10,000 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 10,000 square feet); R-7,000 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 7,000 square feet); High Density Residential (HDR; 15.1-30 du/ac); Moderate Density Residential (MDR; 7.1-15 du/ac); Mobile Home Park (MHP); Mobile Home Park-Senior Overlay (MHP-S); Commercial (C); Commercial Planned Development (CPD); Office Professional (OP); Mixed-Use Commercial (MU-C); Mixed-Use Employment (MU-E); Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N); Mixed-Use Transit Oriented Development (MU-TOD); Mixed-Use Health District (MU-HD); Heavy Industrial (HI); Light Industrial (LI); Health Care (H); Public (P); School (S); Specific Plan (SP); Cemetery (CE); Open Space (O); and Park (PK).

There are also several specific plans and a master plan within Lancaster, including the Downtown Lancaster Specific Plan, Amargosa Creek Specific Plan, Fox Field Specific Plan, Lancaster Business Park Specific Plan, Avanti South Specific Plan, Avanti North Specific Plan, and Lancaster Health District Master Plan.

3.2 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
In September 2013, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law, starting a process that fundamentally changed the way transportation impact analysis is conducted under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SB 743 identifies vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate CEQA transportation metric and eliminates auto delay, or level of service (LOS), and similar measurements of vehicular roadway capacity and traffic congestion as the basis for determining significant impacts. In December 2018, the California Natural Resource Agency certified and adopted the CEQA statute (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15064.3).

Per the CEQA statute, the VMT guidelines became effective on July 1, 2020.

In accordance with SB 743, the City adopted its VMT Guidelines (at the June 15, 2020 City Council meeting) and Local Transportation Assessment Guidelines (dated January 5, 2021). The VMT Guidelines consist of the City Council resolution adopting VMT baselines and thresholds as required by SB 743 as well as the Transportation Analysis Updates in Lancaster, dated May 27, 2020 and prepared by Fehr & Peers. These guidelines established a dual analysis process to the City’s review of development projects: 1) VMT is to be utilized to identify transportation impacts in the context of the CEQA process, and 2) vehicular LOS will continue to be utilized per City policy.

The implementation of SB 743 and the City’s recently adopted VMT Guidelines have created challenges for development projects in Lancaster. Specifically, smaller development projects have been triggering potentially significant VMT impacts under CEQA with no feasible mitigation to offset such impacts.

Thus, the City is proposing to create a VMT mitigation program to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development within Lancaster.

As part of this effort, the City retained Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) to conduct research and prepare the proposed VMT Mitigation Program. Michael Baker reviewed existing City Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-5 Project Description planning documents to inform City staff of potential Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects that can be funded by the program. Additionally, peer agencies also in the process of developing or implementing VMT mitigation programs, including the City of Orange, City of San Diego, County of San Diego, and City of Petaluma were interviewed to obtain insight in their program development and implementation. Planning-level cost estimates and nexus calculations were prepared for the identified TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects to estimate the cost of identified transportation improvements and the net VMT benefits.

The City determined that the mitigation program would utilize an impact fee. The impact fee would allow new development to mitigate VMT impacts by making “fair share” payments to cover the cost of the identified TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects. The fee was calculated based on the cost to implement the identified VMT-reducing improvements and programs divided by the projected growth in Citywide VMT from 2021 to 2040 and also included a two percent fee program administration fee. Overall, the maximum allowable mitigation fee per VMT is $425.

The fee would apply to new residential and nonresidential development in the City that is subject to VMT analysis under CEQA and is shown to generate VMT over the City’s threshold of significance.

In other words, if a project screens out of VMT analysis or is located in a VMT efficient zone, the impact fee would not be applicable. VMT efficient zones are areas of the City where the VMT is already 15 percent or more below the adopted thresholds for the type of use (e.g., residential). The impact fee would only apply for projects that result in potentially significant VMT impacts under CEQA.

3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

3.3.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed VMT Mitigation Program (from herein referred to as the “program” or “project”) aims to establish mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation impact fee. The program identifies relevant TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the impact fee. These funds would be utilized to fund active transportation infrastructure projects in the City to help the City meet its VMT reduction goals. The overall intent of the program is to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects to reduce Citywide VMT.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-6 Project Description Table 3-1, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements, provides a summary of VMT-reducing improvements that could occur with future funding provided by the proposed program. Refer to Appendix 11.2, VMT-Reducing Projects, for a complete list of relevant VMT-reducing projects. Additionally, Exhibit 3- 3, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvement Locations, illustrates the approximate locations of the identified VMT-reducing improvements.

Table 3-1
Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements
Description Quantity
Bus Bulb-Out 11
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon 16
Crosswalk 38
Curb-Pop-Out (per corner) 337
Pedestrian Refuge Island 34
Traffic Signal Modification for Bike Phasing 1
New Traffic Signal (for pedestrian crosswalk) 1
Neighborhood Traffic Circle 1
One-Lane Roundabout 6
Miscellaneous Minor Traffic Calming (including speed humps) 3 Sidewalk (with curb and gutter) 167,385 linear feet (LF) Widen Sidewalk (assume additional five feet) 232,820 LF Restripe Roadway (assume 60-foot wide with slurry) 433,840 LF Two-Way Cycle Track 1,910 LF
Median (12-foot wide) 2,550 LF
Widen Shoulder (12-foot wide) 1,330 LF
Multi-Purpose Path 224,250 LF
Total Buildout
Sidewalk (with curb and gutter) 31.7 miles
Widen Sidewalk (assume additional five feet) 44.1 miles Restripe Roadway (assume 60-foot wide with slurry) 82.2 miles Two-Way Cycle Track 0.4 miles
Median (12-foot wide) 0.5 miles
Widen Shoulder (12-foot wide) 0.3 miles
Multi-Purpose Path 42.5 miles

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION PROGRAM

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Exhibit 3-3
Potential VMT-Reducing Improvement Locations
Source: Michael Baker International, 2021
10/2021 JN 184421
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-8 Project Description The VMT-reducing improvements identified above in Table 3-1 and Exhibit 3-3 could potentially be constructed utilizing funds collected under the proposed VMT Mitigation Program. These projects would be subject to future CEQA analysis on a project-by-project basis as they are proposed and as the extent of impacts become known through the design process. However, these facilities may result in impacts to the environment, and thus are the subject of the programmatic analysis within this EIR.

3.4 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b) states that an EIR project description must include “[a] statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project.” The proposed project objectives are outlined below.

1. Streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects by providing feasible mitigation options to reduce potentially significant VMT impacts.

2. Identify funding for future TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects within Lancaster to help reduce Citywide total VMT.

3. Contribute towards making Lancaster a pedestrian‐, bicycle‐, and transit‐oriented community with active, healthy, and livable spaces.

3.5 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS
City discretionary approvals associated with the project include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Certification of the EIR; and
• Adoption of the VMT Mitigation Program.

Additionally, TDM strategies and VMT-reducing improvements implemented in accordance with the VMT Mitigation Program may be constructed as part of future developments or by the City and require separate future discretionary approvals, such as:
• City of Lancaster
Site Development Permits;
Street Vacations/Dedications;
Encroachment Permits;
Building and Construction Permits;
• California Department of Transportation
Encroachment Permits;
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Incidental Take Permits for Joshua trees;
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-9 Project Description • Other
Federal Aviation Administration;
Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission;
Southern California Edison/California Public Utilities Commission approvals for power line relocations or undergrounding; and
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 3-10 Project Description This page intentionally left blank.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 4-1 Basis of Cumulative Analysis

4.0 BASIS OF CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 provides the following definition of cumulative impacts:
“Cumulative impacts” refer to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. (a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects.
(b) The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 further addresses the discussion of cumulative impacts, as follows:
(1) An EIR should not discuss impacts which do not result in part from the project evaluated in the EIR.
(2) If the combined cumulative impact associated with the project’s incremental effect and the effects of other projects is not significant, the EIR should briefly indicate why the cumulative impact is not significant and is not discussed in further detail in the EIR. (3) If the combined cumulative impact associated with the project’s incremental effect and the effects of other projects is significant, the EIR must determine whether the project’s contribution is cumulatively considerable.
(4) The EIR may conclude the project’s contribution to a significant cumulative impact is less than cumulatively considerable and thus is not significant, if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact.

Section 5.0, Environmental Analysis, assesses the cumulative impacts for each applicable environmental issue, and does so to a degree that reflects each impact’s severity and likelihood of occurrence.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b), the discussion of cumulative impacts shall be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness, and should include the following elements in its discussion of significant cumulative impacts:

1. Either:

A. A list of past, present and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the Agency, or Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 4-2 Basis of Cumulative Analysis B. A summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional or statewide plan, or related planning document, that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect.

Such plans may include: a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. A summary of projections may also be contained in an adopted or certified prior environmental document for such a plan. Such projects may be supplemented with additional information such as a regional modeling program. Any such document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency.

2. When utilizing a list, as suggested in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), factors to consider when determining whether to include a related project should include the nature of each environmental resource being examined, the location of the project and its type. Location may be important, for example, when water quality impacts are at issue since projects outside the watershed would probably not contribute to a cumulative effect. Project type may be important, for example, when the impact is specialized, such as a particular air pollutant or mode of traffic.

3. Lead agencies should define the geographic scope of the area affected by the cumulative effect and provide a reasonable explanation for the geographic limitation used.

4. A summary of the expected environmental effects to be produced by those projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available.

5. A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impacts of the relevant projects, including examination of reasonable, feasible options for mitigating or avoiding the project’s contribution to any significant cumulative effects.

This EIR evaluates the project’s potential cumulative impacts using the summary of projections approach, specifically buildout of the City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 (General Plan). The General Plan considered the following three land use alternatives:
• No Project Alternative. The No Project Alternative assumed buildout of the then current General Plan. Single-family residential and rural residential uses would continue to be the predominant land use within the City. Commercial development would continue to develop within the urban core and along the Antelope Valley Freeway. The majority of industrial growth would be located within Fox Field. Under the No Project Alternative, the predominant transportation mode would continue to be the automobile.
• Balanced Growth Land Use Plan Alternative. The Balanced Growth Land Use Plan Alternative would promote a balanced distribution of land uses throughout the City. Urban areas, currently served by existing infrastructure, would be expanded through infill development.

Under this alternative, the land uses would be arranged with the goal of ensuring that no urban area of the City would be underserved with shopping and recreational opportunities and public services. Areas of the City designated for urban residential uses would also contain sufficient land use inventories for commercial retail and service uses as well as open space and other public land. Although single-family residential and rural residential uses would continue to be the primary land uses within the City, the potential for some mixed-use development would Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 4-3 Basis of Cumulative Analysis also occur within the urban core. Commercial and recreational uses, as well as public services would be located in proximity to residential neighborhoods. The predominant mode of travel would continue to be the automobile, with some reduction in the amount and length of vehicle trips anticipated due to the balance distribution of land uses. • General Plan Citizens Advisory Committee (GPCAC) Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative. The GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative would focus on the utilization of available infill areas within the urban core, rather than emphasizing the outward expansion of low-density residential subdivisions. It promotes the development of localized community centers with compact mixed-uses that minimize the impact of the automobile. The GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative also establishes a clear link between alternative transportation choices and land use encouraging the efficient use of infill parcels and urban revitalization to create neighborhoods that are pedestrian in scale and in easy walking distance to transit services and other uses. By placing an emphasis on infill development, the GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative would promote the preservation of open space and rural residential land. The GPCAC Preferred Plan Alternative incorporates aspects of the Balanced Growth Land Use Plan Alternative in an effort to balance land uses in locations within the urbanizing area that are predominantly designated for single-family use.

Buildout of the GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative was utilized in analyzing cumulative impacts associated with the proposed VMT Mitigation Program given the nature of the project as a mechanism to reduce Citywide VMT with the implementation of VMT-reducing transportation improvements. Table 4-1, General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout, provides a summary of the anticipated development conditions at General Plan buildout in year 2030 under the GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative.

Table 4-1
General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout Land Use
Designation 2030 Acres1
Change in
Acres1
(2006-2030)
Anticipated
Development Change in
DU2
(2006-2030)
2030
du/acre FAR/acre Estimated
DU2,3
Estimated
SF2
Residential Land Use Classification
NU – Non-Urban
Residential4
(0.4 – 2.0 du/ac)
795 (RR-2.5) 180 0.4
N/A
72 317
788 (RR-1) 100 1.0 100 786 N/A
943 (SRR) 316 2.0 631 1,882
UR – Urban
Residential
(2.1 – 6.5 du/ac)5
251 (R-15,000) 111 2.5
N/A
278 627
1,795 (R-10,000) 1,156 3.0 3,469 5,381 N/A
11,423 (R-7000) 4,686 4.0 18,745 45,713
MR1 – MultiResidential
(6.6 – 15.0 du/ac)6
443 (MDR) 22 5.0
N/A
111 1,895
N/A 724 (HDR) 277 12.0 3,325 7,871
MR2 – High Density
Residential 405 59 22 N/A 1,300 8,043 N/A
MU – Mixed Use 567 382 20 0.10:1 7,648 8,123 2,469,852
Downtown Specific
Plan7 1,301 1,301 N/A8
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 4-4 Basis of Cumulative Analysis Table 4-1 [cont’d]
General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout Land Use Designation 2030
Acres1
Change in
Acres1
(2006-2030)
Anticipated
Development Change in
DU2 (2006-
2030)
2030
du/acre FAR/acre Estimated
DU2,3
Estimated
SF2
General Commercial Land Use Classification
C – Commercial 1,660 -- N/A 0.23:1 N/A N/A 16,631,208
OP – Office/Professional 72 -- N/A 0.23:1 N/A N/A 721,354 Employment Land Use Classification
Li – Light Industrial 2,028 -- N/A 0.20:1 N/A N/A 17,667,936 Hi – Heavy Industrial 539 -- N/A 0.20:1 N/A N/A 4,695,768 Public And Quasi-Public Land Use Classification
P – Public Use 1,423 -- N/A N/A N/A -- --
H – Health Care 149 -- N/A N/A N/A -- --
O – Open Space 791 -- N/A N/A N/A -- --
City of Lancaster Subtotal 24,796 -- 81,939 42,186,118
Source: City of Lancaster, City of Lancaster General Plan 2030 Draft Environmental Impact Report, Table 3-8, December 2008.

Notes: du = dwelling units; FAR = floor area ratio; SF = square feet

1. Acreages rounded to the nearest whole number.

2. Density calculated from acreages rounded to the nearest hundredth and then rounded to the nearest whole number.

3. 2030 residential units were determined by adding the number of existing units to the number of potential units based on the increase in residential acreage and density allowed for the specific residential land use designation.

4. The NU – Non-Urban Residential land use designation corresponds with RR-2.5 (Rural Residential, 1 du/ac), RR-1 (Rural Residential 1 du/ac); and SRR (Semi-Rural Residential 1-2 du/ac) zoning districts.

5. The UR – Urban Residential land use designation corresponds with R-15,000 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 15,000 SF); R-10,000 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 10,000 SF); and R-7,000 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size 7,000 SF) zoning districts.

6. The MR1 – Multi-Residential land use designation corresponds with High Density Residential (HDR; 15.1-30 du/ac) and Moderate Density Residential (MDR; 7.1-15 du/ac) zoning districts.

7. The Downtown Lancaster Specific Plan contains several land use designations. Anticipated residential growth is based on projections identified within the Downtown Lancaster Specific Plan.

8. Non-residential square footage anticipated in the Downtown Lancaster Specific Plan is considered within the non-residential land use designations.

It is acknowledged that the geographic area considered for cumulative impacts also varies depending on the environmental issue area. For example, aesthetics and light and glare impacts are local (addressed in Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare), air quality impacts are both regional and local (addressed in Section 5.9, Air Quality), and greenhouse gas emission impacts are global in nature (addressed in Section 5.10, Greenhouse Gas Emissions).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5-1 Environmental Analysis

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The following subsections of the EIR contain a detailed environmental analysis of the existing conditions, project impacts (including direct and indirect, short-term, long-term, and cumulative impacts), recommended mitigation measures, and any significant and unavoidable impacts. The EIR analyzes those environmental issue areas where potentially significant impacts may occur, as stated in Appendix 11.1, Notice of Preparation and Comment Letters.

The EIR examines environmental factors outlined in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, Environmental Checklist Form, as follows:

5.1 Land Use and Planning;

5.2 Aesthetics/Light and Glare;

5.3 Biological Resources;

5.4 Tribal and Cultural Resources;

5.5 Geology and Soils;

5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality;

5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials;

5.8 Transportation;

5.9 Air Quality;

5.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions;

5.11 Energy;

5.12 Noise; and

5.13 Utilities and Service Systems.

Other environmental topical areas are addressed in Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant.

Each environmental issue is addressed in a separate section of the EIR and is organized into six sections, as follows:
• “Existing Setting” describes the physical conditions that exist at the present time and that may influence or affect the issue under investigation.
• “Regulatory Setting” lists and discusses the laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards that apply to the project.
• “Impact Thresholds and Significance Criteria” provides the thresholds that are the basis of conclusions of significance, which are primarily the criteria in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 through 15387).

Primary sources used in identifying the criteria include the CEQA Guidelines; local, State, Federal, or other standards applicable to an impact category; and officially established significance thresholds. “. . . An ironclad definition of significant effect is not possible because the significance of any activity may vary with the setting” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064[b]).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5-2 Environmental Analysis Principally, “. . . a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within an area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance” constitutes a significant impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15382).
• “Impacts and Mitigation Measures” describes potential environmental changes to the existing physical conditions that may occur if the proposed project is implemented. Evidence, based on factual and scientific data, is presented to show the cause and effect relationship between the proposed project and the potential changes in the environment. The exact magnitude, duration, extent, frequency, range or other parameters of a potential impact are ascertained, to the extent possible, to determine whether impacts may be significant; all of the potential direct and reasonably foreseeable indirect effects are considered.

Impacts are generally classified as potentially significant impact, less than significant impact, or no impact. The “Level of Significance After Mitigation” identifies the impacts that would remain after application of mitigation measures, and whether the remaining impacts are or are not considered significant. When these impacts, even with the inclusion of mitigation measures, cannot be mitigated to a level considered less than significant, they are identified as “significant unavoidable impacts.”
“Mitigation Measures” are measures that would be required of the project to avoid a significant adverse impact; to minimize a significant adverse impact; to rectify a significant adverse impact by restoration; to reduce or eliminate a significant adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations; or to compensate for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environment.
• “Cumulative Impacts” describes potential environmental changes to the existing physical conditions that may occur as a result of the proposed project together with all other reasonably foreseeable, planned, and approved future projects producing related or cumulative impacts. • “Significant Unavoidable Impacts” describes impacts that would be significant and cannot be feasibly mitigated to less than significant, and thus would be unavoidable. To approve a project with significant unavoidable impacts, the lead agency must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. In adopting such a statement, the lead agency is required to balance the benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a project are found to outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered “acceptable” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-1 Land Use and Planning

5.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This section identifies existing land use conditions and evaluates the project’s consistency with planning policies. This section identifies on-site and surrounding land use conditions and land use policies and regulations from State, regional, and local regulations.

5.1.1 EXISTING SETTING

ON-SITE LAND USES
The City is characterized by two distinct patterns of development. The first pattern is reflected in the downtown area, and is predominantly developed with a mix of existing single- and multi-family residential, commercial, public, and institutional uses organized on a closely spaced grid system. The second pattern, influenced by the growth of the aerospace industry and private automobile, is dominated by single-use zoning (i.e., shopping centers, office parks, housing tracts, etc.). Overall, Lancaster is generally characterized by a pattern of low-density land uses from 70th Street West to 40th Street East and from Avenue F to Avenue N, with isolated areas of rural development surrounding the core of the City from 110th Street West to 110th Street East. The City’s urban core is defined as 30th Street West to 20th Street East from Avenue I to Avenue L. Based on the General Plan, existing uses in the City include non-urban residential, urban residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, public facilities, and roadways.

Based on the General Plan Land Use Map, land use designations in the City include Non-Urban Residential (NU; 0.4-2.0 dwelling units per acre [du/ac]), Urban Residential (UR; 2.1-6.5 du/ac), MultiResidential (MR1; 6.6-15.0 du/ac), Multi-Residential (MR2; 15.1-30.1 du/ac); Mixed-Use (MU); Commercial (C); Office/Professional (OP); Light Industrial (LI); Heavy Industrial (HI); Health Care (H); Public Use (P); and Open Space (O).

Based on the Municipal Code and Lancaster Zoning Map (Zoning Map), several zoning designations encompass the City, including Rural Residential (RR-2.5; 0.4 du/ac); Rural Residential (RR-1; 1 du/ac); Semi-Rural Residential (SRR; 1-2 du/ac); Single Family Residential on 15,000 Square Foot Lots (R15,000); Single Family Residential on 10,000 Square Foot Lots (R-10,000); Single Family Residential on 7,000 Square Foot Lots (R-7,000); High Density Residential (HDR; 15.1-30 du/ac); Moderate Density Residential (MDR; 7.1-15 du/ac); Mobile Home Park (MHP); Mobile Home Park-Senior Overlay (MHP-S); Commercial (C); Commercial Planned Development (CPD); Office Professional (OP); Mixed-Use Commercial (MU-C); Mixed-Use Employment (MU-E); Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N); Mixed-Use Transit Oriented Development (MU-TOD); Mixed-Use Health District (MUHD); Heavy Industrial (HI); Light Industrial (LI); Health Care (H); Public (P); School (S); Specific Plan (SP); Cemetery (CE); Open Space (O); and Park (PK).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-2 Land Use and Planning

5.1.2 REGULATORY SETTING

REGIONAL LEVEL
Southern California Association of Governments
Regional planning agencies such as the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) recognize that planning issues extend beyond the boundaries of individual cities. Efforts to address regional planning issues such as affordable housing, transportation, and air pollution have resulted in the adoption of regional plans that affect the City of Lancaster.

SCAG has evolved as the largest council of governments in the United States, functioning as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties (Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial) and 191 cities. The region encompasses an area of more than 38,000 square miles. As the designated MPO, the Federal government mandates SCAG to research and develop plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality.

These mandates led SCAG to prepare comprehensive regional plans to address these concerns.

SCAG is responsible for the maintenance of a continuous, comprehensive, and coordinated planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). SCAG is responsible for the development of demographic projections and is also responsible for development of the integrated land use, housing, employment, transportation programs, measures, and strategies for the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP).

Connect SoCal: 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The passage of Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) in 2008 requires that an MPO, such as SCAG, prepare and adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that sets forth a forecasted regional development pattern which, when integrated with the transportation network, measures, and policies, will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from automobiles and light duty trucks (Government Code Section 65080(b)(2)(B)). The SCS outlines certain land use and transportation strategies that provide for more integrated land use and transportation planning and maximize transportation investments. The SCS is intended to provide a regional land use policy framework that local governments may consider and build upon.

On September 3, 2020, SCAG’s Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal: 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020-2045 RTP/SCS). The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS closely integrates land use and transportation so that the region can grow smartly and sustainably. SCAG worked closely with local jurisdictions to develop the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, which incorporates local growth forecasts, projects and programs, and includes complementary regional policies and initiatives. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS includes a financial plan that identifies revenues committed, available, or reasonably available to support the SCAG region’s surface transportation investments. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS also Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-3 Land Use and Planning includes a sustainable communities strategy which sets forth a forecasted development pattern for the region which would reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks to the regional GHG targets set by California Air Resources Board (CARB) for the SCAG region.

Growth Forecasts
SCAG’s Forecasting Section is responsible for producing socio-economic estimates and projections at multiple geographic levels and in multiple years. The Forecasting Section develops, refines, and maintains SCAG’s regional and small area socio-economic forecasting/allocation models. The socioeconomic estimates and projections are used by Federal and State mandated long-range planning efforts such as the RTP, AQMP, RTIP, and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). SCAG’s adopted 2020-2045 RTP Growth Forecasts are used to assess a project’s consistency with adopted plans that have addressed growth management from a local and regional standpoint. Adopted 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS Growth Forecasts provide population, household, and employment data throughout SCAG’s 191 cities and in unincorporated areas to 2045.

Intergovernmental Review
SCAG’s Intergovernmental Review Section is responsible for performing consistency review of regionally significant local plans, projects, and programs with SCAG’s adopted regional plans. The criteria for projects of regional significance are outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15206. The proposed project is considered regionally significant as it would meet the criteria identified in Section 15206(b), requiring consistency review.

LOCAL LEVEL
City of Lancaster General Plan 2030
The General Plan, adopted on July 14, 2009, is the City’s long‐term blueprint for growth based on community values, ideals, and aspirations as to how its natural and man‐made environments should be organized and managed. The General Plan identifies the types of development that are allowed, the spatial relationships among land uses, and the general pattern of future development. All subdivisions, public works, redevelopment projects, zoning decisions, and other various implementation tools must be consistent with the General Plan. Thus, the General Plan not only functions as a guide to the type of community that is desired, but also provides the means by which the community may achieve that desired future.

The General Plan presents seven separate plan documents that contain goals, objectives, policies, and specific actions. The exception is the Housing Element, which is contained under separate cover and updated every eight years pursuant to State law and comprises the eighth component of the General Plan. A description of each plan is provided below.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-4 Land Use and Planning Plan for the Natural Environment
The Plan for the Natural Environment evaluates the natural and human‐induced environments within the General Plan study area. This plan focuses on those resources suitable for certain levels of maintenance and protection, as well as their limitations for rural or urban use. Overall, the Plan for the Natural Environment provides a management program for those resources consistent with community values, and ensures the City is an active participant in the management of the Antelope Valley’s resources. The management program outlined in the Plan for the Natural Environment is aimed at balancing demands for new urban and rural development within Lancaster, with the desire of residents to protect natural resources and retain the open character of the General Plan study area.

Plan for Public Health and Safety
The Plan for Public Health and Safety contains an evaluation of natural and manmade conditions which may pose certain levels of health and safety hazards to life and property within Lancaster, along with a comprehensive program to mitigate those hazards to acceptable levels. Inherent in this plan is a determination of “acceptable risk.” Acceptable risk is based on a determination of how safe is safe enough, balancing the cost of hazard mitigation with its benefits. The Plan for Public Health and Safety identifies constraints to urban and rural development which must be considered as part of overall and site‐specific development strategies. This plan also addresses existing hazards related to geology and seismicity, flooding and drainage, land use compatibility, hazardous materials, crime prevention and protection services, fire prevention and suppression services, disaster preparedness, and emergency medical facilities faced by Lancaster residents and businesses, and provides a program to mitigate those hazards.

Plan for Active Living
The Plan for Active Living focuses on the components of the community’s shelter, culture, and lifestyle. It also focuses on the manner in which those in need can be helped so that all may share in achieving a high quality of life. The Plan for Active Living addresses parks, recreation, and other community services.

Plan for Physical Mobility
The Plan for Physical Mobility focuses on transportation issues, such as how goods and people move within the General Plan study area. The Plan recognizes that transportation affects land use, urban design, energy consumption, air quality, and the City’s infrastructure. Addressed not only at the local level, circulation decisions must be coordinated with regional, State, and Federal agencies, as well as with neighboring communities. In the Plan for Physical Mobility, transportation facilities are discussed, as well as alternative modes of transportation.

Plan for Municipal Services and Facilities
The Plan for Municipal Services and Facilities describes the City’s infrastructure and service providers and the future needs for such services and facilities. Specific topics include water facilities, wastewater facilities, flood control and drainage facilities, solid waste management, and public facilities and Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-5 Land Use and Planning buildings. The Plan for Municipal Services and Facilities sets forth policies and programs for the rational and cost‐efficient provision and extension of public services, infrastructure and facilities to serve the existing community and support planned development and protect natural resources.

The Plan for Economic Development and Vitality
The Plan for Economic Development and Vitality analyzes the local economy and employment in the City. Specific topics include economic development, urban development, fiscal impacts of development, and development economic issues and options. It also contains the implementation structure for the Lancaster Economic Development/ Redevelopment Strategic Plan. The Plan for Economic Development and Vitality establishes policies and programs to guide the City to economic self‐sufficiency.

Plan for Physical Development
The Plan for Physical Development focuses on the organization of the City’s physical environment into a local, functional, and aesthetic pattern consistent with community values. These policies and programs are illustrated on the General Plan Land Use Map. This plan meets the California Government Code land use element mandate to designate the proposed general distribution, general location, and extent of the uses of land for housing, business, industry, and open space. Beyond that requirement, the Plan for Physical Development is also a summary of the manner in which other General Plan issues affect the arrangement and design of development within the General Plan study area. The plan focuses on understanding current land uses, the design and form of present developments, identifies land use constraints to development, land use trends for the future, and agency coordination to ensure compatible land uses.

The Plan for Physical Development also contains a Community Design subsection, which focuses on strengthening the City’s physical image and identity. The Community Design subsection provides direction in the form of policies and action programs that call for the development and implementation of comprehensive community design guidelines that will provide guidance for the creation of an attractive and enduring physical environment.

Housing Element
The Housing Element presents the overall goals, objectives, policies, and action programs the City intends to implement in order to facilitate the provision of housing for existing and future residents of Lancaster. The City prepares the Housing Element to also meet the requirements of State law and achieve certification by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

State law requires jurisdictions to adequately plan to meet its existing and projected housing needs, including its share of the regional housing need. HCD allocates the region’s share of the Statewide housing need to the Councils of Governments (COG) based on population projections and forecasts.

SCAG develops the RHNA, allocating the region’s share to the cities and counties within the region.

Housing elements are required to be updated every eight years.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-6 Land Use and Planning Lancaster Municipal Code
Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning, referred to as the City’s Zoning Ordinance, provides the legislative framework to implement the adopted General Plan and pertinent goals, objectives, policies, and programs. Title 17 protects the public health, safety, and general welfare of the visitors to and residents of the City by regulating the use of buildings, structures, and land for residential, commercial, industrial and institutional purposes; regulating location, height, bulk, and area covered by buildings and structures; and controlling lot size, yards, intensity of land use, signs and off-street parking.

The City is divided into zoning districts to implement the General Plan in accordance with the Zoning Map. The zoning districts determine which land uses are permitted within each zoning district, steps required to establish each use, and the basic development standards that apply.

5.1.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Environmental Checklist form that was used during the preparation of this EIR. Accordingly, a project may create a significant adverse environmental impact if it would:
a) Physically divide an established community (refer to Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); and/or
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 (refer to Impact Statements LU-1 through LU-3).

Based on these standards/criteria, the effects of the proposed project have been categorized as either a “less than significant impact” or “potentially significant impact.” Mitigation measures are recommended for potentially significant impacts. If a potentially significant impact cannot be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of mitigation, it is categorized as a significant and unavoidable impact.

5.1.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

LANCASTER GENERAL PLAN
LU-1 THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES.

Impact Analysis: The proposed project would adopt the VMT Mitigation Program, which aims to fund transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects within the City. Table 3-1, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements, provides a summary of VMT-reducing improvements that could occur with future funding provided by the proposed program. Table 5.1-1, General Plan Consistency Analysis, provides an analysis of the project’s consistency with applicable General Plan policies.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-7 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-1
General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis

PLAN FOR THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
GOAL 3: To identify the level of natural resources needed to support existing and future development within the City and its sphere of influence, and ensure that these resources are managed and protected.

OBJECTIVE 3.3: Preserve acceptable air quality by striving to attain and maintain national, State, and local air quality standards.

Policy 3.3.1: Minimize the amount of vehicular
miles traveled.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Mitigation Program aims to establish mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds under CEQA in the form of a mitigation fee. The program identifies relevant TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the program. Contributed funds would fund active transportation infrastructure projects in the City that have the potential to help the City meet its VMT reduction goals. The overall intent of the program is to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects to reduce Citywide VMT. As such, the project would be consistent in this regard.

Policy 3.3.2: Facilitate the development and
use of public transportation and travel modes
such as bicycle riding and walking.

Consistent. Table 3-1, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements, provides a summary of VMT-reducing improvements that could occur with future funding provided by the proposed program. As shown in Table 3-1, the project could result in various improvements that facilitate the use of public transportation (e.g., bus bulb-outs), bicycle lanes (e.g., traffic signal modifications for bicycle sharing, two-way cycle tracks, and multi-purpose paths), and sidewalks (e.g., raised crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, new traffic signals for pedestrian crosswalks, and neighborhood traffic signs) As such, the project would be consistent in this regard.

Policy 3.3.3: Minimize air pollutant emissions
generated by new and existing development.

Consistent. The intent of the proposed project is to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects to reduce Citywide VMT. Further, as discussed in Section

5.9, Air Quality, air quality impacts, including those related to air pollutant emissions, would result in less than significant impacts upon compliance with applicable regulations and proposed mitigation. Future development projects would be required to comply with all applicable Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) rules and regulations as well as other control measures to reduce construction emissions; refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. Specifically, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would require future projects within the City to utilize construction equipment vehicles in proper condition and in tune per manufacturer’s specifications to ensure ozone precursor emissions are reduced. Additionally, Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would require a Construction Management Plan and Traffic Control Plan be prepared and implemented to reduce traffic congestion during future temporary construction activities, thus reducing construction-related air quality emissions. Overall, reduction of VMT as a result of project implementation would generally reduce air pollutant emissions associated with mobile sources generated by new and existing development.

Thus, the project would be consistent in this regard.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-8 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-1 [cont’d]
General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis OBJECTIVE 3.6: Encourage efficient use of energy resources through the promotion of efficient land use patterns and the incorporation of energy conservation practices into new and existing development, and appropriate use of alternative energy.

Policy 3.6.1: Reduce energy consumption by
establishing land use patterns which would
decrease automobile travel and increase the
use of energy efficient modes of
transportation.

Consistent. Refer to response to Policy 3.3.1. Implementation of VMT-reducing projects in the City would reduce energy consumption associated with vehicular travel and encourage alternative modes of transportation (e.g., walking, transit use, bicycling).

PLAN FOR ACTIVE LIVING
GOAL 10: To provide a park, recreation and open space system which enhances the livability of urban and rural areas by providing parks; establishing a comprehensive trails system and meeting the open space and recreational needs of Lancaster residents.

OBJECTIVE 10.1: Provide sufficient neighborhood and community park facilities such that a rate of 5.0 acres of park land per 1,000 residents is achieved and distributed so as to be convenient to Lancaster residents.

Policy 10.1.1: Provide opportunities for a wide
variety of recreational activities and park
experiences, including active recreation and
passive open space enjoyment within a
coordinated system of local, regional, and
special use park lands areas.

Consistent. As shown in Table 3-1, the project could result in various improvements that add to a coordinated system of local, regional, and special use park lands areas (e.g., construction of sidewalks, cycle tracks, medians, multi-purpose paths, etc.) As such, the project would be consistent in this regard.

OBJECTIVE 10.2: Through the adoption and implementation of a Master Plan of Trails, establish and maintain a hierarchical system of trails (including equestrian, bicycle, and pedestrian trails) providing recreational opportunities and an alternative means of reaching schools, parks and natural areas, and places of employment, and connecting to regional trail systems.

Policy 10.2.4: Facilitate the use of bicycles as
an alternative form of transportation, as well
as a form of recreation (see also Policy 14.4.3
and related Specific Actions of the Plan for
Physical Mobility).

Consistent. As shown in Table 3-1, the project would fund various transportation infrastructure improvements that facilitate the use of bicycles as an alternative form of transportation. These improvements may include traffic signal modifications for bicycle sharing, two-way cycle tracks, and multi-purpose paths.

As such, the project would be consistent in this regard.

PLAN FOR PHYSICAL MOBILITY
GOAL 14: A well‐balanced transportation and circulation system which provides for the efficient and safe transport of goods and people within and through the City of Lancaster; and which balances concerns for mobility with concerns for safety and the quality of the City’s living environment.

OBJECTIVE 14.1: Maintain a hierarchical system which balances the need for free traffic flow with economic realities, such that streets are designed to handle normal traffic flows with tolerances to allow for potential short‐term delays at peak hours, (reference the Transportation Master Plan for details).

Policy 14.1.1: Design the City’s street system
to serve both the existing population and
future residents.

Consistent. As shown in Table 3-1, the program would fund various transportation infrastructure improvements that can reduce Citywide total VMT and contribute towards making Lancaster a pedestrian‐, bicycle‐, and transit‐ oriented community. New and widened sidewalks, restriped roadways, two-way cycle tracks, roadway medians, widened shoulders, and multi-purpose paths could be developed. The potential transportation improvements would enhance the City’s street system to serve both the existing population and future residents.

As such, the project would be consistent in this regard.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-9 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-1 [cont’d]
General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis Policy 14.1.2: Maintain and improve the
operation of the roadway network by adhering
to the circulation system improvements of the
Transportation Master Plan for the
development and operation of the system,
while providing the flexibility to allow
consideration of innovative design solutions.

Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.3, Project Characteristics, the Master Plan of Complete Streets (June 26, 2018) was one of the documents reviewed that helps in identifying unfunded, planned infrastructure improvement projects within Lancaster that contribute towards reducing Citywide VMT and could be funded by the proposed program. Thus, the project would be consistent in this regard.

OBJECTIVE 14.4: Reduce reliance of the use of automobiles and increase the average vehicle occupancy by promoting alternatives to single‐occupancy auto use, including ridesharing, non‐motorized transportation (bicycle, pedestrian), and the use of public transit.

Policy 14.4.1: Support and encourage the
various public transit companies, ridesharing
programs and other incentive programs, that
allow residents to utilize modes of
transportation other than the private
automobile, and accommodate those
households within the Urbanizing Area of the
City that rely on public transit.

Consistent. Refer to response to Policies 3.3.2, 10.2.4 and 14.1.2.

Policy 14.4.2: Promote the use of alternative
modes of transportation through the
development of convenient and attractive
facilities that support and accommodate the
services.

Consistent. Refer to response to Policies 3.3.2 and 10.2.4.

Policy 14.4.3: Encourage bicycling as an
alternative to automobile travel for the
purpose of reducing vehicle miles traveled
(VMT), fuel consumption, traffic congestion,
and air pollution by providing appropriate
facilities for the bicycle riders (see also Policy

10.2.4 and subordinate specific actions of the
Plan for Active Living).

Consistent. Refer to response to Policies 3.3.1, 3.3.2, and 10.2.4.

Policy 14.4.4: Encourage commuters and
employers to reduce vehicular trips by
implementing Transportation Demand
Management strategies.

Consistent. Refer to response to Policy 3.3.1.

Policy 14.4.5: Design transportation facilities
to encourage walking, provide connectivity,
ADA accessibility, and safety by reducing
potential auto/pedestrian conflicts.

Consistent. As shown in Table 3-1, the proposed program would fund various transportation infrastructure improvements, including those related to pedestrian amenities. Potential improvements include rectangular rapid flashing beacons, raised crosswalks, curb pop-outs, pedestrian refuge islands, new traffic signals for pedestrian crosswalks, neighborhood traffic circles, miscellaneous minor traffic calming features, new sidewalks, widened sidewalks, and multi-purpose paths. As such, the project would be consistent in this regard.

PLAN FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND VITALITY
GOAL 16: To promote economic self‐sufficiency and a fiscally solvent and financially stable community.

OBJECTIVE 16.4: Promote the revitalization of Downtown Lancaster as the Urban Center of the Antelope Valley creating a mix of cultural, recreational, social, economic and residential activities.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-10 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-1 [cont’d]
General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis Policy 16.4.1: Continue to promote the
creation of a transit village development
district around the Metrolink commuter rail
station to provide opportunities for transit‐
oriented development, including mixed‐use
housing, shopping, public services,
employment opportunities and
cultural/recreational activities within a safe,
pedestrian‐friendly environment.

Consistent. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvement Locations, several of the proposed VMT-reducing intersection improvements are located in the vicinity of the Metrolink commuter rail station, located at 44812 Sierra Highway. The proposed program would fund various transportation infrastructure improvements, which would encourage development in the area and provide opportunities for transit‐oriented development around the Metrolink commuter rail station. Thus, the project would be consistent in this regard.

OBJECTIVE 16.6: Ensure that new development pays for its fair and equitable infrastructure and public facilities costs.

Policy 16.6.1: Require new development to
construct and/or pay for new on‐site capital
improvements necessitated by their project,
consistent with performance criteria identified
in Objective 15.1.

Consistent. As detailed in Section 3.2, Background and History, the implementation of SB 743 and the City’s recently adopted VMT Guidelines have resulted in smaller development projects triggering potentially significant VMT impacts under CEQA with no feasible mitigation to offset such impacts. The proposed VMT Mitigation Program establishes mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation impact fee. These fees would be utilized to fund identified VMT-reducing transportation infrastructure projects in Lancaster to help the City meet its VMT reduction goals. As such, project implementation would provide opportunities for new development to construct and/or pay for new on‐site capital improvements (e.g., VMT-reducing improvements), and the project would be consistent in this regard.

PLAN FOR PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
GOAL 19: To achieve an attractive and unique image for the community by creating a sustainable, cohesive and enduring built environment.

OBJECTIVE 19.2: Integrate new development with established land use patterns through quality infill to enhance overall community form and create a vibrant sense of place.

Policy 19.2.2: Create walkable, mixed‐use,
transit‐accessible neighborhoods and
commercial districts that provide
opportunities for young and old to live, work,
shop, and recreate.

Consistent. Refer to response to Policies 3.3.2 and 14.1.1.

Policy 19.2.5: Create a network of attractive
paths and corridors that encourage a variety
of modes of transportation within the city (see
also Policy 3.8.1).

Consistent. Refer to response to Policies 3.3.2 and 14.1.1.

Source: City of Lancaster, City of Lancaster General Plan 2030, July 14, 2009.

As demonstrated in Table 5.1-1, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable General Plan policies and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-11 Land Use and Planning

LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE
LU-2 THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH LANCASTER MUNICIPAL CODE STANDARDS OR REGULATIONS.

Impact Analysis: The proposed VMT Mitigation Program would fund future transportation improvement projects that contribute towards reducing Citywide VMT. The program would be an ordinance adopted into the Municipal Code. Future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be subject to existing Municipal Code standards and regulations, including Title 12, Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places. As such, the proposed program would not conflict with the Municipal Code and less than significant impacts would occur in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
LU-3 THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH SCAG’S 2020-2045

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
STRATEGY GOALS.

Impact Analysis: SCAG reviews environmental documents for regionally significant projects for their consistency with the adopted 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. SCAG refers to CEQA Guidelines Section 15206, Projects of Statewide, Regional or Areawide Significance, in determining whether a project meets the criteria to be deemed regionally significant. The proposed VMT Mitigation Program establishes mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation fee and is not considered regionally significant based on criteria outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15206.

Nonetheless, as a transportation-related policy program, the project is reviewed for consistency with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals as detailed in Table 5.1-2, SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-12 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-2
SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis
Goal Consistency Statement
Goal 1. Encourage regional economic
prosperity and global competitiveness.

Not Applicable. Specifically, Goal 1 of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is not adopted for the “purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect” per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

Goal 2. Improve mobility, accessibility,
reliability, and travel safety for people
and goods.

Consistent: No land use development would occur as part of the project. However, the proposed project would fund VMT-reducing transportation improvements, such as bus bulb-outs, traffic signal modifications for bike phasing, neighborhood traffic circles, raised crosswalks, and other traffic calming features that would provide and expand multimodal transportation amenities and opportunities in the City. As such, the project would improve mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety in the project area, which indirectly connects to the overall mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety of the people and goods in the SCAG region.

Goal 3. Enhance the preservation,
security, and resilience of the regional
transportation system.

Not Applicable. Specifically, Goal 3 of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is not adopted for the “purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect” per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Nevertheless, project implementation would accommodate future improvements of roadways within the City. As shown on Exhibit 3-3, Potential VMTReducing Improvement Locations, the program would provide funding for various improvements (e.g., intersection improvements, bike-specific roadway improvements, pedestrian-specific improvements, off-street path, and traffic calming features), all of which would enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system. Additionally, as noted in Section 5.8, Transportation, the project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. Thus, the project would indirectly ensure the security/safety of the City’s transportation network.

Goal 4. Increase person and goods
throughput and travel choices within the
transportation system.

Not Applicable. Specifically, Goal 3 of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is not adopted for the “purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect” per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Nonetheless, as discussed in response to Goal 2, the project would provide and expand multimodal transportation amenities and opportunities in the City.

Goal 5. Reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and improve air quality.

Consistent. As detailed in Section 5.10, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, project-related GHG emissions would not include emissions from indirect sources as the funded transportation improvements would not involve any building construction that may use natural gas, water, or generate solid waste during operation. Similarly, future transportation improvements would not generate area source emissions as no building construction would occur. Additionally, future funded transportation improvements would reduce mobile source emissions as the intent of the proposed program is to reduce Citywide VMT. Further, all future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level GHG impacts and to identify any required mitigation. Overall, project-related GHG impacts would be less than significant.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-13 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-2 [cont’d]
SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis
Goal Consistency Statement
As discussed in Section 5.9, Air Quality, air quality impacts, including those regarding air pollutant emissions, would result in less than significant impacts upon compliance with applicable regulations and proposed mitigation measures. Future development projects would be required to comply with all applicable AVAQMD rules and regulations as well as other control measures to reduce construction emissions; refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. Specifically, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would require future projects within the City to utilize construction equipment vehicles in proper condition and in tune per manufacturer’s specifications to ensure ozone precursor emissions are reduced. Additionally, Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would require a Construction Management Plan and Traffic Control Plan be prepared and implemented to reduce traffic congestion during future temporary construction activities, thus reducing construction-related air quality emissions.

Overall, reduction of VMT as a result of project implementation would generally reduce greenhouse gas emissions and would not contribute to the degradation of air quality in the region. The project would be consistent in this regard.

Goal 6. Support healthy and equitable
communities.

Not Applicable. Specifically, Goal 6 of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is not adopted for the “purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect” per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Nonetheless, the project would fund various VMT-reducing multimodal transportation improvements for bicyclists (e.g., traffic signal modifications for bicycle sharing, two-way cycle tracks, and multi-purpose paths), pedestrians (e.g., raised crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, new traffic signals for pedestrian crosswalks, and neighborhood traffic signs), and transit users (e.g., bus bulb-outs) that would contribute towards a more healthy and equitable community.

Goal 7. Adapt to a changing climate and
support an integrated regional
development pattern and transportation
network.

Consistent. As discussed, the proposed VMT Mitigation Program identifies relevant TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the program. Contributed funds may be applied in VMT efficient areas where active transportation infrastructure projects in the City have the potential to help the City meet its VMT reduction goals. As shown in Table 3-1, the project could result in various transportation improvements that would make the City’s existing transportation network more efficient and equitable for vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. As such, the project would support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network.

Goal 8. Leverage new transportation
technologies and data-driven solutions
that result in more efficient travel.

Not Applicable. Specifically, Goal 8 of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is not adopted for the “purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect” per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Nonetheless, the project would fund various VMT-reducing transportation improvements that would make the City’s transportation network more efficient.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-14 Land Use and Planning Table 5.1-2 [cont’d]
SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis
Goal Consistency Statement
Goal 9. Encourage development of
diverse housing types in areas well
supported by multiple transportation
options.

Consistent. VMT efficient zones are areas of the City where the VMT is already 15 percent or more below the adopted thresholds for the type of use. The proposed project is intended to enhance and expand VMT efficient zones within the City by improving these areas with program-funded transportation improvements. Further, as detailed in Section 3.2, Background and History, the impact fee established by the proposed program would not be applicable if a project screens out of VMT analysis or is located in a VMT efficient zone. As such, the project would incentivize future development, including housing, to be located in these VMT efficient zones. Future developments would also be able to take advantage of the transportation amenities funded by the program. As such, the project would encourage development of diverse housing types in areas well supported by multiple transportation options.

Goal 10. Promote conservation of
natural and agricultural lands and
restoration of critical habitats.

Consistent. As discussed in Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant, and Section 5.3, Biological Resources, the project would not have significant impacts on natural and agricultural lands or impede restoration of critical habitats.

Source: Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal: 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, September 3, 2020.

As detailed in Table 5.1-2, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable goals of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, and impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.1.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan; refer to Table 4-1, General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout.  THE PROPOSED PROJECT, COMBINED WITH OTHER RELATED PROJECTS,

COULD CONFLICT WITH LAND USE PLANS, POLICIES OR REGULATIONS

ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AVOIDING OR MITIGATING AN
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT.

Impact Analysis: Cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project-level environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine potential land use planning impacts. Each cumulative project would be Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-15 Land Use and Planning analyzed independent of other projects, within the context of their respective land use and regulatory setting. As part of the review process, each cumulative project would be required to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the project site’s land use designation(s) and zoning district(s). Each project would be analyzed to ensure consistency and compliance with the General Plan goals and policies, Municipal Code regulations, and other applicable land use plans or policies.

As analyzed above, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable goals, policies, and standards from the General Plan, Municipal Code, and 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. As such, the proposed project would not significantly contribute towards a cumulative impact in this regard. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.1.6 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
No significant unavoidable impacts related to land use and planning have been identified.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.1-16 Land Use and Planning This page intentionally left blank.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-1 Aesthetics/Light and Glare

5.2 AESTHETICS/LIGHT AND GLARE
This section evaluates the visual quality of the City and assesses the potential for visual impacts associated with implementation of the proposed VMT Mitigation Program.

5.2.1 EXISTING SETTING

SCENIC RESOURCES
Scenic resources include unique visual features that provide attractive views. Major visual resources within the City include the foothills area in the southwest corner of the City, Quartz Hill in the southcentral portion of the City, and Little Rock Wash in the eastern portion of the City. Little Buttes and the Piute Ponds are located outside of the City limits but are also scenic resources in the project vicinity.

TOPOGRAPHY
Lancaster and its surrounding areas are part of the Mojave Desert Basin and are relatively flat.

However, within the central portions of the City, the mountains to the south provide significant viewsheds. The most prominent local topographic feature within the City is Quartz Hill, located in the southwestern area of Lancaster. Quartz Hill rises over 200 feet above the nearby unincorporated community of Quartz Hill, immediately south of the City. This community has long had the atmosphere and characteristics of a small town. Over the past few years, large areas surrounding the Quartz Hill community have been developed, primarily with residential subdivisions and custom homes.

DESERT ENVIRONMENT
Scenic views of the desert are available throughout much of the City’s undeveloped areas. Long-range views of the rugged San Gabriel mountains to the south, the Sierra Pelonas to the southwest and west, and the Tehachapi Mountains to the northwest are available from the City and surrounding area, including the Antelope Valley Freeway (State Route 14 [SR-14]). The unique desert scene of Lancaster is directly associated with Joshua trees (Yucca brevifolia) and juniper shrubs, which are most plentiful in the eastern and southern portions of the City. The Prime Desert Woodland Preserve, located on Avenue K-8 and 35th Street West, also includes numerous Joshua trees.

The desert flora of the Antelope Valley region provides a significant visual resource during various times of the year. In the spring, the Antelope Valley exhibits brilliant displays of orange, yellow, and purple wildflowers. The Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve State Natural Reserve, located approximately 15 miles west of the City near 130th Street West and Avenue I, is a State-protected reserve created to preserve these sensitive wildflowers. The reserve contains nature and hiking trails and an interpretive center where tourists can observe and learn more about some of the more colorful residents of the valley. Additionally, the Arthur B. Ripley Desert Woodland State Park is located west Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-2 Aesthetics/Light and Glare of the Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve State Natural Reserve on Lancaster Road at 210th Street West. The Arthur B. Ripley Desert Woodland State Park protects and preserves a stand of native Joshua trees and junipers. The park also features a picnic table and self-guided nature trail with information about the desert wildflowers and animals of the desert woodlands.

LIGHT AND GLARE
Lighting effects are associated with the use of artificial light during the evening and nighttime hours.

There are two primary sources of light: light emanating from building interiors passing through windows, and light from exterior sources (i.e., street lighting, building illumination, security lighting, parking lot lighting, and landscape lighting). Light introduction can be a nuisance to adjacent residential areas, diminish the view of the clear night sky, and if uncontrolled, can cause disturbances.

Uses such as residences are considered light sensitive since occupants have expectations of privacy during evening hours and may be subject to disturbance by bright light sources.

Glare is primarily a daytime occurrence caused by the reflection of sunlight or artificial light by highly polished surfaces such as window glass or reflective materials and, to a lesser degree, from broad expanses of light-colored surfaces. Perceived glare is the unwanted and potentially objectionable sensation as observed by a person as they look directly into the light source of a luminaire. Daytime glare generation is common in urban areas and is typically associated with buildings with exterior facades largely or entirely comprised of highly reflective glass. Glare can also be produced during evening and nighttime hours by the reflection of artificial light sources such as automobile headlights.

Glare-sensitive uses include residences, transportation corridors, and aircraft landing corridors.

Exterior light sources in the City include exterior and interior commercial and industrial operations, as well as street lighting and vehicular headlights, which are found along main arterials and SR-14, where traffic volumes are highest during the evening. Commercial uses generate light and glare from the exterior as well as interior due to evening hours of operation. Hospital uses are significant sources of light and glare due to the size and height of the buildings and associated parking facilities, hours of operation, and 24-hour traffic generated at the facilities. Additionally, industrial buildings include security lighting features that would contribute towards glare on residential uses in the area.

5.2.2 REGULATORY SETTING

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-3 Aesthetics/Light and Glare Objective 3.8: Preserve and enhance important views within the City, and significant visual features which are visible from the City of Lancaster.

Policy 3.8.1: Preserve views of surrounding ridgelines, slope areas and hilltops, as well as other scenic vistas.

Policy 3.8.2: Explore the potential for establishing scenic corridors within the Study Area.

Lancaster Municipal Code
Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning, provides the legislative framework to implement and enhance the General Plan by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City. Specific chapters within Title 17 provide development standards for each of the City’s land use zones, including permitted uses, setbacks, landscaping, off-street parking, outdoor lighting, signs, and design requirements, among others.

Municipal Code Chapter 12.12, Streets, Curbs and Sidewalks, requires street improvements be installed along the frontage of any lots or parcels improved with construction or erection of any new dwelling or building or any dwelling or building expanded in excess of 50 percent of the existing square footage of that dwelling or building. Specifically, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and paving are required and shall conform to the standards specifications of the City’s Development Services Department.

5.2.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Environmental Checklist form used during preparation of this EIR. Accordingly, a project may create a significant adverse environmental impact if it would:
• Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista (refer to Impact Statement AES-1); • Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway (refer to Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant);
• 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? (refer to Impact Statements AES-2); and/or
• Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area (refer to Impact Statement AES-3).

Based on these standards/criteria, the effects of the proposed project have been categorized as either a “less than significant impact” or “potentially significant impact.” Mitigation measures are Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-4 Aesthetics/Light and Glare recommended for potentially significant impacts. If a potentially significant impact cannot be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of mitigation, it is categorized as a significant and unavoidable impact.

5.2.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

SCENIC VISTAS
AES-1 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION COULD HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON A SCENIC VISTA.

Impact Analysis: A scenic vista is generally defined as a view of undisturbed natural lands exhibiting a unique or unusual feature that comprises an important or dominant portion of the viewshed.1 Scenic vistas may also be represented by a particular distant view that provides visual relief from less attractive views of nearby features. Other designated Federal and State lands, as well as local open space or recreational areas, may also offer scenic vistas if they represent a valued aesthetic view within the surrounding landscape of nearby features.

Major scenic visual resources within the City include the foothills area in the southwest corner, Quartz Hill in the south-central portion, and Little Rock Wash in the eastern portion of the City. Additionally, scenic views of the desert, including Joshua tree and juniper shrub plant communities, are afforded throughout much of the City. Long range views of the San Gabriel mountains to the south, Sierra Pelonas to the southwest and west, and the Tehachapi Mountains to the northwest are also available.

The VMT Mitigation Program would fund future transportation improvement projects within the City, including raised crosswalks, widened sidewalks, multi-purpose paths, and traffic calming features, among others; refer to Table 3-1, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements. These improvements would occur as City-initiated projects or as part of future development projects. Most of the improvements would occur within existing public rights-of-way and would not involve structures or other features that could substantially block views or vistas of the City’s major visual resources. For transportation improvements implemented as part of development projects, the improvements would occur on-site or along the project frontages. Regardless, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report) to evaluate project-level scenic vista impacts and implement required mitigation. As such, impacts associated with the proposed program in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.
1 A viewshed is the geographical area which is visible from a particular location.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-5 Aesthetics/Light and Glare

SCENIC QUALITY REGULATIONS
AES-2 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT

WITH APPLICABLE ZONING AND OTHER REGULATIONS GOVERNING
SCENIC QUALITY.

Impact Analysis: The City includes both urbanized and non-urbanized areas. For the purposes of this threshold and given the nature of the proposed program and location of most VMT-reducing improvements within the City, the project’s potential to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality is evaluated below.

As stated, the proposed program would fund VMT-reducing transportation improvements as either City-initiated projects or development projects. Under either scenario, future improvements would be required to comply with existing City standards related to street improvements. Specifically, Municipal Code Chapter 12.12, Streets, Curbs and Sidewalks, requires street improvements (e.g., curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and paving) installed along the frontage of any lots or parcels improved with new or expanded structure to conform to the City’s Development Services Department’s standards and specifications. Additionally, future transportation improvements implemented as part of development projects would be required to comply with zoning-specific development standards governing scenic quality, including setbacks, landscaping, outdoor lighting, and signage per Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning. Future improvements may also be located in Specific Plan areas of the City and thus, would be required to comply with development standards and design guidelines governing scenic quality as they relate to roadway design within those areas. All future transportation improvements would also be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA and implement project-level mitigation measures, as needed.

Overall, future transportation improvements would be required to comply with existing zoning regulations governing scenic quality and would be ensured as part of the City’s plan review process.

Thus, future improvements constructed as part of the proposed project would be consistent with the Municipal Code and impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-6 Aesthetics/Light and Glare

LIGHT AND GLARE
AES-3 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CREATE

NEW SOURCES OF LIGHT AND GLARE, WHICH COULD ADVERSELY
AFFECT DAY OR NIGHTTIME VIEWS.

Impact Analysis: A significant impact may occur if lighting, as part of the proposed project, exceeds adopted thresholds for light and glare, including exterior lighting or light spillover,2 or if the proposed project creates a substantial new source of light or glare. Light-sensitive uses in the City are predominantly associated with residential development.

Construction
Future construction activities associated with the transportation improvements could involve temporary glare impacts as a result of construction equipment and materials. However, as stated, the majority of transportation improvements would occur within existing rights-of-way. Therefore, glare generated from construction activities would not be substantial when compared to other existing sources of glare along City roadways (e.g., buildings, structures, and vehicles).

Additionally, construction activities within the City are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. from Monday through Saturday per Municipal Code Section 8.24.040, Loud, unnecessary and unusual noises prohibited – Construction and building; no construction activities are allowed on Sundays or holidays.

Thus, as no construction activities would be permitted after 8:00 p.m. from Monday through Saturday, or on Sundays/holidays, short-term construction-related impacts pertaining to nighttime lighting are not anticipated.

It should also be noted that all future transportation improvements would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA and would be evaluated on a project-specific level with regards to light and glare construction impacts.

Operations
Most of the anticipated transportation improvements funded by the program would have no operational impacts with regards to light and glare. However, some improvements, including those implemented as part of future development projects, could include additional roadway or pathway lighting within or along existing rights-of-way or at new bus stop shelters. Outdoor lighting requirements for specific zoning districts within the City are detailed in Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning. For example, Municipal Code Section 17.08.140, Outdoor Lighting, regulates outdoor lighting in residential zones and requires lighting to be directed away from adjacent properties and designed and located in a manner that prevents glare onto adjacent properties. As stated, future transportation improvements and those implemented as part of future development projects would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level impacts with regards 2 Light spill is typically defined as the presence of unwanted light on properties adjacent to the property being illuminated. With respect to lighting, the degree of illumination may vary widely depending on the amount of light generated, height of the light source, presence of barriers or obstructions, type of light source, and weather conditions.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-7 Aesthetics/Light and Glare to operational light and glare and implement mitigation, as needed. Thus, impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.2.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan; refer to Table 4-1, General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout.

SCENIC VISTAS
 THE PROJECT COMBINED WITH OTHER CUMULATIVE PROJECTS COULD RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO SCENIC VISTAS.

Impact Analysis: Future cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan could result in adverse impacts to scenic vistas in the City. However, similar to future transportation improvements associated with the VMT Mitigation Program, cumulative projects would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level impacts to scenic vistas and to determine any required mitigation.

As analyzed above, transportation improvements implemented in accordance with the proposed program are not anticipated to contribute to a cumulative impact with regards to scenic vistas, as these improvements would predominantly be located within or along existing rights-of-way and would not be large enough in scale and height to block or obstruct views compared to existing surrounding structures. Further, future transportation improvements would also be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA. Thus, the proposed program would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in this regard and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-8 Aesthetics/Light and Glare

SCENIC QUALITY REGULATIONS
 THE PROJECT COMBINED WITH OTHER CUMULATIVE PROJECTS COULD

CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE ZONING AND OTHER REGULATIONS
GOVERNING SCENIC QUALITY.

Impact Analysis: Under this threshold, future cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be evaluated based on whether the project is located in an urbanized or nonurbanized area. If a cumulative project is proposed in an urbanized area, the project would be evaluated based on whether it could conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. If a cumulative project is proposed in a non-urbanized area (e.g., rural), it would be evaluated based on whether it could substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surrounding. Regardless, cumulative projects would be required to undergo projectspecific environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level impacts and to determine any required mitigation. As part of the City’s plan review process, the City would review each cumulative project for consistency with applicable General Plan policies and site development standards included in the Municipal Code that aid in governing scenic quality.

As stated, future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to comply with existing City standards related to street improvements, specifically Municipal Code Chapter 12.12, Streets, Curbs and Sidewalks, and zoning-specific land use development standards under Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning. Further, should future improvements be located in a Specific Plan area, the improvements would be required to comply with development standards and design guidelines governing scenic quality as they relate to roadway design within those areas. Thus, the proposed project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts to scenic quality regulations and impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

LIGHT AND GLARE
 THE PROJECT COMBINED WITH OTHER CUMULATIVE PROJECTS COULD

CREATE A NEW SOURCE OF SUBSTANTIAL LIGHT OR GLARE, WHICH COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT DAY OR NIGHTTIME VIEWS IN THE CITY.

Impact Analysis: Development of cumulative projects could result in increased light and glare in the City during construction and operational activities. However, all cumulative development would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level impacts associated with light and glare. Additionally, similar to the proposed project, cumulative projects would be required to comply with outdoor lighting requirements specific to each zoning district as detailed in Municipal Code Title 17, Zoning.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-9 Aesthetics/Light and Glare As stated, short-term and long-term light and glare impacts associated with the project’s transportation improvements would be reduced to less than significant levels following conformance with outdoor lighting standards under the Municipal Code. Further, the majority of transportation improvements would occur within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way and would not result in substantial new sources of light and glare compared to existing conditions. Thus, the project would not cumulatively contribute to the creation of substantial new lighting or glare and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.2.6 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
No significant unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics/light and glare have been identified.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.2-10 Aesthetics/Light and Glare This page intentionally left blank.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-1 Biological Resources

5.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
This section identifies existing biological resources in the City and provides an analysis of potential impacts that may result from project implementation. Existing baseline biological conditions and characteristics, an analysis of the potential direct and indirect impacts on sensitive resources, and appropriate mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to the extent feasible for those impacts determined to be significant, if any, are described throughout the analysis.

5.3.1 EXISTING SETTING

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
Based on the General Plan Master Environmental Assessment (MEA), vegetation communities and land cover types occurring throughout the City. A general description of each vegetation community and land cover type within the City is presented below.

Desert Scrub
Desert scrub is a generic habitat term that describes several plant associations, but is generally characterized as a shrub dominated community on sandy soils with a minimal understory of herbaceous plants that occurs in areas of markedly low precipitation. The component species of these habitat types are highly adapted to survival under harsh conditions, and, if perennial, are usually shrub species. Many annual species also occur in these habitats, but are ephemeral in nature, occurring only in good years and only while moisture is present. Many herbaceous perennials will often flower only once every several years when conditions allow. The five plant communities described below fall into the general category of desert scrub.

Mojave Creosote Bush Scrub
Creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) scrub occurs extensively throughout the Mojave Desert area and in large patches in the project area. It intermixes with small areas of other desert scrub habitat as well as with non-native, annual grassland habitat. There are occasional western Joshua trees (Yucca brevifolia).

Burro-weed (Ambrosia dumosa) co-occurs in this habitat, along with spiny senna (Senna armata), ephedra (Ephedra nevadensis), burrobrush (Hymenoclea salsola), and box thorn (Lycium sp.). Shrubs up to ten feet tall are widely spaced throughout, usually with bare ground, remnant herbs, and debris comprising interspaces. This habitat usually occurs on slopes and alluvial fans in the valley portions of the project area. Soils are well drained, with very low water-holding capacity.

Saltbrush Scrub
This scrub community is characterized by low, grayish, microphyllous shrubs ranging from one to three feet tall. Some succulent species are present. Plant cover is often low, with much bare ground between the widely spaced shrubs. Stands of desert saltbush scrub are typically dominated by a single Atriplex species. Common species associated with this community include silverscale (Atriplex Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-2 Biological Resources argentea), shadscale (A. canescens), saltbush (A. confertifolia), wheelscale (A. elegans), big saltbush (A. lentiformis), hop-sage (Grayia spinosa), burrobrush, kochia (Kochia californica), box thorn, mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa), and seepweed (Suaeda occidentalis). Soils in this plant community are generally finetextured, poorly drained, and with high alkalinity and/or salinity.

Rabbitbrush Scrub
This community is dominated by rubber rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) and is characterized by fairly evenly spaced shrubs, usually to three feet tall. This community is a disturbance associated community most commonly occurring along roadsides, heavily grazed areas, and along the borders of agricultural fields. It is typically one of the first communities to establish after fires.

Shadscale Scrub
Shadscale scrub is characterized by well-spaced, low, intricately branched, often spiny shrubs ranging from one to two feet tall. The two dominant species that typify this community are saltbush and budsage (Artemisia spinescens). Other common associates include sand verbena (Abronia villosa), blackbush (Coleogyne ramosissima), ephedra, winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata), hop-sage, matchweed (Gutierrezia spp.), goldenbush (Isocoma acradenius), and kochia. This community most often occurs on poorly drained flats with heavy, somewhat alkaline soil. Conversely, it also occurs on well-drained slopes at higher elevations, frequently intergrading (merges in a series of stages) with other communities, such as Joshua Tree Woodland.

Desert Sink Scrub
Desert sink scrub is very similar to desert saltbush scrub, but it supports more succulent plants that are often more widely spaced and that are adapted to seasonally moist conditions. In many cases, these areas also have high salinity and/or alka, leading to a unique assemblage of plant species and many bare areas containing only plant litter debris. Characteristic species include iodine bush (Allenrolfea occidentalis), shadscale, bee plant (Cleome sparsiflora), alkali weed (Cressa truxillensis minima), western wallflower (Erysimum capitatum), kochia, poverty weed (Monolepis nuttaIIiana), greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus), ditchgrass (Ruppia cirrhosa), and jackass clover (Wislezenia refracta).

Desert sink scrub contains poorly drained soils with extremely high alkalinity and/or salt content. The water table is frequently high in these areas that generally have a salt crust at the surface. Large areas of bare ground occur throughout this habitat, and expansive soils are evident by the cracking of the soil crust where water temporarily ponded.

Desert Wash
Desert Wash Scrub
Natural runoff from nearby mountains has created various washes and channels, primarily in the southwestern and southeastern portions of the project area. These washes range from depressions which are difficult to identify (such as the northern portions of Amargosa Creek), to channels with steep sides (such as Little Rock Wash). Most of these washes support a variety of desert scrub plants, Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-3 Biological Resources such as burro-weed, Parry’s saltbush (Atriplex parryi), arrowscale (Atriplex phyllostegia), rabbitbrush, and burrobrush. Some of the better-defined channels support species such as jimson weed (Datura wrightii) and desert buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum ssp. polifolium). The type and extent of plants a channel supports depends on its topography as well as the amount and frequency of runoff. Steep-sided channels indicate that the infrequent runoff is fast moving, which can scour channel bottoms and slopes of vegetation, while level channels have gentler flows, permitting establishment of vegetation.

Furthermore, as desert washes generally do not have year-round flows, few riparian plants are found in this habitat, although taller desert woodland plants may thrive along some of the washes. The most significant natural desert wash within the project area in terms of plant diversity and biological value is Little Rock Wash, located south of 60th Street East and Avenue I. At present, this area is largely undisturbed.

Artificial drainages and washes are also present within the vicinity of developed areas as a result of runoff. As in developed areas, these artificial drainages support a variety of weedy or introduced species such as cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), black mustard (Brassica nigra), and doveweed. Little native or other natural vegetation grows in these areas due to the highly disturbed nature of these sites, including regular weed abatement, foot traffic, and continual invasion of non-native plant species that favor disturbed sites.

Desert Woodland
Joshua Tree Woodland
Joshua tree woodland consists of open woodland with Joshua tree typically as the only arborescent species (up to 40 ft high) and numerous shrub species between three and-a-half and 13 feet tall. In many areas of the Antelope Valley, Joshua tree woodland habitat intergrades (merges in a series of stages) with creosote scrub habitat. This community supports little to no herbaceous understory during most of the year.

At lower elevations, Joshua tree woodland intergrades with Mojave creosote bush scrub. Common associate species include California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), cholla (Opuntia echinocarpa), box thorn, beavertail cactus (Opuntia basiliaris), cotton-thorn (Tetradymia axillaris), Mojave yucca (Yucca schidigera), Great Basin sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), burrobrush, desert needlegrass (Achnatherum speciosum) and bladder sage (Salazaria mexicana). California juniper (Juniperus californica) is occasionally found in this habitat. The primary growing season is spring, with many species of ephemeral herbs germinating after rainfall. Joshua tree woodland typically occurs on sandy, loamy, or gravelly, welldrained alluvial slopes.

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) considers the Joshua tree woodland as a threatened habitat within California. It is also recognized as a sensitive habitat by the City of Lancaster.

It is endemic to the Mojave and northwest Sonoran deserts and is adapted to harsh desert conditions, requiring high light, well-drained soils, and limited precipitation. Joshua trees exhibit slow growth rates; new seedlings may grow an average of three inches annually for the first 10 years, then growth slows to 1.5 inches per year thereafter. The trunk of a Joshua tree consists of thousands of small fibers and lacks annual growth rings, making it difficult to determine the tree’s age, though it is estimated to Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-4 Biological Resources grow for up to 200 years. This species is considered very susceptible to disturbance by human activity; it does not tolerate soil compaction, nor is it easily relocated. This may be partially due to its shallow root area and top-heavy branch system.

Joshua tree woodland habitat can be best preserved in large, well-populated stands, with its associated understory plants, that are isolated from human disturbances. Historically, some areas of Joshua tree woodland were cleared for agricultural use, but recently, there has been a progressive loss of Joshua trees to new development in the Antelope Valley, particularly around the Lancaster area.

While many individual trees can be found in the Antelope Valley, especially in the eastern portions of the project area, most trees are isolated, and actual Joshua tree woodlands are limited. The most significant existing Joshua tree stands in the project area are located southwest of downtown Lancaster, as well as northeast and south of Quartz Hill, and in the City at the Prime Desert Woodland Preserve adjacent to Rawley Duntley Park.

Upland Scrub
Mixed Upland Scrub
This inland, montane (highland areas located below the tree-line) association supports elements of several plant communities including chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and Great Basin sage scrub, and is a transition community that occurs in the highest regions of the foothills. It is found on dry, rocky, gravelly slopes in the southwest portion of the study project area. In some areas, it covers the lower foothill slopes and adjacent basins. It is dominated by sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), white sage (Salvia apiana), buckwheat, and rabbitbrush. In some areas, chamise (Adenostoma jasciculatum) is also found. As elevations rise out of the projectstudy area (to the south), heartier species such as ceanothus (Ceanothus spp.), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), and scrub oak (Quercus dumosa) can be found in isolated locations.

Riparian
Riparian Woodland/Wetlands
Several locations within the project area support riparian (stream-side) or wetland vegetation. The southwestern margin of the project area contains a few isolated springs or seeps. In addition, several open reservoirs or man-made lakes (such as in Apollo Community Regional Park) contain water most of the year. There are no perennial creeks or channels within the project area. Although there is significant runoff during wet periods, flows along the desert washes tend to be heavy which precludes the establishment of extensive riparian growth. Most of these drainages are designated as “blue-line” streams on U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle maps. These drainages generally fall under the jurisdiction of one or more regulatory agency. Riparian vegetation associated with various washes within the project area include willow (Salix spp.), cottonwood (Populus spp.), white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), western sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and cattail (Typha spp.), among others.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-5 Biological Resources Ruderal
Agriculture
Active farms within the project area are generally well maintained to prevent weed growth. However, fallow or vacant agricultural land can be quickly overrun with local and introduced weedy ruderal species. Many abandoned farms and vacant, open lands support extensive grasslands in the eastern and western portions of the project area. Non-native grasses have supplanted the original native grasses so that only introduced grasses, such as cheatgrass, barley (Hordeum spp.), and fescue (Vulpia spp.) remain today. Other common weedy species on fallow agricultural lands include Russian thistle, or tumbleweed (Salsola tragus), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and varieties of mustard (Brassica spp.), including black mustard.

Developed Areas
Areas within the City that support a variety of weedy or introduced species included many areas of paved or compacted gravel roads; homes with associated infrastructure and planted, ornamental plant species; vacant lots; and undeveloped parcels. Little native or other natural vegetation grows in these areas due to regular weed abatement. There are also roadside and public areas that have been planted with non-native tree species, such as tamarisk (Tamarix tetandra). Typical ruderal species include tumbleweed, mustard (Hirschfeldia spp.), red-stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), dove weed (Eremocarpus setigerus), and occasional common sunflower (Helianthus spp.).

SENSITIVE HABITATS
Sensitive habitats are those areas which possess special biological significance, provide habitat for locally unique biotic species/communities, are areas adjacent to essential habitats (for rare, endangered or threatened species), or are located near bodies of water. According to the General Plan MEA, the project area contains the following sensitive vegetation communities: Desert Wash; Joshua Tree Woodland; Valley Needlegrass Grassland; Wildflower Field. Desert Wash and Joshua Tree Woodland are described under ‘Vegetation Communities,’ above. Valley Needlegrass Grassland and Wildflower Field are further described below.

Valley Needlegrass Grassland
Grasslands are generally defined as open habitats with little or no woody vegetation. In California, most grasses germinate and grow in winter and spring, during winter rains, and set seed prior to the dry, summer season. With the introduction of non-native annual grasslands, increased grazing, changes in fire regime, and other disturbances, most of California’s native grasslands are gone and have been replaced with non-native ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), cheatgrass, and wild oats (Avena fatua).

Historically, most of Central Valley grassland was dominated by native purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra). Open areas between the tussocks of this perennial bunchgrass supported many native wildflowers, rather than the plethora of non-native ruderal species that non-native annual grasslands support. Nearly all of the native Valley Needlegrass Grassland has been replaced by this non-native Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-6 Biological Resources annual grassland and, as such, the CDFW has designated Valley Needlegrass Grassland as a sensitive natural habitat.

Wildflower Field
Wildflower Field is an amorphous mix of plants that are known for their conspicuous, annual wildflower displays that dominate an area. Species include California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), tidy tips (Layia sp.), and lupine (Lupinus sp.). This habitat has been designated a sensitive natural habitat by the CDFW, and occurs in flats at the base of buttes on slopes of zero to five percent on sandy or gravelly soils.

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Special-status plant species are those that are considered rare, threatened, or endangered by the Federal or State government, or the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). More specifically, a plant species may be considered as special-status if it is included in the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California or in the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB).

Sensitive plant status is often based on one or more of three distributional attributes: geographic range, habitat specificity, and/or population size. A species that exhibits a small or restricted geographic range (such as those endemic to the region) is geographically rare. A species may be more or less abundant but occur only in very specific habitats. Lastly, a species may be widespread, but exist naturally in small populations.

The CNDDB and CNPS databases were queried for reported locations of special-status plant species in the quadrangles encompassing the City, including the USGS Lancaster East, Lancaster West, Del Sur, Alpine Butte, Little Butte, Rosamond, Rosamond Lake, and Redman, California 7.5-minute quadrangles. The query identified the following 13 special-status plant species as occurring within the aforementioned quadrangles; refer to Table 5.3-1, Special-Status Plant Species Recorded in the Project Vicinity. 1,2

1 California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9-01

0.0), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/, accessed October 22, 2021. 2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California - Data base report on threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the USGS Lancaster East, Lancaster West, Del Sur, Alpine Butte, Little Butte, Rosamond, Rosamond Lake, and Redman, California 7.5-minute quadrangles, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-7 Biological Resources Table 5.3-1
Special-Status Plant Species Recorded in the Project Vicinity Common Name Scientific Name Rare Plant Rank1
Horn’s milk vetch Astraglus hornii var. hornii 1B.1
Lancaster milk-vetch Astragalus preussii var. laxiflorus 1B.1 Alkali mariposa-lily Calochortus striatus 1B.2
Peirson’s morning-glory Calystegia peirsonii 4.2
White pygmy-poppy Canbya candida 4.2
Parry’s spineflower Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi 1B.1 Clokey’s cryptantha Cryptanthan clokeyi 1B.2
Desert cymopterus Cymopterus deserficola 1B.2
Rosamond eriastrum Eriastrum rosamondense 1B.1
Barstow woolly sunflower Eriophyllum mohavense 1B.2
Sagebrush loeflingia Loeflingia squarrosa var. artemisiarum 2B.2 Short-joint beavertail Opuntia basilaris var. brachyclada 1B.2 California alkali grass Puccinellia simplex 1B.2
Western Joshua tree Yucca brevifolia --2
Notes:
1 California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Rank 1B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. 4 Plants of limited distribution – Watch List.

Threat Ranks
.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree any immediacy of threat). .2 Moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent of occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat). 2 The western Joshua Tree is currently a candidate species for listing under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). It is anticipated that the California Fish and Game Commission will be making a formal decision regarding the listing at their June 15/16, 2022 meeting. However, as a candidate species, the Joshua tree currently has full protection under CESA.

Source: California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9-01 0.0), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/, accessed October 22, 2021.

It should be noted that the identified special-status plant species may not all occur within the project area based on species-specific habitat preferences, distributions, and elevation ranges.

Western Joshua Tree
The Joshua tree is of regional significance in the region and is further described in this section. Joshua trees are a member of the Agave family and native to arid regions in southern California. Standing five to 20 feet tall, Joshua trees have stiff, narrow leaves, and greenish-white flowers that bloom in the spring and are pollinated by moths. Joshua trees are slow-growing and an iconic presence in the high desert. Joshua tree populations have recently been threatened by extreme heat, drought and wildfires.

Joshua trees are protected under the California Desert Native Plant Act.

On October 15, 2019, the California Fish and Game Commission (CFGC) received a petition to list the Joshua tree as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). In February 2020, CDFW completed a review of the petition, as well as other scientific information available to CDFW.

In its review, CDFW determined that the petition provides sufficient scientific information to indicate that the petitioned action may be warranted and on September 22, 2020, the CFGC accepted for Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-8 Biological Resources consideration the petition to list the Joshua tree as threatened or endangered under the CESA and made the Joshua tree a candidate species. Effective October 9, 2020, the Joshua tree is a candidate species for listing under CESA. It is anticipated that CFGC will be making a formal decision regarding the listing at their June 15/16, 2022 meeting. However, as a candidate species, the Joshua tree currently has full protection under CESA, and any activity that results in the removal of a Joshua tree, or any part thereof, or impacts the seedbank surrounding one or more Joshua trees is subject to an Incidental Take Permit from CDFW.

SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Special-status wildlife species include those that are State- or Federally-listed as threatened or endangered, have been proposed for listing as threatened or endangered, have been designated as State or Federal candidates for listing, are considered State Species of Special Concern, or State-designated as Fully Protected.

The CNDDB database was queried for reported locations of special-status wildlife species in the quadrangles encompassing the City, including the USGS Lancaster East, Lancaster West, Del Sur, Alpine Butte, Little Butte, Rosamond, Rosamond Lake, and Redman, California 7.5-minute quadrangles. The query identified the following 23 special-status wildlife species as occurring within the aforementioned quadrangles;refer to Table 5.3-2, Special-Status Wildlife Species within the Project Area. 3,4
Table 5.3-2
Special-Status Wildlife Species within the Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status State Status CDFW Ranking Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor - ST SSC
Northern California legless lizard Anniella pulchra - - SSC Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos - - FP
Short-eared owl Asio flammeus - - SSC
Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia - - SSC
Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi FT - -
Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis - - WL
Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni - ST -
Mountain plover Charadrius montanus - - SSC
Western snowy plover Charadrius nivosus FT - SSC
Northern harrier Circus hudsonius - - SSC
Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii - - SSC Merlin Falco columbarius - - WL
Desert tortoise Gopherus agassizii FT ST -
Loggerhead strike Lanius ludovicanus - - SSC
3 California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9-01

0.0), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/, accessed October 22, 2021. 4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California - Data base report on threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the USGS Lancaster East, Lancaster West, Del Sur, Alpine Butte, Little Butte, Rosamond, Rosamond Lake, and Redman, California 7.5-minute quadrangles, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-9 Biological Resources Table 5.3-2 [cont’d]
Special-Status Wildlife Species within the Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status State Status CDFW Ranking Coast horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii - - SSC
White-faced ibis Plegadis chihi - - WL
American badger Taxidea taxus - - SSC
Le Conte’s trasher Toxostoma lecontel - - SSC
Least Bell’s vireo Vireo bellii pusillus FE SE -
Mojave ground squirrel Xerospermophilus mohavensis - ST - Notes:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
FE Endangered – any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

FT Threatened – any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Rank
FP Species is fully protected in California under California Fish and Game Code Section 3511 (birds), 4700 (mammals), or 5050 (reptiles and amphibians).

SE Endangered – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.

ST Threatened – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required under the California Endangered Species Act.

SSC Species of Special Concern – any species, subspecies, or distinct population of fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, or mammal native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
- is extirpated from California or, in the case of birds, in its primary seasonal or breeding role; - is listed as Federally-, but not State-, threatened or endangered; meets the State definition of threatened or endangered but has not formally been listed.
- is experiencing, or formerly experienced, serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions (not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for State threatened or endangered status; or - has naturally small populations exhibiting high susceptibility to risk from any factor(s), that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for State threatened or endangered status.

WL Watch List - taxa that were previously designated as “Species of Special Concern” but no longer merit that status, or which do not yet meet SSC criteria, but for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status.

Source: California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9-01 0.0), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/, accessed October 22, 2021.

It should be noted that the identified special-status wildlife species may not all occur within the project area based on species-specific habitat preferences, distributions, and elevation ranges.

SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREAS
Significant Ecological Areas (SEAs) are officially designated areas within the County identified as having irreplaceable biological resources. These areas represent the wide-ranging biodiversity of the County and contain some of the County’s most important biological resources. Each SEA within the County is configured to support sustainable populations of its component species, and includes undisturbed to lightly disturbed habitat along with linkages and corridors that promote species Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-10 Biological Resources movement. 5 Portions of the City are within the San Andreas SEA and Antelope Valley SEA. 6 However, County development standards and regulations related to SEAs are not applicable to properties within the City limits.

5.3.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL LEVEL
Endangered Species Act
Federally listed threatened and endangered species and their habitats are protected under provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973. FESA Section 9 prohibits “take” of threatened or endangered species. “Take” under the FESA is defined as to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any of the specifically enumerated conduct.” The presence of any Federally threatened or endangered species that are in a project area generally imposes severe constraints on development, particularly if development would result in “take” of the species or its habitat. Under the regulations of the FESA, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) may authorize “take” when it is incidental to, but not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful act.

Under the FESA, “Critical Habitat” is also designated at the time of listing or within one year of listing. “Critical Habitat” refers to habitat or a specific geographic area that contains the elements and features that are essential for the survival and recovery of the species. In the event a project may result in take or in adverse effects to a species’ designated Critical Habitat, the project proponent may be required to provide mitigation. If the project has a Federal nexus (i.e. occurs on Federal land, is issued Federal permits, or receives any other Federal oversight or funding), the proponent would be required to enter into Section 7 informal and/or formal consultations with the USFWS to obtain, if possible, a biological opinion allowing for incidental take of the species in question. If the project is on private land or would not require any Federal permits, the proponent would be required to prepare a habitat management plan to address the impacts.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S. Government Code [USC] 703) makes it unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, or possess or attempt to do the same to any migratory bird or part, nest, or egg of any such bird listed in wildlife protection treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the countries of the former Soviet Union, and authorizes the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to protect and regulate the taking of migratory birds. It establishes seasons and bag limits for hunted 5 County of Los Angeles Department of Regional Planning, Significant Ecological Areas Program, https://planning.lacounty.gov/site/sea/home/, accessed October 22, 2021. 6 County of Los Angeles Department of Regional Planning, Significant Ecological Areas, https://planning.lacounty.gov/sea/regional_habitat_linkages_and_wildlife_corridors#, accessed October 27, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-11 Biological Resources species and protects migratory birds, their occupied nests, and their eggs (16 USC 703; 50 CFR 10, 21).

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 requires that a permit be obtained from the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) prior to the discharge of dredged or fill materials into any “waters of the United States or wetlands.” Waters of the United States are broadly defined in the USACE’s regulations (33 CFR 328) to include navigable waterways, their tributaries, lakes, ponds, and wetlands.

Wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that normally do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” Wetlands that are not specifically exempt from Section 404 regulations (such as drainage channels excavated on dry land) are considered to be “jurisdictional wetlands.” USACE is required to consult with the USFWS, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), among other agencies, in carrying out its discretionary authority under Section 404.

USACE grants two types of permits, individual and nationwide. Project-specific individual permits are required for certain activities that may have a potential for more than a minimal impact and necessitate a detailed application. The most common type of permit is a nationwide permit. Nationwide permits authorize activities on a nationwide basis unless specifically limited and are designed to regulate with little delay or paperwork certain activities having minimal impacts. Nationwide permits typically take two to three months to obtain whereas individual permits can take a year or more. To qualify for a nationwide permit, specific criteria must be met. If the criteria restrictions are met, permittees may proceed with certain activities without notifying USACE. Some nationwide permits require a preconstruction notification before activities can begin.

STATE LEVEL
California Endangered Species Act
State-listed threatened and endangered species are protected under provisions of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Activities that may result in “take” of individuals (defined in CESA as to “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) are regulated by the CDFW. Habitat degradation or modification is not included in the definition of “take” under CESA. Nonetheless, CDFW has interpreted “take” to include the destruction of nesting, denning, or foraging habitat necessary to maintain a viable breeding population of protected species.

The State of California considers an endangered species as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy. A threatened species is considered as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an endangered species in the near future in the absence of special protection or management. A rare species is one that is considered present in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. State threatened and endangered species are fully protected against take, as defined above.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-12 Biological Resources The CDFW has also produced a Species of Special Concern list to serve as a species watch list. Species on this list are either of limited distribution or their habitats have been reduced substantially, such that a threat to their populations may be imminent. Species of special concern may receive special attention during environmental review, but they do not have formal statutory protection.

California Fish and Game Code
Lake and Streambed Alteration Program
California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) Sections 1600 through 1616 establish a fee-based process to ensure that projects conducted in and around lakes, rivers, or streams do not adversely impact fish and wildlife resources, or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequate mitigation and/or compensation is provided.

Section 1602 requires any person, State, or local governmental agency or public utility to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that would do one or more of the following:

1. Substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake;

2. Substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or

3. Deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake.

Section 1602 applies to all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the State.

CDFW’s regulatory authority extends to include riparian habitat (including wetlands) supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the presence or absence of hydric soils and saturated soil conditions.

Generally, CDFW takes jurisdiction to the top of bank of the stream or to the outer limit of the adjacent riparian vegetation (outer drip line), whichever is greater. Notification is generally required for any project that would take place in or in the vicinity of a river, stream, lake, or their tributaries.

This includes rivers or streams that flow at least periodically or permanently through a bed or channel with banks that support fish or other aquatic life and watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that support or have supported riparian vegetation.

California Native Plant Protection Act
CFGC Sections 1900 through 1913 were developed to preserve, protect, and enhance rare and endangered plants in California. The act requires all State agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve endangered and rare native plants. Provisions of the California Native Plant Protection Act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of the CDFW at least ten days in advance of any change in land use which would adversely impact listed plants. This allows the CDFW to salvage listed plant species that would otherwise be destroyed.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-13 Biological Resources Section 3500, 3503.5, 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515
The CDFW administers the CFGC. There are particular sections of the CFGC that are applicable to natural resource management. For example, CFGC Section 3503 makes it unlawful to destroy the nests or eggs of any birds that are protected under the MBTA. Furthermore, any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (i.e., birds of prey) are protected under CFGC Section 3503.5 which makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy their nest or eggs. A consultation with CDFW would be required prior to the removal of any bird of prey nest that may occur on a project site. CFGC Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 list fully protected bird, mammal, reptile and amphibian, and fish species, respectively. The CDFW is unable to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take these species.

Examples of species that are State fully protected include golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and whitetailed kite (Elanus leucurus). CFGC Section 3513 makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA.

REGIONAL LEVEL
West Mojave Plan
The West Mojave Plan (WMP) is a Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) prepared by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and adopted as an amendment to the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan in March 2006. The planning area covers approximately 9.3 million acres in the western portion of the Mojave Desert, covering parts of San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Kern, and Inyo Counties. The WMP (1) presents a comprehensive strategy to conserve and protect the desert tortoise, the Mohave ground squirrel, and nearly 100 other sensitive plants and animals and the natural communities of which they are a part, and (2) provides a streamlined program for complying with the requirements of the California and Federal Endangered Species Acts. Other agencies did not adopt the HCP proposed in the WMP to cover their jurisdictions, and therefore the adopted plan only applies to BLM lands.

LOCAL LEVEL
City of Lancaster General Plan 2030
Plan for the Natural Environment
The General Plan includes the Plan for the Natural Environment, which identifies natural resources suitable for certain levels of protection, provides a management program for those resources consistent with community values, and ensures the City as an active participant in the management of the Antelope Valley’s resources. The General Plan recognizes the Antelope Valley as a unique biological environment on the edge of the Mojave Desert and adjacent to the San Gabriel Mountains whose biological resources face ongoing and increased pressures from existing and increasing urbanization. The following objective and policies are applicable to the project:

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-14 Biological Resources Objective 3.4: Identify, preserve and maintain important biological systems within the Lancaster sphere of influence, and educate the general public about these resources, which include the Joshua Tree ‐ California Juniper Woodlands, areas that support endangered or sensitive species, and other natural areas of regional significance.

Policy 3.4.1: Ensure the comprehensive management of programs for significant biological resources that remain within the Lancaster sphere of influence.

Policy 3.4.2: Preserve significant desert wash areas to protect sensitive species that utilize these habitat areas.

Policy 3.4.3: Encourage the protection of open space lands in and around the Poppy Preserve, Ripley Woodland Preserve and other sensitive areas to preserve habitat for sensitive mammals, reptiles, and birds, including raptors.

Policy 3.4.4: Ensure that development proposals, including City sponsored projects, are analyzed for short‐ and long‐term impacts to biological resources and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented.

Policy 3.4.5: Encourage educational programs that:
 promote awareness of local biological resources;
 inform about potential protection and preservation programs;  foster community attitudes and behaviors that protect local plants and wildlife;
 encourage community involvement in protection programs.

Lancaster Municipal Code
Municipal Code Chapter 15.66, Biological Impact Fee, establishes a biological impact fee to mitigate longterm incremental impacts of new development on biological resources on a regional basis. The fee is based upon expected regional effects from new development and fees necessary to contribute to the City’s “fair share” to mitigate impacts on a regional basis. The fee applies to all new development on vacant land which has not been previously developed. This includes land subdivisions, new development approvals, and requests for extension.

5.3.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Environmental Checklist form that was used during the preparation of this EIR. Accordingly, a project may create a significant adverse environmental impact to biological resources if it would:

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-15 Biological Resources • 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 (refer to Impact Statement BIO-1);
• 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (refer to Impact Statement BIO-2); • Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 4040 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, march, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means (refer to Impact Statement BIO-3);
• 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 (refer to Impact Statement BIO-4); • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance (refer to Impact Statement BIO-5); • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan (refer to Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant).

Based on these standards/criteria, the effects of the proposed program have been categorized as either a “less than significant impact” or “significant and unavoidable impact.” If a potentially significant impact cannot be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of mitigation, it is categorized as a significant and unavoidable impact.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-16 Biological Resources

5.3.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES
BIO-1 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN 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.

Impact Analysis: As stated above, several special-status plant and wildlife species have been recorded within the USGS Lancaster East, Lancaster West, Del Sur, Alpine Butte, Little Butte, Rosamond, Rosamond Lake, and Redman, California 7.5-minute quadrangles that encompass the project area. The program would establish a VMT mitigation mechanism for future development projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation fee. As such, the program would fund VMTreducing transportation improvements within the City. Potential improvements would primarily occur within existing rights-of-way or within the development footprint of future development projects and thus, would likely avoid adverse impacts to sensitive special-status species. While future transportation improvement projects funded by the program would be largely focused within developed areas, the proposed improvements could still adversely impact sensitive special-status species.

Future transportation improvements would be City-initiated projects or implemented as part of future development projects and would require environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report).

Additionally, per Mitigation Measure BIO-1, a Biological Resources Assessment may be required, as determined by the City, to evaluate potential impacts to on-site biological resources, including sensitive or special-status species. As such, future VMT-reducing improvements would be evaluated on a project-specific level with site-specific analysis and mitigation measures would be identified, as needed.

Thus, the proposed program would not result in significant impacts to sensitive special-status species.

Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures:

BIO-1 Transportation improvements funded by the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review (meaning, subject to discretionary action and not exempt from CEQA), and with the potential to reduce or eliminate habitat for native plant and wildlife species or sensitive habitats, as determined by the City of Lancaster Development Services Department, Community Development Division, shall provide a Biological Resources Assessment prepared by a qualified biologist for review and approval by the Community Development Division. The assessment shall include biological field survey(s) of the project site to characterize the extent and quality of habitat that would be impacted by development. Surveys shall be Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-17 Biological Resources conducted by qualified biologists and/or botanists in accordance with California Department of Fish and Wildlife and/or United States Fish and Wildlife Services survey protocols for target species. If no special status/sensitive species, sensitive habitats/natural communities, or Federally protected wetlands are observed during the field survey, then no further mitigation will be required. If biological resources are documented on the project site, the project proponent shall comply with the applicable requirements of the regulatory agencies and shall apply mitigation determined through the agency permitting process.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

BIO-2 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS FUNDED BY THE

PROPOSED PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL

ADVERSE EFFECT ON RIPARIAN HABITAT OR OTHER SENSITIVE

NATURAL COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS,

POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS OR BY THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE.

Impact Analysis: Several locations within the project area support riparian (stream-side) or wetland vegetation. The southwestern margin of the project area contains several isolated springs or seeps. In addition, several open reservoirs or man-made lakes (such as in Apollo Community Regional Park) contain water most of the year. There are no perennial creeks or channels within the project area; while there is significant runoff during wet periods, flows along the desert washes tend to be heavy which precludes the establishment of extensive riparian growth.

As stated, the majority of future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would occur within existing disturbed rights-of-way and thus, avoid impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities within Lancaster. While future transportation improvement projects funded by the program would be largely focused within developed areas, the proposed improvements could still have the potential to adversely impact riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. All future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of future development projects, would be required to undergo environmental review under CEQA.

Additionally, as stated, a Biological Resources Assessment may be required, as determined by the City, to evaluate potential impacts to on-site biological resources, including riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities; refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Thus, future improvements funded by the proposed mitigation program would be evaluated on a project-specific level with site-specific analysis and implement mitigation measures, as needed. Impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities associated with the proposed program would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-18 Biological Resources BIO-3 THE PROJECT COULD HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON FEDERALLY PROTECTED WETLANDS AS DEFINED BY SECTION 404 OF

THE CLEAN WATER ACT (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, MARSH, VERNAL POOL, COASTAL, ETC.) THROUGH DIRECT REMOVAL,
FILLING, HYDROLOGICAL INTERRUPTION, OR OTHER MEANS.

Impact Analysis: As stated, several locations within the project area support riparian or wetland vegetation, including a few isolated springs or seeps in the southwestern portion of the project area and several open reservoirs and man-made lakes (such as in Apollo Community Regional Park).

The majority of future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would occur within existing rights-of-way in developed areas of the City and not impact Federally protected wetlands. Nevertheless, all future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of future development projects, would be required to undergo project-level environmental review under CEQA and be evaluated on a project-specific level with site-specific analysis and implement mitigation measures, as needed. A Biological Resources Assessment may be required, as determined by the City, to evaluate potential impacts to on-site biological resources, including Federally protected wetlands; refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Impacts to wetland habitat are regulated by the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA, RWQCB in accordance with Section 401 of the CWA, and CDFW under Section 1600 of California Fish and Game Code. Thus, future transportation improvements would be required to comply with existing regulatory requirements in this regard.

Overall, impacts to Federally protected wetlands from the proposed VMT Mitigation Program would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

BIO-4 THE PROJECT COULD INTERFERE SUBSTANTIALLY WITH THE

MOVEMENT OF NATIVE RESIDENT OR MIGRATORY FISH OR

WILDLIFE SPECIES OR WITH ESTABLISHED NATIVE RESIDENT OR

MIGRATORY WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, OR IMPEDE THE USE OF
WILDLIFE NURSERY SITES.

Impact Analysis: Wildlife corridors are key features for wildlife movement between habitat patches and are generally defined as those areas that provide opportunities for individuals or local populations to conduct seasonal migrations, permanent dispersals, or daily commutes. Wildlife corridors are typically larger expanses of undeveloped areas.

The majority of future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would occur within existing rights-of-way in developed areas of the City and thus, would not adversely impact wildlife corridors or nursery sites. However, future transportation improvements implemented as part of future development projects may occur on sites with trees or be located adjacent to trees that could serve as nesting habitat for migratory birds. Therefore, there is potential to impact nesting birds if construction occurs during the avian nesting season (generally from February 1 through August 31).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-19 Biological Resources The MBTA, enforced by the USFWS, makes it unlawful “by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, [or] kill” any migratory bird or attempt such actions, except as permitted by regulation. Thus, compliance with existing regulatory requirements would reduce impacts in this regard. Additionally, Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would require a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities associated with future transportation improvements. As stated, all future transportation improvements would also be required to undergo project-level environmental review under CEQA, be evaluated on a site-specific basis, and implement mitigation, as needed. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures:

BIO-2 A pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than fourteen (14) days prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities associated with a transportation improvement project. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and cover all suitable nesting habitat within the project impact area, and areas within a biologically defensible buffer zone surrounding the project impact area. Further, if an active bird nest is found, the qualified biologist should identify the specific bird species and establish a “no-disturbance” buffer around the active nest to avoid potential direct and indirect impacts. It is further recommended that the qualified biologist periodically monitor any active bird nests to determine if project-related activities disturb the birds and if the “no disturbance” buffer should be increased. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, project activities within the “no-disturbance” buffer may occur following an additional survey by the qualified biologist to search for any new nests in the restricted area.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

BIO-5 THE PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH LOCAL POLICIES OR

ORDINANCES PROTECTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, SUCH AS A
TREE PRESERVATION POLICY OR ORDINANCE.

Impact Analysis: As stated, several local policies and ordinances protect biological resources within the project area, including the General Plan and Municipal Code. The majority of future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would occur within existing rights-of-way in developed areas of the City. Future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of future development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA with project-specific analysis and mitigation measures, as needed. Additionally, future improvements would be required to comply with Municipal Code Chapter 15.66, Biological Impact Fee, where applicable. Thus, compliance with existing regulatory requirements related to the protection of biological resources would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-20 Biological Resources Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.3.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan; refer to Table 4-1, General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout.  THE PROPOSED PROGRAM, IN CONJUNCTION WITH CUMULATIVE

DEVELOPMENT, COULD RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE

IMPACTS TO 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.

As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would similarly require separate environmental review under CEQA. Additionally, per Mitigation Measure BIO-1, a Biological Resources Assessment may be required, as determined by the City, to evaluate potential impacts to on-site biological resources, including sensitive or special-status species. Thus, the proposed VMT Mitigation Program itself would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to sensitive special-status species. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.  THE PROJECT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH CUMULATIVE PROJECTS, COULD

RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO RIPARIAN

HABITAT OR OTHER SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED IN

LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE.

Impact Analysis: Future cumulative development projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine potential impacts to riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities. As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would similarly require environmental review under CEQA. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.3-21 Biological Resources would also ensure a Biological Resources Assessment is prepared, as determined by the City, to evaluate potential impacts to on-site biological resources, including riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities. Thus, the proposed VMT Mitigation Program itself would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts in this regard, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.  THE PROJECT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH CUMULATIVE PROJECTS, COULD

RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO FEDERALLY PROTECTED WETLANDS AS DEFINED BY SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN

WATER ACT (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, MARSH, VERNAL POOL, COASTAL, ETC.) THROUGH DIRECT REMOVAL, FILLING, HYDROLOGICAL INTERRUPTION, OR OTHER MEANS.

As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA. Additionally, a Biological Resources Assessment may be required, as determined by the City, to evaluate potential impacts to on-site biological resources, including Federally protected wetlands; refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Thus, the proposed program would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to Federally protected wetlands and impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.  THE PROJECT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH CUMULATIVE PROJECTS, COULD

RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO THE MOVEMENT

OF NATIVE RESIDENT OR MIGRATORY FISH OR WILDLIFE SPECIES OR

WITH ESTABLISHED NATIVE RESIDENT OR MIGRATOR WILDLIFE
CORRIDORS, OR IMPEDE THE USE OF WILDLIFE NURSERY SITES.

As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would require a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey be conducted prior to construction activities associated with future transportation improvements. Thus, upon compliance with existing regulations and Mitigation Measure BIO-2, future transportation improvements, in conjunction with cumulative projects, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-2.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.  THE PROJECT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH CUMULATIVE PROJECTS, COULD

RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO CONFLICT WITH

LOCAL POLICIES OR ORDINANCES PROTECTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, SUCH AS A TREE PRESERVATION POLICY OR ORDINANCE.

As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA and comply with existing local policies protecting biological resources. Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.3.6 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
No significant unavoidable impacts related to biological resources have been identified.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-1 Tribal and Cultural Resources

5.4 TRIBAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
The purpose of this section is to identify existing cultural and tribal cultural resources within and around the project site and to assess the significance of such resources. Mitigation measures are recommended, as necessary, to minimize impacts as a result of project implementation.

5.4.1 EXISTING SETTING

NATURAL SETTING
The City is located in the southwestern portion of Antelope Valley, which lies in the western portion of the Mojave Desert, bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and by the Tehachapi Mountains to the northwest. Regional geologic maps indicate the site is underlain by Holocene-age flood plain deposits comprised of sand, gravel, silt, and clay. 1, 2, 3 Fill soils of varying thickness and
material types related to roadways and existing developments are also present over portions of the project area.

CULTURAL SETTING
Prehistoric Period
The City lies in the Antelope Valley where, at least during the Lake Prehistoric and Protohistoric periods, the traditional territories of four Native American groups overlap: the Kitanemuk located principally on the southern and western flanks of the Tehachapi Mountains; the Serrano of the San Bernardino Mountains; the Kawaiisu of the Tehachapi Valley region; and the Tataviam of the Santa Clarita Basin. The Kitanemuk were reported to frequent the springs of the Willow Springs area and other areas on the valley floor. The Kawaiisu used the springs found along the northern edge of the Antelope Valley, including areas on the Edwards Air Force Base, and the southern foothills of the valley from Littlerock Creek northwestward to at least as far west as the Fairmont Buttes area was occupied by the Serrano. The Tataviam occupied the southern foothills at the far western edge of the valley.

Although the Kitanemuk had contact with Garces and Spanish colonizers as early as the 1770s, little historical information is available today on this small group, which may have had no more than 500 to 1,000 members at the peak of its population. The Kitanemuk were apparently represented at the San Fernando, San Gabriel, and San Buenaventura Missions. After the American take-over, some were found on the Tejon Reservation in 1850s, and later on at the Tule River Reservation, where some of 1 California Geological Survey, Geological Map of the Del Sur 7.5’ Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, 2010, accessed September 28, 2021. 2 California Geological Survey, Geological Map of the Lancaster West 7.5’ Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, 2010, accessed September 28, 2021. 3 California Geological Survey, Geological Map of the Lancaster East 7.5’ Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, 2011, accessed September 28, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-2 Tribal and Cultural Resources their descendants still reside. Spanish influence on Serrano lifeways was negligible until 1819, when a mission assistencia (smaller branch mission) was established on the southern edge of Serrano territory.

Between then and the end of the mission era in 1834, most of the Serrano in the San Bernardino Mountains and the high desert were removed to the nearby missions. At present, most Serrano descendants are found on the San Manuel and the Morongo Indian Reservations, where they participate in ceremonial and political affairs with other Native American groups on an interreservation basis.

Historic Period
Antelope Valley
In 1772, a small force of Spanish solider under the command of Pedro Fages became the first Europeans to set foot in the Antelope Valley. The first wave of non-native exploration by a number of famous explorers, including Francisco Garces, Jedediah Smith, Kit Carson, and John C. Fremont, traversed the Antelope Valley, but their explorations brought little change to the region. A later exploratory period starting in the 1840s led to the Antelope Valley’s first permanent settlement during the following decade, fueled by California’s Gold Rush and new status as American territory.4 The 1854 establishment of the Fort Tejon military post near Castaic Lake and Grapevine Canyon created a gateway for Antelope Valley traffic.

Several developments were integral to Antelope Valley’s growth starting in the mid-1800s, including gold mining in the Kerns and Owens Rivers; cattle ranching; the start of a Butterfield stagecoach route in 1858; construction of the Los Angeles-to-San Francisco telegraph line in 1860; completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad line in 1876; and ample rainfall during the 1880s and early 1890s, which attracted many farmers. The decade-long drought that began in 1894, the worst in southern California’s recorded history, decimated the regional economy and forced many settlers to abandon their homesteads, but after the turn of the twentieth century, irrigation methods and electricity brought back local farming. The 1913 completion of the aqueduct spanning 233 miles between the Owens Valley and Los Angeles also revived Antelope Valley’s economy. Today, the Antelope Valley retains elements of its agricultural past but its economic base is now supported by aerospace and defense industries.

City of Lancaster
The history of the City of Lancaster began in 1876, when the Southern Pacific Railway Company chose the essentially uninhabited Antelope Valley for its line between the San Joaquin Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, and established a string of regularly spaced sidings and water stops across the desert. Around one of these sidings and water stops, Moses Landley Wicks, a real estate developer who was active in many parts of southern California at the time, purchased from the Southern Pacific Railway Company 640 acres of land and laid out the townsite of Lancaster in 1884. During the land boom of the 1880s and early 1890s, the new town prospered, thanks to the abundance of artesian water in the vicinity. Beginning in 1895, however, several years of continuous drought all but destroyed 4 County of Los Angeles Library, Antelope Valley Local History, https://lacountylibrary.org/antelope-valleylocal-history/, accessed September 28, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-3 Tribal and Cultural Resources Lancaster and other settlements in the Antelope Valley, and forced nearly half of the settlers to abandon their land and leave the region.

Along with the other settlements, Lancaster recovered slowly after the turn of the century. With the adoption of electric water pumps, irrigated agriculture became the primary means of livelihood in the region. Alfalfa, which was first introduced around 1890, emerged as the principal crop in the early 20th century, so much so that “alfalfa is king” became the slogan for the agricultural interests in the valley. After World War II, however, the aerospace and defense industry overtook agriculture as the most important sector in the Antelope Valley economy. In 1977, Lancaster was incorporated as a city.

Since then, the City has experienced rapid growth due to the phenomenal expansion of housing development, and increasingly taken on the characteristics of a “bedroom community” in support of the Greater Los Angeles area.

CULTURAL RESOURCES
According to the General Plan EIR, areas in and around downtown Lancaster have experienced substantial growth, necessitating numerous cultural resource surveys for development projects. Those studies encountered a number of archaeological sites, historic-period buildings, and other built environment features. Meanwhile, most of the rural, less populated land to the west, north, and east of the urbanized portions of Lancaster remains un-surveyed for cultural resources. It should be noted that a notable exception to this is the Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB) to the north of the City, which has been intensively surveyed as part of the EAFB’s effort to inventory the cultural resources located within its boundaries. As a result of that effort, a number of archaeological sites, including prehistoric camps, lithic scatters, historic-period trash dumps, built environment features such as foundations and irrigation dating to the late 19th and early to mid-20th centuries, and isolates (i.e., sites with fewer than three artifacts) have been recorded on the EAFB. The high percentage of sites found on the EAFB suggests that other undeveloped areas within and adjacent to the City have the potential to contain archaeological resources that have yet to be found.

The General Plan EIR evaluated a study area that encompassed substantially more land than solely the City limits. Based on previously completed cultural resource surveys, at least 432 historical/archaeological sites and 134 isolates have been discovered within the General Plan study area. These resources include prehistoric sites and artifacts (e.g., ground or flaked pieces of stone) and historic-period sites and items (e.g., glass bottle fragments and other refuse). A total of 566 previously recorded historical/archaeological sites and isolates have been found within the boundaries of the General Plan study area.

HISTORICAL RESOURCES
According to the General Plan EIR, the historic-period sites recorded in the General Plan study area include late-19th and early-20th century homesteads, ranches, and townsites; residential and public buildings, foundations, and ruins; irrigation features, wells, and reservoirs; agricultural features; old wagon roads; transmission lines from the early 20th century; the remains of past mining activities; military structures from World War II; aeronautic structures from the post-WWII era; and numerous refuse scatters, all indicative of early settlement and land development activities. Many of these sites Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-4 Tribal and Cultural Resources are situated in Lancaster’s downtown area and its immediate vicinity, while others are spread out across the less urbanized areas to the north, east and west. The majority of these sites, however, are located within the boundaries of the EAFB outside of the City limits.

A number of the historic-period buildings in the project area are concentrated in the downtown area, especially along Lancaster Boulevard that runs through the heart of downtown Lancaster. According to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) databases, the following buildings are listed in the NRHP and CRHR:5, 6 • Antelope Valley Indian Museum – 15701 East Ave M (NRHP and CRHR listed); • Cedar Avenue Complex – 44843 (44855), 44845 and 44851 Cedar Avenue, 606 Lancaster Boulevard, and Old Jail Building (no address) (NRHP listed); and • Western Hotel – 557 West Lancaster Boulevard (California Historical Landmark).

NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
On February 1, 2022, the City sent notification letters to the three tribes that have requested to be notified of projects in accordance with AB 52; refer to Appendix 11.3, Tribal Consultation. Responses were received from both the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians requested additional project information, including a site plan and grading plan, to determine potential impacts to tribal cultural resources in the project area. The City responded stating that no development is proposed as part of the VMT Mitigation Program and thus, no site plan or grading plan is available for review. No response was received from SMBMI. As such, consultation was assumed to be concluded.

The Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians requested to have a conversation regarding the proposed project. Additional information regarding the proposed project was sent to the tribe and a consultation call was held on August 2, 2022. Based on the call, the tribe does not have any concerns with respect to the proposed VMT Mitigation Program. As such, AB 52 tribal consultation with the two tribes concluded.

5.4.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL LEVEL
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Enacted in 1966 and amended in 2000, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) declared a national policy of historic preservation and instituted a multifaceted program, administered by the Secretary of the Interior, to encourage the achievement of preservation goals at the Federal, State, and 5 National Park Service, National Register Database and Research, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/database-research.htm#table, accessed November 15, 2021. 6 California Office of Historic Preservation, California Historical Resources, https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=19, accessed November 15, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-5 Tribal and Cultural Resources local levels. The NHPA authorized the expansion and maintenance of the NRHP, established the position of SHPO and provided for the designation of State Review Boards, set up a mechanism to certify local governments to carry out the purposes of the NHPA, assisted Native American tribes to preserve their cultural heritage, and created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).

Section 106 Process
Through regulations associated with the NHPA, an impact to a cultural resource would be considered significant if government action would affect a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP.

The NHPA codifies a list of cultural resources found to be significant within the context of national history, as determined by a technical process of evaluation. Resources that have not yet been placed on the NRHP, and are yet to be evaluated, are afforded protection under the Act until shown to be not significant.

Section 106 of the NHPA and its implementing regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800) note that for a cultural resource to be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, the resource must meet specific criteria associated with historic significance and possess certain levels of integrity of form, location, and setting. The criteria for listing on the NRHP are applied within an analysis when there is some question as to the significance of a cultural resource. The criteria for evaluation are defined as the quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. This quality must be present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. A property is eligible for the NRHP if it is significant under one or more of the following criteria:
• Criterion A: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
• Criterion B: It is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or • Criterion C: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
• Criterion D: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Criterion D is usually reserved for archaeological resources. Eligible cultural resources must meet at least one of the above criteria and exhibit integrity, measured by the degree to which the resource retains its historical properties and conveys its historical character.

The Section 106 evaluation process does not apply to projects undertaken under City environmental compliance jurisdiction. However, should the undertaking require funding, permits, or other administrative actions issued or overseen by a Federal agency, analysis of potential impacts to cultural resources following the Section 106 process would likely be necessary. The Section 106 process Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-6 Tribal and Cultural Resources typically excludes cultural resources created less than 50 years ago unless the resource is considered highly significant from the local perspective. Finally, the Section 106 process allows local concerns to be voiced and the Section 106 process must consider aspects of local significance before a significance judgment is rendered.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties
Evolving from the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation Projects with Guidelines for Applying the Standards that were developed in 1976, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings were published in 1995 and codified as 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 67. Neither technical nor prescriptive, these standards are “intended to promote responsible preservation practices that help protect our Nation’s irreplaceable cultural resources.” “Preservation” acknowledges a resource as a document of its history over time, and emphasizes stabilization, maintenance, and repair of existing historic fabric. “Rehabilitation” not only incorporates the retention of features that convey historic character, but also accommodates alterations and additions to facilitate continuing or new uses. “Restoration” involves the retention and replacement of features from a specific period of significance. “Reconstruction,” the least used treatment, provides a basis for recreating a missing resource. These standards have been adopted, or are used informally, by many agencies at all levels of government to review projects that affect historic resources.

STATE LEVEL
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires a lead agency determine whether a project may have a significant effect on historical resources (Public Resources Code Section 21084.1). A historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the CRHR, a resource included in a local register of historical resources, or any object building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][1-3]).

A resource is considered historically significant if it meets any 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; or

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-7 Tribal and Cultural Resources In addition, if it can be demonstrated that a project would cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (Public Resources Code Section 21083.2[a], [b], and [c]). Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:

1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information;

2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or

3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

California Register of Historical Resources
Created in 1992 and implemented in 1998, the CRHR is “an authoritative guide in California to be used by State and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the State’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change.” Certain properties, including those listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and California Historical Landmarks numbered 770 and higher, are automatically included in the CRHR. Other properties recognized under the California Points of Historical Interest program, identified as significant in historical resources surveys or designated by local landmarks programs, may be nominated for inclusion in the CRHR. A resource, either an individual property or a contributor to a historic district, may be listed in the CRHR if the State Historical Resources Commission determines that it meets one or more of the criteria modeled on the NRHP criteria.

Assembly Bill 52
On September 25, 2014, Governor Brown signed AB 52. In recognition of California Native American tribal sovereignty and the unique relationship of California local governments and public agencies with California Native American tribal governments, and respecting the interests and roles of project proponents, it is the intent of AB 52 to accomplish all of the following:

1. Recognize that California Native American prehistoric, historic, archaeological, cultural, and sacred places are essential elements in tribal cultural traditions, heritages, and identities.

2. Establish a new category of resources in CEQA called “tribal cultural resources” that considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-8 Tribal and Cultural Resources

3. Establish examples of mitigation measures for tribal cultural resources that uphold the existing mitigation preference for historical and archaeological resources of preservation in place, if feasible.

4. Recognize that California Native American tribes may have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, which concern the tribal cultural resources with which they are traditionally and culturally affiliated. Because CEQA calls for a sufficient degree of analysis, tribal knowledge about the land and tribal cultural resources at issue should be included in environmental assessments for projects that may have a significant impact on those resources.

5. In recognition of their governmental status, establish a meaningful consultation process between California Native American tribal governments and lead agencies, respecting the interests and roles of all California Native American tribes and project proponents, and the level of required confidentiality concerning tribal cultural resources, at the earliest possible point in CEQA environmental review process, so that tribal cultural resources can be identified, and culturally appropriate mitigation and mitigation monitoring programs can be considered by the decision making body of the lead agency.

6. Recognize the unique history of California Native American tribes and uphold existing rights of all California Native American tribes to participate in, and contribute their knowledge to, the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA.

7. Ensure that local and tribal governments, public agencies, and project proponents have information available, early in CEQA environmental review process, for purposes of identifying and addressing potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and to reduce the potential for delay and conflicts in the environmental review process.

8. Enable California Native American tribes to manage and accept conveyances of, and act as caretakers of, tribal cultural resources.

9. Establish that a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource has a significant effect on the environment.

California Public Resources Code
California Public Resources Code Sections 5097.9 to 5097.991 provide protection to Native American historical and cultural resources and sacred sites; identify the powers and duties of the NAHC; require descendants to be notified when Native American human remains are discovered; and provide for treatment and disposition of human remains and associated grave goods.

California Health and Safety Code
The discovery of human remains is regulated in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which states:

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-9 Tribal and Cultural Resources In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation…until the coroner…has determined…that the remains are not subject to…provisions of law concerning investigation of 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…. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and…has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission.

LOCAL LEVEL
City of Lancaster General Plan 2030
Plan for Active Living
The Plan for the Active Living Chapter of the General Plan identifies measure for the protection of historical, archaeological and cultural resources. The General Plan recognizes the importance of the unique history of the Antelope Valley and the City by promoting community involvement in the protection, preservation, and restoration of the area’s significant cultural, historical, or architectural features. The following objective and policies are applicable to the project:

Objective 12.1: Identify and preserve and/or restore those features of cultural, historical, or architectural significance.

Policy 12.1.1: Preserve features and sites of significant historical and cultural value consistent with their intrinsic and scientific values.

Policy 19.3.4: Preserve and protect important areas of historic and cultural interest that serve as visible reminders of the City’s social and architectural history.

5.4.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA

SIGNIFICANCE GUIDELINES
Historical Resources
Impacts to a significant cultural resource that affect characteristics that would qualify it for the NRHP or that adversely alter the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR are considered a significant effect on the environment. These impacts could result from “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 [b][1], 2000). Material impairment is defined as demolition or alteration “in an adverse manner [of] those characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-10 Tribal and Cultural Resources its inclusion in, or eligibility for inclusion in, the California Register” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[b][2][A]). CEQA states that when a project will cause damage to a historical resource, reasonable efforts must be made to preserve the resource in place or left in an undisturbed state.

Mitigation measures are required to the extent that the resource could be damaged or destroyed by a project. Projects that follow the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties are typically mitigated below the level of significance.

Archaeological Resources
A significant prehistoric archaeological impact would occur if grading and construction activities result in a substantial adverse change to archaeological resources determined to be “unique” or “historic.” “Unique” resources are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2; “historic” resources are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21084.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4.

Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g) states:

As used in this section, “unique archaeological resource” means an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:

1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information;

2. Has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or

3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

CEQA states that when a project would cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, reasonable efforts must be made to preserve the resource in place or leave it in an undisturbed state. Mitigation measures are required to the extent that the resource could be damaged or destroyed by a project.

Tribal Cultural Resources
AB 52 established a new category of resources in CEQA called tribal cultural resources. (Public Resources Code Section 21074.) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
(A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.
(B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-11 Tribal and Cultural Resources (2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

AB 52 also created a process for consultation with California Native American Tribes in the CEQA process. Tribal governments can request consultation with a lead agency and give input into potential impacts to tribal cultural resources before the agency decides what kind of environmental assessment is appropriate for a proposed project. The Public Resources Code requires avoiding damage to tribal cultural resources, if feasible. If not, lead agencies must mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources to the extent feasible.

CEQA SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Environmental Checklist form that was used during the preparation of this EIR. Accordingly, a project may create a significant adverse environmental impact if it would:

Cultural Resources
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (refer to Impact Statement CUL-1); • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (refer to Impact Statement CUL-2); • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries (refer to Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant);
Tribal Cultural Resources
• 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:
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) (refer to Impact Statement CUL-3); or
A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe (refer to Impact Statement CUL-3).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-12 Tribal and Cultural Resources Based on these standards/criteria, the effects of the proposed project have been categorized as either a “less than significant impact” or “potentially significant impact.” Mitigation measures are recommended for potentially significant impacts. If a potentially significant impact cannot be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of mitigation, it is categorized as a significant and unavoidable impact.

5.4.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

HISTORICAL RESOURCES
CUL-1 THE PROJECT COULD CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO A HISTORICAL RESOURCE.

Impact Analysis: As stated above, numerous known and potential historical resources have been documented throughout the City and surrounding areas. Historic-period sites of the project area contain late-19th and early-20th century homesteads, ranches, townsites and other structures indicative of early settlement and land development activities. The downtown area and its immediate vicinity contain a large portion of these sites. The Antelope Valley Indian Museum, Cedar Avenue Complex and Old Jail Building, and Western Hotel are located within the City’s downtown area and are identified as historical resources in the NRHP and CRHR. The program would establish a mitigation mechanism for future development projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation fee. As such, the program would fund VMT-reducing transportation improvement within the City. Potential improvements would primarily occur within existing developed rights-of-way or within the development footprint of future development projects and thus, would likely avoid adverse impacts to known historical resources. While future transportation improvement projects funded by the program would be largely focused within developed areas, the proposed improvements could still adversely impact historical resources, particularly historical resources not previously documented.

Future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be City-initiated or implemented as part of future development projects. All future improvements would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report). Thus, cultural resource assessments, including historical assessments, may be required to analyze project-specific impacts on historical resources as defined under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; refer to Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would ensure a historical resources assessment is conducted by a qualified architectural historian or historian to evaluate the site for any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that could be impacted by the transportation improvement.

Thus, upon implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, the proposed program would not result in significant impacts to historical resources.

Mitigation Measures:

CUL-1 To ensure identification and preservation of potentially historic resources (as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 as a resource listed in, eligible for listing in, or listing Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-13 Tribal and Cultural Resources in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or local register), each transportation improvement funded by the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review (meaning, subject to discretionary action and non-exempt from CEQA) shall be conditioned as follows: prior to any construction activities that could impact potential or previously identified historical resources, the project proponent shall provide a historical resources assessment performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for architectural history or history (as defined in 48 Code of Federal Regulations 44716) to the City of Lancaster Planning Department for review and approval. The historical resources assessment shall include a records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) and a survey in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) guidelines to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that may be potentially affected by the proposed project. If a historical resource is identified on-site, the resource shall be avoided to the extent feasible.

If relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of a historical resource is required, the project proponent shall utilize the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to the maximum extent feasible to ensure the historical significance of the resource is not impaired.

If demolition or significant alteration of a historical resource is required, the resource shall be evaluated, and/or designated in the NRHP, CRHR, or local register, and recordation shall take the form of Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), or Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS) documentation, and shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. Recordation shall meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering, which defines the products acceptable for inclusion in the HABS/HAER/HALS collection at the Library of Congress. The specific scope and details of documentation shall be developed at the project level in coordination with the City of Lancaster Planning Department and performed prior to the first issuance of any demolition, building, or grading permits.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
CUL-2 THE PROJECT COULD CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE.

Impact Analysis: As stated, several locations within the City and surrounding area have known archaeological resources. Based on previously completed cultural resource surveys, at least 432 historical/archaeological sites and 134 isolates have been discovered within the General Plan study area, including prehistoric sites and artifacts (e.g., ground or flaked pieces of stone) and historic-period Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-14 Tribal and Cultural Resources sites and items (e.g., glass bottle fragments and other refuse). While future transportation improvement projects funded by the program would be largely focused within developed areas and within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way, the proposed improvements could still adversely impact previously unknown archaeological resources. For example, resources may be preserved within native soils below disturbances associated with existing commercial, residential, or other developments.

Future transportation improvements funded by the proposed project would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA. Depending on the nature of future improvements, the City may require preparation of a cultural resources assessment to evaluate project- and site-specific impacts on potential archaeological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would ensure a cultural resources assessment is prepared, if required by the City, and that the potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources are reduced to the greatest extent feasible. Additionally, if a resource is unearthed during any excavation and grading activities, Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would require earth-disturbing activities to halt within a 100-meter radius of the find and the project proponent shall retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the find and appropriate course of action. As such, the proposed program would not result in significant impacts to archaeological resources. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures:

If there will be ground disturbances, prior to issuance of any permits required to conduct ground disturbing activities, the City may require a Cultural Resources Assessment be conducted under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards in either prehistoric or historic archaeology.

The Cultural Resources Assessment shall include a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search conducted through the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) and Sacred Land Files (SLF) search through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), review of historical maps, and a Phase I (intensive) pedestrian survey to assess the likelihood for buried archaeological resources to occur. The Cultural Resources Assessment shall meet or exceed standards in the Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR):

Recommended Contents and Format (1990) and Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs (1991).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-15 Tribal and Cultural Resources CUL-3 In the event that cultural resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future transportation improvement project funded by the proposed program, the construction contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100-meter radius of the find and the project proponent shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards in either prehistoric or historic archaeology to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-3 THE PROJECT COULD CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO A TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCE.

Impact Analysis: As stated above, the City contacted tribes and sent out letters inviting them to consult on the project pursuant to AB 52 on February 1, 2022.

The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) responded requesting additional project information, including a site plan and grading plan, to determine potential impacts to tribal cultural resources in the project area. The City responded stating that no development is proposed as part of the VMT Mitigation Program and thus, no site plan or grading plan is available for review. No response was received from SMBMI. As such, consultation was assumed to be concluded.

The Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians (FTBMI) also responded requesting consultation and mitigation to reduce potential project impacts on tribal cultural resources in the project area. The City consulted with a FTBMI representative on August 2, 2022. City staff sent additional information regarding the proposed project prior to the call and further described the project and explained what the City was trying to achieve on the call. At the conclusion of the call, the FTBMI representative indicated that they have no concerns with the proposed project. As such, consultation has been concluded.

While the proposed VMT Mitigation Program does not involve any development, future transportation improvements implemented in accordance with the program could impact tribal cultural resources during ground-disturbing activities. All future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would similarly require separate environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report). Should future projects require compliance with AB 52, consultation with Native American tribes would occur at a later date and project specific information (e.g., site plans and grading plans) would be available to more accurately determine whether the project could result in potentially significant impacts to tribal cultural resources and help identify appropriate mitigation measures. As such, impacts to tribal cultural resources associated with the adoption of the VMT Mitigation Program itself would be less than significant.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-16 Tribal and Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.4.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan; refer to Table 4-1, General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout.  FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

PROPOSED PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT COULD RESULT IN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO A HISTORICAL RESOURCE.

As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would similarly require separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level potential impacts to historical resources and to identify any required mitigation. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would ensure a historical resources assessment is prepared to identify any previously unrecorded historic resources and evaluate impacts of future transportation improvements on such resources. Thus, the proposed program would not cumulatively contribute towards potentially significant impacts with other development in accordance with the General Plan. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure CUL-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.  IMPLEMENTATION OF IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

PROJECT AND OTHER CUMULATIVE PROJECTS COULD RESULT IN

CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCE.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-17 Tribal and Cultural Resources Future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would similarly be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL2 would also ensure a cultural resources assessment is conducted, as required, to identify any previously unknown archaeological resources and potential impacts of the transportation improvements on such resources. If any resources are uncovered during construction activities, Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would ensure construction activities halt until the find is evaluated by a qualified archaeologist. Thus, future transportation improvements, in conjunction with cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL-3.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.  FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

PROPOSED PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT COULD RESULT IN

CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE IMPACTS TO A TRIBAL CULTURAL
RESOURCE.

As stated, while the proposed program does not involve any development, future transportation improvements funded by the program could impact tribal cultural resources during ground-disturbing activities. However, similar to cumulative development projects, all future transportation improvements funded by the program would similarly require separate environmental review under CEQA, which may include consultation with Native American tribes pursuant to AB 52. As such, future transportation improvements would be evaluated for potential impacts to tribal cultural resources, where applicable, and be required to implement mitigation measures to reduce such impacts. Therefore, future transportation improvements, in conjunction with cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

5.4.6 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
No significant unavoidable impacts related to cultural or tribal cultural resources have been identified.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.4-18 Tribal and Cultural Resources This page intentionally left blank.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-1 Geology and Soils

5.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
This section describes the geologic and seismic conditions within the City and evaluates the potential for geologic impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project.

5.5.1 EXISTING SETTING

GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS
Regional Geology
The project area is located in the Antelope Valley, which is located within the western Mojave Desert.

The Mojave Desert is a wedge-shaped block bounded by the San Andreas Fault Zone on the southwest, the Garlock Fault Zone on the northwest, and the Colorado River on the east. Uplifts of the San Gabriel and Tehachapi Mountains isolated the Mojave Desert from the Pacific Coast and created the interior drainage basins of the western Mojave Desert, such as the Antelope Valley. The Antelope Valley is surrounded by the Tehachapi Mountain range in the north and northwest, and the San Gabriel, Sierra Pelona, and Liebre Mountains to the south and southwest. Geologically, the Antelope Valley is part of the Mojave structural block, which is an elevated desert. The topography of the City generally slopes up to the southwest, with elevations ranging from approximately 2,300 feet in the northeast to 3,500 feet in the southwest. The overall topography of the City is somewhat flat.

Major topographic features include Quartz Hill located in the southern portion of the City, and the Fairmont and Antelope Buttes located outside of the City limits west of 110th Street West.

The geology of the region consists of three main rock groups: crystalline rocks of Pre-Tertiary age; volcanic and sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age; and alluvial sedimentary rocks of Quaternary age. The first of the two groups consist of older, hard, consolidated materials from the surrounding mountains and rocky buttes that rise from the valley floor. The Antelope Valley soils profile consists of up to 4,000 feet of alluvial fill underlain by consolidated rocks. The bottom of the rock formations, known as the basement, includes the oldest formation and consists of quartz, monzonite, granite, gneiss, schist and other igneous and metamorphic rocks. The rocks overlying the basement primarily consist of shale, sandstone, conglomerate and siltstone.

Local Geology
The City lies within a seismically active area referred to as the Mojave Desert Geomorphic Province of Southern California, and is located at the western edge of a moving plate in the earth’s crust.

Defining the boundary of this area is the San Andreas Fault, where the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate meet. The San Andreas Fault is located approximately nine miles south of Lancaster.

Similar to the regional geology, the City’s geology consists of the same three main rock groups:
crystalline rocks of Pre-Tertiary age; volcanic and sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age; and alluvial sedimentary deposits of Tertiary and Quaternary age. Some of these rock types include schists, quartz Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-2 Geology and Soils monzonite, and local volcanic formations. The third group comprises younger, unconsolidated alluvial (stream-deposited) materials formed in the wash areas of the lower foothills and stream beds that comprise much of the valley flow, in some locations to depths in excess of 2,000 feet. Consolidated rocks equivalent to Tertiary and older materials underlie this alluvium.

GROUNDWATER
The City is underlain by the Antelope Valley Groundwater Basin. The Antelope Valley Groundwater Basin stores subsurface water that is extracted by the wells of various agencies as a source of supply.

Elevations across the valley floor range from 2,300 to 3,500 feet above mean sea level. Bounding the basin are the Garlock Fault Zone to the northwest at the base of the Tehachapi Mountains. The Antelope Valley Groundwater Basin consists of the West Antelope, Neenach, Buttes, Finger Buttes, Lancaster, Pearland and North Muroc sub-basins (aquifers).

SEISMIC HAZARDS
Potential seismic hazards involve primary hazards (i.e., surface fault rupture and seismicity/ground shaking) and secondary hazards including liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, seismically-induced landslides, seismically-induced flooding, seiches, and tsunamis. Refer to Section 5.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, for an analysis concerning potential impacts involving flooding, seiches, and tsunamis. The primary and secondary seismic hazards with potential to impact the City are discussed below.

Faulting And Seismicity
There are no active faults zones within the City. The nearest active fault to Lancaster is the San Andreas Fault, located approximately nine miles to the south. Additional principal faults that could produce damaging earthquakes in the regional area are the Sierra Madre-San Fernando, Garlock, Sierra Nevada (Owens Valley), and White Wolf Faults.

Surface Fault Rupture
Surface fault rupture is the offset or rupturing of the ground surface by relative displacement across a fault during an earthquake. The City is not transected by known active or potentially active faults. As discussed above, the active San Andreas fault zone is located approximately nine miles to the south from Lancaster. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture is considered low. However, lurching or cracking of the ground surface as a result of nearby seismic events is possible.

Seismic Ground Shaking
Earthquake events from one of the regional active or potentially active faults near the City could result in strong ground shaking. The level of ground shaking at a given location depends on many factors, including the size and type of earthquake, distance from the earthquake, and subsurface geologic conditions. The type of construction also affects how particular structures and improvements perform Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-3 Geology and Soils during seismic ground shaking events. The southern portions of the City could be subjected to more intense seismic shaking associated with a large earthquake along the San Andreas Fault.

Secondary Seismic Hazards
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the phenomenon in which loosely deposited granular soils located below the water table undergo rapid loss of shear strength due to excess pore pressure generation when subjected to strong earthquake-induced ground shaking. Ground shaking of sufficient duration results in the loss of grain-to-grain contact due to a rapid rise in pore water pressure causing the soil to behave as a fluid for a short period of time.

The greatest danger from liquefaction occurs in areas where the groundwater table is within 30 feet of ground level, and the soil is poorly consolidated or relatively uncompacted. This condition is characterized by the sudden loss of shearing resistance due to ground shaking combined with an increase in pore water pressure. Subsequently, this often results in the collapse or displacement of building foundations. According to the General Plan MEA, the water table is approximately 60 feet from the surface. Therefore, in most areas of the City, the water table rarely comes within 30 feet of the surface.

According to the California Geological Survey and General Plan MEA, potential liquefaction zones are located in various areas of the City, including along the length of Little Rock Wash, in the eastern portion of the City, and in the vicinity of Amargosa Creek, extending from the area north of Quartz Hill to the northeast to the Los Angeles-Kern County line outside if the City limits; refer to the General Plan MEA Figure 2-6, Study Area Seismic Hazards Map.
1 Landslides
Landslides, slope failures, and mudflows of earth materials generally occur where slopes are steep and/or the earth materials are too weak to support themselves. Earthquake-induced landslides may also occur due to seismic ground shaking. Based on the California Geological Survey and General Plan MEA Figure 2-6, Study Area Seismic Hazards Map, the southwestern areas of the City directly below the northern slopes of Quartz Hill and the slopes of Portal Ridge have the potential for landslide hazards.
2 Soil Erosion
Erosion is a process by which soil or earth material is loosened or dissolved and removed from its original location. Erosion can occur by varying processes and may occur on a project site where bare soil is exposed to wind or moving water (both rainfall and surface runoff). The processes of erosion are generally a function of material type, terrain steepness, rainfall or irrigation levels, surface drainage 1 California Geological Survey, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/, accessed November 18, 2021. 2 Ibid.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-4 Geology and Soils conditions, and general land uses. As discussed above, the City has relatively flat topography and thus, would have minimal potential for soil erosion. However, grading and development associated with new development of vacant and underutilized sites within the City have the potential to result in soil erosion and loss of topsoil.

Subsidence
Subsidence is characterized as a sinking of the ground surface relative to surrounding areas, and can generally occur where deep soil deposits are present. Subsidence in areas of deep soil deposits is typically associated with regional groundwater withdrawal or other fluid withdrawal from the ground such as oil and natural gas. Subsidence can result in the development of ground cracks and damage to subsurface vaults, pipelines, and other improvements.

According to the General Plan MEA, the only soil condition identified in the City that may present a hazard from subsidence is the potential for fissuring. Surface water may enter fissures and move laterally through the soils, eroding the underlying rock material. Outside of the City limits, fissures have developed on the dry lakebed used as a runway at Edwards Air Force Base. Soils at Edwards Air Force Base are a hard clay material, while the problem areas in Lancaster have an almost concrete-like material near the surface called caliche, a cemented deposit of calcium carbonate. According to the General Plan MEA, caliche most often underlies soils within the Sunrise association. Sunrise soils are located in the north-central portion of the City, and in the west-central portion, near the California State Prison; refer to General Plan MEA Figure 2-3, Soil Stability Issues.

Compressible/Collapsible Soils
Compressible soils are generally comprised of soils that undergo consolidation when exposed to new loading, such as fill or foundation loads. Soil collapse is a phenomenon where the soils undergo a significant decrease in volume upon increase in moisture content, with or without an increase in external loads. Buildings, structures, and transportation improvements may be subject to excessive settlement-related distress when compressible soils or collapsible soils are present. Areas that have a high potential for fissures are an example of areas with compressible soils.

As stated, and shown on General Plan MEA Figure 2-3, Soil Stability Issues, known areas of fissure occurrence are located generally in the north-central area of the City, north of Lancaster Boulevard and in the west-central portion. Therefore, potentially compressible/collapsible soils are present onsite.

Expansive Soils
Soils within the City are primarily characterized by soils of low shrink-swell potential (i.e., expansion), which do not represent a problem for typical construction activities. However, as shown on General Plan MEA Figure 2-3, Soil Stability Issues, there is an area north of Lancaster Boulevard and west of 10th Street West, an area near Lancaster Boulevard and 30th Street East, and a small area in the eastern end of the City where the soils are classified as moderately expansive.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-5 Geology and Soils

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
According to the General Plan MEA, the southwest corner of the City consists of a moderately sloping ridge formation that has eroded surface exposures of coarse-grained granitic soils. This formation, being igneous and metamorphic in origin, is not conducive to the preservation of fossils. As such, the southwestern corner of the City is considered low in sensitivity for paleontological resources.

However, the area at the base of this formation has developed a thick layer of alluvial sediment that has, over time, eroded from the higher elevations. Because these soils may have buried plant and animal remains during their development, they have a moderate to high potential to contain paleontological resources.

The remainder of the City contains gentler sloping alluvial sediments with finer soils that have developed over time, possibly burying any hard organic materials that were deposited there and preserving them as fossils. The soils in these areas are likely Holocene-age alluvium that is low in sensitivity for paleontological resources, but may overlay older Pleistocene-age alluvium at unknown depths. These Pleistocene-age alluvial soils have a moderate to high potential for paleontological sensitivity, as they have the potential to contain fossil remains of Pleistocene-age mammals.

5.5.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL LEVEL
Federal Clean Water Act
The primary goals of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) are to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters and to make all surface waters fishable and swimmable. The CWA forms the basic national framework for water quality management and control of pollution discharges; it provides the legal framework for several water quality regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), effluent limitations, water quality standards, pretreatment standards, anti-degradation policy, nonpoint-source discharge programs, and wetlands protection. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated the administrative responsibility for portions of the CWA to State and regional agencies. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) administers the NPDES permitting program and is responsible for developing NPDES permitting requirements. The SWRCB works in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to preserve, protect, enhance, and restore water quality. The City lies within jurisdiction of the Lahontan RWQCB.

Under the NPDES permit program, the EPA establishes regulations for discharging stormwater by municipal and industrial facilities and construction activities. CWA Section 402 prohibits discharge of pollutants to “Waters of the United States” from any point source unless the discharge complies with an NPDES Permit.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-6 Geology and Soils Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act
The purpose of the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977 is to protect or restore soil functions on a permanent sustainable basis. Protection and restoration activities include prevention of harmful soil changes, rehabilitation of the soil of contaminated sites and of water contaminated by such sites, and precautions against negative soil impacts. If the soil is impacted, disruptions of its natural functions and of its function as an archive of natural and cultural history should be avoided, as far as practicable. In addition, CWA requirements provide guidance for protection of geologic and soil resources through the NPDES permit.

Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act
The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-124) established the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program which is coordinated through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The purpose of the program is to establish measures for earthquake hazards reduction and promote the adoption of earthquake hazards reduction measures by Federal, State, and local governments; national standards and model code organizations; architects and engineers; building owners; and others with a role in planning and constructing buildings, structures, and lifelines through (1) grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, and technical assistance; (2) development of standards, guidelines, and voluntary consensus codes for earthquake hazards reduction for buildings, structures, and lifelines; and (3) development and maintenance of a repository of information, including technical data, on seismic risk and hazards reduction. The program is intended to improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects on communities, buildings, structures, and lifelines through interdisciplinary research that involves engineering, natural sciences, and social, economic, and decisions sciences.

U.S. Geological Survey Landslide Hazard Program
The USGS Landslide Hazard Program provides information on landslide hazards, including information on current landslides, landslide reporting, real time monitoring of landslide areas, mapping of landslides through the National Landslide Hazards Map, local landslide information, landslide education, and research.

STATE LEVEL
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Act) (Public Resources Code 2621-2624, Division 2 Chapter 7.5) was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Act’s main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act only addresses the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards. The Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones, known as “Earthquake Fault Zones,” around the surface traces of active Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-7 Geology and Soils faults and to issue appropriate maps. Local agencies must regulate most development projects within these zones.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 directs the Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey to identify and map areas prone to liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking. The purpose of the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act is to minimize loss of life and property through the identification, evaluation, and mitigation of seismic hazards.

Staff geologists in the Seismic Hazard Zonation Program gather existing geological, geophysical, and geotechnical data from numerous sources to produce the Seismic Hazard Zone Maps. They integrate and interpret these data regionally to evaluate the severity of the seismic hazards and designate as Zones of Required Investigation (ZORI) those areas prone to liquefaction and earthquake–induced landslides. Cities and counties are then required to use the Seismic Hazard Zone Maps in their land use planning and building permit processes.

The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act requires that site-specific geotechnical investigations be conducted within the ZORI to identify and evaluate seismic hazards (i.e., liquefaction and earthquake induced landslides) and formulate mitigation measures prior to permitting most developments designed for human occupancy.
2019 California Building Standards Code
California building standards are published in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also known as the California Building Standards Code (CBSC). The CBSC, which applies to all applications for building permits, consists of 11 parts that contain administrative regulations for the California Building Standards Commission and for all State agencies that implement or enforce building standards. Local agencies must ensure development complies with the CBSC guidelines. Cities and counties can adopt additional building standards beyond the CBSC. CBSC Part 2, named the California Building Code (CBC), is based upon the 2019 International Building Code.

Soils Investigation Requirements
California Health and Safety Code Sections 17953–17955 and in Section 1802 of the California Building Code identify requirements for soils investigations for subdivisions requiring tentative and final maps, and for other specified types of structures. Testing of samples from subsurface investigations is required, such as from borings or test pits. Studies must be done as needed to evaluate slope stability, soil strength, position and adequacy of load-bearing soils, the effect of moisture variation on load-bearing capacity, compressibility, liquefaction, differential settlement, and expansiveness.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-8 Geology and Soils California Public Resources Code
Paleontological resources are protected under a wide variety of Public Resources Code policies and regulations. In addition, paleontological resources are recognized as nonrenewable resources and receive protection under the Public Resources Code and CEQA. Public Resources Code Division 5, Chapter 1.7, Section 5097.5, and Division 20, Chapter 3, Section 30244 states:

No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

This statute prohibits the removal, without permission, of any paleontological site or feature from lands under the jurisdiction of the State or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. As a result, local agencies are required to comply with Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 for their own activities, including construction and maintenance, as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others. Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 also establishes the removal of paleontological resources as a misdemeanor and requires reasonable mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources from developments on public (State, county, city, and district) lands.

State Water Resources Control Board
Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ
The SWRCB administers water rights, water pollution control, and water quality functions throughout the State, while the RWQCBs conduct planning, permitting, and enforcement activities. The NPDES permit is addressed in two parts: construction and post-construction (operations). Construction permitting would be administered by the SWRCB, while post-construction permitting would be administered by the RWQCB.

On November 16, 1990, the EPA published final regulations that established stormwater permit application requirements for specified categories of industries. The regulations provide that discharges of stormwater to waters of the United States from construction projects are effectively prohibited unless the discharge complies with an NPDES Permit. On August 19, 1999, the SWRCB reissued the General Construction Stormwater Permit (Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ). On December 8, 1999, the SWRCB amended Order 99-08-DWQ to apply to sites as small as one acre.

Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore a facility’s original line, grade, or capacity.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-9 Geology and Soils The Construction General Permit requires the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Construction General Permit Section A describes the elements that must be contained in a SWPPP, which include a site map(s), a list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) the discharger would use to protect stormwater runoff, and the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP is required to contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for “non-visible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. A project applicant must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the SWRCB, to be covered by the Construction General Permit, and prepare the SWPPP prior to construction. Implementation of the plan begins at commencement of construction and continues through project completion. Upon project completion, the applicant is required to submit a Notice of Termination (NOT) to the SWRCB to indicate that construction is completed.

LOCAL LEVEL
City of Lancaster General Plan 2030
Plan for the Natural Environment
The Plan for the Natural Environment evaluates natural and human‐induced environments within the General Plan study area and focuses on resources that are suitable for certain levels of maintenance and protection. The Plan identifies “Land Resources” as a focused resource, which includes geologic and paleontological resources within the City. The following objective and policies are relevant to the proposed project:

Objective 3.5: Preserve land resources through the application of appropriate soils management techniques and the protection and enhancement of surrounding landforms and open space.

Policy 3.5.1: Minimize erosion problems resulting from development activities.

Policy 3.5.2: Since certain soils in the Lancaster study area have exhibited shrink-swell behavior and a potential for fissuring, and subsidence may exist in other areas, minimize the potential for damage resulting from the occurrence of soils movement.

Plan for Public Health and Safety
The Plan for Public Health and Safety evaluates the natural and manmade conditions which may pose certain levels of health and safety hazards to life and property within the City, along with a comprehensive program to mitigate those hazards to acceptable levels. The Plan addresses issues regarding geology and seismicity for facilities and the general population. The following objective and policy are relevant to the proposed project:

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-10 Geology and Soils Objective 4.1: Minimize the potential for loss of life, physical injury, property damage, and social disruption resulting from seismic ground shaking and other geologic events.

Policy 4.1.1: Manage potential seismic hazards resulting from fault rupture and strong ground motion to facilitate rapid physical and economic recovery following an earthquake through the identification and recognition of potentially hazardous conditions and implementation of effective standards for seismic design of structures.

Lancaster Municipal Code
Municipal Code Section 8.16.030, Disturbing Surface of Land or Causing Wind Erosion Prohibited, prohibits persons from disturbing or causing the disturbance of surface or subsurface land by excavating, grading, leveling cultivating, plowing, discing, removing any existing vegetation or by depositing or spreading a quantity of soil on said land, or by any other act likely to cause or contribute to dust emission or wind erosion of said land. The section also states that persons are prohibited from causing or aggravating an existing dust or wind erosion condition without providing sufficient protection so as to prevent the soil on said land from being eroded by wind, creating dust, or blowing into a public road or roads or other public or private property.

Chapter 15.08, Building Code, of the Municipal Code, is the presiding building code within the City for the purposes of regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, use, height, area maintenance of all structures and certain equipment therein and providing penalties for violation of such codes. The City’s Building Code has adopted volumes 1 and 2 of the 2019 CBSC and the 2018 edition of the International Building Code with necessary California amendments.

5.5.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Environmental Checklist form that was used during the preparation of this EIR. Accordingly, a project may create a significant adverse environmental impact if it would:
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 (refer to Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (refer to Impact Statement GEO-1); iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction (refer to Impact Statement GEO-2); Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-11 Geology and Soils iv) Landslides (refer to Section 8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil (refer to Impact Statement GEO-3); 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 (refer to Impact Statement GEO-4); 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 (refer to Impact Statement GEO4); 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 (refer to Section

8.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); and
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature (refer to Impact Statement GEO-5).

5.5.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

STRONG SEISMIC GROUND SHAKING
GEO-1 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS FUNDED BY THE

PROPOSED PROJECT COULD EXPOSE PEOPLE AND STRUCTURES TO

POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK

OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING STRONG SEISMIC GROUND SHAKING.

Impact Analysis: Southern California is known to be earthquake prone, and the City would likely be subjected to some degree of seismic ground shaking during earthquake events. The proposed program would fund VMT-reducing transportation improvement, such as crosswalks, multi-purpose paths, traffic circles, and bicycle lanes, among others, within the City. The identified VMT-reducing projects would not include any habitable structures that could result in risk of upset during a seismic event. As such, the potential transportation improvements would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects involving strong seismic ground shaking. Future transportation improvements would be City-initiated projects or implemented as part of future development projects and would require environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report). Thus, project-specific analysis and Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-12 Geology and Soils mitigation measures would be implemented, as needed. Future transportation improvements and development projects would also be required to comply with existing regulations to minimize potential impacts from seismic ground shaking (e.g., the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act, Seismic Hazard Mapping Act, 2019 CBSC, and Municipal Code Chapter 15.08, Building Code). Thus, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

LIQUEFACTION
GEO-2 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION COULD EXPOSE PEOPLE AND

STRUCTURES TO SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING LIQUEFACTION.

Impact Analysis: As shown on General Plan MEA Figure 2-6, Study Area Seismic Hazards Map, there are multiple areas in the City that are susceptible to liquefaction hazard. Specifically, areas with liquefaction potential are located along the length of Little Rock Wash in the eastern portion of the City and in the vicinity of Amargosa Creek, extending from the area north of Quartz Hill to the northeast across the City to the Los Angeles-Kern County line outside of the City limits.

As shown on Exhibit 3-3, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvement Locations, potential transportation improvements funded by the proposed program could occur in potential liquefaction zones. All future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review (e.g., Categorical Exemption, Negative Declaration/Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report) to evaluate projectspecific impacts and identify any required mitigation measures. Additionally, future improvements would be required to comply with the 2019 CBSC and Municipal Code requirements related to building safety to reduce potential liquefaction impacts. Thus, the proposed VMT Mitigation program itself would not expose people or structures to adverse liquefaction hazards, and impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

SOIL EROSION
GEO-3 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION COULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL SOIL EROSION OR LOSS OF TOPSOIL.

Impact Analysis: As shown on Exhibit 3-3, the majority of future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would occur within or along existing rights-of-way in the City and thus, would not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. However, transportation Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-13 Geology and Soils improvements implemented as part of development projects could occur on vacant, undeveloped sites where soil erosion is more likely to occur during construction activities. Section 8.16.030 Disturbing Surface of Land or Causing Wind Erosion Prohibited, prohibits the disturbance of surface or subsurface land by excavating, grading, leveling cultivating, plowing, discing, removing any existing vegetation or by depositing or spreading a quantity of soil on said land, or by any other act likely to cause or contribute to dust emission or wind erosion of said land. Municipal Code Section 8.16.030 also prohibits the aggravation of an existing dust or wind erosion condition without providing sufficient protection.

Further, in compliance with the NPDES program, development projects involving one or more acres of site disturbance would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP and associated BMPs in compliance with the Construction General Permit during grading and construction. Typical BMPs include erosion prevention mats or geofabrics, silt fencing, sandbags, plastic sheeting, temporary drainage devices, and positive surface drainage to allow surface runoff to flow away from site improvements or areas susceptible to erosion. Surface drainage design provisions and site maintenance practices would reduce potential soil erosion following site development. Adherence to the BMPs in the SWPPP would reduce, prevent, or minimize soil erosion from grading and construction activities.

As such, future transportation improvements and development projects implementing such improvements would be required to comply with Section 8.16.030 Disturbing Surface of Land or Causing Wind Erosion Prohibited, of the Municipal Code, and the NPDES program requirements. Further, all future transportation improvements would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate site-specific impacts and identify any required mitigation measures.

Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

UNSTABLE AND EXPANSIVE SOILS
GEO-4 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS COULD BE LOCATED

ON UNSTABLE OR EXPANSIVE SOILS AND POTENTIALLY RESULT IN GEOLOGIC HAZARDS.

Impact Analysis: Future transportation improvements within the City could be located on unstable or expansive soils that could result in landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.

Refer to Section 8.0 for a discussion concerning the project’s potential impacts in regard to landslide impacts and to Impact Statement GEO-2 for analysis regarding the project’s potential impacts with regards to liquefaction hazards.

Unstable Soils
Lateral Spreading. As shown on General Plan MEA Figure 2-6, Study Area Seismic Hazards Map, there are multiple areas in the City that are susceptible to liquefaction hazard and thus, could be more susceptible to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading. Specifically, areas with liquefaction and lateral spreading potential are located along the length of Little Rock Wash in the eastern portion of the City Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-14 Geology and Soils and in the vicinity of Amargosa Creek, extending from the area north of Quartz Hill to the northeast across the City to the Los Angeles-Kern County line outside of the City limits.

Subsidence. As discussed above, fissures have been known to occur within the City and can lead to subsidence as surface water enters fissures and moves laterally through the soils to eventually erode the underlying rock material. Areas with known occurrences of fissures are illustrated on General Plan MEA Figure 2-3, Soil Stability Issues, and are generally located in the north-central portion and the westcentral portion of the City.

Collapse. Similar to subsidence hazards, collapsible/compressible soils are also associated with potential fissure locations within the City; refer to General Plan MEA Figure 2-3, Soil Stability Issues.

Expansive Soils
As detailed above, most soils within the City have low shrink-swell potential (i.e., expansion), which do not represent a problem for typical construction activities. However, as shown on General Plan MEA Figure 2-3, Soil Stability Issues, there is an area north of Lancaster Boulevard and west of 10th Street West, an area near Lancaster Boulevard and 30th Street East, and a small area in the eastern end of the City where the soils are classified as moderately expansive.

Potential transportation improvements funded by the program could occur in various areas of the City; refer to Exhibit 3-3. Thus, it is speculative to determine and analyze project impacts related to site-specific soil conditions at this programmatic level of analysis. All future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate site-specific impacts related to unstable soils and expansive soils and to identify any required mitigation measures. Additionally, future improvements would be required to comply with the 2019 CBSC and Municipal Code requirements related to building safety to reduce potential geologic hazards. Thus, the proposed VMT Mitigation program itself would not expose people or structures to adverse hazards in this regard, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
GEO-5 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION COULD DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY

DESTROY A UNIQUE PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE OR SITE OR
UNIQUE GEOLOGIC FEATURE.

Impact Analysis: As stated above, no known fossil localities have been previously recorded within the City boundaries, and the southwestern corner of the City has low potential for paleontological sensitivity. However, surface deposits consisting of younger Quaternary alluvial soils near the City (outside of City limits) have recovered faunal remains from small vertebrates. Additionally, soils in the Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-15 Geology and Soils City may overlay Pleistocene-age alluvial soils, which have a moderate to high potential for paleontological sensitivity. As such, multiple areas within and in the vicinity of the City have potential to encounter paleontological resources.

As shown on Exhibit 3-3, potential transportation improvements could occur in various areas of the City, including areas identified to have moderate to high potential in paleontological sensitivity.

Potential impacts to paleontological resources are based on site-specific soil conditions and project details (e.g., depth of excavation required). Thus, it is speculative to determine potential impacts to paleontological resources at this programmatic level of analysis. Nevertheless, future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project- and site-specific impacts and to identify any required mitigation measures. Additionally, Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would require a Paleontological Resources Assessment be prepared at the discretion of the City and based on the type of project and whether ground disturbing activities are proposed. The Paleontological Resources Assessment would identify the paleontological sensitivity of the project site and any required mitigation to reduce impacts to paleontological resources. As such, upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, future improvements developed in accordance with the proposed program would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature, and impacts in this regard would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Mitigation Measures:

GEO-1 To ensure identification and preservation of paleontological resources within the City of Lancaster, each transportation improvement funded by the proposed program subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review (meaning, subject to discretionary action and non-exempt from CEQA) shall be screened by the City of Lancaster Development Services Department, Community Development Division to determine whether a Paleontological Resources Assessment is required. Screening shall consider the type of project and whether ground disturbances will occur. Ground disturbances include activities such as grading, excavation, trenching, boring, or demolition that extend below the current grade. If there will be no ground disturbance, then a Paleontological Resources Assessment shall not be required. If there will be ground disturbances, prior to issuance of any permits required to conduct ground disturbing activities, the City may require a Paleontological Resources Assessment be prepared by a qualified paleontologist, defined as a paleontologist who meets the Society of Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standards for a Principal Investigator or Project Paleontologist.

The Paleontological Resources Assessment shall include and take into account projectspecific and local geologic mapping, geotechnical data, and paleontological records search.

The Paleontological Resources Assessment shall adhere to and incorporate the performance standards and practices from the current SVP Standard procedures for the assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The qualified paleontologist shall submit the Paleontological Resources Assessment to the City of Lancaster Development Services Department, Community Development Division for review and approval before issuance of a grading permit.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.5-16 Geology and Soils Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

5.5.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan; refer to Table 4-1, General Plan 2030 – GPCAC Preferred Land Use Plan Alternative Buildout.  THE PROPOSED PROJECT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH CUMULATIVE

DEVELOPMENT, COULD EXPOSE PEOPLE OR STRUCTURES TO POTENTIAL

SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS INVOLVING GEOLOGY AND SOILS AND COULD IMPACT UNKNOWN PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

Impact Analysis: Future cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine potential effects involving geology and soils and impacts to paleontological resources. Additionally, similar to future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program, cumulative projects would be required to comply with existing local, State, and Federal regulations regarding geologic hazards. For example, future developments would be required to comply with the 2019 CBSC, NPDES program requirements, and Municipal Code Chapter 15.08, Building Code, and Section 8.16.030 Disturbing Surface of Land or Causing Wind Erosion Prohibited.

As concluded above, geologic/seismic hazards and paleontological impacts associated with the proposed program would be less than significant upon implementation of regulatory requirements and Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Further, all future transportation improvements would be required to undergo separate project- and site-specific environmental review Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated.

5.5.6 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
No significant unavoidable impacts related to geology and soils have been identified.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-1 Hydrology and Water Quality

5.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section identifies regional and local hydrology conditions and relevant Federal, State, and local policies and regulations. Potential project impacts related to hydrology and water quality are analyzed herein.

5.6.1 EXISTING SETTING

HYDROLOGY AND DRAINAGE
Groundwater
The Antelope Valley Groundwater Basin (Basin) is located in the southwestern portion of the Mojave Desert. The Basin straddles the Los Angeles County-Kern County line, encompassing approximately 1,220 square miles within Los Angeles County, 2,006 square miles in Kern County, and 143 square miles in San Bernardino County.1 It is considered a closed topographic basin with no outlet to the ocean, which restricts the removal of runoff to percolation or evaporation. The Basin is primarily recharged through infiltration of precipitation and runoff from the surrounding mountains and hills in ephemeral stream channels. Other sources of recharge to the basin include artificial recharge and return flows from agricultural and urban irrigation. Depending on the thickness and characteristics of the unsaturated zone of the aquifer below a particular site, these sources may or may not contribute to recharge of the Basin.

In general, groundwater in the Basin flows northeasterly from several major mountain range canyons, then spreads out and flows across the alluvial fans, eventually reaching the dry lakebeds, including Rogers Lake, Rosamond Lake, and Buckhorn Lake, all located northeast of the City. Storm flows in the undeveloped portions of the City are generally channeled through wide, north-south swales until intercepted by flood control structures or natural creek beds. Natural tributaries within the City include Amargosa Creek and Little Rock Creek. The total storage capacity of the Basin has been reported to be approximately 68,000,000 to 70,000,000 acre-feet.2 For the part of the Basin between 20 and 220 feet in depth, the storage capacity has been reported to be approximately 5,400,000 acre-feet.

Surface Water
Surface watersheds in California are divided into ten hydrologic regions, as defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City is located within the South Lahontan Hydrologic Region and is subject to the objectives and limits of the Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region 1 Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Antelope Valley Watershed, https://dpw.lacounty.gov/wmd/watershed/av/, accessed November 11, 2021. 2 California Department of Water Resources, California’s Groundwater, Bulletin 118, South Lahontan Hydrologic region, Antelope Valley Groundwater Basin, last updated February 27, 2004, https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWRWebsite/Web-Pages/Programs/Groundwater-Management/Bulletin-118/Files/2003-BasinDescriptions/6_044_AntelopeValley.pdf, accessed November 9, 2021.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-2 Hydrology and Water Quality (Basin Plan) under the jurisdiction of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan RWQCB). Hydrologic Regions are subdivided into Hydrologic Units (HUs), and further into Hydrologic Areas (HAs). The City is in the Antelope HU and specifically within the Lancaster HA.

Notable named streams in the watershed include Amargosa Creek, Big Rock Creek, and Little Rock Creek which begin as well-defined channels in the San Gabriel Mountains and become broad, ephemeral washes as they flow northeast onto the valley floor towards Rosamond Dry Lake. Oak Creek and Cottonwood Creek begin in the Tehachapi Mountains and flow southeast towards the center of the watershed.

Drainage Facilities
The City of Lancaster Master Plan of Drainage includes a map showing existing local and regional flood control facilities in Lancaster, including channels, storm drains, and retention basins. 3 City streets are
generally used to convey water runoff, which tends to flow in sheets over paved surfaces and collect in low-lying areas. In many areas, City streets are designed to accommodate 10-year and/or 25-year storm flows within the existing rights-of-way.

Flooding
Based on the General Plan, the City and surrounding area’s population reside in low lying areas adjacent to significant mountain ranges with uncontrolled runoff, including the San Gabriel and Sierra Pelona Mountains to the south. As such, residents in these areas are subject to periodic flooding during and immediately after periods of heavy rain fall. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for Los Angeles County, California (Map Numbers 06037C0150F, 06037C0400F, 06037C0175F, 06037C0405F, 06037C0415F, 06037C0410F, 06037C0420F, 06037C0450F, 06037C0442F, 06037C0475F, 06037C0465F, and 06037C0462F, dated September 26, 2008) show that the majority of the City is located within areas of 0.2-percent annual chance of flood hazard.4 Small areas in the northern part, eastern terminal, and western terminal of the City are identified as areas with one percent annual chance of flood hazard.5 Surface water flows originating in the developed portions of the City, on the floor of the alluvial fan, are generally contained within the existing street.

STORMWATER QUALITY
Point Source Pollutants
Historically, point source pollutants have consisted of industrial operations with discrete discharges to receiving waters. Over the past several decades, many industrial operations have been identified as potential sources of pollutant discharges. For this reason, many types of industrial operations require 3 Stantec Consulting Inc., City of Lancaster Master Plan of Drainage, Appendix C, Existing Hydrology Map, dated March 20, 2019, https://www.cityoflancasterca.org/home/showpublisheddocument/42836/637485843453730000, accessed November 3, 2021. 4 County of Los Angeles, Comprehensive Floodplain Management Plan, Appendix F, FEMA Flood Zone Maps, May 28, 2015. 5 Ibid.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-3 Hydrology and Water Quality coverage under the State of California’s General Industrial Permit. This permit regulates the operation of industrial facilities and monitors and reports mechanisms to ensure compliance with water quality objectives. State regulations require industrial operations to comply with California’s General Industrial Permit, which significantly lessens impacts on the quality of receiving waters. However, industrial operations that are not covered under the General Industrial Permit’s jurisdiction may still have the potential to affect the water quality of receiving waters. These industrial operations would be considered nonpoint source pollutants.

Nonpoint Source Pollutants
A net effect of urbanization can be to increase pollutant export over naturally occurring conditions.

The impact of the higher export affects the adjacent streams and the downstream receiving waters.

However, an important consideration in evaluating stormwater quality is to assess whether the beneficial use to the receiving waters is impaired. Nonpoint source pollutants are characterized by the following major categories to assist in determining the pertinent data and its use. Receiving waters can assimilate a limited quantity of various constituent elements; however, there are thresholds beyond which the measured amount becomes a pollutant and results in an undesirable impact. Standard water quality categories of typical urbanization impacts are:
• Sediment. Sediment is made up of tiny soil particles that are washed or blown into surface waters. It is the major pollutant by volume in surface water. Suspended soil particles can cause the water to look cloudy or turbid. The fine sediment particles also act as a vehicle to transport other pollutants, including nutrients, trace metals, and hydrocarbons. Construction sites are the largest source of sediment for urban areas under development. Another major source of sediment is streambank erosion, which may be accelerated by increases in peak rates and volumes of run-off due to urbanization.
• Nutrients. Nutrients are a major concern for surface water quality, especially phosphorous and nitrogen, which can cause algal blooms and excessive vegetative growth. Of the two, phosphorus is usually the limiting nutrient that controls the growth of algae in lakes. The orthophosphorous form of phosphorus is readily available for plant growth. The ammonium form of nitrogen can also have severe effects on surface water quality. The ammonium is converted to nitrate and nitrite forms of nitrogen in a process called nitrification. This process consumes significant amounts of oxygen, which can impair the dissolved oxygen levels in water. The nitrate form of nitrogen is very soluble and is found naturally at low levels in water.

When nitrogen fertilizer is applied to lawns or other areas more than needed by the plant, nitrates can leach below the root zone, eventually reaching groundwater. Orthophosphate from auto emissions also contributes phosphorus in areas with heavy automobile traffic.

Generally, nutrient export is greatest from development sites with the most impervious areas.

Other problems resulting from excess nutrients are: 1) surface algal scums; 2) water discolorations; 3) odors; 4) toxic releases; and 5) overgrowth of plants. Common measures for nutrients are total nitrogen, organic nitrogen, total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), nitrate, ammonia, total phosphate, and total organic carbon (TOC).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-4 Hydrology and Water Quality • Trace Metals. Trace metals are primarily a concern because of their toxic effects on aquatic life, and their potential to contaminate drinking water supplies. The most common trace metals found in urban run-off are lead, zinc, and copper. Fallout from automobile emissions is also a major source of lead in urban areas. A large fraction of the trace metals in urban runoff are attached to sediment; this effectively reduces the level, which is immediately available for biological uptake and subsequent bioaccumulation. Metals associated with sediment settle out rapidly and accumulate in the soils. Urban runoff events typically occur over a shorter duration, reducing the amount of exposure, which could be toxic to the aquatic environment. The toxicity of trace metals in runoff varies with the hardness of the receiving water. As total hardness of the water increases, the threshold concentration levels for adverse effects increases.
• Bacteria. Bacteria levels in undiluted urban runoff exceed public health standards for water contact recreation almost without exception. Studies have found that total coliform counts exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) water quality criteria at almost every site and almost every time it rained. The coliform bacteria that are detected may not be a health risk by themselves but are often associated with human pathogens. • Oil and Grease. Oil and grease are characterized as high-molecular weight organic compounds.

Elevated oil and grease content can decrease the aesthetic value of the water body, as well as the water quality. Introduction of these pollutants to water bodies may occur due to the wide uses and applications of some of these products in municipal, residential, commercial, industrial, and construction areas. Primary sources of oil and grease are petroleum hydrocarbon products, motor products from leaking vehicles, esters, oils, fats, waxes, and high molecular-weight fatty acids.
• Other Toxic Chemicals. Priority pollutants are generally related to hazardous wastes or toxic chemicals and can be sometimes detected in stormwater. Priority pollutant scans have been conducted in previous studies of urban run-off, which evaluated the presence of over 120 toxic chemicals and compounds. The scans rarely revealed toxins that exceeded the current safety criteria. The urban run-off scans were primarily conducted in suburban areas not expected to have many sources of toxic pollutants (possibly except for illegally disposed or applied household hazardous wastes). Measures of priority pollutants in stormwater include:
1) phthalate (plasticizer compound); 2) phenols and creosols (wood preservatives); 3) pesticides and herbicides; 4) oils and greases; and 5) metals.

Physical Characteristics of Surface Water Quality
Standard parameters, which can assess stormwater quality, provide a method of measuring impairment. A background of these typical characteristics assists in understanding water quality requirements. The quantity of a material in the environment and its characteristics determine the degree of availability as a pollutant in surface run-off. In an urban environment, the quantity of certain pollutants in the environment is a function of the intensity of the land use. For instance, high automobile traffic volumes cause various potential pollutants (such as lead and hydrocarbons) to be more prevalent. The availability of a material, such as a fertilizer, is a function of the quantity and the Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-5 Hydrology and Water Quality way in which it is applied. Applying fertilizer in quantities that exceed plant needs leaves the excess nutrients available for loss to surface or groundwater.

The physical properties and chemical constituents of water traditionally have served as the primary means for monitoring and evaluating water quality. Evaluating the condition of water through a water quality standard refers to its physical, chemical, or biological characteristics. There are many types and classifications of water quality parameters for stormwater. Typically, the concentration of an urban pollutant, rather than the annual load of that pollutant, is required to assess a water quality problem.

Some of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics that evaluate the quality of surface runoff are listed below.
• Dissolved Oxygen. Dissolved oxygen (DO) in the water has a pronounced effect on the aquatic organisms and the chemical reactions that occur. It is one of the most important biological water quality characteristics in the aquatic environment. The DO concentration of a water body is determined by the solubility of oxygen, which is inversely related to water temperature, pressure, and biological activity. DO is a transient property that can fluctuate rapidly in time and space and represents the status of the water system at a point and time of sampling. The decomposition of organic debris in water is a slow process, as are the resulting changes in oxygen status. The oxygen demand is an indication of the pollutant load and includes measurements of biochemical oxygen demand or chemical oxygen demand. • Biochemical Oxygen Demand. The biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is an index of the oxygendemanding properties of the biodegradable material in the water. Samples are taken from the field and incubated in the laboratory at 20oC, after which the residual dissolved oxygen is measured. The BOD value commonly referenced is the standard five-day values. These values are useful in assessing stream pollution loads and for comparison purposes. • Chemical Oxygen Demand. The chemical oxygen demand (COD) is a measure of the pollutant loading in terms of complete chemical oxidation using strong oxidizing agents. It can be determined quickly because it does not rely on bacteriological actions as with BOD. COD does not necessarily provide a good index of oxygen demanding properties in natural waters. • Total Dissolved Solids. Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration is determined by evaporation of a filtered sample to obtain residue whose weight is divided by the sample volume. The TDS of natural waters varies widely. There are several reasons why TDS is an important indicator of water quality. Dissolved solids affect the ionic bonding strength related to other pollutants such as metals in the water. TDS are also a major determinant of aquatic habitat. TDS affects saturation concentration of dissolved oxygen and influences the ability of a water body to assimilate wastes. Eutrophication rates depend on TDS.
• pH. The pH of water is the negative log, base 10, of the hydrogen ion (H+) activity. A pH of 7 is neutral; a pH greater than 7 indicates alkaline water; a pH less than 7 represents acidic water. In natural water, carbon dioxide reactions are some of the most important in establishing pH. The pH at any one time is an indication of the balance of chemical equilibrium in water and affects the availability of certain chemicals or nutrients in water for uptake by Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-6 Hydrology and Water Quality plants. The pH of water directly affects fish and other aquatic life; generally, toxic limits are pH values less than 4.8 and greater than 9.2.
• Alkalinity. Alkalinity is the opposite of acidity, representing the capacity of water to neutralize acid. Alkalinity is also linked to pH and is caused by the presence of carbonate, bicarbonate, and hydroxide, which are formed when carbon dioxide is dissolved. A high alkalinity is associated with a high pH and excessive solids. Most streams have alkalinities less than 200 milligrams per liter (mg/l). Ranges of alkalinity of 100-200 mg/l seem to support welldiversified aquatic life. • Specific Conductance. The specific conductivity of water, or its ability to conduct an electric current, is related to the total dissolved ionic solids. Long-term monitoring of project waters can develop a relationship between specific conductivity and TDS. Its measurement is quick and inexpensive and can be used to approximate TDS. Specific conductivities more than 2,000 microohms per centimeter (μohms/cm) indicate a TDS level too high for most freshwater fish.
• Turbidity. The clarity of water is an important indicator of water quality that relates to the alkalinity of photosynthetic light to penetrate. Turbidity is an indicator of the property of water that causes light to become scattered or absorbed. Turbidity is caused by suspended clays and other organic particles. It can be used as an indicator of certain water quality constituents, such as predicting sediment concentrations.
• Nitrogen. Sources of nitrogen in stormwater are from the additions of organic matter to water bodies or chemical additions. Ammonia and nitrate are important nutrients for the growth of algae and other plants. Excessive nitrogen can lead to eutrophication since nitrification consumes dissolved oxygen in the water. Nitrogen occurs in many forms. Organic nitrogen breaks down into ammonia, which eventually becomes oxidized to nitrate-nitrogen, a form available for plants. High concentrations of nitrate-nitrogen (N/N) in water can stimulate growth of algae and other aquatic plants, but if phosphorus is present, only about 0.30 mg/l of nitrate-nitrogen is needed for algal blooms. Some fish life can be affected when nitratenitrogen exceeds 4.2 mg/l. There are several ways to measure the various forms of aquatic nitrogen. Typical measurements of nitrogen include Kjeldahl nitrogen (organic nitrogen plus ammonia), ammonia, nitrite plus nitrate, nitrite, and nitrogen in plants. The principal water quality criterion for nitrogen focuses on nitrate and ammonia. • Phosphorus. Phosphorus is an important component of organic matter. In many water bodies, phosphorus is the limiting nutrient that prevents additional biological activity from occurring.

The origin of this constituent in urban stormwater discharge is generally from fertilizers and other industrial products. Orthophosphate is soluble and considered the only biologically available form of phosphorus. Since phosphorus strongly associates with solid particles and is a significant part of organic material, sediments influence concentration in water and are an important component of the phosphorus cycle in streams. Important methods of measurement include detecting orthophosphate and total phosphorus.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-7 Hydrology and Water Quality Existing Regional Water Quality Conditions
The City is under the jurisdiction of the Lahontan RWQCB. The Lahontan RWQCB is responsible for establishing water quality standards and objectives that protect the beneficial uses of various waters in their region. The Lahontan RWQCB is also responsible for protecting surface and groundwaters from both point and non-point sources of pollution. Water quality standards and control measures for surface and ground waters of the Lahontan Region are contained in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan designates beneficial uses for surface water and groundwater and establishes water quality objectives, waste discharge prohibitions, and other implementation measures to protect those beneficial uses. Twenty three beneficial uses and their definitions were developed and recommended for use in the Basin Plans, the following of which are applicable to the discussion below:
• AGR – Agricultural Supply. Beneficial uses of waters used for farming, horticulture, or ranching, including, but not limited to, irrigation, stock watering, and support of vegetation for range grazing;
• BIOL – Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance. Beneficial uses of waters that support designated areas or habitats, such as established refuges, parks, sanctuaries, ecological reserves, and Areas of Special Biological Significance, where the preservation and enhancement of natural resources requires special protection; • COLD – Cold Freshwater Habitat. Beneficial uses of waters that support cold water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, and wildlife, including invertebrates;
• COMM – Commercial and Sportfishing. Beneficial uses of waters used for commercial or recreational collection of fish or other organisms including, but not limited to, uses involving organisms intended for human consumption;
• FLD – Flood Peak Attenuation/Flood Water Storage. Beneficial uses of riparian wetlands in floodplain areas and other wetlands that receive natural surface drainage and buffer its passage to receiving waters;
• FRSH – Freshwater Replenishment. Beneficial uses of waters used for natural or artificial maintenance of surface water quantity or quality [e.g., salinity]; • GWR – Ground Water Recharge. Beneficial uses of waters used for natural or artificial recharge of groundwater for purposes of future extraction, maintenance of water quality, or halting of saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers;
• IND – Industrial Service Supply. Beneficial uses of waters used for industrial activities that do not depend primarily on water quality including, but not limited to, mining, cooling water supply, geothermal energy production, hydraulic conveyance, gravel washing, fire protection, and oil well repressurization;
Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-8 Hydrology and Water Quality • MUN – Municipal and Domestic Supply. Beneficial uses of waters used for community, military, or individual water supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water supply; • RARE – Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species. Beneficial uses of waters that support habitat necessary for the survival and successful maintenance of plant or animal species established under State and/or Federal law as rare, threatened or endangered; • REC-1 – Water Contact Recreation. Beneficial uses of waters used for recreational activities involving body contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming, wading, water-skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, white water activities, fishing, and use of natural hot springs; • REC-2 – Noncontact Water Recreation. Beneficial uses of waters used for recreational activities involving proximity to water, but not normally involving body contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beach-combing, camping, boating, tidepool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing, and aesthetic enjoyment in conjunction with the above activities; • SAL – Inland Saline Water Habitat. Beneficial uses of waters that support inland saline water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of aquatic saline habitats, vegetation, fish, and wildlife, including invertebrates; • WARM – Warm Freshwater Habitat. Beneficial uses of waters that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, and wildlife, including invertebrates; • WILD – Wildlife Habitat. Beneficial uses of waters that support wildlife habitats including, but not limited to, the preservation and enhancement of vegetation and prey species used by wildlife, such as waterfowl; and
• WQE – Water Quality Enhancement. Beneficial uses of waters that support natural enhancement or improvement of water quality in or downstream of a water body including, but not limited to, erosion control, filtration and purification of naturally occurring water pollutants, streambank stabilization, maintenance of channel integrity, and siltation control.

The Basin Plan identifies the following beneficial uses for the Basin:
6 • MUN, AGR, IND, FRSH
6 State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region, Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region, North and South Basins, Table 2-2, Beneficial Uses for Ground Waters of the Lahontan Region, effective March 31, 1995, including amendments effective August 1995 through October 29, 2019.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-9 Hydrology and Water Quality Further, the Basin Plan identifies the following beneficial uses for the subunit drainage features (watersheds/sub-watershed) within the Lancaster Hydrologic Area:
7 • Amargosa Creek (above discharge from Lancaster Water Reclamation Plant [Lancaster WRP]) − MUN, AGR, GWR, FRSH, REC-1, REC-2, COMM, WARM, COLD, WILD • Amargosa Creek (below discharge from Lancaster WRP)
− AGR, GWR, FRSH, REC-2, WARM, WILD
• Piute Ponds
− AGR, GWR, FRSH, REC-2, WARM, WILD, BIOL, RARE
• Piute Ponds (wetlands)
− AGR, GWR, FRSH, REC-2, WARM, WILD, BIOL, RARE, WQE, FLD • Rosamond Dry Lake
− GWR, REC-2, WARM, SAL, WILD
• Minor Surface Waters
− MUN, AGR, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, COMM, WARM, COLD, WILD
• Minor Wetlands
− MUN, AGR, GWR, FRSH, REC-1, REC-2, WARM, WILD, WQE, FLD The State and RWQCBs assess water quality data for California’s waters every two years to determine if they contain pollutants at levels that exceed protective water quality criteria and standards. This biennial assessment is required under Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303(d). Once a water body has been listed as “impaired”, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the constituent of concern (pollutant) must be developed for that water body. According to the SWRCB, no waterbody within the Lancaster hydrologic area is identified as 303(d) listed. 8 The closest listed waterbody is Elizabeth
Lake (Category 5)
9 approximately 3.6 miles to the west of the City. As such, no TMDLs have been established.
7 State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region, Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region, North and South Basins, Table 2-1, Beneficial Uses of Surface Waters of the Lahontan Region, effective March 31, 1995, including amendments effective August 1995 through October 29, 2019. 8 State Water Resources Control Board, Impaired Water Bodies, 2010 Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List/305(b) Report) – Statewide,
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/integrated2010.shtml?wbid=CAR635200531998080316 2636, October 11, 2011. 9 Category 5 criteria: A water segment where standards are not met and a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is required, but not yet completed, for at least one of the pollutants being listed for this segment.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-10 Hydrology and Water Quality

5.6.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL LEVEL
Clean Water Act
The principal law governing pollution of the nation’s surface waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act [CWA]). Originally enacted in 1948, it was amended in 1972 and has remained substantially the same since. The CWA consists of two major parts: provisions that authorize Federal financial assistance for municipal sewage treatment plant construction and regulatory requirements that apply to industrial and municipal dischargers. The CWA authorizes the establishment of effluent standards on an industry basis. The CWA also requires States to adopt water quality standards that “consist of the designated uses of the navigable waters involved and the water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses.” The CWA forms the basic national framework for the management of water quality and the control of pollution discharges; it provides the legal framework for several water quality regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), effluent limitations, water quality standards, pretreatment standards, antidegradation policy, nonpoint source discharge programs, and wetlands protection. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated the responsibility for administration of portions of the CWA to State and regional agencies.

Section 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies
CWA Section 303(d) and California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (described below) require that the State establish the beneficial uses of its State waters and to adopt water quality standards to protect those beneficial uses. Section 303(d) establishes a TMDL, which is the maximum quantity of a contaminant that a water body can maintain without experiencing adverse effects, to guide the application of State water quality standards. Section 303(d) also requires the State to identify “impaired” streams (water bodies affected by the presence of pollutants or contaminants) and to establish the TMDL for each stream.

National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
To achieve its objectives, the CWA is based on the concept that all discharges into the nation’s waters are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit. The NPDES is the permitting program for discharge of pollutants into surface waters of the United States under CWA Section 402. Thus, industrial and municipal dischargers (point source discharges) must obtain NPDES permits from the appropriate RWQCB. The existing NPDES (Phase I) stormwater program requires municipalities serving more than 1,000,000 persons to obtain a NPDES stormwater permit for any construction project larger than five acres. Proposed NPDES stormwater regulations (Phase II) expand this existing national program to smaller municipalities with populations of 10,000 persons or more and construction sites that disturb more than one acre. For other dischargers, such as those affecting groundwater or from nonpoint sources, a Report of Waste Discharge must be filed with the regional Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-11 Hydrology and Water Quality RWQCB. For specified situations, some permits may be waived, and some discharge activities may be handled through being included in an existing General Permit.

National Flood Insurance Program
Congress passed the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973. These Acts are intended to reduce the need for large publicly funded flood control structures and disaster relief by restricting development on floodplains.

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) provides a means for property owners to financially protect themselves from flood damage. The NFIP offers flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and business owners if their community participates in the program. Participating communities agree to adopt and enforce ordinances that meet or exceed FEMA requirements to reduce the risk of flooding. The City of Lancaster is a participating community and must adhere to the NFIP.

Through its Flood Hazard Mapping Program, FEMA identifies flood hazards, assesses flood risks and partners with States and communities to provide accurate flood hazard and risk data. Flood hazard mapping is an important part of the NFIP, as it is the basis of the NFIP regulations and flood insurance requirements. FEMA maintains and updates data through FIRMs and risk assessments. A FIRM is an official map of a community on which FEMA has delineated both the special hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community.

A Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) is an area within a floodplain having a one percent or greater chance of flood occurrence within any given year (commonly referred to as the 100-year flood zone).

SFHAs are delineated on flood hazard boundary maps issued by FEMA. The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 and the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 make flood insurance mandatory for most properties in SFHAs.

STATE LEVEL
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The CWA places the primary responsibility for the control of surface water pollution and for planning the development and use of water resources with the States, although it establishes certain guidelines for the States to follow in developing their programs and allows the EPA to withdraw control from States with inadequate implementation mechanisms.

California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues with respect to both surface waters and groundwater is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code Sections 13000, et seq.). The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act grants the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the RWQCBs authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, to regulate discharges to surface and groundwater, to regulate waste disposal sites, and to require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, or oil or petroleum product.

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-12 Hydrology and Water Quality Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan for its region. The regional plans are to conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and established by the SWRCB in its State water policy. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act also provides that a RWQCB may include, within its regional plan, water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste.

State Water Resources Control Board
The SWRCB administers water rights, water pollution control, and water quality functions throughout the State, while the RWQCBs conduct planning, permitting, and enforcement activities. The NPDES permit is divided into two parts: construction and post-construction. Construction permitting is administered by the SWRCB, while post-construction permitting is administered by the regional RWQCB. In California, NPDES permits are also referred to as waste discharge requirements (WDRs) that regulate discharges to waters of the United States.

Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ
On November 16, 1990, the EPA published final regulations that established stormwater permit application requirements for specified categories of industries. The regulations provide that discharges of stormwater to waters of the United States from construction projects are effectively prohibited unless the discharge complies with an NPDES Permit. On August 19, 1999, the SWRCB reissued the General Construction Stormwater Permit (Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ). On December 8, 1999, the State Water Board amended Order 99-08-DWQ to apply to sites as small as one acre.

Dischargers whose projects disturb one (1) or more acres of soil or whose projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore a facility’s original line, grade, or capacity.

To obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit, Permit Registration Documents (PRDs), including a Notice of Intent (NOI), Risk Assessment, Site Map, and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), among others, must be filed with the SWRCB prior to the commencement of construction activity. The NOI would notify the SWRCB of the applicant’s intent to comply with the Construction General Permit. The SWPPP, which must be prepared by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD), would include a list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) the discharger would use to protect stormwater run-off and the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the project’s SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program and a chemical monitoring program for “nonvisible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs.

Groundwater Management Act
In 1992, the State Legislature provided for more formal groundwater management with the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 3030, the Groundwater Management Act (Water Code Section 10750, et seq.).

Program Environmental Impact Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program
Public Review Draft | August 2022 5.6-13 Hydrology and Water Quality Groundwater management, as defined in DWR’s Bulletin 118 Update 2003, is the planned and coordinated monitoring, operation, and administration of a groundwater basin, or portion of a basin, with the goal of long-term groundwater resource sustainability. Groundwater management needs are generally identified and addressed at the local level in the form of Groundwater Management Plans (GMP). The Act provides local water agencies with procedures to develop a GMP to enable those agencies to manage their groundwater resources efficiently and safely while protecting the quality of supplies. Under the Act, development of a GMP by a local water agency is voluntary.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) established a framework for sustainable, local groundwater management. SGMA requires groundwater-dependent regions to halt overdraft and bring basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge. With passage of the SGMA, the Department of Water Resources launched the Sustainable Groundwater Management (SGM) Program to implement the law and provide ongoing support to local agencies around the State. The SGMA:
• Establishes a definition of “sustainable groundwater management”; • Requires that a Groundwater Sustainability Plan be adopted for the most important groundwater basins in California;
• Establishes a timetable for adoption of Groundwater Sustainability Plans; • Empowers local agencies to manage basins sustainably; • Establishes basic requirements for Groundwater Sustainability Plans; and • Provides for a limited State role.

Lancaster City CouncilJanuary 24, 2023

Lancaster City Council
January 24, 2023