Policy M-9.4: New Development. Work with developers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
Action M-9a: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code and related implementation documents, as necessary, to reflect TDM best practices.
Action M-9b: Require developments that are approved based on TDM plans to incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets as part of those plans.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Goal RM-4: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Improved air quality in Lawndale and the region through reductions in air pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Policy RM-4.1: Regional Cooperation. Support regional efforts, including those organized through the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), and the California Air Resource Board (CARB) to implement the regional Air Quality Management Plan.
Policy RM-4.2: Measurement and Enforcement. Coordinate with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to support their ability to properly measure air quality at emission sources and enforce the standards of the Clean Air Act.
Policy RM-4.3: GHG Emissions. Align the City’s local GHG reduction targets with the statewide GHG reduction targets of Assembly Bill 32, and align the City’s GHG reduction goal with the statewide GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05.
Policy RM-4.4: Transportation Options. Promote alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicular emissions and improve air quality. (See Mobility Element) Policy RM-4.5: Walkability. Encourage pedestrian-scale development and pedestrianfriendly design features to reduce vehicle emissions. (See Mobility Element) Policy RM-4.6: Land Use Planning. Encourage and incentivize higher density and mixeduse development opportunities within designated areas of the City to lessen the impacts of traffic congestion on local air quality. (See Land Use Element) Policy RM-4.7: Sensitive Receptors. Insulate sensitive receptors from areas of heightened air quality pollution by utilizing land use planning to buffer and protect residential areas.
Policy RM-4.8: Mitigation. Require the implementation of relevant mitigation measures for all future development upon identification of potential air quality impacts.
Findings
Policy RM-4.9: GHG Reduction. Consider and adopt new local policies and programs that will help to provide energy efficient alternatives to fossil fuel use and reduce consumption in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the local measures identified in the City of Lawndale Climate Action Plan.
Policy RM-4.10: Public Engagement. Promote regional air quality programs in order to inform the public on regional air quality concerns and encourage the engagement of all residents in future planning decisions related to air quality.
Action RM-4a: Implement the local GHG reduction measures identified in the City of Lawndale Climate Action Plan (CAP), participate in future updates of the SBCCOG Climate Action Plan, and perform on-going monitoring and reporting of GHG reduction impacts. Develop a Climate Action Team to support and guide the City’s efforts to conserve energy and reduce emissions. Work with the SBCCOG and/or other local, Regional, State, and Federal agencies or utility to obtain funding necessary to implement, monitor, and report the CAP measures.
Action RM-4b: As applicable, review new industrial and commercial development projects during the CEQA process for potential air quality impacts to residences and other sensitive receptors. Ensure that mitigation measures and best management practices are implemented to reduce significant emissions of criteria pollutants.
Action RM-4c: Review development, infrastructure, and planning projects for consistency with SCAQMD requirements during the CEQA review process. Require project applicants to prepare air quality analyses to address SCAQMD and General Plan requirements, as appropriate, which include analysis and identification of:
1. Air pollutant emissions associated with the project during construction, project operation, and cumulative conditions.
2. Potential exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants.
3. Significant air quality impacts associated with the project for construction, project operation, and cumulative conditions.
4. Mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to less than significant or the maximum extent feasible where impacts cannot be mitigated to less than significant.
Action RM-4d: Work with the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Southern California Association of Governments, the South Bay Cities Council of Governments, and the California Air Resource Board to implement programs aimed at improving regional air quality.
Action RM-4e: Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new public and private development complies with the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24 Findings
standards as well as the energy efficiency standards established by the Lawndale Municipal Code.
Action RM-4f: Provide the necessary facilities and infrastructure to facilitate the use of low or zero-emission vehicles such as electric vehicle charging facilities at key City facilities as operations necessitate and/or as funding becomes available.
Action RM-4g: Evaluate and consider multi-modal transportation benefits to all City employees, such as free or low-cost monthly public transportation (bus) passes. Encourage employer participation in similar programs. Encourage new transit/shuttle services and use.
Action RM-4h: Establish programs that encourage community car-sharing and carpooling.
Action RM-4i: Support the establishment and expansion of a regional network of electric vehicle charging stations and encourage the expanded use of electric vehicles.
Action RM-4j: Encourage multi-family residential and non-residential development to increase the use of higher-albedo materials for surfaces including roofs, parking areas, driveways, roads, and sidewalks. Encourage developments with parking lot areas to shade these areas with vegetation or solar panels when appropriate. Support various programs to plant and maintain trees, which can also contribute to a reduction of urban heat islands.
Action RM-4k: Future development projects will be required to demonstrate consistency with SCAQMD construction emission thresholds. Where emissions from individual projects exceed SCAQMD thresholds, the following actions should be incorporated as necessary to minimize impacts. These measures do not exclude the use of other, equally effective mitigation measures as determined by a project specific Air Quality Assessment. • Require all off-road diesel equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) used for this Project to meet USEPA Tier 4 final off-road emission standards or equivalent. Such equipment shall be outfitted with Best Available Control Technology (BACT) devices including a California Air Resources Board Certified Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) or equivalent. The DPF reduces diesel particulate matter and NOX emissions during construction activities.
• Require a minimum of 50 percent of construction debris be diverted for recycling. • Require building materials to contain a minimum 10 percent recycled content. • Require materials such as paints, primers, sealants, coatings, and glues to have a low volatile organic compound concentration compared to conventional products.
If low VOC materials are not available, architectural coating phasing should be extended sufficiently to reduce the daily emissions of VOCs.
Action RM-4l: Future development projects will be required to demonstrate consistency with SCAQMD’s operational emission thresholds. For projects where operational emissions exceed regulatory thresholds, the following measures may be used to reduce impacts. Note the following measures are not all inclusive and developers have the option Findings
to add or substitute measures that are equally or more appropriate for the scope of the project.
• Develop a project specific TDM program for residents and/or employees that provides opportunities for carpool/vanpools.
• Provide onsite solar/renewable energy in excess of regulatory requirements. • Require that owners/tenants of non-residential or multi-family residential developments use architectural coatings that are 10 grams per liter or less when repainting/repairing properties.
• Require drip irrigation and irrigation sensor units that prevent watering during rain storms.
• Ensure all parking areas are wired for capability of future EV charging and include EV charging stations that exceed regulatory requirements.
Goal RM-5: Energy Resources. A community that safely manages its energy resources.
Policy RM-5.1: Compliance with State Legislation. Comply with all State requirements regarding the generation of power and encourage energy providers to investigate the use or expansion of renewable sources of energy.
Policy RM-5.2: Green Building Standards Code. Ensure that new construction and major redevelopment complies with the most current version of the California Green Building Standards Code.
Policy RM-5.3: Renewable Energy. Promote the development and use of renewable energy resources to reduce dependency on fossil fuels.
Policy RM-5.4: Energy-Efficient Materials. Promote the use of energy-efficient materials, equipment, and design in public and private facilities and infrastructure.
Policy RM-5.5: Energy Conservation. Promote energy conservation and recycling by the public and private sectors.
Policy RM-5.6: Energy Needs. Collaborate with local service providers in determining and meeting the needs of the community for energy in clean, modern, and cost-effective ways.
Policy RM-5.7: Business Community. Support the decisions of the Lawndale business community as they select and implement the most appropriate, financially feasible, and responsible energy source for their individual operations.
Policy RM-5.8: Public Education. Promote public education programs that advocate for reducing energy consumption, and promote renewable sources of energy.
Findings
Policy RM-5.9: Promote Energy Conservation in Existing Building Stock. Promote energy conservation by residents and businesses in existing structures, in close coordination with other agencies and local energy providers.
Action RM-5a: Implement energy conservation measures in public buildings through the following actions:
a. Promote energy efficient buildings and site design for all new public buildings during the site development permit process; and
b. Install energy saving devices in new public buildings and retrofit existing public buildings.
Action RM-5b: During the development review process, encourage innovative building design, layout, and orientation techniques to minimize energy use by taking advantage of sun/shade patterns, prevailing winds, landscaping and building materials that control energy usage, and solar design.
Action RM-5c: Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new public and private development complies with the California Code of Regulations, Title 24 standards as well as the energy efficiency standards established by the General Plan and the Municipal Code.
Action RM-5d: Promote the CEC Building Energy Benchmarking Program (AB 802) on the City’s website to help benchmark and monitor energy use for participating businesses seeking to increase energy efficiency and realize cost savings.
Action RM-5e: Identify and reduce government constraints to installation of renewable energy infrastructure and electric vehicle charging stations, as feasible, through incentives such as, streamlined permitting, and expedited inspection times.
Action RM-5f: Consider participation in a Community Choice Aggregation program, such as Clean Power Alliance, to help meet the City’s energy objectives.
Action RM-5g: Use the City’s website to promote existing incentivized programs such as Energy Upgrade California, financing programs such as Properly Assessed Clean Energy (PACE), and energy audits through State programs.
Action RM-5h: Partner with SBCCOG and relevant utilities on outreach events and to obtain educational content and promote on the City’s website.
Findings
SECTION V
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Regarding the General Plan’s potential to result in cumulative impacts, the City hereby finds as follows:
A. AESTHETICS
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.1.6, pages 5.1-14 through 5.1- 15)
Explanation: The Planning Area does not contain any scenic vistas or scenic resources; long-range views of the Palos Verdes Hills, Santa Monica Mountains, and San Gabriel Mountains are limited and primarily provided along major north-south corridors due to the existing development within the City and surrounding area. The Planning Area, and the surrounding areas, are developed and within an urbanized area. Development and/or redevelopment of the Planning Area would be subject to the regulations and requirements of the City’s Zoning Code, including building heights, setbacks, massing, and design and architectural regulations, while projects in the SOI would be subject to the County’s standards and requirements.
Future development projects in the City would be subject to the City’s development standards, site plan and/or design review process to ensure conformance with City’s established development standards. Although the potential for new development at higher densities/intensities could occur with implementation of the Project, scenic vistas and resources do not readily occur within the City and long-range views are limited due to the existing topography and urbanized nature of the area. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to aesthetics. With implementation of the adopted policies and regulations, the proposed General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to permanent changes in visual character, such as obstruction of scenic views. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on visual character to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving the potential for substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Findings
Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.1.6, pages 5.1-15) Explanation: As there are no officially designated or eligible scenic highways located within the viewshed of the Planning Area, future development and cumulative development associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would not substantially damage scenic resources within a State scenic highway. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving the potential for substantial damage to scenic resources within a State scenic highway would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.1.6, pages 5.1-15 through 5.1- 16)
Explanation: Future development and cumulative development are located within the Planning Area and are therefore within an “Urbanized Area.” Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in new development and intensification of existing urban uses along major corridors. While the Project does not include any specific development proposals, the Project could facilitate future development projects within these areas at higher densities and intensities than currently exist.
Development within the City is subject to the Lawndale Zoning Code, which provides for project-specific design review of future development proposals, which would ensure that development is consistent with the General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions, and the Zoning Code.
Individual development projects are reviewed subject to the specific zoning district and development being proposed. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to scenic quality. The proposed Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving potential conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.1.6, pages 5.1-19 through 5.1- 20)
Explanation: Future development associated with the General Plan Update and development in the surrounding communities could introduce new sources Findings
of light or glare with the potential to adversely affect day or nighttime views. All lighting installed in future development projects would be subject to conformance with the General Plan Update and applicable Zoning Code requirements. Additionally, pursuant to Chapter 17.30, future residential development projects would be reviewed for conformance with the City’s established design criteria, including project illumination.
Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to aesthetics. With implementation of the adopted policies and regulations, the proposed General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to permanent changes in visual character, such as increased lighting resulting in a substantial degradation. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on lighting and glare to a lessthan-significant level. Thus, through compliance with the City’s established regulatory requirements, the Project’s incremental effects involving the potential to create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area would not be cumulative considerable.
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.2.5, pages 5.2-7 through 5.2-8) Explanation: The Planning Area is located within an urbanized area and is generally developed with a mix of residential and non-residential uses. The FMMP classifies the Planning Area as Urban and Built-Up Land. The Planning Area does not contain any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance pursuant to the FMMP. Additionally, there are no existing lands within the Planning Area that are designated for agricultural use on the existing or proposed Lawndale Land Use Map and the Planning Area does not contain land under agricultural production. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact involving the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use and as a result would not contribute to a potential cumulative impact in this regard.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Findings
Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.2.5, page 5.2-8 through 5.2-9) Explanation: The Planning Area, along with the cumulative project sites, is located within an urbanized area and is generally developed with a mix of residential and non-residential uses. The Planning Area does not contain land under agricultural production, nor are any parcels within the Planning Area under a Williamson Act contract. Because the City does not have any zoning districts exclusive to agriculture uses, the General Plan Update, and subsequent zoning code update, would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact involving a conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract, and as a result would not contribute to a potential cumulative impact in this regard.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.2.5, page 5.2-8 through 5.2-9) Explanation: The Planning Area, along with the cumulative project sites, is located within an urbanized area and is generally developed with a mix of residential and non-residential uses. There are no forest lands within the Planning Area, nor are there suitable environmental conditions for forest land to be developed; therefore, implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. The Planning Area does not contain any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance pursuant to the FMMP; there are no existing lands within the Planning Area that are designated for agricultural use on the existing or proposed Lawndale Land Use Map; and the Planning Area does not contain land under agricultural production. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact involving the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and as a result would not contribute to a potential cumulative impact in this regard.
C. AIR QUALITY
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.3.6, pages 5.3-43) Explanation: The City of Lawndale continues to coordinate with SCAQMD and SCAG to ensure Citywide growth projections, land use planning efforts, and local development patterns are accounted for in the regional planning and air quality planning processes. Additionally, the General Plan Update includes Findings
policies and actions to further minimize potential impacts to air quality in support of the AQMP. Therefore, the operation of the proposed General Plan Update would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan and impacts would be less than significant.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable Federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Section 5.3.6, pages 5.3-43 through 5.3-44)
Explanation: Construction-related daily emissions would exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for VOCs, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Potential operational emissions for the proposed Project would also exceed regulatory thresholds (for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5). Feasible mitigation measures are incorporated into the policies and actions included within the General Plan Update. However, there are no feasible criteria air pollutant reduction measures beyond those identified within the policies and actions identified that would reduce impacts. While implementation of these policies and actions would reduce criteria pollutant emissions, the extent to which impacts would be generated by future development and infrastructure projects have to be determined on a project-by-project basis, as necessary.
Moreover, with respect to local air quality emissions, toxic air contaminant emissions, and health impacts, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. Implementation of the policies and actions listed above would mitigate and reduce such emissions. However, as there is no way to determine the extent to which these regulations would be, or need to be, implemented, it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below regulatory thresholds because the details and potential emissions levels of future development projects is not known at this time, as there are no specific development projects proposed as part of the General Plan Update. Additionally, there are no known feasible mitigation measures beyond the policies and actions listed above.
Therefore, localized operational impacts, construction and operational health, and toxic air impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
With respect to other emissions, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. However, as there is no way to determine the extent to which these regulations would be, or need to be, implemented, it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below Findings
regulatory thresholds. As project-specific information is not currently known, there are no known feasible mitigation measures that can be identified at this time beyond the policies and actions listed above. Based on these impacts, the General Plan Update would contribute to a cumulative impact with regard to air quality in the region and within the air basin (i.e. the South Coast Air Basin) as a whole. Therefore, this impact is considered a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impact.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Section 5.3.6, pages 5.3-44 through 5.3-45)
Explanation: With respect to local air quality emissions, toxic air contaminant emissions, and health impacts, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. Implementation of the General Plan Update policies and actions listed above would mitigate and reduce such emissions. However, the exact location, type, nature, and size of future projects that may expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations cannot be calculated at this time, as the details of potential future projects are not currently known. As such, there is no way to determine the extent to which these regulations will be, or need to be, implemented, and it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below regulatory thresholds. Additionally, as project-specific information is not currently known, there are no known feasible mitigation measures that can be identified at this time beyond the policies and actions listed above.
Therefore, this impact is considered a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impact.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Finding: Less than Significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.3.6, pages 5.3-45) Explanation: With respect to potential sources that may emit odors during construction and operations, future developments under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with the CARB requirements, SCAQMD rules, the City’s Municipal Code, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. As a result, the implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative odor impacts. Additionally, adherence to SCAQMD rules and regulations would alleviate potential impacts related to cumulative conditions on a project-byproject basis. Project implementation would not contribute to a Findings
cumulatively considerable objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people within the City; impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, a have 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, have a substantial adverse effect on state or Federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.4.6, pages 5.4-19 through 5.4- 21)
Explanation: The City is highly urbanized and is not known to support any significant wildlife or native planning communities or species. The potential for the Project to have a substantial adverse effect on any special status species, riparian habitat or sensitive natural community or wetlands is less than significant as these resources do not generally occur within the Planning Area. Future development within the City could involve the removal of trees, which may have the potential to impact nesting migratory birds.
Proposed removal of any street trees or trees on public property within the City would be reviewed in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 12.28 and would be required to comply with the requirements for removal. Future development projects would be required to adhere to applicable Federal, State, and local regulations that provide for sensitive species as part of the discretionary approval process for site-specific development projects. Any future development would be assessed for consistency with local policies and ordinances, including the Municipal Code and General Plan goals and policies, and adopted regulations pertaining to biological resources, as appropriate. With implementation of the adopted policies and regulations described above, the proposed General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to adverse effects to biological resources, including special status plant or wildlife species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, or any State or Federally protected wetlands. The polices and Findings
actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with existing regulations would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on biological resources to a less than significant level. Thus, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving special status plant or wildlife species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, or any State or Federally protected wetlands would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, 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?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.4.6, page 5.4-21) Explanation: The Planning Area, along with the surrounding region, are predominantly developed or paved and any landscaping consists primarily of ornamental and/or non-native plant species and do not provide for habitat linkages. The Dominguez Channel is concrete-lined and considered to have low habitat value. Although the channel could be used for wildlife movement, the Project as well as the cumulative projects do not involve any direct or indirect physical changes or modifications to the channel. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to biological resources. The proposed General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to interference of wildlife movement or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Thus, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites would not be cumulatively considerable
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.4.6, pages 5.4-21 through 5.4- 22)
Explanation: Site-specific development is not currently proposed as part of the Project; however, future development associated with implementation of the Project would be assessed for consistency with local policies and ordinances, including the Municipal Code and General Plan Update goals and policies, as appropriate. Proposed removal of any street trees or trees on public property within the City would be reviewed in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 12.28 and would be required to comply with the requirements Findings
for removal. Similarly, cumulative development within the region would be required to comply with any agency-specific policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Future development within the City and cumulative development would be assessed for consistency with the agency-specific Municipal Code and General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions. Since the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, the Project’s incremental effects would not be cumulatively considerable in this regard.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.4.6, page 5.4-22) Explanation: The Planning Area is not located within the boundaries of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving a conflict with any of these plans would not be cumulatively considerable.
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.5.6, page 5.5-17) Explanation: Previously recorded historic built environment resources have been identified within the City. Additionally, due to the age of development within the City, there is the potential for eligible historical resource sites to be located within the Planning Area. Future development and cumulative development within the Planning Area has the potential to impact known and potentially eligible historical resources. As with the Project, the related cumulative projects would undergo environmental review pursuant to CEQA to evaluate potential impacts to historical resources. This would include studies of historical resources that are present or could be present within a development site. Where significant or potentially significant impacts are identified, implementation of all feasible site-specific mitigation would be required to avoid or reduce impacts. Additionally, the General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes policies and actions that would address historical resources. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Findings
Plan Update on historical resources to a less than significant level. Based on the above, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative historical resource impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.5.6, pages 5.5-17 through 5.5- 18)
Explanation: No previously recorded cultural resources have been identified within the City; however, undiscovered archeological sites may be located within the Planning Area. Future development and cumulative development within the Planning Area has the potential to impact previously undiscovered archaeological resources. As with the Project, the related cumulative projects would undergo environmental review pursuant to CEQA to evaluate potential impacts to archaeological resources. This would include studies of archaeological resources that are present or could be present within a development site. Additionally, related projects would be subject to compliance with the established Federal, State, and local regulatory framework concerning the protection of cultural resources on a project-byproject basis. Where significant or potentially significant impacts are identified, implementation of all feasible site-specific mitigation would be required to avoid or reduce impacts. Additionally, the General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes policies and actions that would address archeological resources. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on archeological resources to a less than significant level. Based on the above, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative archaeological resource impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.5.6, page 5.5-18) Explanation: Although unlikely, there is the potential that previously undiscovered human remains could be encountered during construction activities associated with future development within the Planning Area. Future development projects would be required to comply with the established State regulatory framework regarding human remains. Related cumulative projects would undergo environmental review on a project-by-project basis to evaluate the site-specific archaeological sensitivity. Additionally, related projects would be subject to compliance with the established State and local Findings
regulatory framework, including the General Plan Update policies and actions, concerning the discovery of human remains on a project-by-project basis. The proposed Project’s compliance with the regulatory framework regarding the discovery of human remains would reduce potential Project impacts to a less than significant level; thus, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts to human remains would be less than cumulatively considerable.
F. ENERGY
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.6.6, page 5.6-18) Explanation: As future development projects are received and reviewed by the City in subsequent years, those projects would be reviewed for consistency with the General Plan Update and all relevant State-level programs and requirements. All future projects must implement the most current version of the Title 24 energy efficiency requirements, as required by State law.
Consistency with the General Plan Update and other mandatory State-level programs would ensure that future project-level contributions to inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary energy use would be less than significant.
Moreover, as identified above, buildout of the General Plan Update would not be expected to cause an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources nor conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. As a result, the proposed General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to cumulative energy impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.7.6, page 5.7-26) Explanation: There are no designated Alquist-Priolo fault zones within the Planning Area. Future development and cumulative development would be required to comply with CBSC, and each project within the City would be evaluated for conformance with the CBSC, General Plan, Lawndale Municipal Code, Findings
and other regulations. Therefore, the proposed Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts related to potential adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault and impacts in this regard are not cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.7.6, pages 5.7-26 through 5.7- 27)
Explanation: The Project proposes a comprehensive update to the City’s General Plan, including a revised Land Use Map. Buildout associated with the General Plan Update Land Use Map would allow for new or increased residential and non-residential development within specific areas of the City when compared to existing conditions, potentially exposing people to strong seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure. The Planning Area is not located within a mapped liquefaction zone, as delineated by the CGS. Future development and cumulative development would generally experience similar ground shaking associated with seismic activity. Future development within the Planning Area and cumulative projects would be required to conduct a site-specific geotechnical study to determine the geotechnical feasibility of the specific development being proposed at that time. Any recommendations presented in the geotechnical study would be required to be incorporated into the design and construction of the future development. Future development and cumulative development would be required to comply with all applicable regulations in the most recent CBSC, which includes design requirements to mitigate the effects of potential hazards associated with seismic ground shaking and liquefaction. The Lawndale Building and Safety Services Division would review construction plans for compliance with the CBSC and Lawndale Municipal Code, as well as the geotechnical study’s recommendations. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to geologic hazards. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on geologic hazards to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving exposure of people and structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving strong seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Findings
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.7.6, pages 5.7-27 through 5.7- 28)
Explanation: Future development sites and cumulative development sites within the City and surrounding areas may contain soils that have erosion potential.
Implementation of the construction activities associated with Project implementation and cumulative development projects would involve some land clearing, mass grading, and other ground-disturbing activities that could temporarily increase soil erosion rates during and shortly after project construction. However, the Planning Area is primarily urbanized with limited pervious areas; new development would primarily occur through infill development and redevelopment of sites that are currently developed and do not contain significant amounts of pervious area. Due to the limited pervious areas that occur within the Planning Area, it is not anticipated that Project implementation would increase impervious areas resulting in increased runoff when compared to existing conditions. Site specific geology and soil conditions would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis. All future residential development associated with the proposed Project and cumulative projects within the region would be required to comply with stormwater runoff and pollution control requirements required by the RWQCB and implemented by the specific jurisdiction in which the development occurs. Construction activities within the City would be required to comply with the Lawndale Municipal Code which implements erosion and siltation control measures of the Construction General Permit, reducing potential impacts associated with soil erosion or the loss of topsoil during construction activities. Additionally, future development and cumulative development would be required to comply with postconstruction runoff pollution reduction BMPs implemented through the SUSMP. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to stormwater runoff and other causes of soil erosion. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on soil erosion and loss of topsoil to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving substantial soil erosion or the loss of top soil would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects 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 or 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?
Findings
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.7.6, page 5.7-28) Explanation: Due to the generally flat topography within the City and surrounding area, the potential for lateral spreading within the Planning Area is considered to be low. Further, the Planning Area is not identified as having the potential for subsidence. The geotechnical and soil characteristics of future development associated with the Project and any cumulative development within the City would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis and appropriate mitigation measures would be required to reduce potential impacts associated with unstable geologic units or soils. Future development associated with implementation of the proposed Project would be required to prepare a geotechnical study for the specific site being proposed for development. The Lawndale Building and Safety Services Division would review construction plans for compliance with the CBSC and City Municipal Code, as well as the geotechnical study’s recommendations. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to geologic hazards. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on geologic hazards to a less-than-significant level.
Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving unstable geologic units or soils would not be cumulatively considerable
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, 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?
Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.7.6, page 5.7-29) Explanation: Future development within the Planning Area would be required to connect to the existing sewer system and would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. As such, no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.7.6, page 5.7-29) Explanation: The Planning Area has the potential to contain paleontological resources.
Compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce potential impacts to Findings
paleontological resources associated with future construction activities in the Planning Area to a less than significant level. There is also the potential for cumulative project sites within the region to have soils that contain paleontological resources. Construction activities associated with the cumulative projects have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy paleontological resources specific to those development sites. However, these potential impacts are site-specific and generally do not result in cumulative effects. Additionally, individual projects would undergo environmental review on a project-by-project basis pursuant to CEQA to evaluate potential impacts to paleontological resources. Where significant or potentially significant impacts are identified, implementation of all feasible site-specific mitigation would be required to avoid or reduce impacts. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to paleontological resources. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on paleontological resources to a less than significant level. Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving paleontological resources would not be cumulatively considerable.
H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Threshold: Would the Project, combined with other related cumulative projects, generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Section 5.8.6, page 5.8-38 through 5.8-39)
Explanation: The topic of GHG emissions is inherently a cumulative impact. Though significance thresholds can be developed by air districts, as well as State and Federal regulatory agencies, these thresholds and their related goals are ultimately designed to effect change at a global level. As demonstrated in the analysis provided above, it cannot be guaranteed that the proposed Project would be consistent with the 2045 GHG target for the State of California and would therefore have a significant and unavoidable impact, even with the implementation of General Plan Update goals, policies and actions.
I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Findings
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.9.6, pages 5.9-33 through 5.9- 34)
Explanation: Construction activities associated with future development and development associated with the cumulative projects may involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, State, and Federal law. Implementation of the Project would result in new development and intensification of existing urban uses along major corridors, including Hawthorne Boulevard. The General Plan Update does not introduce new industrial uses or allow for the intensification of existing industrial uses. The land uses anticipated by the Project and cumulative development projects do not typically involve the use or storage of hazardous substances other than limited quantities of hazardous materials such as solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, and other materials used for regular maintenance of buildings and landscaping. The quantities of these materials would not typically be at an amount that would pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Adherence to existing regulations would ensure compliance with safety standards related to the use and storage of hazardous materials, and the safety procedures mandated by applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations, which would ensure that risks involving the routine transportation, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes would be less than significant. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials. Implementation of the General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce potential impacts to ensure the General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to significant hazards to the public. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving hazards associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.9.6, pages 5.9-34 through 5.9- 35)
Explanation: Future development sites associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative development sites within the City could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Implementation of construction activities associated with Findings
Project implementation and cumulative development projects would involve some demolition, mass grading, excavation, and other grounddisturbing activities that could temporarily create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through release of hazardous materials. Future site-specific development would be reviewed at the project-level to determine whether any development sites are listed on a hazardous materials site. Any development activities that may occur on documented hazardous materials sites would be required to undergo remediation and cleanup under the supervision of the regulatory agencies, such as DTSC and the Los Angeles RWQCB. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials. Implementation of the General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce potential impacts to ensure the General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to significant hazards to the public. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving hazards associated with the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.9.6, page 5.9-35) Explanation: Future development sites associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative development sites within the City may emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school during construction phases. All future use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials associated with the proposed Project and cumulative projects within the City and region would be would be governed by existing regulations of several agencies, including DTSC, EPA, U.S. DOT, Cal/OSHA, and the LACoFD Health Hazardous Materials Division. Site-specific development would adhere to standard construction practices to ensure that any hazardous materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, State, and Federal law. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials would ensure all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts.
All development within the City is required to adhere to existing regulations which ensure compliance with safety standards related to the use and storage of hazardous materials, and the safety procedures mandated by applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations would reduce Findings
potential impacts to schools within the area. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials. Implementation of the General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce potential impacts to ensure the General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to significant hazards to the public. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving emission of hazardous materials within a onequarter mile of a school would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.9.6, pages 5.9-35 through 5.9- 36)
Explanation: Future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would be evaluated at the project-level to determine whether any development sites are listed on a hazardous materials site. Any development activities occurring on documented hazardous materials sites would be required to undergo remediation and cleanup under the supervision of Federal, State, and local regulations, including the DTSC and the Los Angeles RWQCB, prior to construction. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials. Implementation of the General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce potential impacts to ensure the General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to significant hazards to the public. Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving exposure of people and structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving hazardous materials sites would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.9.6, pages 5.9-36 through 5.9- 37)
Explanation: Future development associated with Project implementation and cumulative development could impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan. Implementation of construction activities associated with Project implementation and cumulative development projects could temporarily interfere with emergency response Findings
plans or emergency evacuation plans. Major arterials within the City generally serve as the primary routes for evacuation. However, evacuation routes would depend upon the emergency event and location. While all residential developments currently meet City evacuation standards, the City would continue to coordinate with LACoFD and the County Sheriff to provide ongoing education to residents about how to safely evacuate in the event of an emergency.
As site-specific development is not currently proposed, it is unknown if implementation of the Project would involve the removal of existing driveways or the construction of new driveways or any associated improvements, such as curb, gutter, and sidewalks. Proposed development would be required to submit appropriate plans for plan review to ensure compliance with zoning, building, and fire codes prior to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed development would be required to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements and would submit construction plans to the Fire Department’s Engineering Building Plan Check Unit for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permit.
Approval by the LACoFD would ensure that construction and operation would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City’s EOP or emergency evacuation plan. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to emergency response and evacuation. Thus, the Project’s incremental effects involving interface of emergency plans would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, combined with other related cumulative projects, result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to wildfire?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.9.6, page 5.9-37) Explanation: The Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative wildfire hazard impacts would not be significant. The City is highly urbanized and future development and redevelopment activities in the City would occur in areas that have been previously developed. As a result, the degree of wildland fire hazard, including secondary hazards such as post-fire flooding and debris flow, would not substantially change with adoption of the General Plan Update, and current hazards would not significantly increase. There are no SRA or FHSZs mapped within the Planning Area. New development would be required to comply with the Fire Code and would be reviewed by LACoFD to ensure fire safety is addressed. Additionally, the General Plan includes policies and programs to address public safety and emergency services, including fire protection. Accordingly, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative wildfire impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Findings
J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.10-6, page 5.10-36) Explanation: Future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative development within the City and surrounding areas may involve future construction activities that could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Future development and cumulative development would be required to comply with NPDES Permit regulations, which requires that any construction activity disturbing one acre or more of soil comply with the Construction General Permit. The permit requires development and implementation of a SWPPP and monitoring plan, which must include erosion-control and sediment-control BMPs that would meet or exceed measures required by the Construction General Permit to control stormwater quality degradation due to potential construction-related pollutants. For projects within the City disturbing less than one acre, Lawndale Municipal Code Section 13.12.070 would require compliance with minimum BMPs to reduce the discharge of pollutants. Regional projects disturbing less than one acre would be required to comply with the SUSMP and/or applicable jurisdictional-level BMPs to reduce the discharge of pollutants.
Additionally, future Project development and cumulative development could increase impervious areas resulting in increased stormwater runoff when compared to existing site conditions. Future development and cumulative development would be required to be consistent with the MS4 Permit and Lawndale Municipal Code Section 13.16.060, which requires post-construction runoff pollution reduction BMPs implemented through the SUSMP, including LID BMPs. Section 13.16.070, Control of Erosion of Slopes and Channels, requires BMPs to be used on slopes or channels in subject new development or redevelopment projects. Section 13.16.110, Maintenance of Best Management Practices, requires ongoing maintenance of structural or treatment control BMPs by subject development and redevelopment projects. Other existing regulatory requirements that manage water quality include requirements to obtain approval from the RWQCB for NPDES permits, other discharge permits, SWPPPs, and to implement BMPs.
Future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to hydrology and water quality. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update Findings
on hydrology and water quality to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, or a substantial degradation of surface water or groundwater quality, would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.10-6, page 5.10-37) Explanation: The General Plan Update does not include any site-specific development, but would enable future residential and non-residential development and is expected to result in increased population growth in the Planning Area, and a corresponding increase in the demand for additional water supplies. The Basin is managed by an adjudication and subject to the Judgment managed by the Watermaster, which ensures ongoing management of the Basin and assures the Basin will be capable of supplying sufficient water to meet local needs, including future growth and development. The Planning Area and surrounding area is primarily urbanized with limited pervious areas anticipated for development. Although future development and cumulative development have the potential to increase impervious areas, these areas are limited and do not provide for substantial groundwater recharge within the Planning Area and surrounding areas. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to hydrology and water quality, including water conservation measures and LID BMPs. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on groundwater to a less than significant level.
Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving a substantial decrease in groundwater supplies or substantial interference with groundwater recharge is not cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor offsite; create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or impede or redirect flood flows? Findings
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.10-6, pages 5.10-37 through
5.10-39)
Explanation: Erosion and Siltation
Future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative development within the City and surrounding areas may involve future construction activities that could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Future development and cumulative development would be required to comply with NPDES Permit regulations, which requires that any construction activity disturbing one acre or more of soil comply with the Construction General Permit. The permit requires development and implementation of a SWPPP and monitoring plan, which must include erosion-control and sediment-control BMPs that would meet or exceed measures required by the Construction General Permit to control stormwater quality degradation due to potential construction-related pollutants. For projects disturbing less than one acre, Lawndale Municipal Code Section 13.12.070 would require compliance with minimum BMPs to reduce the discharge of pollutants. Regional projects disturbing less than one acre would be required to comply with the SUSMP and/or applicable jurisdictional-level BMPs to reduce the discharge of pollutants.
Additionally, future development could increase impervious areas resulting in increased stormwater runoff when compared to existing site conditions.
Future development and cumulative development would be required to be consistent with the MS4 Permit and Lawndale Municipal Code Section
13.16.060, which requires post-construction runoff pollution reduction BMPs implemented through the SUSMP, including LID BMPs. Section
13.16.070 requires BMPs to be used on slopes or channels in subject new development or redevelopment projects. Section 13.16.110 requires ongoing maintenance of structural or treatment control BMPs by subject development and redevelopment projects. Other existing regulatory requirements that manage water quality include requirements to obtain approval from the RWQCB for NPDES permits, other discharge permits, SWPPPs, and to implement BMPs. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to hydrology and water quality, including compliance with construction BMPs and implementation of LID BMPs. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on hydrology and water quality to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving erosion and siltation is not cumulatively considerable.
Findings
Surface Runoff and Water Quality
The Planning Area is primarily urbanized with limited pervious areas anticipated for development. Although future development and cumulative development have the potential to increase impervious areas, Federal, State, and local regulations would require individual projects to provide the onsite storm drain infrastructure and any off-site infrastructure improvements to ensure stormwater runoff associated with future and cumulative development would be adequately captured and conveyed into the City’s storm drain system and LACFCD facilities. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff which would result in flooding on- or offsite or create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving or contributing runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems is less than cumulatively considerable.
Future Project development and cumulative development within the City and surrounding areas may involve future construction activities that could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Lawndale Municipal Code Chapter 17.88 promotes establishes requirements and standards for water efficient landscapes in new and substantially altered or expanded existing development projects, including the integration of stormwater BMPs into landscape design plans to minimize runoff and to increase on-site rainwater retention and infiltration. Existing regulatory requirements that manage water quality include requirements to obtain approval from the RWQCB for NPDES permits, other discharge permits, SUSMPs, SWPPPs, and to implement BMPs. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to hydrology and water quality, including compliance with construction BMPs and implementation of LID BMPs. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on hydrology and water quality to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Flood Flows
The Planning Area is highly urbanized and primarily developed with residential and non-residential uses. The Project does not propose any changes to the Dominguez Channel and would not result in the alteration of the course of a river or stream. Flood impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to result in cumulative impact. Additionally, there are no Findings
mapped flood hazard zones located within the Planning Area. Pursuant to the CWA, each subsequent development project or improvement project that disturbs more than one acre would be required to obtain NPDES coverage under the Construction General Permit, which would require an approved SWPPP that includes BMPs for grading and preservation of topsoil. Additionally, construction of storm drainage improvements would occur as part of an overall development or infrastructure project. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving impeding or redirecting flood flows would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.10-6, pages 5.10-39 through
5.10-40)
Explanation: Flood impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts. There are no mapped flood hazard zones located within the Planning Area. The Planning Area is approximately three miles inland of the Pacific Ocean and is not located within a mapped Tsunami Hazard Area. There are no dams with the potential to inundate the Planning Area according to the Division of Safety of Dams Dam Breach Inundation Maps.
Although there is a man-made lake within close proximity to the Planning Area, the lake does not generate a significant seiche risk to the Planning Area due to its size and the flat topography of the area. As a result, tsunamis and seiches do not pose hazards to the Planning Area. Additionally, construction of storm drainage improvements would occur as part of an overall development or infrastructure projects. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to hydrology and water quality, including compliance with construction BMPs and implementation of LID BMPs, which would reduce the risk of release of pollutants due to inundation within the Planning Area. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving the risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.10-6, pages 5.10-40 through
5.10-41)
Explanation: The local water quality control plan (Basin Plan), maintained by the Los Angeles RWQCB, specifies the State’s water quality standards (i.e., Findings
beneficial uses, water quality objectives, and antidegradation policy) and serves as the basis for the RWQCB’s regulatory programs. Future development and cumulative development projects would be required to comply with the provisions of applicable NPDES permits and water quality permitting, consistent with the Basin Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving implementation of a water quality control plan is less than cumulatively considerable.
The Planning Area is located entirely within the West Coast Basin and subject to the West Coast Judgment. The West Coast Judgment provides for the legal and practical means of ensuring that the waters of the Basin are sustainably managed and put to maximum beneficial use. The Project does not propose site-specific development. Future development and cumulative development projects would be subject to the West Coast Judgment.
Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to hydrology and water quality, including compliance with construction BMPs, implementation of LID BMPs, and water conservation measures. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects involving obstruction of implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan is less than cumulatively considerable.
K. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, physically divide an established community?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.11.5, page 5.11-25) Explanation: Development of cumulative projects in the City of Lawndale would be required to mitigate land use impacts on a project-by-project basis. Each project would be evaluated for consistency with the project site’s General Plan land use designation and zoning, adopted General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and other applicable regional land use plans, such as SCAG’s RTP/SCS. The proposed General Plan Update would result in less than significant impact related to land use and relevant planning. Therefore, the incremental impact of the proposed Project, when considered in combination with development within the City and region, would not result in cumulatively considerable land use impacts. The land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan provide opportunities for cohesive new growth at infill locations primarily within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area, but would not create physical division within the community. The proposed General Plan Update does not include any new roadways, infrastructure, or other features that would divide existing communities.
Each individual development project would be reviewed to determine its consistency and compatibility with the surrounding area and its potential to physically divide an established community. As the Project would not Findings
physically divide an established community, the Project’s incremental effects would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, 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?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.11.5, pages 5.11-25 through
5.11-26)
Explanation: The proposed General Plan Update was prepared in conformance with State laws and regulations associated with the preparation of general plans, including requirements for environmental protection. As demonstrated throughout the Draft EIR, the proposed Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with a land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The proposed General Plan Update carries forward and enhances policies and measures from the City’s existing General Plan that were intended for environmental protection, and would not remove or conflict with City plans, policies, or regulations adopted for environmental protection. The proposed General Plan Update would require modifications to the City’s Zoning Code to provide consistency between the General Plan and zoning; however, these modifications will not remove or adversely alter portions of the Lawndale Municipal Code that were adopted to mitigate an environmental effect. Similar to future development associated with the proposed Project, cumulative development projects would be evaluated for consistency with the project site’s General Plan land use designation and zoning; General Plan goals, policies, and actions; and other applicable plans for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As analyzed in the Draft EIR, the proposed Project would not 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. Thus, the proposed Project’s incremental effects would not be cumulatively considerable.
L. MINERAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other relative cumulative projects, result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.12.5, page 5.12-4) Explanation: The majority of land within the Planning Area is designated as MRZ-1, land where no significant mineral deposits are present, with a smaller portion designated as MRZ-3, land for which the significance of mineral resources Findings
cannot be determined. The land within the MRZ-3 is currently developed and is within a highly urbanized area, indicating there is little to no potential for resource extraction from the MRZ-3 area. Further, there are no known mineral deposits or resources in the Planning Area that are of significant value to the region or the State. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update, in combination with other relevant cumulative projects, would not contribute to cumulative impacts and impacts in this regard are not cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other relative cumulative projects, result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.12.5, page 5.12-4) Explanation: The Planning Area does not contain any locally-important mineral resource recovery sites delineated on local general plans, specific plans and other land use plans. As such, future development projects, in combination with other relative cumulative projects, would not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site. Impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
M. NOISE
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.13.6, pages 5.13-32 through
5.13-34)
Explanation: Transportation Noise Impacts
Table 5.13-11 in the Draft EIR shows the cumulative noise levels associated with traffic on the local roadway network, including projects within the Planning Area. Cumulative conditions include traffic due to 2045 buildout of the General Plan Update in addition to pass-through traffic from other jurisdictions. Table 5.13-12 in the Draft EIR shows the estimated noise level increases which may occur under cumulative conditions. As shown in Table
5.13-11 and Table 5.13-12 in the Draft EIR, by the year 2045, existing land uses adjacent to the studied roadways would be exposed to noise levels that exceed the City's exterior standards of 65 dBA CNEL for sensitive uses. A significant impact would occur if the Project resulted in levels higher than 65 dBA CNEL and increased the overall roadway noise level by 3 dBA CNEL, which is a noticeable change in noise level. As shown in Table 5.13- Findings
12 in the Draft EIR, compared to existing traffic noise levels, 2045 without Project traffic volumes are expected to be up to 0.8 dBA CNEL louder than existing ambient noise levels at existing land uses and would result in inaudible increases in ambient noise along the analyzed roadways.
Compared to existing traffic noise levels, 2045 with Project traffic volumes are expected to be up to 0.9 dBA CNEL louder than existing ambient noise levels at existing land uses and would result in inaudible increases in ambient noise. Implementation of the Project would therefore not result in a cumulatively considerable impact relative to traffic noise.
Stationary Noise
While the Project does not explicitly propose any new noise-generating uses, implementation of the Project could result in the future development of land uses that generate noise levels in excess of applicable City noise standards for non-transportation noise sources. Implementation of land use planning and policies and actions can minimize cumulative noise impacts related to stationary sources by avoiding the placement of noise generating equipment near noise-sensitive land uses and where unavoidable, including design measures to the degree practicable to avoid violating the noise criteria presented in Table PS-1 of the General Plan Update and the Lawndale Municipal Code. The General Plan Update includes policies and actions that are intended to reduce noise associated with stationary sources.
Applicants of future development projects would be required to demonstrate compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance and the policies and actions in the proposed General Plan Update Public Safety Element, including proposed Policies PS-6.3, PS-6.4, PS-6.8, and proposed Actions PS-6c, PS-6d, and PS-6e. Conformance with the existing regulatory framework would reduce cumulative noise impacts from stationary noise sources to a less than significant level. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with stationary noise would not be cumulatively considerable.
Construction Noise
Short-term construction noise and vibration is a localized activity and would affect only land uses that are immediately adjacent to a specific project site.
Each construction project would have to comply with the local noise ordinance and General Plan Update policies and actions, including Policy PS-6.9,which requires construction activities to reduce noise impacts on adjacent uses to the criteria identified to the maximum extent feasible by complying with Chapter 8.20 of the Lawndale Municipal Code and use best practices, and Action PS-6f, which requires all construction activity to comply with the limits established in the Lawndale Municipal Code in order to reduce impacts associated with temporary construction noise to the extent feasible. Additionally, projects would comply with mitigation measures that may be prescribed pursuant to CEQA provisions that require significant Findings
impacts to be reduced to the extent feasible. Further, it is unlikely that all construction projects would occur simultaneously within the City.
Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with construction noise would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.13.6, page 5.13-34) Explanation: Short-term construction noise and vibration is a localized activity and would affect only land uses that are immediately adjacent to a specific project site.
The General Plan Update includes policies and actions that are intended to reduce groundborne vibration and groundborne noise levels. In order to reduce potentially significant impacts related to groundborne vibration associated with construction activities of future site-specific development, project applicants would be required to comply with proposed General Plan Update Public Safety Element Policy PS-6.14 and Action PS-6k, which require vibration impact studies when construction utilizes pile drivers within 200 feet of existing buildings or vibratory rollers within 50 feet of existing buildings. The vibration impact studies would be required to include a detailed mitigation plan to avoid any potential significant impacts to existing structures due to groundborne vibrations. With implementation of the General Plan Update, potential significant impacts associated with the proposed Project related to construction vibration would be reduced to less than significant. Cumulative development projects within the City would also be reviewed to ensure project-specific construction activities would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels. If it is determined that site-specific development associated with the cumulative projects would result in groundborne vibration or noise impacts, mitigation measures would be required to reduce the impact. As the Project’s potential for vibration impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with construction vibration would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise?
Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Section 5.13.6, pages 5.13-34 through 5.13-35) Explanation: The noise contours associated with the airport do not extend beyond the municipal boundaries of the City of Hawthorne. The Planning Area is not Findings
located within any adopted airport land use plan and is located outside of any airport 65 dBA CNEL contours. As such, there are no impacts related to private airports, public airports, airstrips, or adopted airport land use plans. Therefore, proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with airport noise would not be cumulatively considerable.
N. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes, and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.14.6, page 5.14-13) Explanation: Although implementation of the General Plan Update would provide for increased population growth within the Planning Area when compared to SCAG’s growth forecasts, the proposed Project is intended to accommodate the City’s fair share of statewide housing needs, which are allocated by SCAG, based on regional numbers provided by HCD on a regular basis (every five to eight years). SCAG’s Connect SoCal growth forecasts through 2045 do not currently consider the regional housing need for the 2021-2029 period, as jurisdictional allocations were not known at the time of SCAG’s Connect SoCal adoption. However, the regional housing needs and associated General Plan growth projections will be included as part of SCAG’s future growth forecasts. The land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan Update provide opportunities for infill development in the Planning Area, primarily in the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area, but would not create physical division within existing communities. New development and redevelopment projects would be designed to complement the character of existing neighborhoods and provide connectivity between existing development and new development within the cumulative analysis area. The proposed General Plan Update does not include any new roadways, infrastructure, or other features that would divide existing communities. Moreover, with implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth, the land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan Update, the infrastructure anticipated to accommodate proposed land uses, and the goal and policy framework would not induce growth that would exceed adopted thresholds, beyond those disclosed and analyzed throughout the Draft EIR. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update's incremental contribution to cumulative population impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Findings
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.14.6, page 5.14-14) Explanation: Implementation of the General Plan Update would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Sites designated with the Housing Opportunity Overlay have existing non-residential uses. The Project does not propose any site-specific development at this time; therefore, no existing residents would be displaced. Development and redevelopment of the identified parcels would occur gradually over time. The General Plan Update establishes goals, policies, and actions to ensure the compatibility of new and existing development, including housing. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update's incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with displacement of people or housing would be less than cumulatively considerable.
O. PUBLIC SERVICES
Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection and Emergency Services? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.15.5, pages 5.15-23 through
5.15-24)
Explanation: LACoFD provides fire protection services to the Planning Area. In addition, cumulative projects within the City would receive fire protection services from LACoFD. Similar to future development associated with Project implementation, cumulative development projects would be required to comply with standard LACoFD conditions of approval. LACoFD Fire Prevention Division reviews site plans to ensure that access and water system requirements, which would enhance the proposed development’s fire protection, are adequate. Project implementation may require new or the expanded fire protection facilities. The specific impacts of providing new and expanded facilities cannot be determined at this time, as the Project does not propose or authorize development nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded fire protection facilities. However, it is anticipated that if new facilities or expansion of facilities are determined necessary, the facilities would be primarily provided on sites with land use designations that allow such uses and the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the facilities would likely be similar to those associated with new Findings
development projects under the Project. Thus, the Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Future development within the City and LACoFD service area would be reviewed to determine whether the development being proposed would require new or expanded facilities with the potential for causing significant environmental impacts. The provision of specific facilities or the expansion of facilities would undergo review pursuant to CEQA. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to the provision of public services, including fire protection, and fire hazards. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on the provision of fire facilities to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to the provision of fire protection services would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Police Protection?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.15.5, pages 5.15-24 through
5.15-25)
Explanation: LASD provides police protection services to the Planning Area. In addition, cumulative projects within the City would receive police protection services from LASD. Similar to future development associated with the Project, the LASD would review cumulative development projects development plans and applicants would be required to comply with any specific conditions related to safety and security specified by the LASD. Project implementation may require new or the expanded police protection facilities. The specific impacts of providing new and expanded facilities cannot be determined at this time, as the Project does not propose or authorize development nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded police facilities. However, it is anticipated that if new facilities or expansion of facilities are determined necessary, the facilities would be primarily provided on sites with land use designations that allow such uses and the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the facilities would likely be similar to those associated with new development projects under the Project. Thus, the Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered Findings
police facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.
Future development within the City would be reviewed to determine whether the development being proposed would require new or expanded facilities with the potential for causing significant environmental impacts.
The provision of specific facilities or the expansion of facilities would undergo review pursuant to CEQA. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to the provision of public services, including police protection. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on the provision of sheriffs’ facilities to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to the provision of police protection services would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Schools?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.15.5, pages 5.15-25 through
5.15-26)
Explanation: Students generated by the implementation of the Project, combined with other relevant cumulative projects within the City and LESD and CVUHSD service areas would combine to result in increased demand on schools within the area. The exact location of future development and associated student generation is currently unknown. Future development associated with the Project is anticipated to occur gradually through 2045 and would be largely based on market demand. Thus, any increase in demand for school services would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area. Future residential development associated with implementation of the Project would be required to comply with SB 50, which would fully mitigate potential impacts related schools. Similarly, the cumulative development projects would be required to pay the statutory fees, so that school facilities can be constructed/expanded, if necessary, to accommodate future students. Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to the provision of public services. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on the provision of school facilities to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the Project’s Findings
incremental impacts relative to the provision of schools would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Other Public Facilities? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.15.5, pages 5.15-23 through
5.15-24)
Explanation: Future Project development and cumulative development may result in the need for additional LA County Library resources and other public facilities.
Future development is assumed to occur over time through 2045; thus, any increase in demand for public services would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the City. The General Plan Update includes policies to ensure that library services are adequately funded, are coordinated between the City and the LA County Library, and that new development funds its fair share of services. Similar to the Project, cumulative development projects within the City would be required to comply with the General Plan Update policies and the established regulatory framework regarding the payment of fees. Any future development of library facilities or other public facilities to serve demand associated with implementation of the proposed Project and cumulative projects would be required to comply with applicable regulations, policies, and standards, and would be subject to CEQA review as appropriate.
Further, future projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions pertaining to the provision of public services. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the existing regulatory environment would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on the provision of libraries and other public facilities to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts relative to the provision of other public facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
P. PARKS AND RECREATION
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other relevant cumulative projects, result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Parks?
Findings
Would the Project, combined with other relevant cumulative projects, increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Would the Project, combined with other relevant cumulative projects, include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.16.5, pages 5.16-11 through
5.16-12)
Explanation: Future development associated with the General Plan Update, combined with other relevant cumulative projects, would bring new residents to the Planning Area. These new residents are expected to use existing park and recreational facilities, and this additional use may result in greater demands on parks and recreational facilities in the Planning Area such that deterioration of these facilities could occur or be accelerated. Additionally, the additional demand on existing parks and recreational facilities would increase the need for maintenance and improvements. These improvements could have potential environmental impacts, although the exact impacts cannot be determined since the potential improvements are currently unknown. As future parks and recreation projects are considered by the City, each project will be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan Update, Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations. Parks and recreation projects would also be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA. Although implementation of the Project would cause an increase in demand for parks in the future, potential impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level through the payment of park fees, as established in Municipal Code Chapter 12.34, and adherence to local regulations established in the Municipal Code and General Plan Update policies and actions, which support the creation of new parks and recreation facilities, to accommodate a wide range of activities for all age groups. Similarly, cumulative development projects would be required to comply with Municipal Code and General Plan Update policies regarding parks and recreation facilities, including compliance with CEQA associated with any site-specific development of parks or recreational facilities. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
Q. TRANSPORTATION
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the Findings
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.17.6, page 5.17-33) Explanation: The Project is a programmatic land use plan and is not proposing any changes to the circulation system. Any future development within the City would be assessed for consistency with local policies and ordinances, including the Municipal Code and General Plan goals and policies, as appropriate. Therefore, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts related to transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.17.6, pages 5.17-33 through
5.17-34)
Explanation: As described in Section 5.17 of the Draft EIR, with implementation of the General Plan Update under the City’s cumulative buildout conditions, the 2045 Project VMT per capita is approximately 28 percent less than the existing Los Angeles countywide average VMT per capita and the 2045 Project VMT per employee is approximately 18 percent less than the existing Los Angeles countywide average VMT per employee. With implementation of the Project, the City’s VMT per capita would not exceed 15 percent below the Los Angeles countywide average. Implementation of the Project would therefore not result in a cumulatively considerable impact relative to VMT. A significant cumulative VMT impact would occur if the Project threshold is exceeded or if the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the 2020 RTP/SCS. As discussed, the Project would be consistent with the SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS and would contribute toward furthering the goals of SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS. As the Project does not exceed the Project VMT threshold and is consistent with the relevant SCAG’s 2020 RTP-SCS goals, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative VMT impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, substantially increase hazards due to geometric design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.17.6, page 5.17-34) Explanation: The types of uses that would be allowed as part of Project implementation Findings
are generally similar to existing and surrounding uses and thereby are compatible with the existing uses in the Planning Area and in the surrounding area. Additionally, site-specific developments would be reviewed by the City to ensure adequate ingress and egress would be provided and site distance standards would be implemented.
Implementation of the Project would therefore not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact relative to an increase in hazards due to a geometric design feature.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, result in inadequate emergency access?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.17.6, pages 5.17-34 through
5.17-35)
Explanation: A cumulatively significant project impact would occur if implementation of the Project with cumulative projects would result in inadequate emergency access. As noted, the Project does not propose site-specific development; emergency accessibility is typically assessed at the project level. The Project does not propose changes to the citywide roadway network and configuration that would affect local emergency access. The proposed Project along with the cumulative development projects could result in the temporary closure or control of traffic lanes located immediately adjacent to a development site during construction activities. Any temporary closure would be required to comply with the Lawndale Municipal Code. Similarly, the applicant of any proposed development would be required to submit appropriate plans for plan review to ensure compliance with zoning, building, and fire codes prior to the issuance of a building permit. LACoFD would review all development projects for access requirements, minimum driveway widths, fire apparatus access roads, fire lanes, signage, access devices and gates, access walkways, among other requirements to ensure adequate emergency access would be provided to and within the site.
Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts relative to emergency access would not be cumulatively considerable.
R. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
• 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)?
Findings
• 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.
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.18.6, page 5.18-10 through
5.18-11)
Explanation: Tribal cultural resource impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts. Construction of the individual development projects allowed under the land use designations of General Plan Update may result in the discovery and removal of tribal cultural resources. The General Plan Update policies and actions, as well as Federal, State, and local regulations, would reduce the risk to tribal cultural resources in the region. Site-specific development with the potential to impact tribal cultural resources would require a resource assessment and coordination with the tribes to determine the potential for tribal cultural resources and identification of mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the proposed development. Adherence to the General Plan Update policies and actions, and existing Federal, State and local regulations would avoid and/or minimize a cumulative loss of tribal cultural resources.
Therefore, the General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to cumulative tribal cultural resource impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
S. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects, or have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.19.6, pages 5.19-46 through
5.19-47)
Explanation: Water service in the Planning Area is provided by the GSWC. In addition to the Project, cumulative projects within the City would receive water service from GSWC. Similar to future development associated with Project implementation, cumulative development projects would be located within areas that are already developed and serviced by the GSWC. Additionally, Lawndale Municipal Code Section 3.14.090 imposes a tax on water users in the City and would help fund necessary infrastructure improvements. The specific impacts of providing new and expanded facilities cannot be Findings
determined at this time, as the Project does not propose or authorize development nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded water facilities. Cumulative development projects are anticipated to occur gradually as development occurs in the Planning Area and would be required to pay applicable development impact fees to ensure water facilities can be constructed/expanded, if necessary. Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to the provision of utilities and water conservation. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on water facilities to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to water facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
Project implementation may result in increased population growth in the Planning Area, and a corresponding increase in the demand for additional water supplies. Similar to future development associated with Project implementation, cumulative development projects would require an analysis of sufficient water supplies through provisions in SB 610 and/or the CEQA process. Additionally, future development associated with the Project and cumulative projects would be required to comply with existing Federal, State, and local regulations, including the Municipal Code, to conserve water and ensure the efficient use of available water supplies.
Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to the provision of utilities and water conservation. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on water supplies to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to water supplies would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects, or result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.19.6, pages 5.19-47 through
5.19-48)
Explanation: The City and LACSD provide wastewater services to the Planning Area. In addition to the Project, cumulative projects within the City would be provided wastewater services by the City and LACSD. Similar to future development associated with Project implementation, cumulative development projects would be located within areas that are already developed and serviced by the City and LACSD. The City would review Findings
each site to determine if sufficient local and trunk sewer capacity exists to serve each specific development project. Pursuant to Lawndale Municipal Code Section 13.08.070, a building permit would not be issued if the anticipated sewage from a proposed project is found by the City Engineer to exceed the capacity available in the public sewer. Lawndale Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 provides for sewer connection and facilities expansion fees for the City’s local wastewater transmission lines. The specific impacts of providing new and expanded facilities cannot be determined at this time, as the Project does not propose or authorize development nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded wastewater facilities.
Cumulative development projects are anticipated to occur gradually as development occurs in the Planning Area and would be required to pay applicable development impact fees to ensure wastewater facilities can be constructed/expanded, if necessary, to ensure adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to the provision of utilities. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on wastewater facilities to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to wastewater facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
Project implementation may result in increased population growth in the Planning Area, and a corresponding increase in the flow of wastewater requiring treatment. The Project enables additional development but does not include specific development proposals. At the time future projects are proposed, they would be required to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity exists. Additionally, LACSD charges annual wastewater sewer fees through its Wastewater Treatment Surcharge Program, as well as sewer connection fees through its Connection Fee Program, in order to maintain and expand wastewater services, including wastewater treatment. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to wastewater would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded stormwater facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.19.6, page 5.19-48) Explanation: Storm drain infrastructure in the Planning Area is owned and operated by the City and the LACFCD. The Planning Area is primarily developed, with limited areas of pervious surfaces. Similar to the Project, cumulative projects have the potential to slightly increase impervious areas within specific areas of the Planning Area. However, due to the urbanized nature of the Planning Area, the majority of development activities associated with Findings
cumulative development would consist of infill and redevelopment on currently urbanized sites and would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. Federal, State and local regulations would require individual projects to provide necessary on-site storm drain infrastructure and any off-site infrastructure improvements.
The specific impacts of providing new and expanded drainage facilities cannot be determined at this time, as the Project does not propose or approve any specific development project nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded public facilities. Stormwater drainage and conveyance facilities would be evaluated at the project-level in association with subsequent development projects. However, the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the facilities would likely be similar to those associated with new development under the proposed Project. As future development and cumulative development projects are considered by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations. Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to the provision of public facilities. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on stormwater facilities to a less than significant level.
Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to stormwater would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.19.6, pages 5.19-48 through
5.19-49)
Explanation: The City is within the service areas of SCE, SoCalGas, and various telecommunication providers. The Planning Area is primarily developed and includes existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure. Similar to the Project, cumulative projects have the potential to increase demand for electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services, potentially resulting in the new construction or relocation of facilities. The specific impacts of providing new and expanded electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services cannot be determined at this time, as the Project does not propose or approve any specific development project nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded public facilities. The environmental effects of future expansions of electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities would be evaluated with each development proposal and would require a separate environmental review, as required, related to the construction and operation of new electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure. Future development Findings
associated with the Project and cumulative projects would have to coordinate with each utility provider to establish service, provide any necessary extensions of facilities, and comply with regulations in existence at that time. As future development and cumulative development projects are considered by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations, including the General Plan Update. The General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to the provision of utilities. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on natural gas, electrical, and telecommunications facilities to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to electrical, natural gas, or telecommunications would not be cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals, and comply with Federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.19.6, pages 5.19-49 through
5.19-50)
Explanation: Similar to the Project, cumulative projects have the potential to increase solid waste generated within the Planning Area. The Lawndale Municipal Code, Chapter 8.28 establishes mandatory solid waste and recycling collection to comply with the requirements of AB 939 and AB 341. As permitted by AB 939, the City authorizes a private solid waste franchisee (i.e., Republic Services) to handle the City’s solid waste and cooperate in the preparation of solid waste disposal characterization studies and the preparation of waste stream audits. Republic and the City work together to submit information to meet the reporting requirements of AB 939, or any other law or regulation, to reach the solid waste and recycling goals mandated by the AB 939. Future development associated with the Project and cumulative projects would be required to implement existing regulations, including the Municipal Code, to comply with regulations related to solid waste and ensure the permitted capacity of landfills serving the City is not exceeded. Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to solid waste, including source reduction. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on solid waste to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to solid waste would not be cumulatively considerable.
Findings
T. WILDFIRE
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.20.5, pages 5.20-17 through
5.20-18)
Explanation: The Planning Area and immediately surrounding area is highly urbanized and not located within an SRA or FHSZ per CAL FIRE and County regulatory maps. Therefore, future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would not be developed in an SRA or FHSZ. Additionally, future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The County OAERP addresses the planned response to extraordinary situations associated with natural disasters and/or human caused incidents, including wildfires, and outlines mutual aid provisions within the Los Angeles County OA. The City’s EOP addresses the City’s planned response to natural or human-caused disasters and describes the organizational structures, roles, responsibilities, policies and protocols for providing emergency support. Future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would be subject to similar fire protection development standards and would be required to comply with each jurisdiction’s established regulatory framework, including the respective municipal code and General Plan policies and programs to assist in protecting life and property in the event of a wildfire. The Project’s would not contribute to cumulative wildfire hazard impacts. Thus, the Project and cumulative development projects’ incremental effects involving an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.20.5, page 5.20-18) Explanation: The Planning Area and immediately surrounding area is highly urbanized and not located within an SRA or FHSZ per CAL FIRE and County regulatory maps. Therefore, future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would not be developed in an SRA or FHSZ. Urbanized land does not typically facilitate the spread of wildfire in the same manner as vegetated, open space areas.
Future development and cumulative development would be required to Findings
comply with the Fire Code, which would further minimize and reduce impacts related to wildfire. Additionally, the General Plan Update includes policies and programs to address public safety and emergency services. As part of the City’s development review process, the LACoFD would review all projects for related fire hazards. Wildfire risks would not change with adoption of the General Plan Update, and exposure to pollutant concentrations from wildfire for occupants in the Planning Area would not significantly increase. Accordingly, the Project’s incremental contribution to wildfire risks exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.20.5, page 5.20-18 through
5.20-19)
Explanation: The Planning Area and immediately surrounding area is highly urbanized and not located within an SRA or FHSZ per CAL FIRE regulatory maps.
Therefore, future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would not be developed in an SRA or FHSZ. Future development and cumulative development could require the eventual construction and installation of new infrastructure or maintenance of existing infrastructure, including roads, water and sewer, and power lines to serve increased growth and development. Maintenance of existing infrastructure and the potential installation of new infrastructure for future development and cumulative development would be required to comply with Fire Code requirements and would be reviewed by the LACoFD to determine the specific fire requirements applicable to ensure compliance with the Fire Code. Additionally, the General Plan Update includes policies and programs to address public safety and emergency services. Thus, the Project’s incremental contribution involving potential wildland fire hazards due to the installation or maintenance of local infrastructure would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Section 5.20.5, page 5.20-19 through
5.20-20)
Findings
Explanation: Future development associated with implementation of the Project and cumulative projects would be subject to similar fire protection development standards and would be required to comply with each jurisdictions established regulatory framework, including the respective municipal code and General Plan policies and programs to assist in protecting life and property in the event of a fire. The Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative wildfire hazard impacts would not be significant. The City is highly urbanized and future development and redevelopment activities in the City under would occur in areas that have been previously developed.
As a result, the degree of wildland fire hazard, including secondary hazards such as post-fire flooding and landslides, would not substantially change with adoption of the General Plan Update, and current hazards would not significantly increase. Additionally, there are no SRA or FHSZs mapped within the Planning Area. As such, the General Plan Update does not approve, propose, or authorize development in an SRA or FHSZ per CAL FIRE and County regulatory maps. New development would be required to comply with the Fire Code, which would further minimize and reduce impacts related to potential fires within the City. As part of the City’s development review process, the LACoFD would review all projects for fire related hazards. Additionally, the General Plan Update includes policies and programs to address public safety and emergency services. Accordingly, the Project’s incremental contribution involving significant risks as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Findings
SECTION VI
FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL
CHANGES
Sections 15126(c) and 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR address any significant irreversible environmental changes that would occur should the project be implemented. Determining whether the proposed Project would result in significant irreversible effects requires a determination of whether key resources would be degraded or destroyed such that there would be little possibility of restoring them. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.
Consumption of Nonrenewable Resources
Future development would consume limited, slowly renewable and non-renewable resources. This consumption would occur during each individual project’s construction phase and would continue throughout its operational lifetime. Future development would require a commitment of resources that would include: (1) building materials; (2) fuel and operational materials/resources; and (3) the transportation of goods and persons to and from individual development sites. Construction would require the consumption of resources that are not renewable or which may renew so slowly as to be considered non-renewable. These resources would include the following construction supplies: lumber and other forest products; aggregate materials used in concrete and asphalt; metals; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be consumed to power construction vehicles and equipment.
The operational activities of new development accommodated through implementation of the General Plan Update would consume resources which would be similar to those currently consumed within the City (i.e., energy resources such as electricity and natural gas, petroleumbased fuels required for vehicle-trips, fossil fuels, and water). Fossil fuels would represent the primary energy source associated with both construction and ongoing operation, and the existing, finite supplies of these natural resources would be incrementally reduced. Future development operations would occur in accordance with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6, which sets forth conservation practices that would limit energy consumption. Nonetheless, the proposed Project’s energy requirements would represent a long-term commitment of essentially non-renewable resources.
Construction activities associated with implementation of the General Plan Update could release hazardous materials into the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions; refer to Section 5.9 in the Draft EIR. All potential demolition, grading, and excavation activities would be subject to the established regulatory framework to ensure that hazardous materials are not released into the environment. Compliance with the established regulatory framework and mitigation measures would protect against a significant and irreversible environmental change resulting from the accidental release of hazardous materials. In addition, there is the potential that individual future development projects would use and store limited amounts of potentially hazardous materials typical. All future development activities requiring the routine use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials would be subject to all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations and standards in place for hazardous materials. Compliance Findings
with these regulations and standards would protect against significant and irreversible environmental changes due to the accidental release of hazardous materials.
In conclusion, future construction and operations would result in the irretrievable commitment of limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources, which would limit the availability of these resource quantities for future generations or for other uses during the life of the individual developments. It is noted that the continued use of such resources would be on a relatively small scale in a regional context.
Irretrievable Commitments/Irreversible Physical Changes Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in a commitment of land uses designated for the foreseeable future. Land use and development consistent with the Project would result in irretrievable commitments by designating land for development that is more intense, in some instances, than current designations allow. Additionally, residential development would be allowed on land not currently designated for residential development. Development would physically change the environment in terms of aesthetics, air emissions, noise, and traffic. These physical changes are irreversible after development occurs. Therefore, the Project would result in changes in land use within the Planning Area that would commit future generations to these uses.
In summary, the General Plan Update includes an extensive policy framework that is designed to address land use and environmental issues to the greatest extent feasible, while allowing growth and economic prosperity for the City. Construction and operation of future development projects associated with Project implementation would result in the irretrievable commitment of limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources that would limit the availability of these resource quantities for future generations or for other uses during the life of the Project. However, the Planning Area is an urbanized area and already uses such resources.
Additionally, the continued use of such resources would be on a relatively small scale in a regional context. As such, although irreversible environmental changes would result from the Project, such changes would not be considered significant.
Findings
SECTION VII
GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
Section 15126.2(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires a Draft EIR to evaluate the growthinducing impacts of a proposed action. The State CEQA Guidelines do not provide specific criteria for evaluating growth inducement. Growth-inducing impacts fall into two general categories:
direct or indirect. Direct growth-inducing impacts are generally associated with new residences or businesses that could induce population growth directly. Indirect growth-inducing impacts provide urban services, such as the extension or roads or other infrastructure, to an undeveloped area that could induce population growth indirectly.
In general, a project may foster spatial, economic, or population growth in a geographic area if it results in any of the following:
• Removal of an impediment to growth (e.g., establishment of an essential public service and provision of new access to an area);
• Fostering of economic expansion or growth (e.g., changes in revenue base and employment expansion);
• Fostering of population growth (e.g., construction of additional housing), either directly or indirectly;
• Establishment of a precedent-setting action (e.g., an innovation, a change in zoning and general plan amendment approval); or
• Development of or encroachment on an isolated or adjacent area of open space (being distinct from an infill project).
Should a project meet any one of the above-listed criteria, it may be considered growth inducing.
The Planning Area and surrounding area are fully developed and urbanized. Transportation and infrastructure exists to serve the range of residential and non-residential uses within the surrounding area. The General Plan Update does not introduce new roadways or new or significantly expanded infrastructure that would provide for additional development within the surrounding area. Potential infrastructure improvements associated with future site-specific development would not remove obstacles to growth since the Planning and surrounding area are already served by existing utility providers and potential improvements would be to serve the specific development being proposed. As the General Plan Update would not establish an essential public service or provide new access to an area, the proposed Project would not be considered growth-inducing.
In addition to residential uses, the Project anticipates the development of commercial uses within the Planning Area. The construction of future development projects would result in construction-related jobs. However, construction activities and durations would vary depending upon the specific development and would be temporary in respect to each individual development site and therefore, would not be considered growth-inducing.
Findings
Project operations would introduce new residents and jobs to the Planning Area. Future development associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would primarily consist of infill development and redevelopment of already developed sites. New residential development could occur and greater densities, providing additional housing opportunities that would further support commercial and retail uses within the City. Additional non-residential development would provide for new employment opportunities. Residents and employees would seek shopping, entertainment, employment, and other economic opportunities in the City and surrounding area.
This could create an increased demand for goods and services that would encourage the creation of new businesses or the expansion of existing businesses. Although economic growth is anticipated within the Planning Area, significant economic growth resulting in the potential to significantly affect the environment is not anticipated as the surrounding area is urbanized.
As shown in Table 3-4 of the Draft EIR buildout of the General Plan Update through 2045 could yield up to 3,942 new housing units and 808,864 square feet of new non-residential building square footage within the Planning Area. Project implementation would exceed the population projections anticipated by SCAG’s growth forecasts. While Project growth projections are anticipated to exceed SCAG’s 2045 population, SCAG’s projections, which are compiled using a number of sources including adopted plans, historical trends, and interviews with local jurisdictions, tend to be more accurate on a regional level than on a local or city level.
Discrepancies between Project and regional forecasts can also be attributed to the RHNA process.
The General Plan Update is intended to implement the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element; SCAG’s Connect SoCal growth forecasts through 2045 do not consider the regional housing need for the 2021-2029 period, as jurisdictional allocations were not known at the time of SCAG’s Connect SoCal adoption. The regional housing needs and associated General Plan growth projections will be included as part of SCAG’s future growth forecasts.
Although the Project would allow for currently unplanned population growth anticipated in the existing General Plan and by SCAG, the Draft EIR identifies General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions, where appropriate, that would serve to reduce or eliminate potentially significant impacts associated with specific environmental issues associated with growth. Sections
5.1 through 5.20 in the Draft EIR provide a discussion of environmental effects associated with development allowed under the General Plan Update. With implementation of General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth, the land uses allowed under the General Plan Update, the infrastructure anticipated to accommodate proposed land uses, and the goal and policy framework would not induce growth that would exceed adopted thresholds. Therefore, population and housing growth associated with the General Plan Update would result a less than significant impact.
The General Plan is a long-term plan intended to accommodate projected population, housing, and employment growth, including the appropriate balance among these factors with the necessary public services and infrastructure. The proposed General Plan Update would serve as a comprehensive, long-term plan for the physical development of Lawndale. The proposed General Plan Update would only regulate future land development within the Planning Area and would not induce growth within areas outside of the City’s jurisdiction. Any future development within the Planning Area would be reviewed in light of the General Plan and this General Plan Update EIR Findings
pursuant to CEQA on a project-by-project basis. Future development would be required to comply with the goals, policies, and actions intended to reduce potential environmental impacts associated with future site-specific development. Thus, Project implementation would not involve a precedent-setting action that could significantly impact the environment.
The Planning Area is located within an urbanized area. Park and open space resources within the City are limited and primarily associated with parks and schools. The Project does not propose modifications to these existing resources and would not result in encroachment into these areas. The Project would not be growth-inducing with respect to development or encroachment into an isolated or adjacent area of an existing open space.
Findings
SECTION VIII
ALTERNATIVES
A. BACKGROUND
The Draft EIR analyzed two alternatives to the Project as proposed and evaluated these alternatives for their ability to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects while also meeting the majority of the Project’s objectives. This section sets forth the potential alternatives to the Project analyzed in the EIR and evaluates them in light of the Project objectives, as required by CEQA.
Where significant impacts are identified, section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires EIRs to consider and discuss alternatives to the proposed actions. Subsection (a) states:
(a) An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.
Subsection 15126.6(b) states the purpose of the alternatives analysis:
(b) Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21002.1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.
In subsection 15126.6(c), the State CEQA Guidelines describe the selection process for a range of reasonable alternatives:
(c) The range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the Project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed. The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination.
Findings
Additional information explaining the choice of alternatives may be included in the administrative record. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
The range of alternatives required is governed by a “rule of reason” that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The EIR shall include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed Project. Alternatives are limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project.
B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives have been established for the Project (Draft EIR, pages 3-5 through 3-6):
1. Reflect the current goals and vision expressed by City residents, businesses, decisionmakers, and other stakeholders;
2. Address issues and concerns identified by City residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders;
3. Protect Lawndale’s existing residences, character, and sense of community;
4. Proactively plan for and accommodate local and regional growth in a responsible manner;
5. Encourage mixed-use development patterns that promote vibrant commercial and residential areas;
6. Allow for a range of high-quality housing options;
7. Attract and retain businesses and industries that provide jobs for local residents;
8. Continue to maintain and improve multimodal transportation opportunities;
9. Maintain strong fiscal sustainability and continue to provide efficient and adequate public services;
10. Address new requirements of State law; and
11. Address emerging transportation, housing, and employment trends.
C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED FROM DETAILED
ANALYSIS
Section 15126.6(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that an EIR should (1) identify alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were eliminated from detailed consideration because they were determined to be infeasible during the scoping process; and (2) briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives; (ii) infeasibility; and/or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
Findings
There were no alternatives considered but rejected from detailed analysis in the EIR.
D. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS
The alternatives selected for further detailed review within the EIR focus on alternatives that could potentially reduce the Project’s significant environmental impacts, while still meeting most of the basic Project objectives. Those alternatives include:
• Alternative 1: No Project Alternative/Existing General Plan (Draft EIR, pages 7-4 through 7-15)
• Alternative 2: Reduced Growth Alternative (Draft EIR, pages 7-15 through 7- 25)
1. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
Description: Under Alternative 1, the City would continue to implement the existing General Plan and no changes would be made to address updated OPR General Plan Guidelines, or the requirements of State law. Since adoption of the existing General Plan, State legislation has been passed requiring the City to address new safety and circulation requirements in the General Plan and to further address greenhouse gas emissions.
Additionally, the City recently updated its 2021-2029 Housing Element (adopted in February 2022), and the existing General Plan does not conform to State requirements regarding planning for future housing growth. The General Plan goals, policies, and actions, as well as the Land Use Map, would not be updated to address the vision and concerns of the City’s residents, property owners, decision-makers, and other stakeholders that actively participated in the visioning and goal and policy development process.
Alternative 1 would result in the continuation of existing conditions and development levels. New growth would be allowed as envisioned under the existing General Plan, with land uses required to be consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use Map.
Alternative 1 (No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative) would result in less development within the Planning Area compared to the proposed Project. Under Alternative 1, the existing General Plan policy framework would still be in effect, which would constitute a status quo approach to land use regulation in the City. The Proposed Land Use Map, along with the policy framework proposed by the General Plan Update, encourages and aims to achieve a community with a balanced land use pattern that meets the City’s long-term housing, employment, and civic needs. The land uses allowed under the General Plan Update provide opportunities for cohesive new growth at infill locations primarily within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area. A balanced land use pattern would create a community where new development blends with existing neighborhoods.
The proposed General Plan Update carries forward and enhances policies and measures from the City’s existing General Plan that were intended for environmental protection. The proposed General Plan Update was prepared in conformance with State laws and regulations associated with the preparation of general plans, including requirements for environmental protection.
Alternative 1 would not include updated policies, particularly those related to housing, Findings
greenhouse gases, hazards, complete streets, and environmental justice to address environmental health concerns for disadvantaged communities, as required by State law.
This alternative would not include policies proposed in the General Plan Update to ensure protection of environmental resources, both at a project level and under cumulative conditions, consistent with the objectives of CEQA.
Impacts: As shown in Draft EIR Table 7-4, Alternative 1 would result in the same impacts as the proposed Project for the environmental issues of: Agricultural Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Transportation, and Wildfire. Alternative 1 would result in reduced impacts to Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, Public Services and Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Irreversible Effects.
Alternative 1 would result in increased impacts to Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Population and Housing, and Tribal Cultural Resources. This alternative would fail to reduce any significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level.
Attainment of Project Objectives: This alternative would not meet most of the Project objectives, including the following: reflect the current goals and vision expressed by City residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders; address issues and concerns identified by city residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders; proactively plan for and accommodate local and regional growth in a responsible manner; encourage mixed-use development patterns that promote vibrant commercial and residential areas; allow for a range of high-quality housing options; attract and retain businesses and industries that provide jobs for local residents; continue to maintain and improve multimodal transportation opportunities; address new requirements of State law; and address emerging transportation, housing, and employment trends.
Finding: The City Council rejects Alternative 1: No Project Alternative/Existing General Plan, on the following grounds, which provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative fails to meet most of the Project objectives; (2) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level; (3) this alternative fails to comply with State law specific to General Plan requirements; and (4) this alternative would not provide the necessary residential densities for housing development to allow the City to meet its RHNA obligations and could be cause for HCD’s approval of the Housing Element to be rescinded.
2. Alternative 2: Reduced Growth Alternative
Description: Alternative 2 (Reduced Growth Alternative) continues to allow for new development in mixed-use opportunities, like those included in the proposed Project, but at lower densities that are more consistent with those allowed under the current General Plan. The goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan Update would apply to subsequent development, planning, and infrastructure projects under this alternative. This Alternative was developed to reduce the severity of potential impacts related to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, as overall development of residential uses within the Planning Area would be less than what could under the proposed Project.
Findings
Alternative 2 would result in approximately 1,603 fewer housing units and 3,639 fewer residents within the Planning Area when compared to the proposed General Plan Land Use Map. Nonresidential development potential and employment opportunities would remain the same under this alternative when compared to the proposed General Plan Update. In the 2021-2029 Housing Element, the City introduced two new mechanisms to allow for residential development to be created to implement the Housing Element on sites considered viable for housing development. The first is “Housing Overlay 100”, which will be applied to 16 nonresidential sites outside of the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area and allow for residential densities of up to 100 dwelling units per acre. The second is “Housing Overlay 150” which will be applied to 68 nonresidential sites inside the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area, will allow for residential densities up to 150 dwelling units per acre. This Alternative assumes that the 2021-2029 Housing Element would be in non-compliance, since it would not implement these mechanisms at the planned densities.
Impacts: As shown in Draft EIR Table 7-4, Alternative 2 would result in the same impacts as the proposed Project for the environmental issues of: Aesthetics, Agricultural Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Wildfire. Alternative 2 would result in reduced impacts to Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Public Services and Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Irreversible Effects.
Alternative 2 would result in increased impacts to Transportation. This alternative would fail to reduce any significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level.
Attainment of Project Objectives: Alternative 2 would not meet some of the Project objectives, including: proactively plan for and accommodate local and regional growth in a responsible manner; allow for a range of high-quality housing options; address new requirements of State law; and address emerging transportation, housing, and employment trends.
Finding: The City Council rejects Alternative 2: Reduced Growth Alternative, on the following ground, which provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative:
(1) the alternative fails to meet all of the Project objectives; (2) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level; and (3) this alternative would not be consistent with the planned residential densities in the 2021-2029 Housing Element and could be cause for HCD’s approval of the Housing Element to be rescinded.
E. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines indicates that an analysis of alternatives to a proposed Project shall identify an environmentally superior alternative among the alternatives evaluated in an EIR. Based on the alternatives analysis contained within the Draft EIR, Alternative 2 (Reduced Growth Alternative) is identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
Findings
Alternative 2 (Reduced Growth Alternative) is the environmentally superior alternative as it is the most effective in terms of overall reductions of impacts compared to the proposed General Plan Update and Alternative 1 (No Project Alternative/Existing General Plan). Alternative 2 meets most of the Project objectives. Like the proposed Project, Alternative 2 reflects the current goals and vision expressed by City residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders; addresses issues and concerns identified by City residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders; protects Lawndale’s existing residences, character, and sense of community; encourages mixed-use development patterns that promote vibrant commercial and residential areas; attracts and retains businesses and industries that provide jobs for local residents; continues to maintain and improve multimodal transportation opportunities; and maintains strong fiscal sustainability and continues to provide efficient and adequate public services. However, the alternative fails to meet several Project objectives, including: proactively plan for and accommodate local and regional growth in a responsible manner; allow for a range of high-quality housing options; address new requirements of State law; and address emerging transportation, housing, and employment trends. In addition, Alternative 2 fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level and would not be consistent with the planned residential densities in the 2021-2029 Housing Element and could be cause for HCD’s approval of the Housing Element to be rescinded. Therefore, City Council rejects the environmentally superior alternative.
SECTION IX
ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a), the City Council must balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the Project. If the specific benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those environmental effects may be considered acceptable.
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible through the implementation of the General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions; having considered the entire administrative record on the Project; the City Council has weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation in regards to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. While recognizing that the unavoidable adverse impacts are significant under CEQA thresholds, the City Council nonetheless finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from the Project are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the Project.
In making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the Project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City Council would be able to stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference into this section, and in the documents found in the Records of Proceeding.
Findings
The City Council therefore finds that for each of the significant impacts which are subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project, independent of the other benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts and render acceptable each and every one of these unavoidable adverse environmental impacts:
1. The General Plan Update promotes more compact, environmentally-sustainable, and equitable development through goals, policies, and actions that balance the need for adequate infrastructure, housing, economic vitality, and environmental justice with the need for resource management, environmental protection, and preservation of quality of life for Lawndale residents.
2. The General Plan Update implements principles of sustainable growth by concentrating new development and intensification of existing urban uses primarily along key commercial and transportation corridors, thereby providing opportunities for a diverse mix of uses while maintaining the City’s residential neighborhoods.
3. The General Plan Update provides a land use map that accounts for existing development, physical constraints, economic development, hazards, and incompatible uses, and assigns densities and use types accordingly to enhance the safety, livability, and economic vitality of Lawndale.
4. The General Plan Update improves mobility options through the development of a multimodal transportation network that enhances connectivity, supports community development patterns, limits traffic congestion, promotes public and alternative transportation methods, and supports the goals of adopted regional transportation plans.
5. The General Plan Update addresses adverse environmental effects associated with global climate change by facilitating sustainable development, promoting energy efficiency, conserving water resources, and promoting compact development patterns that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
6. The General Plan Update enhances the local economy and provides opportunities for future jobs and business development commensurate with forecasted growth by planning for a mix of residential and commercial development near existing urbanized areas and transportation corridors.
7. The General Plan Update is the product of a comprehensive public planning effort driven by members of the public, city stakeholders, the Planning Commission and the City Council through a series of public meetings, hearings, and workshops that resulted in a thoughtful balance of community, economic, social, and environmental interests.
GENERAL
PLAN 2045
PUBLIC DRAFT
JULY 2023
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | TOC-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... IN-1 PURPOSE OF THE GENERAL PLAN....................................................................................................... IN-2 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES................................................................................................................ IN-2 SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN................................................................................. IN-4 PLANNING PROCESS ............................................................................................................................ IN-5 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ........................................................................................................................ IN-5 COMMUNITY VISION STATEMENT ........................................................................................................ IN-7 APPLYING THE GENERAL PLAN.......................................................................................................... IN-14 ANNUAL REPORTING ........................................................................................................................... IN-16
LAND USE ELEMENT
GOAL LU-1 LAND USE MIX............................................................................................................ LU-7 GOAL LU-2 MANAGED GROWTH.................................................................................................. LU-9 GOAL LU-3 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY..................................................................................... LU-11 GOAL LU-4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND DESIGN............................................................... LU-13
MOBILITY ELEMENT
GOAL M-1 LOCAL CIRCULATION SYSTEM ................................................................................. M-2 GOAL M-2 REGIONAL CIRCULATION........................................................................................... M-4 GOAL M-3 COMPLETE STREETS.................................................................................................. M-5 GOAL M-4 PARKING...................................................................................................................... M-6 GOAL M-5 TRANSIT....................................................................................................................... M-7 GOAL M-6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION........................................................................................ M-8 GOAL M-7 GOODS MOVEMENT ................................................................................................... M-9 GOAL M-8 FUNDING.................................................................................................................... M-10 GOAL M-9 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT......................................................................... M-11
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
GOAL RM-1 PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE..............................................................RM-2 GOAL RM-2 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING ...................................................RM-4 GOAL RM-3 CULTURAL RESOURCES..........................................................................................RM-6 GOAL RM-4 AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ..............................................RM-9 GOAL RM-5 ENERGY RESOURCES............................................................................................RM-12 GOAL RM-6 WATER CONSERVATION ........................................................................................RM-14
PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
GOAL PS-1 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS ......................................................................................PS-4 GOAL PS-2 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS........................................................................PS-6 Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | TOC-2
GOAL PS-3 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS .........................................................................................PS-8 GOAL PS-4 FIRE HAZARDS.........................................................................................................PS-10 GOAL PS-5 FLOOD HAZARDS.....................................................................................................PS-11 GOAL PS-6 NOISE........................................................................................................................PS-12 GOAL PS-7 CLIMATE CHANGE AND RESILIENCY PLANNING..................................................PS-17
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
GOAL EJ-1 POLLUTION EXPOSURE AND AIR QUALITY............................................................. EJ-2 GOAL EJ-2 ACCESS TO PUBLIC FACILITIES............................................................................... EJ-3 GOAL EJ-3 HEALTHY FOOD ACCESS.......................................................................................... EJ-4 GOAL EJ-4 SAFE AND SANITARY HOMES................................................................................... EJ-5 GOAL EJ-5 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY................................................................................................... EJ-7 GOAL EJ-6 CIVIC ENGAGEMENT ................................................................................................. EJ-8 GOAL EJ-7 IMPROVEMENTS AND PROGRAMS........................................................................ EJ-10
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOAL ED-2 SUPPORT AND EXPAND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.......................................... ED-3 GOAL ED-3 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND RETENTION..................................................... ED-5 GOAL ED-4 CREATE A VIBRANT HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD .................................................... ED-6 GOAL ED-5 FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY........................................................................................... ED-7
COMMUNITY FACILITIES ELEMENT
GOAL CF-1 INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES............................................................CF-2 GOAL CF-2 WATER SYSTEM......................................................................................................... CF 4 GOAL CF-3 WASTEWATER SYSTEM ............................................................................................ CF 5 GOAL CF-4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT................................................................................. CF 6 GOAL CF-5 TELECOMMUNICATIONS........................................................................................... CF 8 GOAL CF-6 HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES......................................................................... CF 9
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE LU-1 LAND USE MAP ........................................................................................................ LU-15 FIGURE LU-2 PLANNING AREA...................................................................................................... LU-17 FIGURE LU-3 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN MAP.................................................LU-19 FIGURE M-1 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................... M-13 FIGURE M-2 EXISTING AND PLANNED BIKE FACILITIES............................................................. M-15 FIGURE M-3 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION NETWORK.................................................................... M-17
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE LU-1 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE 2045 POTENTIAL BUILDOUT SUMMARY...................LU-6 TABLE PS-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE (dBA, CNEL)......PS-16 LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-1
Introduction Since its historic founding in 1905, the City of Lawndale has grown from a small agrarian society into a thriving residential community characterized by its small-town feel, support for local businesses, and convenient location in the heart of the South Bay region of Los Angeles County.
In 2023, over 32,000 people call Lawndale home. Looking forward over the next 20 years, the City will continue to value its existing residents while planning for a prosperous and sustainable future by embracing smart growth and economic development. New opportunities for residential, commercial, and mixed-use development are envisioned alongside quality public services, facilities, and infrastructure. The Lawndale General Plan embodies community principles. Through thoughtful planning, Lawndale is prepared to make decisions that support the community’s long-term goals, as defined here in the General Plan.
The Lawndale General Plan is a dynamic policy document that identifies the community’s vision for the future and provides a framework to guide the City’s longterm growth and development. The General Plan reflects the community’s values and desires and addresses important issues such as land use and urban design; mobility; housing; resource management; public safety; environmental justice; economic development; community facilities and services; and public health. Although it may be updated periodically to reflect changing market conditions, new legislative requirements, and modern local opportunities, the intent of the Lawndale General Plan is to lay the foundation for long-term decision-making that stands the test of time.
The Lawndale General Plan is supported and implemented by important complementary plans and programs, including the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Climate Action Plan. While the General Plan provides high-level guidance on local issues and priorities, these plans and programs implement the General Plan and provide more specific direction regarding critical topics, such as the redevelopment of Hawthorne Boulevard, which serves as the City’s primary transportation route, corridor of economic activity, and community focal point; expectations on permitted uses throughout the City; and the City’s strategy to support a more resilient and sustainable future. Taken together with the General Plan, these plans and programs chart the path forward for Lawndale for the next 20 years.
IN
Contents:
+ Purpose of the
General Plan
+ General Plan
Objectives
+ Scope and
Content of the
General Plan
+ Planning
Process
+ Public
Participation
+ Community
Vision
Statement
+ Applying the
General Plan
+ Annual
Reporting
Introduction
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-2
Purpose of the General Plan
In California, all cities and counties are required to adopt a general plan. The general plan is a comprehensive policy document that shapes the long-term physical development of a jurisdiction’s planning area. The planning area is the geographic area for which the general plan provides a framework for long-term growth and resource conservation. State law requires the planning area for the general plan to include all territory within the incorporated area as well as "any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency's judgment bears relation to its planning" (California Government Code Section 65300).
The general plan must include eight state-mandated elements including land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, environmental justice, and safety elements, as specified in Government Code Section 65302, to the extent that the issues identified by State law exist in the City’s planning area.
Additional elements that relate to the physical development of the city may also be addressed in the general plan. The degree of specificity and level of detail of the discussion of each general plan element need only reflect local conditions and circumstances. The Lawndale General Plan has been prepared consistent with the requirements of State law and addresses the relevant items addressed in Government Code Section 65300 et seq.
General Plan Objectives
The General Plan is more than just the legal basis for all local land use decisions; it is the vision for how the City will evolve, reflecting the community’s objectives. The objectives of the Lawndale General Plan include:
• Reflect the current goals and vision expressed by City residents, businesses, decisionmakers, and other stakeholders; • Address issues and concerns identified by City residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders;
• Protect Lawndale’s existing residences, character, and sense of community; • Proactively plan for and accommodate local and regional growth in a responsible manner; • Encourage mixed-use development patterns along major corridors that promote vibrant commercial and residential areas;
• Allow for a range of high-quality housing options;
• Attract and retain businesses and industries that provide jobs for local residents; • Continue to maintain and improve multimodal transportation opportunities; • Maintain strong fiscal sustainability and continue to provide efficient and adequate public services;
• Address new requirements of State law; and
• Address emerging transportation, housing, and employment trends.
What is a General Plan?
The general plan serves as a “blueprint” for future development of a city or county. It establishes land use designations and policies to assist decision makers as they review proposals for new development or consider changes to city ordinances. The general plan addresses issues that impact the entire city, such as how land is used, where buildings are built, the locations of roads and parks, safety, noise, and more.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-3
A general plan is:
Comprehensive
A general plan is comprehensive in nature, covering a wide range of topics such as land use, housing, economic development, infrastructure, public safety, recreation, and natural resources.
Long Range
A general plan provides guidance on achieving a long-range vision of the future for a city or county.
To reach this envisioned future, the general plan includes goals, policies, and implementation programs that address both near-term and long-term needs. The City of Lawndale’s General Plan looks ahead approximately 20 years—to the year of 2040. At the same time, the General Plan will provide policy direction that allows for flexibility to respond to changes in the marketplace and in technology, positioning the City for long-term success.
Consistent
A general plan must be internally (“horizontally”) consistent, meaning it cannot contradict itself. A general plan uses a consistent set of assumptions and projections to assess future demands for housing, employment, public services, and infrastructure and must fully integrate its separate parts and relate them to each other without conflict. Additionally, all adopted portions (elements) of a general plan have equal weight. None may supersede another, so the general plan must resolve conflicts among the provisions of each element. Finally, all other plans, ordinances, and policies must be consistent with the general plan. This “vertical” consistency helps resolve conflicts between local specific plans, the City’s Zoning Code, and the General Plan.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-4
Scope and Content of the General Plan
General Plan Policy Document
The General Plan policy document contains the goals and policies that will guide future decisions within the City and identifies action items (implementation measures) to ensure the vision and goals of the General Plan are carried out. Two important documents support the General Plan: the Existing Conditions Report and the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Both are intended to be used in conjunction with this General Plan and to serve as companions to this policy document. The Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP) provides detailed policies, standards, and criteria for the corridor’s development, consistent with the direction provided in the General Plan policy document and as analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
The Lawndale General Plan also contains a land use diagram (map), which serves as a general guide to the distribution of land uses throughout the City. The Lawndale General Plan addresses all of the elements required by State law, in addition to a range of optional topics and elements that the City has decided to include. The table below identifies the elements included in the Lawndale General Plan and the corresponding requirement in State law.
Relationship Between General Plan Elements and State Requirements General Plan Elements
State Mandated
Land Use
Circulation
Conservation
Open Space
Noise
Safety
Housing
Environmental
Justice
Optional Topics
Lawndale General Plan
Land Use ▲
Mobility ▲
Housing
(Separate Cover) ▲
Resource Management ▲ ▲ ▲
Public Safety ▲ ▲
Environmental Justice ▲
Economic
Development ▲
Community Facilities ▲
Organization of the General Plan Elements
Each element (i.e., chapter) of the General Plan is organized into a set of goals, policies, and implementation actions. Each goal is supported by a particular set of policies and actions to implement and achieve that goal.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-5
Planning Process
The last comprehensive update to the General Plan occurred in 1992. Since then, substantial changes to the planning context of the City have occurred, including shifts in the community’s demographics and new ways of thinking about sustainability, public health, and placemaking. In light of these changes, the City undertook a comprehensive update of the General Plan (Lawndale General Plan) as an opportunity to reassess its long-term vision and identify new challenges, opportunities, and approaches to make that vision a reality. The update process began in 2020 and included the following steps.
Public Participation
The Lawndale General Plan was developed with community input and reflects the community’s vision for Lawndale. A summary of the community outreach and public participation process is provided below.
Outreach Objectives
Objectives established for the comprehensive outreach program were to:
• Conduct an open and transparent process.
• Engage the full spectrum of Lawndale community members, residents, business owners, landowners, and other stakeholders in the General Plan Update process; enhance public awareness of the project and its importance.
• Gather meaningful community input, ideas, and feedback to shape the vision, alternatives, and policies to be included in the Lawndale General Plan.
• Build a framework to develop community consensus throughout the process. • Strengthen and expand relationships and trust between the City and community members.
Lawndale General Plan Outreach
For all public workshops and meetings, the City of Lawndale conducted extensive bilingual outreach (English and Spanish), using a wide variety of methods and tools, to inform and encourage the community to participate in the update process. The following is a list of methods and tools used to inform the public of meetings, workshops, and the status of the work efforts. • General Plan Website: A website devoted to informing the public about, and encouraging participation in, the update process has been maintained throughout the general plan update process. The website includes workshop materials, background information, and draft and final work products.
• Focus Group Briefings: The City held briefings with interested focus groups including representatives from the development community and community health and wellness stakeholders.
• E-mail distribution list: The list was developed and maintained over time, and included email contacts for agencies, organizations, stakeholders, and individuals.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-6
Visioning Workshops
The City hosted eight workshops (February through December 2021), addressing a different topic of focus each month. Each workshop was conducted in a bilingual environment (English and Spanish) to minimize barriers to participation. Each workshop included a brief overview of the General Plan, including why it’s important and why the City is updating its Plan, some background information on the evening’s topic, and a series of facilitated activities to solicit input on key topics or ideas.
Workshop 1: Values, Issues, and Opportunities
The first General Plan Visioning Workshop was held virtually on February 2, 2021 (English) and March 9, 2021 (Spanish). The focus of this Visioning workshop was to introduce the General Plan and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan Update, and ask for input from residents on what they value in Lawndale, what they see as challenges, and what their vision is for the future of the City. After a brief presentation on the General Plan and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan Update, the City held a discussion and answered questions from the community.
During this workshop there was approximately 26 attendees for the English workshop and 3 Spanish speakers.
Workshop 2: Land Use
The second workshop was held virtually on March 23, 2021 (English) and April 26, 2021 (Spanish). The workshop included a presentation followed by a discussion with the community. During this workshop staff explained to what Land Use is and the types of Land Uses withing a community. Residential, Commercial, Institutional, Open Space and Industrial uses were described. During this workshop there was a public comment period where staff interacted with the community to obtain public opinions on the existing and desired land uses. There was approximately 16 attendees at this meeting’s conclusion.
Workshop 3: Land Use and Transportation
The third workshop was held virtually on April 27, 2021 (English) and May 18, 2021 (Spanish). The focus of the last Workshop was on land use and transportation. As part of the overview presentation, the group considered the interface between transportation and land use planning in Lawndale. This meeting also recapped the desirable and undesirable land uses as proposed by the residents.
Workshop 4: General Plan and Land Use
The fourth workshop was held telephonically on May 17, 2021. This event gave the community an opportunity to call in and ask questions, as well as provide comments and suggestions on the General Plan and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan Update. During this workshop there was no attendees.
Workshop 5: Virtual Community Workshop
The fifth workshop was held virtually on May 20, 2021. The workshop included a presentation followed by a discussion with the community. Staff discussed the Environmental Justice element and explained its importance. Staff also took some public comments. There were approximately 8 attendees at the meeting’s conclusion.
Workshop 6: Virtual Community Workshop
The sixth workshop was held virtually on June 22, 2021. The workshop included a presentation that provided a recap on the General Plan Elements and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan, followed by a discussion with the community. This workshop focused on obtaining public opinions on the future of the City.
Workshop 7: Virtual Community Workshop
The seventh workshop was held virtually on August 4, 2021. The focus of this workshop was the Housing Element and Fair Housing Act. The workshop included a presentation followed by a discussion with the Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-7
community. The Housing element was explained, residential sites inventory was presented. During the workshop staff discussed potential sites suitable for housing to accommodate all future housing from the Regional Housing Needs Assessment provided by California Department of Housing and Development.
Workshop 8: Interactive Community Workshop
The eighth workshop was held virtually on August 31, 2021. The workshop included a presentation followed by a discussion with the community. Staff prepared an in person workshop. There were several interactive activities including setting up desired density locations, choosing desired and undesired land uses, going over all elements and providing public comments. There were 7 attendees at this in person workshop.
Workshop 9: Virtual Community Workshop
The nineth workshop was held virtually on November 17, 2021. The workshop included a presentation followed by a discussion with the community. During this workshop staff presented the housing sites chosen for the housing element. Staff presented types of density and locations where they would be placed during the next RHNA cycle. Staff took notes on the public comments and responded to questions.
Workshop 10: Virtual Community Workshop
The tenth workshop was held virtually on December 15, 2021. The focus of this workshop was the Housing Element, including proposed sites. The workshop included a presentation followed by a discussion with the community. This was the final workshop, which was a whole recompilation review of the General Plan Update and what the intent of the workshops were.
Online Surveys and Polls
In order to capture as much input from the community as possible, including input from those who may not have participated in workshop community engagement opportunities, the project team designed two online surveys that were open to all and available throughout the outreach phase of the project. The surveys were administered online via the SurveyMonkey web platform and were available in English and Spanish. Survey #1 focused on visioning, values and living conditions in Lawndale as well as demographic questions. Survey #2 focused on community priorities and existing conditions related to housing. The City received a total of 99 responses to the surveys. The survey responses provide insight into the demographics and opinions of Lawndale community members concerning goals and topics related to the update of the City’s General Plan.
Community Vision Statement
A Vision Statement is a collection of aspirational statements framing community needs and desires. Vision Statements are important to help guide the creation of the General Plan. The Lawndale Community Visionillustrated on the following pageswas developed to reflect the meaningful community input received at the Lawndale 2020 General Plan workshops, online surveys, from key community members and stakeholders, and elected and appointed officials.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-8
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-9
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-10
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-11
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-12
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-13
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-14
Applying the General Plan
The General Plan is intended for use by a broad range of persons, including City decision-makers, City staff, developers, and community members, to serve the following purposes:
• To identify land use patterns, growth, transportation, environmental, economic, and community goals and policies as they relate to land use, conservation, development, and provision of community services and facilities.
• To articulate a vision and strategy for the future development of Lawndale and its residents.
• To enable the City Council and Planning Commission to establish long-range land use, transportation, services, conservation, and growth goals and policies.
• To provide a basis for judging whether specific private development proposals and public projects are in harmony with these goals and policies.
• To inform citizens, developers, decision makers, and other jurisdictions of the policies that will guide development and resource conservation within Lawndale.
The General Plan applies to lands in the incorporated area of the City, to the extent allowed by Federal and State law. Under State law, many actions, such as development projects, specific plans, master plans, community plans, zoning, subdivisions, public agency projects, and other decisions must be consistent with the General Plan. State law requires that the City's ordinances regulating land use be consistent with the General Plan. The Zoning Code, individual project proposals, and other related plans and ordinances must be consistent with the goals and policies in the General Plan.
Interpreting the General Plan
In reading the General Plan, one should infer that the goals, policies, and implementation measures are limited to the extent that it is financially feasible and appropriate for the City to carry them out and to the extent legally permitted by Federal and State law. For example, policies and measures which indicate that the City will “provide,” “support,” “ensure,” or otherwise require or carry them out do not indicate an irreversible commitment of City funds or staff resources to those activities, but rather, that the City will support them when the City deems that it is financially feasible and appropriate to do so. In some cases, the City will carry out various policies and measures by requiring development, infrastructure, and other projects to be consistent with the policies and actions of the General Plan. In other cases, the City may include General Plan items in the Capital Improvement Program, annual budget, or other implementation mechanisms, as the City deems appropriate.
Key Terms
Goal: A description of the
general desired condition
that the community seeks
to create.
Policy: A specific
statement that guides
decision-making as the City
works to achieve the
various goals. Once
adopted, policies represent
statements of City
regulations.
Action: An action,
procedure, implementation
technique, or specific
program to be undertaken
by the City to help achieve
a specified goal or
implement an adopted
policy.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-15
How to Read Lawndale’s General Plan
As the guide for future development and desired conditions, residents, property owners, and business owners should also familiarize themselves with how to read this document. Each element contains a brief introduction, several goals and related policies, and a description of related actions to help implement the City’s vision.
Goals
A goal in the General Plan is the broadest statement of community values. It is a generalized ideal which provides a sense of direction for action. Goals are overall statements of desired future conditions.
Policies and Implementation Actions
The essence of the General Plan is contained within its policies. Policies are statements which further refine the goals, and guide the course of action the City must take to achieve the goals in the plan. It is important to note that policies are guides for decision makers, not decisions themselves. Policies and implementation measures must be clear to be useful. However, policies may range in terms of commitment of resources, importance, and expected results. Therefore, it is important for readers to understand the distinctions between various levels of policy and implementation action. The following is a list of common terms used in policies and implementation measures, and how to interpret its usage in the General Plan.
In cases where other terms are used (and not defined below), an equivalent to the closest applicable term can be used.
Shall: Absolute commitment to the policy or action, and indicate that the policy must be adhered to in all cases.
Should: Policy will be followed in most cases, but exceptions are acceptable for good reasons.
Ensure: Policy indicates that the City plays a role in making sure something happens, often times in partnership with other agencies or as part of other City programs and processes.
Encourage: Policy is highly recommended and/or desired, and should be pursued when feasible.
Allow: Policy will be supported within certain parameters and certain guidelines.
Coordinate: Policy will occur in conjunction with another entity, and the City will carry its share of the responsibility.
Explore: Effort will be taken to investigate the subject at hand, to discover whether or not further commitment is relevant.
Consider: Policy may or may not be followed, depending upon the results of analysis that will be completed.
Limit: Effort will be taken to keep the subject within certain limits, or will at least make undesired change more difficult.
Restrict: Effort will be taken to keep the undesired action to a minimum.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | IN-16
Amending the General Plan
The General Plan is not static, but rather is a dynamic and multi-faceted document that defines and addresses the changing needs of the City. It is based on an on-going assessment and understanding of existing and projected community needs. The City’s decision-makers have broad discretion in interpreting the General Plan and its purposes, and are allowed to weigh and balance the various goals and policies when applying them. Recognizing the need for the General Plan to remain current and reflective of local issues and policies, State law allows the City to periodically amend the General Plan to ensure that it is consistent with the conditions, values, expectations, and needs of its residents, businesses, and other stakeholders. The General Plan may be amended in accordance with State law. While specific findings may be applied on a project-by-project basis, at a minimum the following standard findings shall be made for each proposed General Plan amendment:
1. The amendment is deemed to be in the public interest;
2. The amendment is consistent and/or compatible with the rest of the General Plan;
3. The potential impacts of the amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
4. The amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City’s Municipal Code.
City-initiated amendments, as well as amendments requested by other parties, are subject to the same basic process described above to ensure consistency and compatibility with the General Plan. This includes appropriate environmental review, public notice, and public hearings, leading to an official action by the City Council.
Timing
Under State law, mandatory elements of the General Plan may be amended up to four times in each calendar year. The City Council or any citizen may initiate consideration of a General Plan Amendment. State law further requires that the Housing Element be reviewed and updated at least once every eight years.
Exemptions
The State Legislature has recognized that occasions arise which require the local jurisdiction to have some flexibility in amending the General Plan. As set forth in the California Government Code, the following are exempt from the General Plan amendment schedule:
• Amendments to optional elements.
• Amendments requested and necessary for affordable housing (Section 65358(c)). • Any amendment necessary to comply with a court decision in a case involving the legal adequacy of the general plan (Section 65358(d)(1)).
• Amendments to bring a general plan into compliance with an airport land use plan (Section 65302.3).
Annual Reporting
Given the long-term nature of the General Plan, it is critical to periodically evaluate its effectiveness and to document the implementation status of the various policies and actions that it contains. State law provides direction on how cities and counties can maintain the General Plan as a useful policy guide. State law also requires the City to annually report "the status of the plan and progress in its implementation" (California Government Code Section 65400(b)) to the City Council. The Action items in each Element identifies each measure to be carried out by the General Plan.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-1
Introduction to Land Use
The Land Use Element is a guide to land use planning in Lawndale and provides a framework for the economic, environmental, and infrastructure issues examined in the other General Plan elements. The Land Use Element, which includes the Land Use Map (Figure LU-1), identifies how and where land will be used in the future—for housing, commercial and industrial uses, public facilities, parks, open space, and transportation.
The Land Use Element identifies the range of allowed uses and development densities and intensities permitted by the Land Use Plan. Overall, this element is designed to:
• Preserve and protect the City’s existing residential neighborhoods, • Direct future growth to key opportunity areas along the City’s primary transportation corridors,
• Support quality expanded housing and employment opportunities, and • Promote a strong sense of place and identity in Lawndale.
Organization of Element
The Land Use Element goals and policies address each of the following topics as they relate to Lawndale:
• Land Use Mix
• Managed Growth
• Land Use Compatibility
• Community Character and Design
LU
Land Use
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-2
Overview
The Land Use Element provides for a development and resource conservation pattern that preserves and protects Lawndale’s unique small-town character while promoting opportunities for expanded housing opportunities, economic development, and local job growth. Ensuring that Lawndale has sufficient capacity and flexibility to support a diverse mix of land uses is essential to the community’s ability to thrive and be economically sustainable over time; the Economic Development Element provides important complementary policy direction to support the City’s land use priorities.
State law requires the Land Use Element to address the following, to the extent they are locally relevant:
• Proposed general distribution, general location and extent of the uses of the land for housing, business, industry, open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty, education, public buildings and grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities, and other categories of public and private uses of land; • Population density and building intensity; and
• Areas subject to flooding (the Lawndale General Plan addresses this topic within the context of its Public Safety Element).
Background information regarding land use is presented in Chapter 2 of the General Plan Update Existing Conditions Report.
Planning Area Boundaries
City Limits
The City Limits include all area within the City’s corporate boundary, over which the City exercises land use authority and provides public services.
Sphere Of Influence
A Sphere of Influence (SOI) is the probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency, as adopted by a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). A SOI may include both incorporated and unincorporated areas within which a city or special district will have primary responsibility for the provision of public facilities and services. Lawndale’s SOI extends east of City Limits into the Los Angeles County unincorporated community of El Camino Village. El Camino Village is primarily a densely developed, singlefamily residential community with commercial uses along Crenshaw Boulevard. Although parts of El Camino Village share a Lawndale zip code, the City has historically not provided services to the community.
Planning Area
The Planning Area is the geographic area for which the General Plan provides a framework for long-term growth and resource conservation. State law requires the General Plan to include all territory within Lawndale’s incorporated area as well as "any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency's judgment bears relation to its planning" (California Government Code Section 65300). The Planning Area, as shown in Figure LU-2, includes the entire city limits (approximately 917 acres) as well as the City of Lawndale’s SOI (approximately 229 acres); the entire Planning Area is approximately 1,146 acres.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-3
Specific Plan Area
A city will often have neighborhoods or areas that are unique and/or important in ways that require special consideration. A specific plan is a major planning document that includes land use and development policies specific to an area. For Lawndale, the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP) regulates and guides the development of the Hawthorne Boulevard corridor and the north side of both Artesia Boulevard and Redondo Beach Boulevard. The HBSP acts as a tool for implementing the goals and policies of the General Plan through the regulation of use, density, height, and other design standards to achieve the overall vision for the area. The Specific Plan was originally adopted in June 1999 and has undergone various amendments since its adoption. A key action item of this Land Use Element is to update the HBSP to implement the goals and policies included in the City’s updated General Plan.
The purpose of the HBSP is to help facilitate the successful redevelopment of the Specific Plan area into a thriving mixed-use activity center featuring high-quality multifamily housing choices, dynamic commercial options, and inviting public spaces. The Specific Plan is important to the City and its residents because it emphasizes economic growth along Hawthorne Boulevard and other significant transportation corridors, and accounts for the unique conditions along these corridors when providing detailed development guidance.
The boundaries of the HBSP are depicted on Figure LU-3.
Land Use Designations
The Land Use Designations in this General Plan specify the type of allowed uses associated with each designation. Zoning, specific plans, and individual development projects must be consistent with the intensities allowed under the General Plan.
Land Use Classification System
The Land Use Map (Figure LU-1) illustrates the various types and distribution of land uses planned for the community. The land use classification system includes nine land use designations. Land use designations identify the types and nature of development allowed in particular locations depicted on the Land Use Map (Figure LU-1).
The residential category includes three land use designations and an overlay designation that allow for a range of housing types and densities. The nonresidential grouping includes a variety of jobs-generating designations (Commercial and Industrial) as well as designations that serve the public good, including Public Facilities and Open Space. Finally, the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan designation indicates that the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan guides future land use and zoning decisions for that area of the City.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-4
Density
Density refers to the intensity of residential uses in terms of a range, from a minimum to a maximum, of dwelling units per gross acre. Various building configurations representing different densities are shown below.
Buildout Potential
State General Plan law requires that the Land Use Element indicate the maximum densities and intensities permitted within the Land Use Plan. The land use designations shown on the Land Use Map are described in detail in this Element. Table LU-1 lists each of the land use designations shown on the Land Use Map and provides a corresponding indication of maximum density or intensity of allowable development.
Maximum allowable development on individual parcels of land is governed by these measures of density or intensity. The table also includes the effective overall level of development within each land use designation within the City. These effective levels of development represent an anticipated overall density and intensity of development for Lawndale and are, therefore, less than the absolute maximum allowed for an individual parcel of land. For various reasons, many parcels in the community have not been developed to maximum density or intensity and, in the future, maximum development as described in this Element can be expected to occur only on a limited number of parcels. Actual future development would depend on future real estate and labor market conditions, property owner preferences and decisions, sitespecific constraints, land turnover, and other factors. Additionally, new development and growth are largely dictated by existing development conditions. Very few communities in California actually develop to the full potential allowed in their respective General Plans during the planning horizon.
The overall future development in Lawndale is anticipated to occur at the expected level of density or intensity indicated in Table LU-1. Development at an intensity or density between the expected and maximum levels is desired when projects offer exceptional design quality, important public amenities or benefits, or other factors that promote important goals and policies of the General Plan. For the residential land use designations, projects are expected to build to a density at least as high as the lowest density allowed by the respective designation.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-5
Residential Land Use Designations
Low Density Residential (LDR); 0 – 8.9 du/ac
The Low Density Residential land use designation provides for the development of single-family dwellings.
This designation allows a density of 0–8.9 du/ac.
Medium Density Residential (MDR); 9.0 – 17.4 du/ac
The Medium Density Residential land use designation allows for a range of housing types including singlefamily detached and attached units and duplexes, condominiums, and townhouses. This designation allows a density of 9.0–17.4 du/ac.
High Density Residential (HDR); 17.5 – 33 du/ac
The High Density Residential land use designation provides for a variety of small-lot single-family dwelling units and multi-family dwelling units including: courtyard homes, patio homes, duplex, condominiums, townhouses, apartments, and manufactured homes. This designation allows a density of 17.5–33 du/ac.
Housing Opportunity Overlay (HOO); 20.0 – 100 du/ac
The Housing Opportunity Overlay, which applies to select sites outside of the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan, provides opportunity for the development of high density housing in single-use and mixeduse formats at a density of 20.0–100.0 du/ac. New residential development at HOO sites, including residential development as part of a mixed-use project, must meet a minimum residential density of at least 20.0 du/ac, regardless of the underlying land use designation. For new nonresidential development, all standards related to the underlying land use designation shall continue to apply.
Non-Residential Land Use Designations
Commercial (C)
The Commercial land use designation provides for a variety of retail and service-oriented business activities, restaurants, services and office uses to meet the daily needs of residents. There is no minimum or maximum building intensity.
Industrial (I)
The Industrial designation permits light manufacturing, assembly, packaging, fabrication and processing of materials into finishing products rather than the conversion of raw materials. The industrial activity shall be conducted primarily within structures and outside storage areas and assembly activity should be limited. There is no minimum or maximum building intensity.
Open Space (OS)
The Open Space designation includes public parks, parks that are part of school sites, public and private outdoor recreational facilities, and landscaped open space areas.
Public Facilities (PF)
The Public Facilities designation provides for publicly owned properties and facilities including, schools, fire stations, police stations, community centers, utility substations, water facilities, administrative offices and City government office complexes. Other uses that are determined to be compatible with primary uses may also be allowed. There is no minimum or maximum building intensity.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-6
Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan
Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP); Densities and Intensities Vary The Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan designation provides detailed policies, standards, and criteria for the area’s development. Land uses within the Specific Plan area are detailed in the Specific Plan document. The Specific Plan serves as the land use and zoning map for the Specific Plan area. Any future amendments to the land uses identified in the Specific Plan will not require a revision to the General Plan (General Plan Amendment).
Table LU-1 General Plan Land Use 2045 Potential Buildout Summary Land Use Designation Acres1
Allowed
Density
and/or
Building
Intensity
Assumed
Density
and/or
Building
Intensity2
Units Population
NonResidential
Square Feet
Jobs
RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
Low Density Residential 49 0-8.9 du/ac 8.5 du/ac 420 1,537 - - Medium Density Residential 460 9-17.4
du/ac 12 du/ac 5,534 18,404 - -
High Density Residential 115 17.5-33
du/ac 30 du/ac 3,464 9,418 - -
Housing Opportunity Overlay3 20-100
du/ac 50 du/ac - -
Residential Subtotal - - - -
NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
Commercial 38 No max 0.5 311 706 4,904,877 1,673
Industrial 21 No max 0.5 - - 459,130 612
Public Facilities 172 No max 0.15 - - 1,124,243 1,124
Open Space 14 - - 27 62 - -
Non-Residential Subtotal - -
SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USES
Hawthorne Boulevard Specific
Plan Area4 95 Varies 24-75 du/ac and 0.6 3,931 11,017 2,484,823 4,970 Specific Plan Subtotal 95 - - 3,931 11,017 2,484,823 4,970 Totals 1,195 - - 15,405 47,430 5,351,026 9,208
1. Acres are given as adjusted gross acreages, which do not include the right-of-way for major roadways, flood control facilities, or railroads.
2. Density/building intensity includes both residential density, expressed as dwelling units per acre, and nonresidential intensity, expressed as floor area ratio (FAR), which is the amount of building square feet in relation to the size of the lot.
While no minimum or maximum building intensities apply to land uses within Lawndale, an assumed building intensity) is used in Table LU-1 to establish potential buildout totals. Historically, citywide buildout levels do not achieve the maximum allowable density/intensity on every parcel, and are, on average, lower than allowed by the General Plan. Accordingly, the projections in this General Plan do not assume buildout at the maximum density or intensity but are adjusted downward to account for variations in development.
3. Acreage and the development potential of the Housing Opportunity Overlay is not included in the total acreage; figures associated with development of these areas are included within the underlying base designations. The assumed density for all sites designated with the HOO is 50 du/ac, regardless of the underlying base designation.
4. Parcels within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan that are identified in the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element as Housing Overlay 150 sites shall have a maximum density of 150 du/ac. The buildout estimate for the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan uses an assumed density of 75 du/ac for sites in the Specific Plan area identified in the City’s Housing Sites Inventory. All other sites where residential uses are allowed have an assumed density of 24 du/ac.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-7
LAND USE MIX
A community with a fiscally sustainable mix of land uses that meets the diverse needs of Lawndale residents, offers a variety of housing, employment opportunities, and supports the provision of public services.
Every community requires a mixture of land uses: residential land to provide housing; commercial and industrial land to provide goods and services, tax revenue, employment opportunities; public and institutional land to provide public services and infrastructure; and parks and open space for the enjoyment of all. A desirable community provides a balance of land uses that responds to and anticipates its residents’ current and future needs.
LU-1 Policies
LU-1.1 Sustainable Land Use Pattern. Provide an appropriate land use plan that promotes efficient development; fosters and enhances community livability and public health; sustains economic vitality; promotes efficient development and multiple transportation options; reduces pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and the expenditure of energy and other resources; and ensures compatibility between uses consistent with the land use designations identified in this Element and Land Use Map (LU-1).
LU-1.2 Balance Jobs and Housing. Balance levels of employment and housing within the community to provide more opportunities for Lawndale residents to work locally, reduce commute times, and improve air quality.
LU-1.3 Diversity of Residential Options. Strive to maintain a reasonable balance between rental and ownership housing opportunities across all residential types, including single family detached homes and senior housing, by maintaining a range of allowable land use densities.
LU-1.4 Commercial Corridors. Encourage development of well-maintained, functional, and appropriate commercial, retail, and employment opportunities in stand-alone and mixed-use formats, particularly along Hawthorne Boulevard, major arterials, and at major intersections where there is maximum visibility and access.
LU-1.5 Public Services for Quality of Life. Maintain appropriate sites for institutional and public facility uses that can accommodate the infrastructure and facilities needed to serve the community.
LU-1.6 Uses to Meet Daily Needs. Encourage uses that meet daily needs, such as grocery stores, local-serving restaurants, and other businesses and activities, within walking distance of residences to reduce the frequency and length of vehicle trips.
LU-1.7 Public Gathering Spaces. Support the provision of attractive outdoor public gathering places such as plazas, green space, and squares to strengthen social engagement and provide visual relief throughout the City.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-8
LU-1 Actions
LU-1a Create consistency between the City’s Zoning Code and Zoning Map and General Plan.
LU-1b Update the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan as appropriate to ensure consistency with this Land Use Element, designations shown on Figure LU-1, and the City’s adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element.
LU-1c Review the Zoning Code and update as appropriate to reflect Land Use goals, policies, and implementation actions included in this Plan.
LU-1d As part of development review process, ensure that developments fall within the minimum and maximum density requirements stipulated on the Land Use Map and included within the Land Use Descriptions. Projects shall also be reviewed for consistency with the development standards and density requirements established by any applicable Specific Plan governing the area in question.
LU-1e Initiate a coordinated process to regularly review and adjust population assumptions and forecasts in conjunction with the Department of Finance, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the County of Los Angeles in order to adequately plan for growth, including jobs-housing balance projections.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-9
MANAGED GROWTH
A City that manages and directs growth to strategic locations so that the community and its neighborhoods are protected and enhanced.
Population growth in Lawndale and the Los Angeles metropolitan region is expected to continue, accompanied by a variety of new development that has the potential to impact community character.
While recognizing that change is inevitable, the community can strategically plan and guide future development to specific locations most suitable for redevelopment to support the provision of new residential and employment opportunities, while protecting and enhancing the existing character of Lawndale and its neighborhoods.
LU-2 Policies
Existing Land Use Pattern. Strive to maintain the basic pattern of existing land uses, preserving residential neighborhoods, while providing for enhancement of mixed-use corridors to accommodate desirable redevelopment plans and improve economic sustainability.
Focused Areas for New Development. Encourage new development to be focused within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area and within the City’s Housing Opportunity Overlay sites to preserve the character of the community’s existing single-family uses, promote active transportation options, and create vibrant mixed-use activity nodes.
Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan. Facilitate the redevelopment of Hawthorne Boulevard through implementation of the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan which encourages a mixture of quality multi-family housing development, local- and destination-type commercial uses, eateries, and civic uses such as cultural and performing art facilities in innovative development formats.
Developable Parcels. Encourage the consolidation of small lots into larger developable parcels (at least 0.50 acres), particularly in the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area, to create new opportunities for financially viable development that supports the City’s desired land use mix.
Homeownership Opportunities. Encourage the development of for-sale housing to expand local homeownership opportunities.
Regional Growth. Notify adjacent jurisdictions and agencies of proposed land use actions within the Planning Area that may affect them and take appropriate action to consider and respond to their concerns.
Unincorporated Areas. Respect the history of the unincorporated neighborhoods in Lawndale’s planning area and continue to provide land use direction for those areas in accordance with applicable local, regional, and State regulations.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-10
LU-2 Actions
LU-2a Prepare a General Plan Status Report annually as required by California Government Code. This includes reviewing the General Plan Land Use planning objectives and General Plan Land Use Map to ensure they continue to support the community’s long-term land use vision and amend the text and map as necessary to maintain a modern land use planning perspective.
LU-2b Conduct outreach to commercial center owners to discuss strategies, benefits, and opportunities for lot consolidation, parcel assemblage, and parking/reciprocal access agreements.
LU-2c Evaluate the feasibility of providing administrative incentives, such as expedited processing, for lot consolidations, especially in the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area and Housing Opportunity Overlay sites.
LU-2d Investigate possible incentives for new pedestrian-friendly anchor development at important road intersections to attract retail clientele and increase foot traffic.
LU-2e Implement the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan to guide future development in this area. This includes reviewing and revising the implementation strategies identified in the Specific Plan as part of the Specific Plan’s comprehensive update, and prioritizing the most critical actions for funding and staff resources.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-11
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY
A community where new development is sensitively integrated with existing development, including residential neighborhoods, and minimizes impacts on surrounding land uses.
Lawndale is primarily a residential community and will continue to have a substantial portion of its land devoted to housing. While the City requires a comprehensive circulation system and revenue generated by commercial, office, and industrial uses to support the needs of the community, these roadways and non-residential land uses must be compatible with the existing community and neighborhoods.
LU-3 Policies
LU-3.1 Surrounding Uses. Consider as part of the development review process the compatibility of new development with surrounding uses and the ability of new development to enhance the character of the surrounding area.
LU-3.2 Use Configuration. Permit a mixture of compatible land uses on a single site or within a single development project in a vertical or horizontal configuration.
LU-3.3 Code Compliance. Require land use compatibility through adherence to the policies, standards, and regulations in the Municipal Code, Zoning Code, and other regulations or administrative procedures that manage the form and relationship of projects and uses.
LU-3.4 Residential Uses. Require that new residential development be designed to protect residents from potential conflicts with adjacent land uses, and other features including transportation facilities.
LU-3.5 Scale and Massing. Require that the scale and massing of new development provide appropriate transitions in building height and bulk that are sensitive to the physical and visual character of adjacent lower density neighborhoods.
LU-3.6 Mixed-Use Design Integration. Require that residential and nonresidential portions of mixeduse buildings and sites be integrated through site and building design to ensure compatibility among uses.
LU-3.7 Development Buffers. Require new uses to provide buffers between existing uses where potential adverse impacts could occur, such as decorative walls, setbacks and landscaping, restricted vehicular access, parking enclosures, and lighting control.
LU-3.8 Telecommunications Facilities. To the extent legally possible, regulate and ensure that telecommunications facilities such as cell towers, radio towers, and other appurtenances do not block, impede, or impair the visual quality of Lawndale.
LU-3.9 Interagency Cooperation. Establish and maintain an ongoing liaison with Caltrans, LA Metro, utility companies, adjacent cities, and other major government and private agencies to help minimize the traffic, noise, and visual impacts of their facilities and operations.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-12
LU-3 Actions
LU-3a Prepare and adopt Objective Design Standards applicable to all new multi-family residential and mixed-use development.
LU-3b Ensure all projects are reviewed and processed per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
LU-3c Through the development review process, evaluate development proposals for land use and transportation network compatibility with existing surrounding or abutting development and neighborhoods.
LU-3d Review the Zoning Code, and amend it, if necessary, to create standards addressing appropriate treatments to buffer nonresidential uses from residential and other sensitive uses.
LU-3e Analyze land use compatibility through the development review process to require adequate buffers and/or architectural enhancements that protect sensitive receptors from intrusion of development activities that may cause unwanted nuisances and health risks.
LU-3f Work with Southern California Edison (SCE) to improve compatibility of its facilities with other development and scenic resources. On an ongoing basis and through the development review process, the City shall:
• Request SCE improve transmission line corridors with attractive ornamental plantings, landscape screening, and trails.
• Require new development to underground all utility lines needed to serve the development.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-13
COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND DESIGN
A visually attractive community that helps create a unique sense of place.
As a built-out, primarily residential community, Lawndale respects existing neighborhoods that comprise the community character. It is important that new development and redevelopment activities be planned and designed in a manner that enhances the community’s identity and quality of life. Comprehensive policies, standards, and guidelines that encourage thoughtful community design and foster a sense of place should be implemented.
LU-4 Policies
LU-4.1 Local Identity. Enhance Lawndale’s local identity, distinct from its South Bay neighbors, through implementation of attractive high-quality gateways, city entry signs and design features, cohesive street signs, and other design features at public gathering spaces and other areas.
LU-4.2 Standards and Guidelines. Develop and enforce development standards and objective design guidelines that provide clear direction for achieving quality community design in new development and redevelopment projects consistent with the City’s desired aesthetic.
LU-4.3 Site Planning. Require that new development use site planning techniques (e.g., the placement of proposed structures, building materials, landscaping, access ways) that consider the physical characteristics of its site and surrounding land uses, maximize access to sunlight and natural airflow between buildings, and optimize energy efficiency.
LU-4.4 Pedestrian-Scale Amenities. Support the installation of pedestrian-scale amenities throughout the City that contribute to a high-quality living environment, such as street furniture, fountains, pedestrian-scaled signs and lighting, murals or public art, landscaping, and sidewalk improvements.
LU-4.5 Gathering Places. Encourage the integration of on-site plazas or gathering spaces in new multifamily and mixed-use developments, and explore ways to creatively integrate outdoor dining, seating, or other activity-generating features into project design.
LU-4.6 Older Neighborhoods and Businesses. Develop or participate in programs to rehabilitate older residential neighborhoods and commercial centers to prevent blight and maintain the quality of the built environment.
LU-4.7 Landscaping. Encourage, to the maximum extent feasible, project and streetscape landscaping be designed to include drought tolerant, native California plant species and the use of a drip, micro-spray or other low-flow irrigation systems.
LU-4.8 Arts in Public Places. Promote art in public places to provide a diverse and culturally rich environment for Lawndale’s residents and visitors.
LU-4.9 Undergrounding of Utilities. Encourage and assist, where possible, with the undergrounding of utility lines consistent with City regulations established in the Municipal Code.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-14
LU-4 Actions
LU-4a Create a master streetscape plan addressing landscaping, signage, lighting, gateway design, and special design features along enhanced corridors and at key entryways to the City. The plan should identify selected features and amenities that will create separate identities in different parts of the City.
LU-4b Meet with Caltrans to stay informed regarding ongoing freeway improvements and to develop a strategy to create enhanced landscaping at the City’s interchanges.
LU-4c Create a process to consider community-generated requests in the formulation of the annual Capital Improvement Program budgeting process.
LU-4d Research and evaluate the possibility of creating a façade improvement program to encourage property owners to improve upon and reinvest in their businesses.
LU-4e Continue to implement the City’s existing development standards, or create new standards if appropriate, to regulate new construction and revisions to existing buildings. New standards shall be created for higher density stand-alone residential projects and mixed-use projects to promote quality infill developments.
LU-4f Seek grant funding (“greening” grants) to help offset the cost of landscape improvements along community corridors, with a focus on Hawthorne Boulevard.
LU-4g Work with local nurseries to make tress more easily available.
LU-4h Continue to implement the City’s Art in Public Spaces ordinance, collect impact fees, and install art as appropriate.
LU-4i Work with SCE to coordinate the undergrounding of new utilities with the undergrounding of existing utilities whenever financially and physically feasible.
LEGEND
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Assessor Parcel
Boundary
Housing Overlay
Housing Overlay
Low Density Residential
Medium Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Commercial
HBSP
Industrial
Open Space
Public Facilities
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.
Date: November 18, 2022.
CITY OF LAWNDALE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Figure LU-1.
Land Use Map
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
144th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
May Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
0 500 1,000
Feet
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-16
This page intentionally left blank.
LEGEND
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Adjacent Inorporated Area
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.
Date: November 18, 2022.
CITY OF LAWNDALE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Figure LU-2.
Planning Area
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
144th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
May Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
G a r d e n a
To r ra n c e
0 500 1,000
Feet
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-18
This page intentionally left blank.
CITY OF LAWNDALE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
LEGEND
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Adjacent Incorporated
Hawthorn Boulevard Specific
Plan Boundary
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.
Date: June 20, 2023.
Figure LU-3.
Hawthorne Boulevard
Specific Plan Map
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
144th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
May Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
G a r d e n a
To r ra n c e
0 500 1,000
Feet
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | LU-20
This page intentionally left blank.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-1
Introduction to Mobility
The City of Lawndale consists of approximately 65 miles of roadway. With only 1.97 square miles, the City is bordered by Redondo Beach, Hawthorne, Torrance and the unincorporated area of El Camino Village LA County, all connected by a vast network of roadways. The Mobility Element provides the framework for decisions concerning the City’s multimodal transportation system, which includes all users of streets, roads and highways, including bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and parking, plus goods movement and parking. The Mobility Element provides for coordination with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), which serves as the coordinating agency for transportation funding for Los Angeles County.
State law (California Government Code Section 65302(b)) mandates that the Mobility Element contain the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, military airports and ports, and other public utilities and facilities, to the extent these items exist in the planning area.
The Mobility Element reflects the City’s desire to provide complete street, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities to serve residents, employees and visitors to the City. The City’s transportation infrastructure is included as a main component for mobility, and is impacted by growing developments, population, business, recreational activities, and more. This element will incorporate policies and actions that will maintain and/or improve safety, walkability and connectivity within and through the City, accommodating these expectations for economic growth.
Organization of Element
The Mobility Element will address each of the topics below as they relate to the City of Lawndale. The goals and policies of this element are organized around the following topics:
• Local Circulation System
• Regional Circulation
• Complete Streets
• Parking
• Transit
• Active Transportation
• Goods Movement
• Funding
• Transportation Management
M
Mobility
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-2
GOAL M-1 LOCAL CIRCULATION SYSTEM
A community served by a safe circulation system with adequate traffic flow on arterial roadways and minimized adverse traffic effects on residential neighborhoods.
The circulation system includes a hierarchy of roadways, railways, and off-street paths and trails that serve mobility and local access needs for those who live in, work in, or visit the City. The circulation system allows individuals to travel safely and conveniently to, from, and through the City by vehicle, transit, bicycles, foot, and other methods. Figure M-1 depicts the City of Lawndale’s Local Transportation network and presents the roadway Functional Classifications. These are defined by the vehicle volume and number of vehicular lanes provided, and may include other features such as raised medians, center turn lanes, on-street parking, and bike lanes; the City’s roadway Functional Classifications are defined as follows:
• Major Arterials serve as high-capacity inter-city thoroughfares, and generally carry the majority of traffic traveling through the City, and provide regional travel and access to freeways. Their primary function is to move vehicles. Major Arterials are designed to carry high traffic volumes at higher speeds.
Major Arterials serve to collect traffic entering or exiting the 405 Freeway. They consist of four to eight travel lanes (two to four in each direction) and a raised or painted median with a center turn lane.
Typical posted speeds may range from 35 to 45 miles per hour. • Collectors are intended to carry low to moderate capacity traffic between the arterial street network and local streets. They serve commercial, residential, or public uses, and consist of two travel lanes (one in each direction) and are undivided (with or without centerline striping). Typical posted speeds may range from 25 to 35 miles per hour.
• Local Streets provide intra-city direct access and parking to adjacent land uses. Local Streets are not intended to serve through-traffic. They typically consist of two travel lanes (one in each direction) and are undivided (with or without centerline striping). Typical posted speeds are 25 miles per hour.
M-1 Policies
M-1.1 Arterial Roadway Network. Implement the roadway network based on the classifications mapped in Figure M-1. Implementation will require a plan to accommodate existing and future needs due to land use growth and shifts in travel patterns.
M-1.2 Vehicle Level of Service (LOS). Maintain vehicular LOS “D” along major City intersections (two major arterials intersecting) whenever possible. Certain intersections may be exempt from the LOS “D” target as determined on a case-by-case basis determined by right-of-way constraints, community goals and complete street objectives.
M-1.3 Traffic System Management. Facilitate the efficient movement of vehicles and minimize delay utilizing existing roadway facilities.
M-1.4 Rail Crossings Traffic Operations. Collaborate with Metro and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to provide adequate intersection operations at at-grade crossing locations to minimize delays and con gestion and to create safe crossings for all users.
M-1.5 Development-Related Traffic Impacts. Impose conditions on new development to provide appropriate and feasible improvements to enhance and/or prevent the impediment to traffic flow, parking, ADA accessibility and roadway operations.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-3
M-1.6 Effects of New Technologies on Traffic Flow. Maximize technologies and services such as ride-hailing, autonomous vehicles, electric bicycles, scooters, and other mobility devices, without adversely affecting the City’s transportation network, such as added traffic on roads and sidewalks.
M-1.7 Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Encourage traffic calming strategies, such as diverters, median islands, and speed humps, and incorporation of traffic calming design in residential and school areas to slow traffic and promote safety, while not reducing parking supply.
M-1 Actions
M-1a Periodically review and assess the vehicular level of service along City facilities to determine, what, if any, improvements are warranted to maintain a safe and efficient flow of traffic throughout the City of Lawndale. Based on a thorough review of facility operations and funding availability, improvements should be included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan and/or required as part of project approval through the development review process.
M-1b Continue to update and implement projects in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan to maintain and repair roadways; construct and improve roadways to build out the roadway network to ensure adequate levels of service.
M-1c As part of the development review process, require new developments to conduct traffic impact studies and construct, as a condition of approval, all feasible roadway and intersection improvements warranted by the new development. These studies shall be reviewed by the City Engineer or his designated representative. For development that will increase the traffic demand along SR 107 (Hawthorne Boulevard), SR 91 (Artesia Boulevard), and I-405 (San Diego Freeway), traffic studies shall be submitted to Cal trans District 7 for approval.
M-1d Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential local effects on vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit facilities and operations and seek funding to invest in associated infrastructure and technologies such as Traffic System Management (TSM) and traffic signal synchronization.
M-1e Monitor cut-through traffic on local streets, especially along residential areas and schools, and where appropriate evaluate the applicability of traffic calming tools and implement improvements as necessary.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-4
GOAL M-2 REGIONAL CIRCULATION
A City that facilities the movement of people, services and goods between neighboring jurisdictions and agencies to promote consistent and efficient regional circulation.
The circulation system includes a comprehensive network of roadways that provide regional connections for people and for goods movement. Because these regionally significant connections serve transportation needs for people across the County and beyond, these facilities need to be planned and maintained in coordination with other agencies.
M-2 Policies
M-2.1 Freeway Interchanges. Coordinate with Caltrans to develop appropriate configurations and operations at Interstate 405 interchange intersections to minimize congestion on City streets and create safe conditions.
M-2.2 Agency Coordination. Coordinate with neighboring cities, telecom companies, and regional agencies such as County of Los Angeles, South Bay Cities Council of Governments, and Metro to meet the mobility needs of people living in, working in, or visiting Lawndale.
M-2.3 Facility Connections. Plan and implement vehicular facilities, roadway treatments, active transportation facilities, transit routes, and goods movement network to relate to those in neighboring jurisdictions.
M-2.4 Local Facility Utilization. Discourage pass-through traffic on City streets and the use of City streets by those users not doing business in the City.
M-2 Actions
M-2a Participate in regional planning forums to ensure that the City’s concerns are considered at the regional level.
M-2b Advocate for the completion of planned regional transportation projects that would improve traffic conditions on City streets.
M-2c Monitor land use, circulation planning, and the development review process of neighboring jurisdictions, so that the City has an opportunity to recommend that impacts to Lawndale are considered by those jurisdictions.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-5
GOAL M-3 COMPLETE STREETS
A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users.
Complete streets are streets that are designed to provide safe travel for everyone – people driving, riding transit, walking, biking, or using any other means of travel. Planning for and designing complete streets starts with policies that promote consideration for all users within all facility types.
M-3 Policies
Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply Complete Streets principles to all transportation improvements projects (e.g. safety, intelligent transportation systems, roads and intersections widening, transit facilities).
Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities, wherever feasible.
Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety.
Traffic Calming on Residential Streets. Encourage traffic calming strategies and incorporation of traffic calming design in residential areas to slow traffic and promote safety.
ADA Accessibility. Implement a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), to allow mobility-impaired users, such as disabled persons and seniors, to safely travel within the City.
Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement and incentives to support Safe Route to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.
M-3 Actions
M-3a When planning roadway facilities, incorporate the concept of complete streets. Complete streets include design elements for all modes that use streets, including autos, transit, pedestrians, and bicycles. Complete streets shall be developed in a context-sensitive manner.
For example, it may be more appropriate to provide a Class I bike path instead of bike lanes along a major arterial.
M-3b Periodically review and update the City’s standard street plans to ensure that the plans reflect the City’s goals and policies for the circulation system.
M-3c Partner with Lawndale school administrators to improve traffic and parking conditions in school areas, especially during school drop off and pick-up periods.
M-3d Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/longterm parking, especially along major corridors and in the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan Area.
M-3e Include ADA-accessible facilities as part of roadway infrastructure projects.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-6
GOAL M-4 PARKING
A community with an adequate parking supply to support business vibrancy and a high quality of life and regulations to support safe and convenient parking for residents and businesses.
Adequate off- and on-street parking is necessary to accommodate people who rely upon vehicles to travel to homes, businesses, recreation, and other uses. Effectively planning for and managing both public and private parking supply provides a balance between meeting demand and efficiently using space.
M-4 Policies
M-4.1 New Development Parking Supply. Ensure new residential and non-residential developments provide adequate parking supply to meet demand and reduce spillover to surrounding areas.
M-4.2 Effects of New Technologies on Parking Demand. Monitor the development of mobility new technologies and the potential effects on parking demand.
M-4.3 Parking Demand and Supply Trends. Monitor trends in the region pertaining to reduced parking demand for transit-oriented developments, mixed-use developments, and other high activity areas and the allocation of parking for shared vehicles, alternative energy vehicles, bicycles, and other modes of transportation.
M-4 Actions
M-4a Maintain and enforce City parking regulations as set in the Municipal Code.
M-4b Periodically review the City’s parking code to address new types and patterns of development and new technologies which may have an impact on parking supply and/or demand in the City.
M-4c Maintain and manage the parking supply to ensure efficient and safe utilization through the employment of parking management strategies, such as shared parking in mixed-use areas and preferential parking districts in residential areas.
M-4d Review the feasibility of the development of a parking management plan to ensure developments within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan provide adequate parking supply to meet demand in the area. The plan may include flexible parking principles, such as shared parking, and may consider timing and pricing strategies, and adding supply with the development of parking structures.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-7
GOAL M-5 TRANSIT
A community with a comprehensive public transportation system.
Transit is part of a comprehensive transportation network. It is a critical mode of transportation for those who cannot drive or do not have access to a vehicle, and also supplements other modes such as bicycle and pedestrian travel.
M-5 Policies
M-5.1 Transit Use. Support programs encouraging public transit use by people living in, working in, or visiting Lawndale.
M-5.2 Improve Local Public Transit Service. Work with Metro, Lawndale Beat Bus, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the City.
M-5.3 Transit Facilities. Require new developments to construct, when appropriate, transit facilities, including bus turn-outs, lighted bus shelters, and route information signage.
M-5.4 C (Green) Line Service. Work with Metro to ensure C (Green) Line service (including headways and service hours) are sufficient to meet the needs of transit commuters to and from Lawndale.
M-5.5 C (Green) Line Stations. Work with Metro to ensure the planned C (Green) Line extension project implementation is consistent with the City's Complete Streets, active transportation, and parking policies, and that it provides pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between neighborhoods within Lawndale and future stations.
M-5.6 Effects of New Technologies on Transit Use. Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential effects on transit demand and how users access public transit.
M-5 Actions
M-5a Continue on-going coordination with transit authorities toward the expansion of transit facilities.
M-5b Work with Metro to increase transit service frequency, speed, and reliability and increase ridership and to strengthen linkages and access to the C line rail stations.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-8
GOAL M-6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
A community with a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourages active transportation.
A network of supportive infrastructure can encourage travel by non-motorized transportation. The City has existing pedestrian and bicycle paths that support active transportation. Connecting gaps and providing supportive infrastructure benefits users and promotes these travel modes.
M-6 Policies
M-6.1 Bicycle Master Plan. Implement the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan within City limits to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles, including the Plan’s facility recommendations as shown in Figure M-2.
M-6.2 Local Travel Network. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote local micromobility modes by implementing the Local Travel Network plan and supporting efforts to integrate the network with adjacent cities, as shown in Figure M-3.
M-6.3 Hawthorne Boulevard Sidewalks. Allow for modified sidewalk standards and encourage enhanced pedestrian amenities along Hawthorne Boulevard to reflect the corridors unique character and land use vision.
M-6.4 Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways.
M-6.5 Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and nonresidential developments in the City to provide safe and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture, landscaping, and other improvements.
M-6.6 Effects of New Technologies on Active Transportation. Monitor the development of mobility new technologies and the potential effects on designing a transportation network that accommodates all modes and users.
M-6 Actions
M-6a As part of development review and specific plans, review any existing gaps in active transportation infrastructure that inhibit mobility.
M-6b Implement the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan when roadways are being rehabilitated or resurfaces, as funding allows.
M-6c Review and update the City’s Municipal Code, as necessary, to consider bicycle and pedestrian access as part of the site plan review for new development projects.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-9
GOAL M-7 GOODS MOVEMENT
A community that integrates safe and efficient goods movement into the local transportation network.
Planning for a transportation system to facilitate goods movements is necessary to anticipate regional and local needs for the safe and efficient movement of goods and people, while minimizing negative impacts on local circulation and sensitive land uses.
M-7 Policies
M-7.1 Local Truck Routes. Maintain a network of local truck routes to facilitate goods movement to regional roads and to discourage the use of residential roads.
M-7.2 Roadway Design. Maintain roadway design standards to facilitate access to light industrial and manufacturing areas along designated truck routes.
M-7 Actions
M-7a Review and update the City’s designated truck routes as needed while considering the potential mobility conflicts and the location of sensitive land uses in the City.
M-7b Monitor e-commerce trends and develop regulations and guidance to address potential adverse effects of goods movement deliveries, including increased truck traffic and increased demand for curbside loading.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-10
GOAL M-8 FUNDING
A community with a well-funded and fiscally sound transportation system that utilizes a variety of funding methods.
Funding and financing sources are available at the regional, state, and federal level to help realize the City’s transportation vision and mobility plan. These funds can complement the City’s resources to plan, design and implement circulation and access improvements and promote the General Plan’s goals.
M-8 Policies
M-8.1 Innovative Funding. Research and pursue innovative funding sources at the federal, state, regional, and county level to implement transportation projects.
M-8.2 Regional Funding. Encourage regional agencies to continue to provide adequate transportation funding to local jurisdictions such as Metro’s Measure R and Measure M to fund capital projects and programs.
M-8.3 Development Fees. Ensure that new development projects contribute their appropriate fair share to transportation network improvements.
M-8 Actions
M-8a Develop and support a flexible financing program to fund the construction, maintenance, and improvement of the roadway system.
M-8b Monitor federal, State, and Metro funding programs to identify potential sources of funds for transit programs, to implement the City bikeway system, to improve crosswalks and transit facilities improvements in the City in Lawndale. Pursue any potential funding through the identified programs.
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-11
GOAL M-9 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT
A community with transportation management strategies that contributes to achieving regional and statewide greenhouse gas emission targets.
Recent state legislation has shifted to focus land use and transportation planning on reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), in alignment with a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and address climate change. Transportation management strategies that promote alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle travel can be employed to guide land use and transportation decisions in support of these environmental goals.
M-9 Policies
M-9.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled Guidelines. Require vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City shall continue to maintain Level of Service (LOS) standards for the purposes of planning and designing street improvements.
M-9.2 Transportation Demand Management. Require transportation demand management (TDM) strategies as mitigation measures for new projects that exceed the City's thresholds Vehicle Miles Traveled impact thresholds.
M-9.3 Regional Coordination. Encourage regional agencies such as Metro, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote TDM programs that reduce single occupancy vehicle travel.
M-9.4 New Development. Work with developers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and onsite improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
M-9 Actions
M-9a Review and update the City’s Municipal Code and related implementation documents, as necessary, to reflect TDM best practices.
M-9b Require developments that are approved based on TDM plans to incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets as part of those plans.
M-9c Consider adoption of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) guidelines and thresholds for transportation analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-12
This page intentionally left blank.
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.
Date: March 21, 2023.
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
To r r a n c e
H a w t h o r n e
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
0 500 1,000
Feet
CITY OF LAWNDALE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Figure M-1.
Functional
Classification
LEGEND
Freeway
Major Arterial
Collector
Local Street
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Other Incorporated Area
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-14
This page intentionally left blank.
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.
Date: March 21, 2023.
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
To r r a n c e
H a w t h o r n e
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
0 500 1,000
Feet
CITY OF LAWNDALE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Figure M-2.
Existing and Planned
Bike Facilities
LEGEND
Existing Bike Facilities
Class I Bike Paths
Class II Bike Lanes
Class III Bike Routes
Class IV Protected Bike Lanes
Proposed Bike Facilities
Class I Bike Paths
Class II Bike Lanes
Class III Bike Routes
Class IV Protected Bike Lanes
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Other Incorporated Area
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-16
This page intentionally left blank.
LEGEND
Local Transportation Network
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Other Incorporated Area
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.
Date: March 21, 2023.
CITY OF LAWNDALE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Figure M-3.
Local Transportation
Network
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
To r r a n c e
H a w t h o r n e
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
0 500 1,000
Feet
LAWNDALE – GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | M-18
This page intentionally left blank.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-1
Introduction to Resource Management
The focus of this Element is to deliver the goals, policies and actions to preserve and protect the City of Lawndale’s invaluable resources. Preservation and improvement of these resources require careful planning and effective management. These resources may be natural (such as biological resources) or man-made (such as energy infrastructure). Together, the City’s resources form part of the City’s unique character.
The Resource Management Element provides strategies to maintain the City’s character that serves to enhance the residents’ and visitors’ quality of life through a variety of open spaces, services, and the continued effort to conserve natural resources.
Organization of Element
The Resource Management Element will address each of the topics below as they relate to Lawndale. The goals and policies of this element are organized around the following topics:
• Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
• Solid Waste Management and Recycling
• Cultural Resources
• Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Energy Resources
• Water Conservation
RM
Resource Management
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-2
PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE
A community with attractive, safe and accessible parks, recreation, and open space areas.
Parks, recreation, and open space facilities provide innumerable benefits that enrich a community. There are two forms of parkland provided in the City – parks that are City-owned and parks that are contracted through a Joint Powers Agreement with the Lawndale Elementary School district for City utilization. The City operates the Harold E. Hofmann Community Center and the Dan McKenzie Community Garden. The City strives to provide well-planned, welcoming, and safe opportunities for recreation to all members of the community.
RM-1 Policies
RM-1.1 Recreation Types. Provide residents a variety of useable and accessible public recreational lands, facilities, trails, open space, and amenities.
RM-1.2 Parkland Standard. Achieve a minimum parkland standard of 3 acres per 1,000 City residents.
RM-1.3 Open Space for Private Developments. Require new private residential development to incorporate on-site open areas, greenspace, or recreational facilities for resident use.
RM-1.4 Parkland Funding. Actively pursue financing for parkland acquisition and maintenance, and allocate sufficient funding to park development to support the community’s recreational needs.
RM-1.5 Partnerships and Joint-Use Agreements. Collaborate with school districts, local and regional agencies, and private developers to create partnerships and joint-use agreements that broaden the range of recreation facility options available to the public.
RM-1.6 Non-Residential Open Space. Encourage outdoor gathering spaces, such as mini-parks and plazas, be incorporated into private non-residential development to encourage social interaction, create experience-oriented centers, and enhance the visual character of the community.
RM-1.7 Street Trees. Provide for the consistent use of street trees along all sidewalks and property frontages.
RM-1.8 Creative Open Space and Parks. Recognize the value of non-traditional public and semi-public open space and encourage creativity and innovation during the development and provision of additional open space or parks, including but not limited to plazas, parklets, pedestrian paths, patios, rooftop gardens, community gardens, parkways, green space integrated into parking structures, and temporary or semi-permanent gathering spaces, to supplement the City’s green space and parks.
RM-1.9 Active Transportation Trails. Provide safe and accessible bicycle and pedestrian trails for the City’s residents by improving and promoting the establishment of trails utilizing alleys, streets, sidewalks, railroad right-of-way, and other open space areas.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-3
RM-1.10 Service Area Radius. Focus new park facilities in areas that are outside a 1/2-mile walking radius from an existing or proposed park or bike trail, and enhance options for residents to access these facilities through safe walking, bicycling, and transit routes. Physical barriers such as I-405 should also be considered when evaluating service area and access.
RM-1.11 CPTED. Utilize “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design” (CPTED) principles in the design and renovation of new and existing parks and open space facilities.
RM-1 Actions
RM-1a Periodically review and update the park development fee ordinance as necessary to better reflect current costs and needs to address park demand generated by infill development.
RM-1b Pursue available resources to fund recreation facilities and parkland acquisition, development, and maintenance, including but not limited to, State and Federal grants, special districts, private donations, gifts, and endowments.
RM-1c Prepare and adopt a Master Parks Plan to guide the provision and maintenance of parkland.
The Master Park Plan should be designed to serve as a statement of general policy and desired City standards for location and development of public parks and community open space areas, with definite time frames outlined.
RM-1d Continue to work with the Lawndale Elementary School District to maximize the joint use of facilities and pursue additional partnerships with public and private entities, including adjacent jurisdictions, for the joint use of and expanded access to, regional parks, open space, and recreational programs.
RM-1e Advertise recreational programs and promote the use of the Civic Center and Prairie Avenue Community Center facilities to promote a strong, healthy, and active community.
RM-1f Encourage commercial recreational uses to locate in Lawndale by advertising on City-owned bulletin boards and through development incentives such as, deferred or reduced development fees, and/or streamlined development review processes.
RM-1g Coordinate with LA Metro and associated entities regarding the multi-use trail and/or greenway proposed as part of Metro’s C Line (Green) extension project. The City should be actively engaged in the design and implementation of the project to ensure the project reflects community preferences, is compatible with surrounding uses, and maximizes connectivity for active transportation.
RM-1h Consider the creative use of space for the median along Hathorne Boulevard to expand available open space and opportunities for physical fitness, including but not limited to, greenways, parklets, bike or pedestrian paths, and a fitness trail.
RM-1i Periodically review and update parks, recreational facilities, and community center facility rental fees as necessary to better reflect current costs to maintain and provide the facilities.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-4
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING
A community with a cost-effective, integrated waste management system that meets or exceeds recycling and waste diversion mandates and community expectations The State of California requires communities to be proactive in addressing waste management by developing solid waste diversion and recycling programs to meet gradually increasing performance standards. The City understands that proactive waste management practices are important to protect the environment and it supports an integrated waste management approach that includes waste prevention (or “source reduction”), recycling and composting, and proper disposal of waste.
RM-2 Policies
Compliance with State Legislation. Comply with local, Regional and State regulations regarding waste diversion, source reduction, recycling and composting.
Solid Waste Collection. Support efforts of the solid waste service provider to maintain adequate waste disposal, recycling and refuse services for present and future residents and businesses, and periodically review waste collection performance to verified adequacy of service.
Hazardous Waste. Promote the proper disposal of hazardous waste, including paint, tires, medications, medical sharps, infectious waste, asbestos waste, construction waste, and electronic waste through education, monitoring, and enforcement of proper use, storage, handling, and disposal.
Source Reduction and Recycling Efforts. Participate in source reduction and recycling techniques to reduce the amount of solid waste sent to landfills and ensure adequate landfill capacity in the region.
Organic Waste. Work with appropriate service providers to collect and compost green waste, including landscaping, Christmas trees, composting and mulch, and other sources of organic waste, to distribute for use in parks, medians, and other municipal areas.
Fees and Funding. Work with appropriate service providers to periodically review collection, recycling, and disposal fees to achieve State and Federal mandates, meet community expectations, and reflect cost efficiencies or increases for service delivery.
Public Education. Promote Citywide educational programs to inform residents of the benefits of recycling and appropriate recycling options and locations.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-5
RM-2 Actions
RM-2a On an ongoing basis and in compliance with State law, ensure solid waste collection activities, facility siting and construction of transfer and/or disposal facilities, operation of waste reduction and recycling programs, and household hazardous waste disposal and education programs are consistent with the Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan.
RM-2b Regularly monitor the level of services provided by waste and recycling collection contractors to ensure that service levels meet the terms of the contract.
RM-2c Include standard language in request for services and in City agreements requiring contractors to use best management practices to maximize diversion of waste from the landfill in order to meet the City’s specified diversion rates.
RM-2d Encourage local businesses to provide electronic waste (e-waste) drop-off services and encourage residents and businesses to properly dispose of, or recycle, e-waste.
RM-2e Encourage recycling, reuse, and appropriate disposal of hazardous materials, including the following:
• Increased participation in single-family and multi-family residential curbside recycling programs;
• Increased participation in commercial and industrial recycling programs for paper, cardboard, and plastics; and
• Reduce yard and landscape waste through methods such as composting, grass recycling, and using resource efficient landscaping techniques.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-6
CULTURAL RESOURCES
A community that promotes the preservation and rehabilitation of cultural resources that are significant to the Lawndale community because of their age, architecture, history, or symbolism.
The City's paleontological, archeological, historical, and tribal resources help define the community and offer opportunities for cultural, educational, and community enrichment through community events, holiday celebrations and historic preservation. The City encourages and insists on the ongoing protection and enhancement of these resources for generations to come.
RM-3 Policies
RM-3.1 Preservation. Protect areas containing significant historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, as defined by the California Public Resources Code.
RM-3.2 Documentation. Promote community identity and local history by identifying, documenting, and appropriately archiving tangible and intangible cultural resources so they can be recognized, accessed, and appreciated by future generations.
RM-3.3 Cultural Reminders. Seek to incorporate reminders of the City’s culture through adaptive reuse, signage, markers, cultural events, and other reminders of Lawndale’s community identity and local history.
RM-3.4 Public Education. Educate and actively involve the public in preserving cultural assets, including techniques, incentives, and legal requirements for preservation.
RM-3.5 Tribal Consultation. In accordance with State, local, and Tribal intergovernmental consultation requirements, consult with Native American tribes that may be impacted by proposed development and land use policy changes, as necessary.
RM-3.6 Historic Preservation. Evaluate the condition of historical buildings, the costs of rehabilitation, and the feasibility of preservation or conservation alternatives when considering the demolition or movement of historic structures; when possible, encourage the adaptive re-use of the historic structure.
RM-3.7 Funding. With input and involvement of stakeholder groups, seek adequate funding and support from public and private sources that aim to protect cultural and historic resources within the City.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-7
RM-3 Actions
RM-3a Continue to assess development proposals for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RM-3b Evaluate the feasibility of implementing a local historic registry program that provides incentives for retrofitting and building maintenance, as well as public recognition, of the local resource.
RM-3c Consider conducting a historic properties inventory that takes into consideration buildings, neighborhoods, and other features of historic, architectural, or cultural significance.
RM-3d For structures that potentially have historic significance, the City shall require that a study be conducted by a professional archaeologist or historian to determine the actual significance of the structure and potential impacts of the proposed development in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The City may require modification of the project and/or mitigation measures to avoid any impact to a historic structure, when feasible, such as retaining or rehabilitating historic buildings or relocating the historic building as feasible.
RM-3e For all development proposals within areas with the potential to contain prehistoric/historic resources, the City shall require a study to be conducted by a professional archaeologist. The objective of the study will be to determine if significant archaeological resources are potentially present and if the project will significantly impact these resources. If significant impacts are identified, the City may require the project to be modified to avoid the impacts, or require mitigation measures to mitigate the impacts. Mitigation may involve archaeological investigation and resources recovery.
RM-3f The City shall require an assessment of the potential for development proposals to significantly impact paleontological resources pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. If the project involves earthworks, the City may require a study conducted by a professional paleontologist to determine if paleontological assets are present, and if the project will significantly impact the resources. If significant impacts are identified, the City may require the project to be modified to avoid impacting the paleontological materials, require monitoring of rock units with high potential to contain significant nonrenewable paleontological resources, or require mitigation measures to mitigate the impacts, such as recovering the paleontological resources for preservation.
RM-3g In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the City shall halt excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County Coroner has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the remains are of Native American origin, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the descendants from the deceased Native Americans have made a recommendation to the landowner or the persons responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98, or the Native American Heritage Commission was unable to identify a descendant or the descendant failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being granted access to the site.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-8
RM-3h Prior to adopting any general plan, specific plan, or any amendment thereto, the City shall notify appropriate tribes of the opportunity for consultation for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places located on land within the City’s jurisdiction that may be affected by the proposed plan or amendment.
RM-3i Prior to the adoption or substantial amendment of a general plan or specific plan, the City shall refer the proposed action to those tribes that are on the NAHC contact list and have traditional lands located within the City’s jurisdiction for a 45-day comment period.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-9
AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Improved air quality in Lawndale and the region through reductions in air pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Improved air quality within the City means a higher quality of life for residents, workers, and visitors. Air quality is especially important due to the City’s location in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which does not meet State and Federal air quality standards. Regional cooperation among all agencies in the basin is necessary to achieve desired improvements to air quality. Lawndale can assist in reducing local emissions through proper planning for land use and transportation.
RM-4 Policies
RM-4.1 Regional Cooperation. Support regional efforts, including those organized through the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), and the California Air Resource Board (CARB) to implement the regional Air Quality Management Plan.
RM-4.2 Measurement and Enforcement. Coordinate with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to support their ability to properly measure air quality at emission sources and enforce the standards of the Clean Air Act.
RM-4.3 GHG Emissions. Align the City’s local GHG reduction targets with the statewide GHG reduction targets of Assembly Bill 32, and align the City’s GHG reduction goal with the statewide GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05.
RM-4.4 Transportation Options. Promote alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicular emissions and improve air quality. (See Mobility Element) RM-4.5 Walkability. Encourage pedestrian-scale development and pedestrian-friendly design features to reduce vehicle emissions. (See Mobility Element)
RM-4.6 Land Use Planning. Encourage and incentivize higher density and mixed-use development opportunities within designated areas of the City to lessen the impacts of traffic congestion on local air quality. (See Land Use Element)
RM-4.7 Sensitive Receptors. Insulate sensitive receptors from areas of heightened air quality pollution by utilizing land use planning to buffer and protect residential areas.
RM-4.8 Mitigation. Require the implementation of relevant mitigation measures for all future development upon identification of potential air quality impacts.
RM-4.9 GHG Reduction. Consider and adopt new local policies and programs that will help to provide energy efficient alternatives to fossil fuel use and reduce consumption in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the local measures identified in the City of Lawndale Climate Action Plan.
RM-4.10 Public Engagement. Promote regional air quality programs in order to inform the public on regional air quality concerns and encourage the engagement of all residents in future planning decisions related to air quality.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-10
RM-4 Actions
RM-4a Implement the local GHG reduction measures identified in the City of Lawndale Climate Action Plan (CAP), participate in future updates of the SBCCOG Climate Action Plan, and perform ongoing monitoring and reporting of GHG reduction impacts. Develop a Climate Action Team to support and guide the City’s efforts to conserve energy and reduce emissions. Work with the SBCCOG and/or other local, Regional, State, and Federal agencies or utility to obtain funding necessary to implement, monitor, and report the CAP measures.
RM-4b As applicable, review new industrial and commercial development projects during the CEQA process for potential air quality impacts to residences and other sensitive receptors. Ensure that mitigation measures and best management practices are implemented to reduce significant emissions of criteria pollutants.
RM-4c Review development, infrastructure, and planning projects for consistency with SCAQMD requirements during the CEQA review process. Require project applicants to prepare air quality analyses to address SCAQMD and General Plan requirements, as appropriate, which include analysis and identification of:
1. Air pollutant emissions associated with the project during construction, project operation, and cumulative conditions.
2. Potential exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants.
3. Significant air quality impacts associated with the project for construction, project operation, and cumulative conditions.
4. Mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to less than significant or the maximum extent feasible where impacts cannot be mitigated to less than significant.
RM-4d Work with the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Southern California Association of Governments, the South Bay Cities Council of Governments, and the California Air Resource Board to implement programs aimed at improving regional air quality.
RM-4e Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new public and private development complies with the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24 standards as well as the energy efficiency standards established by the Lawndale Municipal Code.
RM-4f Provide the necessary facilities and infrastructure to facilitate the use of low or zero-emission vehicles such as electric vehicle charging facilities at key City facilities as operations necessitate and/or as funding becomes available.
RM-4g Evaluate and consider multi-modal transportation benefits to all City employees, such as free or low-cost monthly public transportation (bus) passes. Encourage employer participation in similar programs. Encourage new transit/shuttle services and use.
RM-4h Establish programs that encourage community car-sharing and carpooling.
RM-4i Support the establishment and expansion of a regional network of electric vehicle charging stations and encourage the expanded use of electric vehicles.
RM-4j Encourage multi-family residential and non-residential development to increase the use of higher-albedo materials for surfaces including roofs, parking areas, driveways, roads, and sidewalks. Encourage developments with parking lot areas to shade these areas with vegetation Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-11
or solar panels when appropriate. Support various programs to plant and maintain trees, which can also contribute to a reduction of urban heat islands.
RM-4k Future development projects will be required to demonstrate consistency with SCAQMD construction emission thresholds. Where emissions from individual projects exceed SCAQMD thresholds, the following actions should be incorporated as necessary to minimize impacts.
These measures do not exclude the use of other, equally effective mitigation measures as determined by a project specific Air Quality Assessment. • Require all off-road diesel equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) used for this Project to meet USEPA Tier 4 final off-road emission standards or equivalent. Such equipment shall be outfitted with Best Available Control Technology (BACT) devices including a California Air Resources Board Certified Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) or equivalent. The DPF reduces diesel particulate matter and NOx emissions during construction activities. • Require a minimum of 50 percent of construction debris be diverted for recycling. • Require building materials to contain a minimum 10 percent recycled content. • Require materials such as paints, primers, sealants, coatings, and glues to have a low volatile organic compound concentration compared to conventional products. If low VOC materials are not available, architectural coating phasing should be extended sufficiently to reduce the daily emissions of VOCs.
RM-4l Future development projects will be required to demonstrate consistency with SCAQMD’s operational emission thresholds. For projects where operational emissions exceed regulatory thresholds, the following measures may be used to reduce impacts. Note the following measures are not all inclusive and developers have the option to add or substitute measures that are equally or more appropriate for the scope of the project. • Develop a project specific TDM program for residents and/or employees that provides opportunities for carpool/vanpools.
• Provide onsite solar/renewable energy in excess of regulatory requirements. • Require that owners/tenants of non-residential or multi-family residential developments use architectural coatings that are 10 grams per liter or less when repainting/repairing properties.
• Require drip irrigation and irrigation sensor units that prevent watering during rain storms. • Ensure all parking areas are wired for capability of future EV charging and include EV charging stations that exceed regulatory requirements.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-12
ENERGY RESOURCES
A community that safely manages its energy resources.
Future development within the City will result in increased energy demands for the operation of businesses, homes, and transportation facilities. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pollutants, and ensure that there are adequate energy resources for future generations, safe management and conservation methods need to be implemented.
RM-5 Policies
RM-5.1 Compliance with State Legislation. Comply with all State requirements regarding the generation of power and encourage energy providers to investigate the use or expansion of renewable sources of energy.
RM-5.2 Green Building Standards Code. Ensure that new construction and major redevelopment complies with the most current version of the California Green Building Standards Code.
RM-5.3 Renewable Energy. Promote the development and use of renewable energy resources to reduce dependency on fossil fuels.
RM-5.4 Energy-Efficient Materials. Promote the use of energy-efficient materials, equipment, and design in public and private facilities and infrastructure.
RM-5.5 Energy Conservation. Promote energy conservation and recycling by the public and private sectors.
RM-5.6 Energy Needs. Collaborate with local service providers in determining and meeting the needs of the community for energy in clean, modern, and cost-effective ways.
RM-5.7 Business Community. Support the decisions of the Lawndale business community as they select and implement the most appropriate, financially feasible, and responsible energy source for their individual operations.
RM-5.8 Public Education. Promote public education programs that advocate for reducing energy consumption, and promote renewable sources of energy.
RM-5.9 Promote Energy Conservation in Existing Building Stock. Promote energy conservation by residents and businesses in existing structures, in close coordination with other agencies and local energy providers.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-13
RM-5 Actions
RM-5a Implement energy conservation measures in public buildings through the following actions:
a. Promote energy efficient buildings and site design for all new public buildings during the site development permit process; and
b. Install energy saving devices in new public buildings and retrofit existing public buildings.
RM-5b During the development review process, encourage innovative building design, layout, and orientation techniques to minimize energy use by taking advantage of sun/shade patterns, prevailing winds, landscaping and building materials that control energy usage, and solar design.
RM-5c Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new public and private development complies with the California Code of Regulations, Title 24 standards as well as the energy efficiency standards established by the General Plan and the Municipal Code.
RM-5d Promote the CEC Building Energy Benchmarking Program (AB 802) on the City’s website to help benchmark and monitor energy use for participating businesses seeking to increase energy efficiency and realize cost savings.
RM-5e Identify and reduce government constraints to installation of renewable energy infrastructure and electric vehicle charging stations, as feasible, through incentives such as, streamlined permitting, and expedited inspection times.
RM-5f Consider participation in a Community Choice Aggregation program, such as Clean Power Alliance, to help meet the City’s energy objectives.
RM-5g Use the City’s website to promote existing incentivized programs such as Energy Upgrade California, financing programs such as Properly Assessed Clean Energy (PACE), and energy audits through State programs.
RM-5h Partner with SBCCOG and relevant utilities on outreach events and to obtain educational content and promote on the City’s website.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-14
WATER CONSERVATION
A community that protects and conserves limited water resources.
Water is an indispensable resource that is integral to Lawndale’s prosperity and growth. The City embraces an integrated water management approach in order to preserve these precious resources for years to come.
RM-6 Policies
RM-6.1 Conservation. Promote residential, commercial and institutional water conservation strategies using multiple innovative strategies and contemporary best practices.
RM-6.2 Landscaping. Encourage all public and private landscaping in new development and significantly altered redevelopment projects to be designed to reduce water demand, prevent erosion, decrease flooding, and reduce pollutants through the installation of irrigation systems, the selection of appropriate plant materials, and proper soil preparation.
RM-6.3 Riparian Habitat. Work with Los Angeles County Public Works and Los Angeles County Flood Control District to preserve and/or restore riparian communities along and within established flood control channels such as the Dominguez Channel, if feasible.
RM-6.4 Stormwater. Work cooperatively with local water agencies to effectively and efficiently manage stormwater runoff as part of the City’s multi-pronged water conservation strategy.
RM-6.5 Reclaimed Water. Promote the expanded use of reclaimed (recycled) water, where feasible.
RM-6.6 Education and Appreciation. With community partners, support a range of educational programs that cultivate an appreciation of Lawndale’s urban and natural habitats and biological resources.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-15
RM-6 Actions
RM-6a To reduce soil erosion and pollutants in urban runoff, require new development and redevelopment projects to control stormwater runoff through implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent any deterioration of water quality that would impair subsequent or competing uses of the water. Existing development shall control stormwater runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water quality that would impair subsequent or competing uses of the water. As specific development projects are implemented, project proponents will be required to consult with relevant agencies such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). Also, ensure that projects of one acre or more complete a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) pursuant to State of California, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the City’s MS4 permit (order no. R4-2012-0175 (NPDES No. CAS 004001).
RM-6b In cooperation with the State, Regional and local water agencies and suppliers, participate in programs that seek to expand the availability and use of recycled water for irrigation where feasible and legally permitted. Cooperate with these agencies to establish standards and regulations for the use of recycled water in development projects.
RM-6c Work with local water agencies and service providers, regional wholesalers, and private developers to encourage water conservation in the following ways:
• Implementing groundwater recharge programs;
• Participating in water conservation programs operated by the local and Regional water districts;
• Establishing water conservation education programs;
• Requiring Water-Efficient Landscaping for public and private areas, including parks and recreational facilities, in accordance with the Water-Efficient Landscape requirements; • Expanding the production and use of reclaimed (recycled) water; • Requiring the incorporation of water conservation devices, including low flush toilets, flow restriction devices, and water conserving appliances in both new public and private development projects and rehabilitation projects.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | RM-16
This page intentionally left blank.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-1
Introduction to Public Safety
The goal of Lawndale’s Public Safety Element is to reduce the risk of death, injury, property damage, economic loss, and harm due to natural and manmade hazards. An effective response to natural and human-caused disasters requires planning, education, coordination and training by multiple government agencies and the public. A resilient community has the capacity to maintain critical functions during hazard events as well as adapt to and reduce future hazard risks.
This Element establishes goals, policies, and actions to minimize and address these potential hazards as well as support an adequate and coordinated response. The goals are statements of the City’s desires and consist of broad statements of purpose and direction. The policies serve as guidelines for reducing risk associated with natural and human activity hazards. The policies also serve to direct and maximize community emergency preparedness. The actions explain how the goals and policies will be achieved and implemented.
The Public Safety Element supports the City’s participation in regional and subregional planning efforts including the Lawndale Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, County of Los Angeles All-Hazards Mitigation Plan, and the Lawndale Climate Action Plan.
Organization of Element
The Public Safety Element will address each of the topics below as they relate to Lawndale. The goals and policies of this element are organized around the following topics:
• Emergency Operations
• Geologic and Seismic Hazards
• Hazardous Materials
• Fire Hazards
• Flood Hazards
• Noise
• Climate Change and Resiliency Planning
PS
Public Safety
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-2
Related Plans, Programs, and Regulations
The following Plans, Programs, and Regulations are incorporated by reference into the City of Lawndale’s Public Safety Element.
City of Lawndale
• General Plan: Lawndale’s General Plan is a broad, long-range policy document that serves as a blueprint for future development in the City. It includes the Public Safety Element, as well as the Land Use, Mobility, Housing, Resource Management, Environmental Justice, Economic Development, and Community Facilities Elements.
• Zoning Code: The City’s Zoning Code implements the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan by regulating the uses of land and structures within Lawndale. The Zoning Code is codified in Title 17 of the Municipal Code.
• Fire Code: The Fire Code establishes requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practices to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare from the hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and provides safety and assistance to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. Lawndale adopts the County of Los Angeles Fire Codes every three years. The City’s Fire Code is codified in Chapter 15.20 of the Municipal Code. • Building Code: The Building Code regulates construction and property use to ensure safe, healthy, efficient, and accessible environments for human occupancy and habitation. Lawndale adopts the County of Los Angeles Building and Safety Codes every three years. The City’s Building Code is codified in Title 15 of the Municipal Code. • Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP): The City adopted the LHMP in 2016 to assess natural hazard risk and incorporate mitigation strategies to reduce the potential impact from hazards. It complies with the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act (2000), and Federal Register 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206. The City's Emergency Preparedness Coordinator managed preparation of the LHMP in cooperation with the City’s other departments, community stakeholders, partner jurisdictions, agencies and organizations, and members of the public.
• Emergency Operations Plan (EOP): The City adopted the EOP in 2011, which was updated in 2015. The EOP addresses the City’s planned response to natural or human-caused disasters, provides an overview of operational concepts, and identifies components of the City’s emergency/disaster management organization within the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the Incident Command System (ICS). The EOP also describes the organizational structures, roles, responsibilities, policies and protocols for providing emergency support.
• Climate Action Plan (CAP): The City, in cooperation with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), developed a Climate Action Plan (CAP) which was adopted in 2017. The CAP includes measures to reduce human-caused greenhouse gas emissions and enhance carbon storage, or sequestration, as a local response to mitigate global climate change and comply with State and Federal legislation.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-3
Los Angeles County
• County of Los Angeles All-Hazard Mitigation Plan (AHMP): The AHMP was adopted in 2014 and conforms to the requirements of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The County developed the AHMP to cover mitigation responsibilities of County departments (including Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD)). It helps ensure the most effective allocation of resources for the maximum benefit and protection of the public in time of emergency.
• Los Angeles County Operational Area Emergency Response Plan (OAERP): The OAERP was adopted in 2012 and establishes the coordinated emergency management system, which includes prevention, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation within the Los Angeles County Operational Area (OA). The OA is defined as the County and all political subdivisions within the County.
• Los Angeles County Fire Department 2020 Strategic Fire Plan: The Strategic Fire Plan outlines goals focused on enhancing the protection of lives, property, and natural resources from wildland fire, as well as improving environmental resilience to wildland fires through local, State, Federal, and private partnerships. The 2020 Plan is focused on three primary goals: emergency operations, public service, and organizational effectiveness.
Los Angeles County Fire District Facilities Master Plan: The Master Plan was prepared in 2020 as a collaborative effort between the LA County Fire District and the LA County Chief Executive Office. The Plan evaluates the current capacity, condition, and functionality of the Fire District's facilities and then projecting future capacity deficits utilizing Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) population growth projections and methodologies.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
A community prepared to provide effective response and recovery efforts in the event of an emergency.
Advanced emergency planning and preparedness is essential in responding to natural and human-caused disasters. The City supports multi-jurisdictional and -agency cooperation and communication for emergency planning and response management. Public safety services in Lawndale are provided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) South Los Angeles Station and the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) Kenny Hahn Memorial Fire Station No. 21.
The City will continue to coordinate with LASD and LACoFD to provide ongoing education to residents about how to safely evacuate in the event of an emergency. While the California Government Code requires jurisdictions to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes, there are not any hazard areas within the boundary of Lawndale and therefore this analysis is not warranted. Major arterials serve as the primary routes for evacuation; however, evacuation routes will depend upon the emergency event and area affected. Law enforcement will identify the appropriate routes and assist residents leaving the City in the event an evacuation of all or part of the City is required.
PS-1 Policies
PS-1.1 Citywide Safety. Support projects, programs, policies, and regulations that help to mitigate potential impacts associated with natural and man-made hazards.
PS-1.2 Critical Facilities. Coordinate with service providers to promote the resilience of critical facilities, lifeline services, and infrastructure, and plan for the use of critical facilities during postdisaster response and recovery.
PS-1.3 Emergency Preparedness and Response. Continue to implement emergency preparedness and response measures in coordination with Los Angeles County including periodic trainings with staff and/or participation in County trainings on emergency operations procedures and responses.
PS-1.4 Local Hazard Mitigation. Regularly maintain and update natural and man-made hazard information relevant to the Lawndale Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
PS-1.5 Resources. Support policies and programs that facilitate the availability of adequate resources to respond to health, fire, and police emergencies.
PS-1.6 Emergency Access. Investigate and seek out opportunities to improve emergency access and circulation throughout the community.
PS-1.7 Public Safety Education. Promote public safety education programs to educate on emergency preparedness, reduce accidents, injuries, and fires, and to train members of the public to respond to emergencies.
PS-1.8 Cooperation. Collaborate with the school district, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and community members/groups to maintain safety throughout the City.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-5
PS-1 Actions
PS-1a Regularly review and coordinate emergency response procedures with Los Angeles County and State emergency response procedures.
PS-1b Continue to implement and update (when relevant) the City’s Emergency Operations Plan.
PS-1c Continue to implement and update (at least every five years) the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
PS-1d Coordinate with local agencies and organizations to develop and distribute informational brochures and give presentations to civic groups and local schools to educate residents and businesses about appropriate actions to take during an emergency situation.
PS-1e Investigate and pursue available funding sources to fund safety programs, provide services, upgrade/construct facilities, and purchase equipment.
PS-1f Promote after school programs, volunteer programs, and Business & Neighborhood Watch programs to help maintain a safe environment.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-6
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS
A community protected from loss of life or injury and damage to property due to geologic and seismic hazards.
Lawndale is within the northern margin of the Peninsular Ranges. The topography of Lawndale is relatively flat with an elevation of approximately 59 feet above sea level. Like most cities in the Southern California region, Lawndale is subject to risks associated with potentially destructive earthquakes. Although there are no designated Alquist-Priolo fault zones within the City, regional fault zones may have an impact on the City if the rupture is of a significant magnitude. There are numerous earthquake faults within 15 miles of the City. The most active faults near the City are the Palos Verdes fault located to the south and the Newport-Inglewood fault to the northeast.
As detailed in the Existing Conditions Report, there are no areas within the City designated as having the potential for liquefaction, in addition Lawndale does not have areas susceptible to earthquake-induced landslides and other slope failures. Most areas in the City are considered to have a low potential for erosion. Generally, erosion potential within the City increases to the south. The majority of the City has ‘Low to Medium’ expansive soils. Only a small portion of the City has areas with ‘Low to High’ expansive soils and potential for non-seismically induced landslides. The City of Lawndale does not have any historic or current U.S. Geological Survey-recorded subsidence. Because existing soil types are well-drained and permeability is moderate to slow, the risk for collapsible soils is low. According to the California Geological Survey, there is no naturally occurring asbestos mapped within the City. Lawndale is not within a tsunami or seiche hazard area. Risk of exposure to natural hazards can be reduced through careful land use planning, building construction practices, and implementation of the following policies and actions.
PS-2 Policies
Geologic Hazard Identification. Continue to incorporate geotechnical hazard data in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards.
Earthquake Protection. Enforce State seismic design guidelines and all relevant building codes to reduce the risk of damage associated with seismic activity, with a special focus on creating resilient critical infrastructure and facilities.
Development Projects. Monitor and enforce mitigation measures to reduce risks for projects where seismic and geologic hazards can be mitigated and prohibit development in areas where seismic and geologic hazards cannot be mitigated.
Seismic Hazard Education. Continue to seek out opportunities to educate and encourage the community on ways to implement measures to mitigate potential injury and damage associated with earthquakes.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-7
PS-2 Actions
PS-2a Review and update (at least annually) the City’s geologic and seismic hazards maps in concert with updates from the California Geologic Survey and local surveys.
PS-2b Review development proposals to confirm compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 19100 et seq. (Earthquake Protection Law), which requires that buildings be designed to resist stresses produced by natural forces such as earthquakes and wind.
PS-2c Adopt the latest version of the building codes adopted by the State of California and ensure implementation in all new construction and renovations.
PS-2d During review of discretionary development and redevelopment proposals, require surveys of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering Geologists and Civil Engineers where appropriate. When potential geologic impacts are identified, require project applicants to mitigate the impacts per the recommendations contained within the geologic survey.
PS-2e Reduce the risk to the community from hazards related to geologic conditions and seismic activity by requiring feasible mitigation of such impacts on development projects. Assess development proposals for potential hazards pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Require measures to mitigate all identified significant public safety hazards.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-8
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
A community protected from the harmful effects of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and environmental contamination.
Certain types of development and uses within the City utilize hazardous materials, such as gas stations and automobile repair shops. These uses make Lawndale susceptible to hazards from spills of toxic materials. Accidents can occur in the production, use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. This danger is mitigated, however, by various State and federal legislation regulating the use, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials and the strict enforcement of these regulations. The Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFd) Health Hazardous Materials Division maintains an emergency response team that would respond in the event of a hazardous materials spill or other environmental health emergencies.
The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division enforces the provisions of the Hazardous Waste Control Law of the State of California as set forth in the California Health and Safety Code and the California Code of Regulations. The City coordinates with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division to effectively manage hazardous materials and waste as well as implement educational programs.
LACoFD maintains the mandatory disclosure file on use (or non-use), handling, and storage practices of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes annually of all businesses. Inventories of hazardous materials are data-processed for immediate availability to fire, police, and other first-responder (i.e. first at the scene of an incident) departments. These potential risks are carefully monitored and controlled through annual inspection.
PS-3 Policies
PS-3.1 Compatible Land Uses. Require land uses involved in the production, storage, transportation, handling, or disposal of hazardous materials be located and operated in a way to reduce risk to neighboring land uses.
PS-3.2 Safe Residential Uses. Discourage the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses.
PS-3.3 Emergency Operations. Coordinate with Los Angeles County to review and update, as appropriate, the County’s Emergency Operations Plan Hazardous Materials Annex so that the Plan adequately addresses and responds to potential hazardous materials incidents within the City.
PS-3.4 Cleanup Sites. Require that developers coordinate with the Los Angeles Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division and the LACoFD to confirm that hazardous waste cleanup sites located within the City are remediated by the property owner in a manner that keeps the public safe.
PS-3.5 Monitoring. Monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.
PS-3.6 Transportation. Promote the routing of vehicles transporting hazardous materials to transportation corridors posing the minimum risk to the public and prohibit the parking of vehicles transporting hazardous materials on City streets.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-9
PS-3.7 Pipelines. Require new pipelines or other similar facilities that would transport hazardous materials to avoid residential areas to the greatest extent possible.
PS-3.8 Rail Lines. Coordinate with Metro and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Rail (BNSF) on opportunities to maintain and improve the safety of the transport of hazardous materials by rail.
PS-3.9 Public Education. Educate residents and businesses on how to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials and products as well as appropriate disposal methods.
PS-3 Actions
PS-3a As part of the development review process, require projects that result in significant risks associated with hazardous materials to include measures to address the risks and reduce the risks to an acceptable level.
PS-3b Require the submittal of information regarding hazardous materials manufacturing, storage, use, transport, and/or disposal by existing and proposed businesses and developments to LACoFD.
PS-3c Protect the community from hazards related to air pollution, hazardous materials, and ground and air transportation by requiring feasible mitigation to be incorporated into new development and redevelopment proposals to address safety impacts associated with those proposals.
PS-3d Continue to work with the Los Angeles County Public Works Department to implement and advertise the Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program to protect residents from dangers resulting from the use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials used in the home.
Provide informational materials at public locations and links on the City’s website about the County’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection program, collection facilities, drop-off centers, and the 24-hour Household Hazardous Waste hotline.
PS-3e Continue to coordinate with the California Department of Conservation Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources for any development proposed to occur near oil wells.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-10
FIRE HAZARDS
A community protected from loss of life or injury and damage to property due to fire hazards.
There are no Fire Hazard Severity Zones located within Lawndale and no threat of wildland fire. Due to the urbanized character of the City, fires would primarily be associated with structures, trash/debris, and vehicle fires. Structure fires, including homes, industrial and commercial buildings, and other facilities are of the greatest concern due to the potential for loss of life as well as property. Generally, the risk of injury and damage is greater for higher occupancy structures, such as condominiums, apartment buildings, hotels, and churches. In addition, higher density areas are of increased concern due to the large number of people residing within a concentrated area and the potential for fires to spread from one structure to another. Lawndale is one of the most densely populated areas within Los Angeles County. Development of the City has resulted in small lot development with multiple structures on single lots and narrow streets.
Emergency access is limited between the closely spaced structures and along the narrow streets that occur throughout the City. On-street parking, especially during the evening hours, further restricts the access and maneuverability of fire equipment. Due to the nature of the development that has occurred, many structures do not meet current emergency access requirements.
PS-4 Policies
PS-4.1 Fire Protection Services. Coordinate fire protection services with LACoFD so that sufficient capacity, stations, personnel, and equipment are available to meet needs in Lawndale for fire protection and related emergency services.
PS-4.2 Development Review. Involve LACoFD in the development review process so that fire safety is addressed in new and modified developments.
PS-4.3 Emergency Access. Require all new developments provide adequate access for emergency vehicles and evacuation as part of the development review process.
PS-4.4 Building Fire Codes. Require that all buildings and facilities within the City comply with local, State, and federal regulatory standards such as the California Building and Fire Codes, as well as other applicable fire safety standards.
PS-4.5 Hazard Mitigation Plans. Coordinate with local, State, and federal agencies to update emergency, evacuation, and hazard mitigation plans, as necessary.
PS-4 Actions
PS-4a Require all new habitable structures be designed in accordance with the most recent California Building and Fire Code with local amendments adopted by the City.
PS-4b Work with LACoFD to disseminate educational programs for residents on fire hazard risks and fire safety measures.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-11
FLOOD HAZARDS
A community that is protected from flood hazards.
The City has been designated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), as being in Zone X, which is a Non-Special Flood Hazard Area. Zone X includes areas that are:
• Outside the 1% annual flood risk floodplain
• Of 1% annual shallow flooding risk where average depths are less than 1 foot • Of 1% annual stream flooding risk where the contributing drainage area is less than 1.0 square mile
• Protected by levees from the 1% annual flood risk
These areas are not in any immediate danger from flooding caused by overflowing rivers or hard rains.
However, it is noted that structures within a Non-Special Flood Hazard Areas are still at risk, particularly to localized flooding. The City is not in a dam inundation zone so is not as risk of flooding from dam or reservoir failure.
PS-5 Policies
PS-5.1 Flood Control Regulations. Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies so that the City’s regulations related to flood control are in compliance with Federal, State, and Local standards.
PS-5.2 Flood Maps. Coordinate with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) so that Federal Insurance Rate Maps correctly depict flood hazards in the City.
PS-5.3 Site Design. Adhere to the latest building, site, and design codes to avoid or minimize the risk of flooding hazards in the community.
PS-5.4 Best Management Practices. Encourage new developments that add substantial amounts of impervious surfaces to integrate low impact development Best Management Practices to reduce stormwater runoff.
PS-5.5 Changing Conditions. Coordinate with the Los Angeles County Flood Control and Waterworks Districts on changing flood conditions associated with climate change and extreme weather.
PS-5.6 Local Storm Drainage Infrastructure. Maintain and regularly assess the status of local storm drainage infrastructure to confirm that the system is functioning property.
PS-5 Actions
PS-5a Monitor changes in Federal and State laws and regulations related to local flood protection, including the National Flood Insurance Program and incorporate necessary changes into the Municipal Code and building codes as required.
PS-5b Communicate with FEMA annually regarding updates to Flood Insurance Rate Maps and Letter of Map Revisions.
PS-5c Periodically review County, State, and Federal flood control best practices and incorporate appropriate standards into the Municipal Code.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-12
NOISE
An environment where excessive or harmful noise pollution is limited.
Noise levels within the community can affect the quality of life experienced by people living and working in Lawndale. High noise levels can create stress and irritation. The following policies and actions address other potential sources of excessive noise by creating effective strategies to reduce and limit the community’s exposure to loud sources of noise.
PS-6 Policies
PS-6.1 California Building Code. Adhere to the latest standards related to noise in the most current edition of the California Building Code to avoid or minimize noise pollution in the community.
PS-6.2 Noise Exposure. Consider the noise compatibility of existing and future development when making land use planning decisions. Require development and infrastructure projects to be consistent with the land use compatibility standards contained in Table PS-1 and the Lawndale Municipal Code to facilitate acceptable noise exposure levels for existing and future development.
PS-6.3 Noise Mitigation. Require new development to mitigate excessive noise to the standards indicated in Table PS-1 and the Lawndale Municipal Code through best practices, including building location and orientation, building design features, placement of noise-generating equipment away from sensitive receptors, shielding of noise-generating equipment, placement of noise-tolerant features between noise sources and sensitive receptors, and use of noiseminimizing materials.
PS-6.4 Acoustical Studies. Require acoustical studies for new discretionary developments and transportation improvements that have the potential to affect existing noise-sensitive uses such as schools, hospitals, libraries, care facilities, and residential areas; and for projects that would introduce new noise-sensitive uses into an area where existing noise levels may exceed the thresholds identified in this element. For projects that are required to prepare an acoustical study, the following mobile and stationary noise source criteria shall be used to determine the significance of those impacts.
A. Mobile Noise Sources:
● Where existing traffic noise levels are within or below the “normally acceptable” noise criteria at the affected land use (see Table PS-1), a readily perceptible 5 dBA CNEL or greater increase in roadway noise will be considered significant; ● Where existing traffic noise levels falls within the “conditionally acceptable” noise criteria at the sensitive land use, a +3 dBA CNEL or greater increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant; and
● Where existing traffic noise levels exceed the “conditionally acceptable” noise criteria at the sensitive land use, a + 1.5 dBA CNEL or greater increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-13
B. Stationary and Non-Transportation Noise Sources
A significant impact will occur if the project results in an exceedance of the noise level standards contained in this element, or the project will result in an increase in ambient noise levels by more than 3 dB, whichever is greater.
PS-6.5 Roadway Noise. Encourage nonmotorized transportation alternatives for local trips and the implementation of noise sensitivity measures in the public realm, including traffic-calming road design, lateral separation, natural buffers, and setbacks to decrease excessive motor vehicle noise.
PS-6.6 Freeway Noise. Coordinate with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to achieve maximum noise abatement in the design of new freeway projects or improvements along I-405.
PS-6.7 Railroad Noise. Coordinate with Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Rail (BNSF) to support and maintain reasonable limits on the use of bells and whistles, and the speed and hours of rail operation in affected areas of the City and maintain adequate setbacks and buffer zones along rail lines to reduce adverse noise impacts on sensitive receptors.
PS-6.8 Commercial Noise. Require the use of noise attenuation measures, including screening and buffering techniques, for all new commercial development expected to produce excessive noise; in existing cases where the City’s noise standards are exceeded, work with Code Enforcement to require compliance.
PS-6.9 Construction Noise. Require construction activities to reduce noise impacts on adjacent uses to the criteria identified to the maximum extent feasible by complying with Chapter 8.20 of the Lawndale Municipal Code and use best practices.
PS-6.10 Special Events. Temporary special events which generate noise in excess of local noise standards including, but not limited to, festivals, concerts, parades, and other similar activities may be considered on a case-by-case basis through issuance of a temporary use permit.
PS-6.11 Temporary Emergency Operations and Emergency Equipment Usage. Temporary emergency operations or emergency equipment usage are exempt from noise standard criteria set by this element.
PS-6.12 Interjurisdictional and Multiagency Coordination. Coordinate with neighboring cities and transportation providers such as Caltrans to minimize noise conflicts between land uses along the City's boundaries.
PS-6.13 Community Education. Provide education to the community regarding potential noise sources and how to reduce them or report violations.
PS-6.14 Vibration Studies. Require vibration impact studies for new discretionary development and transportation improvements whose construction utilizes pile drivers within 200 feet of existing buildings or vibratory rollers within 50 feet of existing buildings.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-14
PS-6 Actions
PS-6a Monitor changes in the California Building Code and other Federal and State laws and regulations related to noise and incorporate necessary changes into the Municipal Code and building codes as required.
PS-6b Review the Lawndale Municipal Code and update as necessary so that the noise standards are consistent with this General Plan, including Table PS-1, and to require new residential, mixeduse with a residential component, and other noise-sensitive development to be designed to minimize noise exposure to noise sensitive uses through incorporation of site planning and architectural techniques. The update shall also include noise standards for residential uses within a mixed-use development, which may differ from other adopted residential noise standards.
PS-6c Review new development and transportation projects for compliance with the noise requirements established in this General Plan, including the standards established in Table PS1 and the Lawndale Municipal Code. Where necessary, require new development to mitigate excessive noise through best practices, including building location and orientation, building design features, placement of noise-generating equipment away from sensitive receptors, shielding of noise-generating equipment, placement of noise-tolerant features between noise sources and sensitive receptors, and use of noise-minimizing materials such as rubberized asphalt.
PS-6d Require acoustical studies for all new discretionary projects, including those related to development and transportation, which have the potential to generate noise impacts which exceed the standards identified in this General Plan. The studies shall include representative noise measurements, estimates of existing and projected noise levels, and mitigation measures necessary to facilitate compliance with this element.
PS-6e Review the locations of proposed projects with the potential to generate stationary noise in relation to sensitive receptors through the discretionary project review process. Limit delivery or service hours for stores and businesses with loading areas, docks, or trash bins that front, side, border, or gain access on driveways next to residential and other noise sensitive areas. Only approve exceptions if full compliance with the nighttime limits of the noise regulations is achieved.
PS-6f Require all construction activity to comply with the limits (maximum noise levels, hours and days of allowed activity) established in the Lawndale Municipal Code in order to reduce impacts associated with temporary construction noise to the extent feasible.
PS-6g Actively enforce the standards identified within the Lawndale Municipal Code to reduce impacts to the extent feasible. Update and amend the Lawndale Municipal Code as appropriate. Provide a link on the City's website for those to file complaints against activities and uses that may be violating the Municipal Code.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-15
PS-6h Require new residential projects located adjacent to railroad lines to follow the FTA vibration screening distance criteria to prevent residential uses from being exposed to vibrations exceeding 72 VdB for frequent events (more than 70 events per day), 75 VdB for occasional events (30-70 events per day), or 80 VdB for infrequent events (less than 30 events per day).
PS-6i Enforce the provisions of the most current California Motor Vehicle Code regarding muffler maintenance and exhaust systems.
PS-6j Limit truck traffic in noise sensitive areas.
PS-6k Require vibration impact studies for all new discretionary projects, including those related to development and transportation, whose construction utilizes pile drivers within 200 feet of existing buildings or vibratory rollers within 50 feet of existing buildings. The studies shall include a detailed mitigation plan to avoid any potential significant impacts to existing structures due to groundborne vibrations, based on the California Department of Transportation’s Construction Vibration Guidance Manual.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-16
Table PS-1: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Exposure (dBA, CNEL) Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-17
CLIMATE CHANGE AND RESILIENCY PLANNING
A resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risks to life, property, the economy, and the environment resulting from climate change are minimized.
The impacts of climate change pose an increasing and
growing challenge to the safety and well-being of the
residents of Lawndale. California will continue to experience effects of climate change in different ways, including
increased likelihood of drought, heat waves, severe
weather, flooding, and wildfires. In addition to climate change planning becoming necessary on its own merits,
Senate Bill 379 requires Lawndale to update the Public
Safety Element to address climate change adaptation and resilience strategies applicable to the City.
Lawndale developed a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in
cooperation with the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments in 2017. The CAP serves as a guide for action by setting GHG emission reduction goals and establishing strategies and policy to achieve desired outcomes over the next 20 years.
Lawndale’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) assesses climate change vulnerability and identifies risks that climate change pose to the City. The following policies are informed by, and intended to supplement, the CAP and LHMP.
PS-7 Policies
PS-7.1 Community Preparedness. Promote a wellprepared City that can effectively overcome natural disasters and scarcity of resources due to
climate change.
PS-7.2 Collaboration. Collaborate with local, regional, State and/or Federal jurisdictions and agencies
on climate resiliency and adaptation strategies.
PS-7.3 Ecological Recovery. Coordinate with Federal,
State, and local agencies to establish ecological
recovery programs.
PS-7.4 Air Pollution. Work with responsible Federal,
State, and County agencies to decrease air
pollution emissions occurring within the air basin
to reduce the risk posed by air pollution.
PS-7.5 Energy Supply. Promote plans and programs
that increase sustainable energy sources.
As Lawndale looks to the future, State
law requires the City to consider
climate impacts facing California as
well as methods to adapt and increase
resiliency to climate change effects. As
a result of climate change, Lawndale
may experience more intense and
frequent heat waves, drought, and
wildfires, and more severe storms and
extreme weather events.
Emissions scenarios used in the
General Plan and Environmental
Impact Report are the same as those
used by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change’s Sixth
Assessment Report and are called
Representative Concentration
Pathways, or RCPs. There are five
RCPs: SSP1-1.9, SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5,
SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5. Each
represents a set of possible underlying
socioeconomic conditions, policy
options, and technological
considerations, spanning from a lowend scenario that requires significant emissions reductions resulting in zero
global emissions by 2050 (RCP 1.9) to
a high-end, “business-as-usual,”
fossil-fuel-intensive emissions scenario
(RCP 8.5). The low-end scenario is
most closely aligned with California’s
ambitious greenhouse gas reduction
targets and the aspirational goals of
the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change 2015
Paris Agreement. Thus far, global
emissions continue to follow the
business-as-usual trajectory.
LOOKING AHEAD
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | PS-18
PS-7.6 Drought Preparation. Implement necessary actions and programs to improve drought preparation and response for the most vulnerable community members.
PS-7.7 Cooling Centers. Designate public buildings, specific private buildings, or institutions with air conditioning as public cooling shelters; extend hours at air-conditioned sites during periods of extreme heat or power outage (if the site is supported by a backup generator).
PS-7.8 Storms. Provide access to flood protection resources and services (signage, sandbags, etc.) as feasible at designated public facilities during and after extreme weather events.
PS-7.9 Special Assistance. Address the needs of individuals with limited mobility or limited access to transportation for access to safe and comfortable shelter during extreme heat events or other severe weather events.
PS-7.10 Leadership. Demonstrate leadership in local climate planning efforts through a range of tangible actions and policies at the municipal operations level.
PS-7.11 Greenhouse Gas Reductions. Reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emissions locally by actively support regional efforts to reduce greenhouse gases throughout the region.
PS-7.12 Extreme Heat Vulnerabilities. Require that new developments, major remodels, and redevelopments address urban heat island issues and reduce urban heat island effects for the proposed project site and adjacent properties.
PS-7.13 Ongoing Monitoring. Monitor climate change-related effects with local, regional, state, and/or federal partners to provide information of effectiveness of existing infrastructure and programs.
PS-7 Actions
PS-7a Provide information and resources to the public and businesses regarding steps the City is taking to address the issue of climate change.
PS-7b Expand the use of energy-efficient lighting, such as LEDs, for City-owned light facilities.
PS-7c Consider purchasing only electric or alternative-energy vehicles for the City vehicle fleet, as appropriate, based on the intended use of the vehicle.
PS-7d Evaluate the feasibility for government-constructed and/or -operated new development to exceed the California Green Building Standards Code CalGreen Tier 1, or successor program, standards.
PS-7e Promote the use of sustainable and carbon-neutral energy sources in new development.
PS-7f Explore using renewable energy and clean generation technologies such as solar, wind, biogas, or fuel cells to power City facilities where appropriate.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-1
Introduction to Environmental Justice
The Environmental Justice Element seeks to reduce disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations in Lawndale and promote equal distribution of resources. Senate Bill 1000 (SB 1000), the Planning for Healthy Communities Act, was signed into law by then Governor Jerry Brown, on September 24, 2016. It mandates that cities and counties with Environmental Justice Communities (described below) adopt an Environmental Justice Element or integrate appropriate goals, objectives, and policies into other elements of their general plans, with the intent to create healthier places. The City of Lawndale has chosen to prepare a separate element so that all Environmental Justice-related goals, policies, and actions are conveniently located in one document for easy reference.
Environmental Justice Communities
Environmental Justice Communities are described by the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen) as areas (i.e., census tracts) of a city or county that have higher environmental burdens and vulnerabilities than other areas. Based on data from CalEnviroScreen Version 4.0 and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Priority Populations Mapping Tool, all seven census tracts in the Planning Area are considered to be Environmental Justice Communities (Figure EJ-1). The methodology is described in more detail in the Existing Conditions Report. This Environmental Justice Element supports continued improvements for areas identified as Environmental Justice Communities as well as neighborhoods throughout the City, as a whole.
Organization of Element
The Environmental Justice Element will address each of the topics below as they relate to Lawndale. The goals and policies of this element are organized around the following topics:
• Pollution Exposure and Air Quality
• Access to Public Facilities
• Healthy Food Access
• Safe and Sanitary Homes
• Physical Activity
• Civic Engagement
• Improvement and Programs
EJ
Environmental Justice
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-2
GOAL EJ-1 POLLUTION EXPOSURE AND AIR QUALITY
Pollution exposure is reduced and air quality is enhanced through land use and development patterns, especially in Environmental Justice Communities.
Pollution exposure occurs when people come into direct contact with air, food, water, and soil contaminants and is often the result of incompatible land uses sited adjacent to each other. Sensitive populations (such as children, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems) and sensitive land uses (such as schools, day cares and hospitals) are the most susceptible to pollution exposure.
Environmental Justice Communities are often disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution exposure. Pollution can come from many sources including storage tanks leaking hazardous chemicals into soil and groundwater, agricultural land uses applying pesticides, mobile sources such as vehicles emitting exhaust, and stationary sources such as diesel engines emitting exhaust.
EJ-1 Policies
Emission Sources. Encourage existing sources of emissions to use feasible measures to minimize air quality impacts in Environmental Justice Communities and avoid new sources of significant emissions in these communities, as feasible.
Green Industry. Attract non-polluting industry and green technology companies to the City.
Traffic-Related Emissions. Support strategies to reduce traffic-related emissions such as timed-signals and vegetative barriers.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. Encourage development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities to reduce dependency on transportation options that emit pollutants. (See Mobility Element)
EJ-1 Actions
EJ-1a Coordinate with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) to ensure enforcement of air quality permits.
EJ-1b Collaborate with local and regional partners to identify strategies for reducing the asthma rate in the City.
EJ-1c Create a plan to clean up identified contaminated groundwater sites (Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites, Department of Defense Sites, Cleanup Program Sites) in the City.
EJ-1d Work with the community to identify gaps in the bicycle and pedestrian network and research and apply for grants to help fill the identified gaps.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-3
GOAL EJ-2 ACCESS TO PUBLIC FACILITIES
Public facilities and services are equitably distributed throughout the City of Lawndale and are easily available to residents of Environmental Justice Communities.
The adequate provision of public facilities is a critical component to the current and future prosperity of a community. Under State law (SB 1000), “public facilities” is an umbrella term that includes “public improvements, public services, and community amenities”. This covers a wide spectrum of publicly provided uses and services including infrastructure, school facilities, parks, and transportation and emergency services. These amenities and services act to improve the health, safety, and well-being of a community by either enhancing the public sphere or providing services that are available to every resident.
Insufficient public facilities can have significant impacts to the health and quality of life of residents, and historically, Environmental Justice Communities have struggled with insufficient access to public facilities and substandard amenities more than other communities.
EJ-2 Policies
EJ-2.1 Convenient Access. Consider the ease of accessibility of public facilities in relation to Environmental Justice Communities during the review and evaluation of public facility expansion, replacement, and construction.
EJ-2.2 Prioritize Resources. Support opportunities to meet parks, recreation, and open space needs in underserved areas of the City that have a demonstrably greater need for these amenities.
EJ-2.3 Keep Pace with Development. Ensure that the development of parks and recreation facilities and services keep pace with development and growth within the City. (See Resource Management Element)
EJ-2.4 Coordination. Coordinate with partnering agencies that provide public facilities and services within the City to ensure effective, efficient, and equitable service delivery.
EJ-2.5 Local Transit. Encourage local transit providers to establish and maintain routes and services that provide the community with convenient access to jobs, shopping, schools, parks, and healthcare facilities, where feasible.
EJ-2 Actions
EJ-2a Explore areas to add enhanced safety features at crosswalks.
EJ-2b Coordinate with the Police Department to address safety in parks and along walking/biking routes.
EJ-2c Investigate the possibility of adding more recreation classes to meet the needs of the community.
EJ-2d Consider distributing City events across multiple public spaces, as feasible.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-4
GOAL EJ-3 HEALTHY FOOD ACCESS
Healthy food and nutritional choices are accessible for all community members.
Food plays a critical role in the health of a community. Therefore, it is essential that all residents have access to food that is healthy, affordable, and culturally appropriate. Environmental Justice Communities may face constraints related to accessibility to nutritional food, and this lack of accessibility has a direct impact on personal health and well-being. Food access is not only associated with the physical accessibility of affordable and culturally appropriate food, but also with food security, defined as access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life. Food security includes the availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods as well as the ability to acquire foods.
EJ-3 Policies
EJ-3.1 Incentivize Healthy Food Supply. Encourage retailers to improve the quality and selection of healthy foods and nutritional information and to stock fresh and healthy food at affordable prices by providing incentive programs, technical assistance, or other services.
EJ-3.2 Access to Healthy Food. Strive to locate healthy food establishments so that all residences are within walking distance (quarter to a half-mile) of a store with healthy options, where feasible and appropriate.
EJ-3.3 Options for Healthy Food. Prioritize healthy food supplies in economic development efforts and encourage the establishment and operation of farmers’ markets, farm stands, ethnic markets, mobile health food markets, and convenience/corner stores that sell healthy foods, including fresh produce.
EJ-3.4 Community Gardens. Support opportunities for neighborhood-run community gardens including coordination with local school districts and non-profits.
EJ-3.5 Organic Waste Diversion. Support policies and programs to divert organic waste from landfills into recycling activities and food recovery organizations that help provide healthy food to the local community.
EJ-3 Actions
EJ-3a Set an example in City facilities and at City-sponsored events by providing healthy food and beverage options.
EJ-3b Encourage local markets, restaurants, and food recovery organizations to donate surplus food to residents in need.
EJ-3c Prepare and distribute information on the benefits of healthy eating and on the availability of food assistance programs.
EJ-3d Encourage local organizations and community groups to provide free or reduced cost lunches after the school year ends.
EJ-3e Encourage and support the establishment of a regular farmer’s market in the City.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-5
GOAL EJ-4 SAFE AND SANITARY HOMES
A community with healthy living conditions for all residents, particularly those in Environmental Justice Communities.
The housing conditions of homes in a community have direct health implications for those who live in the homes. Many residents in Environmental Justice Communities live in dwellings that were built before standards and regulations were established to ensure that new homes are free from pollutants such as lead and asbestos. The proportion of older homes in Environmental Justice Communities are usually higher than in non-environmental justice areas and thus residents in Environmental Justice Communities are disproportionately exposed to these health threats. Older housing often has other problems such as poor ventilation, which leads to uncomfortable indoor temperatures and mold-producing moisture, and pest and vermin infestation.
Overcrowded housing is another issue that affects the safety and cleanliness of homes. Overcrowding is typically measured by determining the persons-per-room in a dwelling unit, with more than one person per room considered overcrowded. Housing affordability also influences whether homes in a community are safe and sanitary. When a tenant or homeowner spends more than 30 percent of their income toward housing (including utilities), they are generally considered to be cost-burdened. When a household is costburdened, there is less money for housing maintenance or other needs such as healthcare and healthy food. These issues are further discussed and addressed in the Housing Element of this General Plan.
EJ-4 Policies
EJ-4.1 Code Enforcement. Focus code enforcement efforts in Environmental Justice Communities to improve unsafe and unsanitary conditions, focusing on overcrowding; parking on lawns; unpermitted garage conversions, additions, and accessory-dwelling units; unpermitted plumbing and electrical; deferred property maintenance, and trash and dumping.
EJ-4.2 Lead-Based Paint. Raise awareness about the risks associated with lead-based paint and other housing hazards, including by distributing information about remediation of lead and best practices to reduce and eliminate other housing hazards.
EJ-4.3 Indoor Air Quality. Encourage measures to reduce indoor air quality impacts (e.g., air filtration systems, kitchen range hood exhaust fans, low-VOC paint and carpet) for new developments.
EJ-4.4 Absentee Owner Outreach. Support the upkeep and maintenance of rental properties throughout the City, including in Environmental Justice Communities.
EJ-4.5 Tenant Rights. Distribute information with City newsletters and/or other periodical publications about protecting tenant rights, so they are not penalized for reporting or living in a dwelling unit that does not meet health and safety standards.
EJ-4.6 Capital Improvements. Support capital improvements such as sewer, water, street, and electrical improvements that facilitate the provision of safe, decent, and sanitary housing.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-6
EJ-4 Actions
EJ-4a Distribute information about remediation of lead and best practices to reduce and eliminate other housing hazards.
EJ-4b Conduct periodic absentee owner outreach in Environmental Justice Communities to inform owners of their legal requirements to maintain and upkeep their rental properties.
EJ-4c Distribute information with City newsletters and/or other periodical publications about protecting tenant rights, so they are not penalized for reporting or living in a dwelling unit that does not meet health and safety standards.
EJ-4d Apply for funds for housing rehabilitation resources as feasible.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-7
GOAL EJ-5 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
Land use and development patterns encourage physical activity and improve multimodal access and connectivity to employment, shopping, services, schools, parks, and other destinations.
Physical activity is a large contributor to the physical and mental health of Lawndale residents. Research by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that physically active people tend to live longer and have lower risk for heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, depression, and some cancers. Physical activity is promoted by the built environment by providing places that encourage walking, biking, and other forms of exercise. These places include parks, open space, trails, urban green spaces, areas with robust tree canopies, and active transportation networks. An important component of environmental justice is distributing facilities that promote physical activity equitably throughout the community so there are equal opportunities for all residents to be physically active.
EJ-5 Policies
EJ-5.1 Physical Activity Opportunities. Prioritize increasing opportunities for physical activity within Environmental Justice Communities.
EJ-5.2 Eliminate Barriers. Update the Zoning Ordinance and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan to eliminate any barriers to facilitating the development of complete neighborhoods with access to retail and recreation resources within walking distance of homes.
EJ-5.3 Accessibility. Endeavour to provide parks that are easily accessible to the surrounding neighborhood and beyond, and are as barrier-free as possible, particularly for those with limited mobility.
EJ-5.4 Physical Activity. Promote physical activity programs and education offered by the City and community partners and encourage residents to regularly participate in physical activity and active lifestyles.
EJ-5.5 Partnerships. Form partnerships with non-profit organizations, healthcare organizations, and regional governmental agencies to foster and participate in efforts promoting healthy lifestyles, physical activity, and positive health outcomes.
EJ-5 Actions
EJ-5a Promote programs that encourage walking and/or biking to work and school such as walk-athons, marathons, and bike-a-thons.
EJ-5b Coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions to explore options for creating cross-jurisdictional bike lanes.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-8
GOAL EJ-6 CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
Accessible and culturally appropriate opportunities for all people to engage in the decision-making process.
Civic, or community, engagement is an important goal across all local planning and decision-making processes. It can help foster a strong sense of place within a neighborhood and can deepen the investment of stakeholders in working toward neighborhood improvements. Environmental Justice issues will be more effectively identified and resolved if accessible and culturally appropriate opportunities to engage in local decisions are created for low-income, minority, and linguistically isolated stakeholders. Effective civic engagement not only provides the City with an opportunity to strengthen its relationship with the community but provides for sound investment in better decision-making by ensuring decisions are informed by community needs and aspirations.
EJ-6 Policies
EJ-6.1 Equitable Civic Engagement. Support an equitable and comprehensive approach to civic engagement and public outreach on all aspects of City governance and delivery of services.
EJ-6.2 Community Events. Promote, sponsor, and support a variety of community events to strengthen social cohesion and the overall identity of the City.
EJ-6.3 City Information. Distribute City information in Environmental Justice Communities, such as numbers to call for code enforcement, programs offered through the City, housing needs, and general City information.
EJ-6.4 Partnerships. Partner with and support the efforts of any community-based organizations or non-profits that focus on programs and activities for the Environmental Justice Communities.
EJ-6.5 Representation. Specifically invite residents from traditionally underrepresented demographic groups to become board, commission, and committee members as openings occur.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-9
EJ-6 Actions
EJ-6a Survey community values periodically to encourage more involvement from residents and to determine if the General Plan and other City documents are fulfilling the residents’ goals for a desirable and attractive community. The survey should occur every five years.
EJ-6b Promote meaningful cross-cultural participation in local planning and decision-making processes by:
a. Continuing to provide City-sponsored material in multiple languages. b. Organizing outreach events and conducting surveys directly to specific demographic groups.
c. Partnering with community-based organizations that have relationships, trust, and cultural competency with target communities to conduct outreach for local initiatives and issues.
d. Tailoring activities and the venues where they take place to accommodate the cultural preferences of different racial/ethnic groups.
EJ-6c Make meetings and other public engagement forums accessible to a wide range of residents and encourage greater attendance by:
a. Ensuring any materials are distributed far enough in advance of meetings to allow sufficient time for review and comment.
b. Using communication methods that convey complex or technical information in an easily understandable manner.
c. Facilitating meetings using diverse methods that can engage all participants and can appeal to multiple styles of learning.
d. Focusing on methods to effectively engage younger residents.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | EJ-10
GOAL EJ-7 IMPROVEMENTS AND PROGRAMS
Public improvements and programs address the needs of Environmental Justice Communities.
An important component of Environmental Justice is prioritizing projects, programs, and investments that directly serve and benefit residents within areas experiencing higher levels of environmental burdens. Effective prioritization requires coordination and alignment across departments, agencies, and shared jurisdictional partners along with consistent and sustained engagement with community stakeholders. Environmental Justice Communities typically have specific needs that arise from past geographic and procedural inequities. This requires taking targeted actions that will improve existing conditions in these communities. Many of these actions will not be applicable across the entire City but will be applicable only to Environmental Justice Communities due to their special circumstances.
EJ-7 Policies
EJ-7.1 Prioritize Spending. Where possible, prioritize spending of funds for air quality and other environmental improvements, public infrastructure improvements, recreation, and community programming in Environmental Justice Communities, and make fiscal decisions based on this priority.
EJ-7.2 Public Amenities. Promote the equitable provision of public amenities such as sidewalks, street trees, crosswalks, paving, streetlights, bike lanes, and other amenities as specified in other sections of this Environmental Justice Element.
EJ-7.3 Coordination. Coordinate with relevant utility providers to provide adequate and appropriate levels of service and promote the maintenance of water, sewer, stormwater, and electrical facilities serving Environmental Justice Communities.
EJ-7 Actions
EJ-7a Seek grants that will specifically help with the issues in Environmental Justice Communities such as safe housing, air quality and environmental concerns, increased tree coverage, recreational resources, and other issues.
EJ-7b Engage with the community to identify desired programs that would benefit targeted segments of the population such as youth, women, and small business owners.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-1
Introduction to Economic Development
The Economic Development Element is intended to guide the City’s future policy decisions in service of growing and strengthening the local economy. The Economic Development Element is not a required element for a General Plan, but the City has decided to include it in recognition that promoting economic vibrancy and resiliency is a central aspect of planning for Lawndale’s future. While presented as a separate chapter, the policies contained within the Economic Development Element are intertwined with those found in the other Elements of the General Plan. Decisions made around the topics of these other elements, such as land use, housing, mobility, open space, and health and wellness, necessarily impact economic development, and vice-versa.
Organization of Element
Given market conditions and trends in Lawndale and its location in the region, this Element has identified key areas in which the City has the greatest opportunity for economic growth and development. The goals and policies identified in the Economic Development Element are focused on these areas of opportunity and underscore the City’s commitment to being a place where workers, residents, visitors, and businesses can thrive, today and into the future. The Element is organized into five topics, as follows:
• Economic Diversification
• Support and Expand Business Community
• Workforce Development and Retention
• Create a Vibrant Hawthorne Boulevard
• Fiscal Sustainability
ED
Economic Development
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-2
GOAL ED-1 ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION
A City with a strong and diversified economic base that promotes job growth, economic stability, and fiscal sustainability.
A diversified economy makes cities stronger and more resilient in the face of changing economic trends.
Businesses in today’s economy are highly mobile, and firms consider a variety of factors when deciding where to locate or re-locate. These factors include the ease with which a firm can establish itself and operate in the City, and the level of a city’s investment in and responsiveness to its business community.
Creating such an environment requires intentional work and coordination from the City. To foster a healthy economic climate, Lawndale should position itself to accommodate and expand on its current strengths.
The City can leverage new residential growth to drive the development of retail and office spaces. New hotels can additionally expand opportunities for visitor-serving businesses.
ED-1 Policies
Mixed-Use Growth. Leverage allowed mixed-use growth as a tool for drawing in a greater range of businesses that can take advantage of a growing local labor market and consumer base.
Targeted Development. Encourage the development of multifamily and mixed-use spaces that incorporate office, retail, and residential uses in high-activity/high-traffic corridors and areas.
Targeted Business Attraction. Identify and target outreach to businesses in industries that align with the City’s existing industry clusters, land use patterns, and community needs while expanding business attraction to include higher-paying industry sectors.
Visitor-Serving Businesses. Support development of hotels and visitor-serving businesses that leverage the City’s proximity to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and regional attractions.
ED-1 Actions
ED-1a Create a five-year economic development strategic plan to design, manage, and implement short- and medium-term economic development priorities for the City.
ED-1b Perform a baseline analysis to identify industry niches that are well-suited for the City and periodically update this analysis based on local and regional trends.
ED-1c Identify market surpluses and leakages in the City’s local economy to better understand which industries are present and/or absent compared to peer cities and to inform targeted business attraction activities.
ED-1d Identify vacant, underdeveloped, or underutilized sites and buildings in targeted corridors that represent redevelopment opportunity, and improve their redevelopment potential by engaging with and educating property owners, finding strategic opportunities for parcel consolidation, and facilitating investor “matchmaking” through a public online inventory and other efforts.
ED-1e Coordinate with neighboring cities and regional partners to host regional events and trade shows to broaden the City’s visibility and promote local visitor-serving businesses.
ED-1f Explore public-private partnerships and/or catalytic development projects to anchor and spur growth that builds on the City’s economic, physical, and cultural assets.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-3
GOAL ED-2 SUPPORT AND EXPAND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY
A community that supports, collaborates with, and fosters local business development.
One of the City’s most important assets in promoting economic growth is its existing economic base.
Supporting existing local businesses so that they can thrive, grow, and adapt to changing economic conditions will not only help those businesses and their employees, but also demonstrate to investors that the City is a desirable place to locate to. This support extends to residents, workers, students, and new entrepreneurs who may be looking to establish or grow a business in the City.
ED-2 Policies
ED-2.1 Support the Existing Business Community. Help retain and expand existing businesses through supportive and responsive policies and programs.
ED-2.2 Partnerships. Create and maintain avenues through which Lawndale’s business community, elected officials, City staff, and civic organizations can discuss economic development issues.
ED-2.3 Marketing. Market the City's central South Bay location and excellent regional access to attract new businesses and industries.
ED-2.4 Processes. Streamline support for local businesses and remove potential barriers to economic development.
ED-2.5 Resources. Provide the business community with easily accessible information on available resources for growth and development, including those aimed at entrepreneurship and small businesses.
ED-2.6 Entrepreneurship. Educate and support entrepreneurs in establishing and expanding small and local businesses.
ED-2.7 Infrastructure. Identify and address infrastructure needs that support commercial development.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-4
ED-2 Actions
ED-2a Meet regularly with representatives of the City’s business community, including the Lawndale Chamber of Commerce, to solicit feedback on how to improve the business environment, cement effective relationships, and help businesses overcome challenges.
ED-2b Support collaborative partnerships and networks between and among businesses to create a robust business ecosystem that supports entrepreneurship through reoccurring roundtable events and other platforms that enable flexible participation.
ED-2c Develop and implement a creative marketing plan that attracts new employers to the City.
ED-2d Review and maintain a Development Code that supports investment and innovation in the City.
ED-2e Identify ways to simplify and streamline permitting for new and expanding businesses and implement the changes as feasible.
ED-2f Use local revenue sources as well as State and Federal grants and other financing tools to fund capital improvements and the redevelopment of targeted commercial areas.
ED-2g Maintain and regularly update the City’s public-facing sources of information on economic development resources, including webpages, social media, and other platforms to offer accessible and up-to-date information for the business community.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-5
GOAL ED-3 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND RETENTION
A City that invests in the economic success of its community and people.
The presence of a workforce aligned with the needs of the local economy, particularly growth sectors, is a major component in business retention and expansion. City residents are primarily employed in some of the region’s lowest-paying industries, with a small proportion working in higher-paying industries such as finance and insurance, information, and professional/scientific/technical services. In addition to diversifying the local job base, the City should look to enhance education and workforce development opportunities for residents. In doing so, the City can improve residents’ social mobility while bolstering its economic vibrancy. Aligning the resident workforce’s skills with the needs of the businesses of today and tomorrow will have a critical impact on expansion and diversification of the City’s economy.
ED-3 Policies
ED-3.1 Workforce as an Economic Driver. Pursue strategies and programs for enhancing education and workforce skills aligned with local industries targeted for retention, expansion, and attraction.
ED-3.2 Workforce as Social Mobility. Promote training, education, and labor support programs that enhance the City’s labor force, assist residents in obtaining new employment opportunities, and grow median incomes.
ED-3.3 Housing Choices. Develop land use policies that facilitate development of housing affordable to a range of household types and incomes, to help diversify the local labor force and promote long-term stable residency.
ED-3 Actions
ED-3a Partner with regional education institutions and local secondary schools to strengthen the workforce pipeline.
ED-3b Develop and implement strategies to attract higher-paying industries to locate in the City, including outreach to targeted businesses and industry organizations, and investment in infrastructure and branding of major commercial centers such as the Hawthorne Boulevard corridor.
ED-3c Convene major local and regional employers to solicit guidance on how the City can support partnerships and develop policies and programs to create a strong workforce pipeline.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-6
GOAL ED-4 CREATE A VIBRANT HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD
A community with a successful corridor for commerce, mixed-use development, and social activity.
Major commercial activity corridors have the potential to drive economic diversification, anchor business activity, and generally open the City to increased economic opportunity. By enhancing the City’s primary commercial corridor along Hawthorne Boulevard, Lawndale can promote economic activity that serves the needs of residents, workers, and visitors. Enabling more intense development of mixed-use spaces along the Corridor and investing in the Corridor’s businesses, marketing, and infrastructure can generate employment and daytime activity that can support a wide range of businesses with an established customer base. These opportunities in turn will enhance the City’s overall economic base and prospects.
ED-4 Policies
ED-4.1 Intensification. Promote mixed-use development along Hawthorne Boulevard that will attract visitors from across the region, support the local needs of residents, and build a sense of place.
ED-4.2 Streetscape Improvements. Enhance aesthetics and “curb appeal” of the Hawthorne corridor with strategic investments such as landscaping, outdoor lighting, wayfinding, entry and building façade improvements, and other initiatives that increase its attractiveness for businesses and consumers.
ED-4.3 Accessibility. Enhance City and regional connectivity by supporting multimodal transportation options along Hawthorne Boulevard and other major City thoroughfares.
ED-4.4 Branding Strategy. Create and cultivate a distinctive Lawndale/Hawthorne Boulevard brand that attracts investors and update it periodically.
ED-4 Actions
ED-4a Encourage development of mixed-use spaces in high-activity areas and corridors through zoning changes and incentive programs (e.g., density bonuses and other concessions).
ED-4b Implement strategies and actions in the Housing Element that promote the development of diverse housing options in targeted areas along the Corridor to enhance economic activity and accessibility for residents.
ED-4c Implement strategies and actions in the Mobility Element and the Hawthorne Specific Boulevard Plan that promote infrastructure improvements and land use policies that will enhance economic activity and accessibility.
ED-4d Pursue funding from Local, State, and Federal sources to support storefront and streetscape improvements.
ED-4e Conduct and implement a branding study that is consistent with and reinforces the marketing efforts, streetscape improvements, and other initiatives described herein.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-7
GOAL ED-5 FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY
A City that pursues fiscal sustainability through sound financial management and balanced growth.
The fiscal health of the City is dependent on long-term sustainability of the City’s finances and operations, measured by the City’s revenues, spending per capita, and its ability to provide services. Each of these in turn effect the ability of the City to plan, manage, and pay for public services and investments, including many of the economic development initiatives described herein. A diverse set of revenue sources helps protect a city’s budget in downturns in revenue-generating activities. Lawndale, like most cities in California, relies on a handful of revenues sources—such as property, sales, and transient occupancy taxes—to fund day-to-day municipal operations. Enabling further development and attracting a range of real estate development and business types will prevent the City from becoming overly dependent on any one sector of the market and economy. Simultaneously, new residential development and new residents will require additional costs related to city services and infrastructure, and the City will need to plan for these needs through strong financial management and fiscal policies.
ED-5 Policies
ED-5.1 Revenue Sources. Consider opportunities to expand municipal revenue sources that diversify the City’s tax base, particularly those that can support infrastructure needs for future growth.
ED-5.2 Impacts of New Development. Pursue strategies that ensure new development adequately and fairly mitigates its impacts on City infrastructure and service costs.
ED-5.3 Retail Support. Promote additional retail development to increase sales tax revenues and expand retail amenities available to residents, employers, and visitors.
ED-5.4 Hotels. Encourage the development of new hotels to serve the regional visitor population and generate additional transient occupancy tax.
ED-5.5 Funding. Pursue a range of public, private, and non-profit funding sources to fund community revitalization and economic development activities.
ED-5.6 Cost Control. Carefully manage City costs through judicious expansion of municipal services and infrastructure.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | ED-8
ED-5 Actions
ED-5a Assess peer cities tax and fee structures and rates to evaluate Lawndale’s own structure and revise tax and fee structures as appropriate.
ED-5b Identify the estimated costs and potential funding sources for each proposed Capital Improvement Plan project.
ED-5c Support new retail development by maintaining mixed-use zoning at strategic nodes as allowed by the Land Use Element and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan, supporting the chamber of commerce and other business associations, facilitating community engagement with property owners, and developing retail-specific marketing strategies.
ED-5d Support development of new hotel and visitor-serving establishments by developing tourism marketing initiatives, coordinating with hospitality industry representatives, and ensuring access to developable land aligned with appropriate zoning regulations.
ED-5e Require analysis of fiscal implications of new development and request fiscal mitigations as needed to ensure adequate public service levels can be provided over the long term.
ED-5f Continue to investigate and pursue revenue sources, such as state and federal funding programs, that do not add to the tax burden of residents or local businesses.
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-1
Introduction to Community Facilities
The City and various local utilities, agencies, and districts provide a range of community services and facilities that are integral to providing a high quality of life for Lawndale’s residents. The future public facility and infrastructure needs of new projects must be carefully considered when evaluating new opportunities for growth to ensure that existing residents and businesses continue to receive adequate services and new developments have the necessary facilities and infrastructure to support long-term viability.
While not specifically required by State law for inclusion in the General Plan, this Community Services and Facilities Element is a critical component in meeting the infrastructure and public services needs of Lawndale. This Element works collaboratively with the topics addressed in all other General Plan Elements, specifically the City’s Land Use, Resource Management, Public Safety, and Environmental Justice Elements.
Organization of Element
The Community Services and Facilities Element will address each of the topics below as they relate to Lawndale. The goals and policies of this element are organized around the following topics:
• Infrastructure and Public Services
• Water System
• Wastewater System
• Stormwater Management
• Telecommunications
• Health and Human Resources
CF
Community Facilities
CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN
The heart of the Southbay
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-2
GOAL CF-1 INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES
A community with adequate, reliable public and quasi-public infrastructure and services to support existing and future development.
A number of public and private agencies provide essential public goods and services to Lawndale.
Infrastructure provides the physical and organizational means of production and distribution for essential services required for community function. The City actively plans for the provision and financing of infrastructure and public services to maintain quality of life.
CF-1 Policies
CF-1.1 Capital Improvements. Maintain and finance the capital improvement program to ensure the timely implementation of the General Plan and the adequate and efficient provision of public facility and municipal improvements.
CF-1.2 Fair Share. Require that new development and major redevelopment provide for and fund its fair share of the costs for the expansion of public infrastructure and services, recreational amenities and facilities, and other public facilities.
CF-1.3 Public Facility Plans. Maintain and implement public facility master plans, in collaboration with appropriate Regional, State, and Federal laws, to identify infrastructure needs, funding sources, and implement improvements for public facilities and services in Lawndale.
CF-1.4 Revenue Sources. Identify and proactively pursue all available sources of revenue to meet public infrastructure and services, recreational amenities and facilities, and other public facilities needs.
CF-1.5 Infrastructure Rehabilitation. Regularly maintain and rehabilitate public facilities and critical infrastructure to extend its useful life; prioritize infrastructure improvements in areas targeted for near-term redevelopment and in areas designated as lower-income and/or disadvantaged communities.
CF-1.6 Preventive Street Maintenance. Maintain and improve streets, sidewalks, and other public rights-of-way to provide a reliable network for circulation through a proactive preventive maintenance program.
CF-1.7 Facility Sharing. Promote the clustering of public and quasi-public facilities (e.g., schools, parks, activity centers, etc.), the joint use of facilities, and agreements for sharing costs and operational responsibilities among users.
CF-1.8 Regional Issues. Continue to participate in the preparation of plans and programs addressing regional infrastructure and public services issues.
CF-1.9 Cost Sharing. Explore equitable methods for sharing the costs of facilities or services that serve multiple jurisdictions in the South Bay Cities Council of Governments and/or Los Angeles County.
CF-1.10 Regional Services Providers. Collaborate with the various regional facility and service providers to deliver high levels of service to Lawndale residents, and to plan for new development.
CF-1.11 Capital Improvement Planning. Encourage agencies to carry out long-range capital improvement planning, which includes funding methods for the construction of projects that are compatible with regional land use planning goals and objectives.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-3
CF-1.12 Undergrounding of Facilities. Continue to require that all new utility lines are installed underground where feasible and promote the undergrounding of existing overhead facilities, including poles and lines.
CF-1 Actions
CF-1a Regularly coordinate with outside service providers and other agencies regarding their public facility plans and provide local input on goals, objectives, and projects.
CF-1b Maintain records regarding the quality and status of public facilities and critical infrastructure and use this information to inform the capital improvement planning process.
CF-1c Study mechanisms for funding and phasing of new infrastructure.
CF-1d Require any new development or major redevelopment that would put local and/or regional facilities at or near capacity to upgrade those facilities.
CF-1e Participate in regional and sub-regional planning forums that may address matters affecting the quality of life in Lawndale and the region.
CF-1f Require the undergrounding of utility lines in new development, and as areas are redeveloped, except where infeasible for operational reasons.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-4
GOAL CF-2 WATER SYSTEM
A community with a safe and reliable water supply, storage, and distribution system to meet the needs of existing and future users.
The City is served by the Golden State Water Company (an investor-owned public utility company) Southwest System. The City is underlain by potable and non-potable water infrastructure owned and maintained by GSWC and West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD), respectively. Golden State Water Company’s potable water supplies consist of groundwater pumped from the West Coast Basin and Central Basin groundwater systems and imported water purchased from Central Basin Municipal Water District and the West Basin Municipal Water District.
CF-2 Policies
Water Supply Needs. Coordinate with local water districts when considering land use changes in order to assist the districts in planning for adequate capacity to accommodate future growth.
Use of Recycled Water. Encourage the use of recycled water in development projects and landscaping; implement best practices (e.g., dual plumbing) to expand recycled water use when safe, financially feasible, and available.
Climate Change Impacts. Consider the impacts of climate change in projections used to establish which water supply, distribution facilities, and conservation efforts are necessary to sustain future water demands.
Drought Planning. Support the implementation of drought contingency plans to support the availability of adequate water during drought, including emergency water connections and related measures.
CF-2 Actions
CF-2a Through the development review process, require that sufficient water supply and water infrastructure capacity is available to serve the development prior to approval of the project, pursuant to Water Code Section 10910 and Government Code Section 66473.7.
CF-2b Work with water districts to expedite the improvement and expansion of water and reclaimed water facilities when necessary.
CF-2c In cooperation with the State, Regional, and Local water agencies and suppliers, participate in programs that seek to expand the availability and use of recycled water for irrigation where feasible and legally permitted.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-5
GOAL CF-3 WASTEWATER SYSTEM
A community with a well-maintained wastewater system that properly disposes of waste and safely transports it to regional facilities.
Wastewater management systems protect public health and the environment by collecting and treating municipal wastewater (sewage). Wastewater generated in Lawndale is conveyed via local and regional infrastructure to the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts’ treatment facilities. Sewer collection system infrastructure serving the City is owned and maintained by three separate entities: the City, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW), and the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD).
CF-3 Policies
CF-3.1 Wastewater System. Work with appropriate service providers to promote safe and reliable wastewater collection and treatment infrastructure to serve existing and future development.
CF-3.2 Adequate Infrastructure. Coordinate with the County of Los Angeles Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District to encourage facilities to provide sufficient capacity for Lawndale, and that wastewater infrastructure within the City is adequately monitored and maintained.
CF-3.3 Integrated Systems Planning. Develop a comprehensive approach to water infrastructure that integrates sewer system planning with potable and recycled water systems, stormwater systems, and increased conservation awareness.
CF-3.4 Statewide Requirements. Comply with current Statewide General Waste Discharge requirements concerning the operation and maintenance of the City’s wastewater collection system.
CF-3 Actions
CF-3a Through the development review process, continue to cooperate with the County of Los Angeles Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District to ensure adequate wastewater facilities are provided and maintained in the community. Specifically, the City should:
• Require that sufficient wastewater infrastructure capacity is available to serve the development prior to approval of the project;
• Ensure the project applicant has paid the required fees prior to occupancy of any new development; and
• Periodically review the fee schedules for sewer connections and revise fees as necessary to cover the cost of related services and facilities.
CF-3b Work with the County of Los Angeles Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District to expedite the improvement and expansion of sewer facilities when necessary.
CF-3c Develop a Citywide Sewer Facilities Master Plan to identify existing and future wastewater treatment needs, implement needed improvements, and identify potential funding sources, as funding is available.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-6
GOAL CF-4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
A community with an efficient, well-maintained stormwater management system that protects from flooding and enhances water quality.
Storm drains convey excess water from rain and outdoor water uses away from urban areas. As urban areas have less vegetation and more impervious surfaces, less water is able to infiltrate into the ground, and more runoff is generated. Lawndale supports an integrated stormwater management approach that includes storm drains and Low Impact Development (LID) measures designed to mitigate the increase in runoff volumes and velocities to downstream areas to prevent flooding and protect downstream areas from water pollution. The City of Lawndale is responsible for managing the public storm drain system within Lawndale’s limits and ensuring that an adequate level of service is provided to protect the public from excessive surface flooding conditions. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) infrastructure conveys stormwater out of City limits via its regional infrastructure systems.
CF-4 Policies
CF-4.1 Maintain Capacity. Encourage the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) to maintain sufficient levels of storm drainage service, improve flood control facilities and channel segments, and implement other best practices in order to protect the community from flood hazards.
CF-4.2 Stormwater Runoff. Encourage stormwater be directed towards permeable surfaces to allow for more percolation of stormwater into the ground.
CF-4.3 Stormwater Treatments. Promote Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development measures (LID) to treat stormwater before discharge from the site.
CF-4.4 National Programs. Cooperate in regional programs to implement the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-7
CF-4 Actions
CF-4a Continue to implement the Watershed Control Measures identified in the Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) for the Dominguez Channel Watershed Management Area Group. Review and update as needed.
CF-4b Work with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD), and Dominguez Channel Watershed Management Area (DCWMA) Group to meet the requirements of Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit Order R4-2012-0175.
CF-4c Encourage new developments and/or public roadway projects to incorporate recommendations from the Dominguez Watershed Management Master Plan, including:
• Use of pervious pavement during development and redevelopment; • Install and maintain catch basin inserts in high priority areas; • Reduce green waste to storm drains;
• Create grassy swales and/or vegetated areas to treat urban runoff; • Perform roadway improvements using vegetated medians, buffers and/or parkways; • Use water-wise landscaping;
• Use and expansion of the recycled water system; and
• Installation of rainwater harvesting systems and cisterns.
CF-4d Continue to review development projects to identify potential storm drain and drainage impacts and require developments to include measures to ensure that off-site runoff is not increased beyond pre-development levels during rain and flood events.
CF-4e Project designs shall minimize drainage concentrations, minimize impervious coverage, utilize pervious paving materials, utilize low impact development (LID) strategies, and utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce stormwater runoff.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-8
GOAL CF-5 TELECOMMUNICATIONS
A community with an efficient and reliable telecommunications system that improves economic development and equitable access.
The telecommunications system involves technologies that allow for the exchange of information over long distances, such as telephone, television, and internet. Lawndale is proactive in its plans to ensure fast and reliable telecommunications services for all.
CF-5 Policies
CF-5.1 Cooperation with Utilities Providers. Work cooperatively with utility providers to promote the provision of adequate telecommunications services and facilities to serve the needs of existing and future residents and businesses.
CF-5.2 Service. Support telecommunications providers that provide efficient, reliable, affordable, and state-of-the-art service.
CF-5.3 Future Technologies. Proactively explore the viability of new communication technologies for their relevancy and implementation in Lawndale.
CF-5.4 Access for All. Encourage the installation of public use wireless broadband access points throughout Lawndale.
CF-5.5 Appropriate Siting and Design. Coordinate with service providers in the siting and design of telecommunication facilities to minimize environmental, aesthetic, and safety impacts.
CF-5.6 Co-location of Facilities. Encourage the co-location of telecommunications facilities between different services and providers, when feasible.
CF-5.7 Undergrounding of Facilities. Continue to require that all new telecommunication lines are installed underground where feasible and promote the undergrounding of existing overhead facilities.
CF-5 Actions
CF-5a Confer with telecommunications providers regarding major development plans and participate in the planning of the extension of utilities.
CF-5b Require the undergrounding of telecommunication lines in new development, and as areas are redeveloped, except where infeasible for operational reasons.
CF-5c Periodically review and revise existing City ordinances regulating the placement, maintenance, and operation of telecommunication facilities.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-9
GOAL CF-6 HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES
A community that enhances the quality of life for all its residents through the provision of health and educational resources including quality schools, libraries, medical, and other community services and facilities.
Education and medical services are important for every stage of life. Lawndale supports the provision of high-quality human services that enhance the health and well-being of all. Lawndale is a proud community with strong support for public schools. Primary education (grades kindergarten through 12) in the Planning Area is provided mainly by two school districts – Lawndale Elementary School District (LESD) and Centinela Valley Union High School District (CVUHSD). The City is also served by the Lawndale Library, which is part of the Los Angeles County Library system.
CF-6 Policies
CF-6.1 Education and Learning. Continue to encourage the maintenance of high-quality schools and diverse educational opportunities in Lawndale.
CF-6.2 Lifelong Learning. Proactively cooperate with the Lawndale Elementary School District and Centinela Valley Union High School District to encourage the provision of lifelong learning opportunities for persons living and working in Lawndale.
CF-6.3 School Facilities. Work with developers and the school districts to ensure the payment of fees, construction, and expansion of school facilities to address expected increases in school-age population.
CF-6.4 Early Childhood Development. Encourage community organizations and schools to provide expanded opportunities for early childhood care (0–5 years) and development.
CF-6.5 Occupational Training. Partner with regional occupational boards and local educational institutions to implement career pathway and job training programs for youth and adults.
CF-6.6 Libraries. Work closely with the Los Angeles County Library system to provide library facilities and services necessary to meet the needs of all segments of the community.
CF-6.7 Senior Services. Provide facilities, programs, and services for seniors to participate in opportunities for physical activity, social interaction, and mental stimulation.
CF-6.8 Health Care Services. Work with neighboring jurisdictions and service providers to provide high-quality health care services to Lawndale residents.
Lawndale – General Plan Update
POLICY DOCUMENT
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN | CF-10
CF-6 Actions
CF-6a Continue to work with the school districts to ensure adequate school facilities are provided and maintained in the community. Specifically, the City should:
• During the processing of residential and non-residential development proposals, ensure the school districts are consulted regarding the potential impact of the project on educational services and facilities. When proposed developments cannot be served by existing facilities and services, the City shall work with the developer and the school district in exploring options for service provision and facility funding.
• Prior to approving a project that is likely to generate students, require the applicant to mitigate school impacts to the full extent permitted by State law through land dedications, payment of fees, participation in a special assessment district, or any combination of the above. • Cooperate with school districts to update population projections, student generation formulas, potential school sites, and facilities improvement plans.
CF-6b Continue to work with the Los Angeles County Library system to ensure that library development keeps pace with overall City development and population growth.
CF-6c Continue to support the provision of low- or no-cost community services to seniors and specialneeds communities, including but not limited to, senior health and wellness programs, meal and emergency food assistance programs, and senior transit programs, as funding is available.
CF-6d Explore feasibility of partnering with local schools, the Lawndale Chamber of Commerce, and local community colleges to coordinate educational support programs and services offered to Lawndale residents.
CF-6e Explore opportunities to use the Lawndale Community Center to provide low- or no-cost health and educational resources accessible to every resident.
CF-6f Partner with churches and other local organizations to provide additional youth and senior programs and services.
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
(SCH: 2022120088)
OCTOBER 2023
Prepared for:
City of Lawndale
Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue
Lawndale, CA 90260
Prepared by:
De Novo Planning Group
180 East Main Street, Suite 108
Tustin, CA 92780
De Novo Planning Group
A Land Use Planning, Design, and Environmental Firm
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
(SCH: 2022120088)
OCTOBER 2023
Prepared for:
City of Lawndale
Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue
Lawndale, CA 90260
[email protected]
310-973-3206
Prepared by:
De Novo Planning Group
180 East Main Street, Suite 108
Tustin, CA 92780
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 TOC-1 Table of Contents
Chapter Page Number
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Intended Uses of the EIR ...................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Environmental Review Process.................................................................................. 1-2
1.3 Organization of the Final EIR...................................................................................... 1-4
2.0 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses.................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 List of Commenters.................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Comments and Responses......................................................................................... 2-1
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 TOC-2 Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 1-1 Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR or FEIR) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15132). The City of Lawndale is the lead agency for the environmental review of the City of Lawndale General Plan Update (General Plan, General Plan Update, or Project) and has the principal responsibility for approving the Project. This Final EIR assesses the expected environmental impacts resulting from approval and adoption of the General Plan Update and responds to comments received on the Draft EIR.
The Lawndale General Plan is the overarching policy document that guides land use, housing, transportation, open space, public safety, community services, and other policy decisions throughout the City of Lawndale and the Sphere of Influence (collectively referred to as the Planning Area). The General Plan includes the eight elements mandated by State law, to the extent that they are relevant locally, including: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, environmental justice, and safety elements. The City has chosen to combine the topics of Conservation and Open Space into one Element: Resource Management. The topic of Noise is included in the Public Safety Element. General plans must also address the topics of climate change and resiliency planning, either as separate elements or as part of other required elements. At the discretion of each jurisdiction, the general plan may combine these elements and may add optional elements relevant to the physical features of the jurisdiction. The City may also address other topics of interest; this General Plan includes elements related to Economic Development and Community Facilities. The General Plan Update sets out the goals, policies, and actions in each of these areas, serves as a policy guide for how the City will make key planning decisions in the future, and guides how the City will interact with the broader Los Angeles County, surrounding cities, and other local, regional, State, and Federal agencies.
The General Plan Update contains the goals and policies that will guide future decisions within the Planning Area. It also identifies implementation programs, in the form of actions, that will ensure the goals and policies in the General Plan Update are carried out. As part of the General Plan Update, the City and the consultant team prepared several support documents that serve as the building blocks for the General Plan Update and analyze the environmental impacts associated with implementing the General Plan Update.
Refer to Section 3.0, Project Description of the Draft EIR for a more comprehensive description of the details of the proposed Project.
1.1 PURPOSE AND INTENDED USES OF THE EIR
CEQA REQUIREMENTS FOR A FINAL EIR
This Final EIR for the Lawndale General Plan Update has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State CEQA Guidelines. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132 requires that a Final EIR consist of the following:
• The Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) or a revision of the draft; • Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR, either verbatim or in summary; Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 1-2 Introduction
• A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; • The responses of the lead agency to significant environmental concerns raised in the review and consultation process; and
• Any other information added by the lead agency.
In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132(a), the Draft EIR is incorporated by reference into this Final EIR.
An EIR must disclose the expected environmental impacts, including impacts that cannot be avoided, growth-inducing effects, impacts found not to be significant, and significant cumulative impacts, as well as identify mitigation measures and alternatives to the proposed project that could reduce or avoid its adverse environmental impacts. CEQA requires government agencies to consider and, where feasible, minimize environmental impacts of proposed projects, and obligates them to balance a variety of public objectives, including economic, environmental, and social factors.
PURPOSE AND USE
The City of Lawndale, as the lead agency, has prepared this EIR to provide the public and responsible and trustee agencies with an objective analysis of the potential environmental impacts resulting from adoption of the General Plan Update and subsequent implementation of projects consistent with the General Plan Update. The environmental review process enables interested parties to evaluate the proposed Project in terms of its environmental consequences, to examine and recommend methods to eliminate or reduce potential adverse impacts, and to consider a reasonable range of alternatives to the project. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding adverse environmental effects, the lead agency must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives, including the economic and social benefits of a project, in determining whether a project should be approved.
This EIR will be used as the primary environmental document to evaluate all subsequent planning and permitting actions associated with the General Plan Update. This EIR may also be used by other agencies within Los Angeles County. Responsible and trustee agencies that may use the EIR are identified in Section
2.0, Introduction and Purpose of the Draft EIR.
1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
The review and certification process for the EIR has involved, or will involve, the following general procedural steps:
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City of Lawndale circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the Project on December 6, 2022 to trustee and responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse, and the public. A scoping meeting was held on December 15, 2022 at 6:30 p.m. at the Harold E. Hofmann Community Center located at 14700 Burin Avenue in the City of Lawndale. No public or agency comments on the NOP related to the EIR analysis were presented or submitted during the scoping meeting. During the 30-day public review period for the NOP, which ended on January 5, 2023, four written comment letters were received on the NOP. A summary of the NOP comments is provided in Section 2.8 of the Draft EIR. The NOP and all comments received on the NOP are presented in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 1-3 Introduction
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY AND DRAFT EIR
The City of Lawndale published a public Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR on August 15, 2023, inviting comment from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties. The NOA was filed with the State Clearinghouse (SCH# 2022120088) and was published in the Daily Breeze pursuant to the public noticing requirements of CEQA. The Draft EIR was available for public review from August 15, 2023 through October 2, 2023. The Public Draft General Plan Update was also available for public review and comment during this time period.
The Draft EIR contains a description of the Project, description of the environmental setting, identification of the Project’s direct and indirect impacts on the environment and General Plan policies and actions to reduce impacts to the extent feasible, as well as an analysis of Project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. The Draft EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. Comments received in response to the NOP were considered in preparing the analysis in the Draft EIR.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS/FINAL EIR
The City of Lawndale received seven comment letters regarding the Draft General Plan and Draft EIR from public agencies, organizations, and members of the public during the 45-day review period.
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, this Final EIR responds to the written comments received on the Draft EIR. This document and the Draft EIR, as amended herein, constitute the Final EIR.
CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR/PROJECT CONSIDERATION
The Lawndale City Council will review and consider the Final EIR. If the City Council finds that the Final EIR is "adequate and complete," then it may certify it in accordance with CEQA. The rule of adequacy generally holds that an EIR can be certified if:
1) The EIR shows a good faith effort at full disclosure of environmental information; and 2) The EIR provides sufficient analysis to allow decisions to be made regarding the proposed project in contemplation of environmental considerations.
Upon review and consideration of the Final EIR, the Lawndale City Council may take action to approve, revise, or reject the Project. A decision to approve the Lawndale General Plan Update, for which this EIR identifies significant environmental effects, must be accompanied by written findings in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093.
Policies and actions to mitigate potential environmental impacts have been incorporated into the Project, to the extent feasible. No additional mitigation is feasible or available, as described in Sections 5.1 through
6.0 of the Draft EIR. The annual report on general plan status required pursuant to the Government Code will serve as the monitoring and reporting program for the Project.
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 1-4 Introduction
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE FINAL EIR
This Final EIR has been prepared consistent with Section 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which identifies the content requirements for Final EIRs. This Final EIR is organized in the following manner:
SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION
Section 1.0 briefly describes the purpose of the environmental evaluation, identifies the lead agency, summarizes the process associated with preparation and certification of an EIR, and identifies the content requirements and organization of the Final EIR.
SECTION 2.0 – COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIR AND RESPONSES
Section 2.0 provides a list of commenters, copies of written comments made on the Draft EIR (coded for reference), and responses to those written comments
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 2-1 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses
2.0 COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIR AND RESPONSES
2.1 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15088, the City of Lawndale, as the lead agency, has evaluated the comments received on the Public Review Draft Lawndale General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2022120088).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 states that: New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement.
Section 2.0 of this Final EIR include information that has been added to the EIR since the close of the public review period in the form of responses to comments and/or errata. As noted below, no new significant information was provided on the Draft EIR during the comment period.
2.2 LIST OF COMMENTERS
Table 2-1 lists the comments on the Draft EIR that were submitted to the City during the 45-day public review period. The assigned comment letter, letter author, affiliation, if presented in the comment letter or if representing a public agency, and letter date are also listed.
Table 2-1
List of Commenters
Response
Letter Individual or Signatory Affiliation Date
A [email protected] N/A 8/21/2023
B Andrew Salas Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation 8/22/2023 C Constantin Raether California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services 8/23/2023 D Sahar Ghadimi South Coast Air Quality Management District 8/25/2023 E Ronald M. Durbin County of Los Angeles Fire Department 9/1/2023 F Andrew Salas Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation 9/28/2023 G Miya Edmonson State of California Department of Transportation 9/29/2023
2.3 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESPONDING TO COMMENTS ON A DRAFT EIR
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 requires that lead agencies evaluate and respond to all comments on the Draft EIR that regard an environmental issue. The written response must address the significant environmental issue raised and be detailed, especially when specific comments or suggestions (e.g., Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 2-2 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses
additional mitigation measures) are not accepted. In addition, the written response must be a good faith and reasoned analysis. However, lead agencies only need to respond to significant environmental issues associated with the project and do not need to provide all the information requested by the commenter, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(a)).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 recommends that commenters provide detailed comments that focus on the sufficiency of the Draft EIR in identifying and analyzing the possible environmental impacts of the project and ways to avoid or mitigate the significant effects of the project, and that commenters provide evidence supporting their comments. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, an effect shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 also recommends that revisions to the Draft EIR be noted as a revision in the Draft EIR or as a separate section of the Final EIR.
RESPONSES TO COMMENT LETTERS
Written comments on the Draft EIR are reproduced on the following pages, along with responses to those comments. To assist in referencing comments and responses, the following coding system is used:
a) Each comment letter is lettered (i.e., Letter A), each comment within each letter is numbered (i.e., A-1, A-2, etc.), and each response is numbered correspondingly (i.e., A-1, A-2, etc.).
From: Jared Chavez
To: Ashley Brodkin
Subject: FW: City of Lawndale General Plan Update: Notice of Availability of a Draft EIR Date: Wednesday, September 13, 2023 10:24:35 AM
Here is one
Ms. Jared Chavez, Community Development Manager
City of Lawndale, Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260
Phone: (310) 973-3231/ Fax: (310) 970-2183
[email protected] / lawndalecity.org
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2023 1:04 PM
To: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Cc: Adrian Gutierrez <[email protected]>; Jose Hernandez <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: City of Lawndale General Plan Update: Notice of Availability of a Draft EIR CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Thanks!
------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, August 29th, 2023 at 12:16, Jared Chavez <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi yes you can look at it with this link :
General Plan - City of Lawndale, CA (lawndalecity.org)
Thank you
Ms. Jared Chavez, Community Development Manager
City of Lawndale, Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260
Phone: (310) 973-3231/ Fax: (310) 970-2183
[email protected] / lawndalecity.org
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 12:53 PM
To: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City of Lawndale General Plan Update: Notice of Availability of a Draft EIR Comment Letter A
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Jared, could you please email me a copy of this document? Thanks!
------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, August 15th, 2023 at 07:20, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
The City of Lawndale (City) is preparing a comprehensive update to its existing General Plan. The City of Lawndale has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update (Project) to address the environmental impacts associated with the Project at a programmatic level. The proposed Project is a long-term plan consisting of policies that will guide future development activities and City actions. No specific development projects are proposed as part of this General Plan Update. However, the Program EIR can serve to streamline environmental review of future projects.
Members of the public and other interested agencies and individuals are invited to provide comments on the Lawndale General Plan Update and Draft EIR. Comments on the Lawndale General Plan Update and the Draft EIR can be provided in writing to the City at the address below, or by email to Jared Chavez, Community Development Manager at [email protected], during the 45-day public review period, starting on August 2, 2023 and ending on October 2, 2023. Comments in response to this notice must be submitted to the address below, or by email by the close of the Draft EIR public review period, which is 6:00 PM on Monday, October 2, 2023:
Jared Chavez - Community Development Manager
City of Lawndale
14717 Burin Ave.
Lawndale, CA 90260
Email: [email protected]
Regards,
Ashley Brodkin | Senior Planner
De Novo Planning Group | www.denovoplanning.com
[email protected] | 714-440-0273
Southern California | 180 East Main St #108 | Tustin, CA 92780 Northern California | 1020 Suncast Ln #106 | El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 A-1
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 2-5 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses
Response to Comment Letter A
[email protected]
N/A
August 21, 2023
A-1 The comment requests a copy of the Draft EIR. The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. No further response is warranted.
GABRIELENO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS - KIZH NATION
Historically known as The San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians recognized by the State of California as the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles basin August 22, 2022
Project Name: City of Lawndale General Plan
Thank you for your letter dated August 15, 2023. Regarding the project above. This is to concur that we agree with the General Plan Amendment. However, our Tribal government would like to request consultation for all future projects within this location.
Andrew Salas, Chairman
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
Andrew Salas, Chairman Nadine Salas, Vice-Chairman Dr. Christina Swindall Martinez, secretary Albert Perez, treasurer I Martha Gonzalez Lemos, treasurer II Richard Gradias, Chairman of the council of Elders PO Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 [email protected] [email protected] Comment Letter B
B-1
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 2-7 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses
Response to Comment Letter B
Andrew Salas
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
August 22, 2023
B-1 The comment indicates that the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation does not have any comments on the Project; however, the Tribal government would like to request consultation for all future projects within the Lawndale General Plan Planning Area. Section 5.18, Tribal Cultural Resources of the Draft EIR addresses tribal cultural resources. As stated in Section 5.18 of the Draft EIR, the General Plan includes Policy RM-3.5, which requires consultation with Native American tribes that may be impacted by proposed development and land use policy changes, in accordance with State, local, and Tribal intergovernmental consultation requirements. Future projects within the Planning Area would be required to consult with Tribal Organizations, consistent with State law (i.e., AB 52 and SB 18). The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. The comment is noted and no further response is warranted.
From: Jared Chavez
To: Ashley Brodkin
Cc: Sean Moore
Subject: Fw: City of Lawndale Safety Element Update
Date: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 1:45:50 PM
Hi Ashley,
Please see the comments from Cal OES below.
Thank you,
Ms. Jared Chavez, Community Development Manager
City of Lawndale, Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260
Phone: (310) 973-3231/ Fax: (310) 970-2183
[email protected] / lawndalecity.org
From: Raether, Constantin@CalOES <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 1:04 PM
To: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Cc: LaMar-Haas, Victoria@CalOES <[email protected]>; Boemecke, Wendy@CalOES <[email protected]>; CalOES Mitigation Planning <[email protected]>
Subject: City of Lawndale Safety Element Update
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good day,
The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team has taken the time to review the proposed updates/changes to your General Plan.
Government Code 65302(g)(8) states “before preparing or revising its Safety Element, each city and county shall consult…. the Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of including information known by and available to the department.”
The Cal OES Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team reviews and compares your current Safety Element hazards against those listed in your most recent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP).
Our office has reviewed your proposed Safety Element update posted on CEQA.net and found no substantive changes to your hazard profiles when compared against your most recent FEMA approved LHMP. Our office has no further comments at this time.
Should you need further assistance or have questions please email our team at [email protected].
Comment Letter C
C-2
C-1
Constantin Raether, Environmental Planner
Local Mitigation Planning | Recovery Directorate
California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Office: (916) 328-7778
Cell:(916) 715-9408
www.caloes.ca.gov/HMGP
Constantin Raether, Environmental Planner
Local Mitigation Planning | Recovery Directorate
California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Office: (916) 328-7778
Cell:(916) 715-9408
www.caloes.ca.gov/HMGP
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 2-10 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses
Response to Comment Letter C
Constantin Raether
California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
August 23, 2023
C-1 These introductory paragraphs state that the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) has reviewed the proposed updates to the Lawndale General Plan. The comment references Government Code 65302(g)(8), which states “before preparing or revising its Safety Element, each city and county shall consult…. the Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of including information known by and available to the department.” The comment further states that Cal OES reviews and compares Safety Element hazards against those listed in the City’s most recent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. No further response is warranted.
C-2 The comment indicates that Cal OES has reviewed the City of Lawndale’s proposed Safety Element update and found no substantive changes to the City’s hazard profiles when compared against the City’s most recent FEMA approved LHMP. The comment indicates that Cal OES does not have any comments on the Project. The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. The comment is noted and no further response is warranted.
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: "Jared Chavez"
Subject: RE: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Date: Monday, August 28, 2023 9:48:32 AM
Attachments: CalEEMod_export_2023-07-12T01_01_16.540Z.json Good morning,
In response to your request for an electronic copy of any live modeling and emission calculation files, please find attached the requested files for your review of the Lawndale General Plan Update EIR.
The attached .jason file is the CalEEMod model file (for the latest version of CalEEMod, 2022.1).
Please let me know if you need any additional information for your review.
Thank you,
Ashley Brodkin | Senior Planner
De Novo Planning Group | www.denovoplanning.com
[email protected] | 714-440-0273
Southern California | 180 East Main St #108 | Tustin, CA 92780 Northern California | 1020 Suncast Ln #106 | El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 From: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 1:19 PM
To: Ashley Brodkin <[email protected]>
Cc: Sean Moore <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Hi Ashley please see comment below. They are requesting further documentation.
Ms. Jared Chavez, Community Development Manager
City of Lawndale, Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260
Phone: (310) 973-3231/ Fax: (310) 970-2183
[email protected] / lawndalecity.org
From: Sahar Ghadimi <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 9:44 AM
Comment Letter D
To: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Cc: Sam Wang <[email protected]>
Subject: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Jared Chavez,
South Coast AQMD staff received the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project (South Coast AQMD Control Number: LAC230823-11). Staff is currently in the process of reviewing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
Please provide an electronic copy of any live modeling and emission calculation files (complete files, not summaries) that were used to quantify the air quality impacts from construction and/or operation of the Proposed Project as applicable, including the following:
· CalEEMod Dear Phayvanh Nanthavongdouangsy,
Input Files (.csv files);
· Live EMFAC output files;
Any emission calculation file(s) (live version of excel file(s); no PDF) used to calculate the Project’s emission sources
(i.e. truck operations).
You may send the above-mentioned files via a Dropbox link in which they may be accessed and downloaded by South Coast AQMD staff by the end of next week. Without all files and supporting documentation, South Coast AQMD staff will be unable to complete a review of the air quality analyses in a timely manner. Any delays in providing all supporting documentation will require additional time for review beyond the end of the comment period.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Sahar Ghadimi
Air Quality Specialist, CEQA IGR
Planning, Rule Development & Implementation
South Coast Air Quality Management District
21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(909) 396-2392
[email protected]
D-1
D-2
From: Sahar Ghadimi
To: [email protected]
Cc: "Jared Chavez"
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]RE: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Date: Thursday, October 5, 2023 3:34:50 PM
Dear Ashley,
Thank you so much for your email.
After thorough review, we decided we do not need to provide any comment letter for the Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Sincerely,
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 10:00 AM
To: Sahar Ghadimi <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Jared Chavez' <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]RE: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Good morning,
The public review period for the Lawndale General Plan Update Project Draft EIR closed on Monday, October 2. The City has begun preparing the Final EIR for the Project. As a commenter on the Project, we are providing you this notice. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Ashley Brodkin | Senior Planner
De Novo Planning Group | www.denovoplanning.com
[email protected] | 714-440-0273
Southern California | 180 East Main St #108 | Tustin, CA 92780 Northern California | 1020 Suncast Ln #106 | El Dorado Hills, CA 95762 From: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2023 10:31 AM
To: 'Sahar Ghadimi' <[email protected]>
Cc: Ashley Brodkin <[email protected]>; Adrian Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Good Morning,
D-3
We responded on 8/28. See attached email, let me know if you need anything else.
Thank you,
Ms. Jared Chavez, Community Development Manager
City of Lawndale, Community Development Department
14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260
Phone: (310) 973-3231/ Fax: (310) 970-2183
[email protected] / lawndalecity.org
From: Sahar Ghadimi <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 11:02 AM
To: Jared Chavez <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Jared Chavez,
I hope this email finds you well.
I wanted to follow up on my previous email on providing the technical data for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Erly,
From: Sahar Ghadimi
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 9:44 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Sam Wang <[email protected]>
Subject: Technical data request for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project.
Dear Jared Chavez,
South Coast AQMD staff received the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of Lawndale General Plan Update Project (South Coast AQMD Control Number: LAC230823-11). Staff is currently in the process of reviewing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
Please provide an electronic copy of any live modeling and emission calculation files (complete files, not summaries) that were used to quantify the air quality impacts from construction and/or operation of the Proposed Project as applicable, including the following:
CalEEMod Dear Phayvanh Nanthavongdouangsy,
Input Files (.csv files);
Live EMFAC output files;
Any emission calculation file(s) (live version of excel file(s); no PDF) used to calculate the Project’s emission sources
(i.e. truck operations).
You may send the above-mentioned files via a Dropbox link in which they may be accessed and downloaded by South Coast AQMD staff by the end of next week. Without all files and supporting documentation, South Coast AQMD staff will be unable to complete a review of the air quality analyses in a timely manner. Any delays in providing all supporting documentation will require additional time for review beyond the end of the comment period.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Sahar Ghadimi
Air Quality Specialist, CEQA IGR
Planning, Rule Development & Implementation
South Coast Air Quality Management District
21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(909) 396-2392
[email protected]
Lawndale General Plan Update
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
October 2023 2-16 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses
Response to Comment Letter D
Sahar Ghadimi
South Coast Air Quality Management District
August 25, 2023
D-1 This introductory paragraph states that the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) received and is in the process of reviewing the Draft EIR. The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. No further response is warranted.
D-2 This comment requests an electronic copy of any live modeling and emission calculation files that were used to quantify the air quality impacts from construction and/or operation of the Project.
The comment further states that South Coast AQMD staff will be unable to complete a review of the air quality analyses in a timely manner without all files and supporting documentation. The comment is noted. A response to this comment was sent on August 28, 2023 and the requested files were provided to the South Coast AQMD. The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. No further response is warranted.
D-3 This comment states that the AQMD received the requested files and after a thorough review, does not have any comments on the Project. The comment does not contain any information requiring changes to the Draft EIR. The comment is noted and no further response is warranted.
ANTHONY C. MARRONE
FIRE CHIEF
FORESTER & FIRE WARDEN
"Proud Protectors of Life,
the Environment, and Property"
September 1, 2023
Jared Chavez
14717 Burin Avenue
Lawndale, CA 90260
Dear Mr. Chavez:
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
FIRE DEPARTMENT
1320 NORTH EASTERN AVENUE
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90063-3294
(323) 881-2401
www.fire.lacounty.gov
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
JANICE HAHN, CHAIR
FOURTH DISTRICT
HILDA L. SOLIS
FIRST DISTRICT
LINDSEY P HORVATH
THIRD DISTRICT
HOLLY J. MITCHELL
SECOND DISTRICT
KATHRYN BARGER
FIFTH DISTRICT
THE DRAFT EIR GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, "CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE", PROPOSES TO GUIDE THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT, GROWTH, AND
CONSERVATION THROUGH LAND USE OBJECTIVES AND POLICY GUIDANCE, CITY OF LAWNDALE, FFER2023004404
The Draft EIR General Plan Update reviewed by the Planning Division, Land Development Unit, Forestry Division, and Health Hazardous Materials Division of the County of Los Angeles Fire Department.
The following are their comments:
PLANNING DIVISION:
We have no comments.
For any questions regarding this response, please contact Kien Chin, at (323) 881-2404 or Kien. Chin@fire. lacounty .gov.
LAND DEVELOPMENT UNIT:
All future development of within the City of Lawndale General Plan boundaries shall comply with all applicable code and ordinance requirements for construction, access, water mains, fire flows and fire hydrants.
When involved with subdivision in a city contracting fire protection with the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Fire Department requirements for access, fire flows and hydrants are addressed during the subdivision tentative map stage.
AGOURA HILLS
ARTESIA
AZUSA
BALDWIN PARK
BELL
BELL GARDENS
BELLFLO\11,ER
BRADBURY
CALABASAS
SERVING THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF:
CARSON
CERRITOS
CLAREMONT
COMMERCE
COVINA
CUDAHY
DIAMOND BAR
DUARTE
EL MONTE
GARDENA
GLENDORA
HAWAIIAN GARDENS
HAWTHORNE
HERMOSA BEACH
HIDDEN HILLS
HUNTINGTON PARK
INDUSTRY
INGLEWOOD
IRWINDALE
LA CANADA-FLINTRIDGE
LA HABRA
LA MIRADA
LA PUENTE
LAKEWOOD
LANCASTER
LAWNDALE
LOMITA
LYNWOOD
MALIBU
MAYWOOD
NORWALK
PALMDALE
PALOS VERDES ESTATES
PARAMOUNT
PICO RIVERA
POMONA
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
ROLLING HILLS
ROLLING HILLS ESTATES
ROSEMEAD
SAN DIMAS
SANTA CLARITA
SIGNAL HILL
SOUTH El MONTE
SOUTH GATE
TEMPLE CITY
VERNON
WALNUT
\/\,EST HOLLYWOOD
IM:STLAKE VILLAGE
V\oHITTIER
Comment Letter E
E-1
E-2
E-3
Jared Chavez
September 1 , 2023