Agenda packet — Lawndale City Council, December 18, 2023 (part 1 of 9)

CITY OF LAWNDALE
14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, California 90260
Phone (310) 973-3200 – www.lawndalecity.org

AGENDA OF THE

LAWNDALE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

REDEVELOPMENT SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING
Monday, December 18, 2023 - 6:30 p.m.

Lawndale City Hall Council Chamber
14717 Burin Avenue
How to observe the Meeting:

To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can now observe the meeting in person. Members of the public are still be able to view the meeting on YouTube “Lawndale CityTV”, the City Website, or Lawndale Community Cable Television on Spectrum and Frontier Channel 3.

Copies of this Agenda packet may be obtained prior to the meeting inside the Lawndale City Hall foyer or on the City Website. Interested parties may contact the City Clerk Department at (310) 973-3213 for clarification regarding individual agenda items.

This Agenda is subject to revision up to 72 hours before the meeting.

A. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
B. CEREMONIALS (Flag Salute and Inspiration)
C. PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT
a. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Update
D. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (Public Comments) E. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL
F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items 1 through 5 will be considered and acted upon under one motion unless a City Councilmember removes individual items for further City Council consideration or explanation.

1. Motion to read by title only and waive further reading of all ordinances listed on the Agenda
Recommendation: that the City Council approve.

Any person who wishes to address the City Council regarding any item listed on this agenda or any other matter that is within its subject matter jurisdiction is invited, but not required, to fill out a Public Meeting Speaker Card and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the oral communications portion of the meeting. The purpose of the card is to ensure that the speaker’s name is correctly recorded in the meeting minutes and, where appropriate, to provide contact information for staff follow-up.

Agenda
City Council Regular Meeting
December 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

2. Accounts Payable Register
Recommendation: that the City Council adopt Resolution No. CC-2312-051 authorizing the payment of certain claims and demands in the amount of $684,423.66.

3. Minutes of the Lawndale City Council Regular Meeting, December 4, 2023 Recommendation: that the City Council approve.

REDEVELOPMENT SUCCESSOR AGENCY

4. Consideration of the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) 2024-25 and the Administrative Budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25
Recommendation: that the Successor Agency 1) Approve and direct staff to submit to the Los Angeles County Oversight Board and California Department of Finance (DOF) the ROPS 24-25 and Administrative Budget FY 2024-25; and 2) Authorize staff to make any changes requested by the DOF.

5. Minutes of the Redevelopment Successor Agency Meeting – June 5, 2023 Recommendation: that the Board approve.

G. PUBLIC HEARINGS

6. Case No. 23-19, Consideration and Adoption of a Comprehensive Update to the City’s General Plan (2045) and Adoption of an Associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Recommendation: that the City Council A.) Hold a public hearing; B.) Approve Resolution No. CC-2312-049 Approving and Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report; and C.) Adopt Resolution No. CC-2312-048 Approving the General Plan 2045 comprehensive update.

7. Selection of Projects for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 (50th) Program Year of the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Recommendation: that the City Council 1.) Conduct a public hearing; 2.) Adopt the FY 2024-25 budget for the CDBG program; and 3.) Adopt Resolution No. CC-2312-047, Approving the City’s participation in the FY 2024-25 CDBG Program.

H. ADMINISTRATION

8. Update on Contract with Motorola Solutions, Inc./Vigilant Solutions to be the exclusive provider of Automatic License Plate Recognition cameras for the City of Lawndale
Recommendation: that the City Council choose one of the following options: Option l) Receive and file this staff report; or Option 2) Provide further direction to staff on this matter.

9. Federal Grant Agreement for Youth Development Center Project Recommendation: that the City Council 1.) Approve the attached FY 2023 Community Project Funding Grant Agreement NO. B-23-CPCA-0257 and authorize the City Manager to sign the funding agreement between the City of Lawndale and United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; or 2.) Provide further direction.

Agenda
City Council Regular Meeting
December 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

10. Recreation Facility Security Camera Project, Additional Funding Request Recommendation: that the City Council approve the use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding in the amount of $3,433.00 to be paid to Blue Violet Networks for: 1) two DVR cabinets and related electrical work at Hopper and Rudolph parks and; 2) mounting of one existing DVR at Hogan Park and necessary electrical work to complete the State grant-funded Recreation Facility Security Camera Replacement Project.

11. Approve Street Sweeping Services Agreement
Recommendation: that the City Council approve agreement with CleanStreet for citywide street sweeping services for the period of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2025 at an annual rate of $327,728 plus four hours of special sweeping services for the annual parade (two hours per year) at $163.65 per hour for a total not-to-exceed $656,111 for the two-year term of the agreement.

12. Professional Service Agreement Extension with De Novo Planning Group Recommendation: that the City Council approve to extend the professional service agreement with De Novo for the General Plan and Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP) Update.

13. Annual Reorganization of the City Council
Recommendation: that the City Council appoint one of its members to serve as Mayor Pro Tern for a term beginning on January 1, 2024, and ending on December 31, 2024.

I. CITY MANAGER REPORT
J. ITEMS FROM CITY COUNCILMEMBERS

14. Mayor/City Councilmembers Report of Attendance at Meetings and/or Events K. CLOSED SESSION

15. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation The City Council will conduct a closed session, pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2), because there is significant exposure to litigation in one (1) case. Facts unknown to the potential plaintiff.

L. ADJOURNMENT
The regular meeting scheduled to be held on January 1, 2024, was cancelled by order of the City Council on October 2, 2023.

The next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council will be held at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 16, 2024, in the Lawndale City Hall Council Chamber, 14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, California.

Agenda
City Council Regular Meeting
December 18, 2023

Page 4 ends

It is the intention of the City of Lawndale to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee or a participant at this meeting, you need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, we will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. Please contact the City Clerk Department (310) 973-3213 prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible. Please advise us at that time if you will need accommodation to attend or participate in meetings on a regular basis.

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the Agenda for the regular meeting of the City Council to be held on December 18, 2023, was posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting.
/s/ Yvette Hall
Yvette Hall, Assistant City Clerk
1 2

MINUTES

LAWNDALE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
December 4, 2023
A. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Pullen-Miles called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, California.

Councilmembers Present: Mayor Robert Pullen-Miles, Mayor Pro Tem Sirley Cuevas, Councilmember Rhonda Hofmann Gorman, Councilmember Pat
Kearney, Councilmember Bernadette Suarez
Other Participants: City Manager Sean M. Moore, City Attorney Gregory M. Murphy, City Clerk Erica Harbison, Assistant City Clerk Yvette Hall, Deputy City Manager/Director of Human Resources Raylette Felton, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Sergeant Justin Smith, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Captain Nicole Palomino, Municipal Services Director Michael Reyes, Finance Director Hrant Manuelian, Community Development Manager Jared Chavez, Public Works Director Lea Reis
B. CEREMONIALS
Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas led the flag salute and Pastor Matthew Harbison of Lawndale Wesleyan Church provided the inspiration.

C. PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT
a. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Update
Captain Palomino summarized the recent law enforcement activities and announced that there will be a Coffee with a Cop event on December 13, 2023. b. Los Angeles County Fire Department Update
City Manager Moore gave a summary of recent Fire Department activities provided by the Fire Department.

D. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (Public Comments) Ray Hollar, Resident, commented on the City’s fast response to graffiti removal, the City’s automatic license plate recognition program (ALPR), requested additional information on data access, metrics, how much crime is solved, and how the City will evaluate the ALPR program.

Matthew Harbison, Resident, thanked the City for the Angel Tree Lighting event and commented on recent red-light infractions he has witnessed.

Deena Sopko, Resident, commented in favor of ALPRs and in disapproval of tinted windows. 3 Minutes - City Council
December 4, 2023

Page 2 ends

E. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL
Councilmember Hofmann Gorman thanked everyone for attending the meeting tonight, asked City Manager Moore to address Resident Hollar’s comments on ALPRs, commented on the large attendance at the Angel Tree Lighting event and invited residents to attend the Coffee with a Cop event to discuss their concerns. Councilmember Hofmann Gorman commented in favor of ALPRs.

City Manager Moore responded that Municipal Services Director Reyes will follow up with Resident Hollar regarding the ALPRs.

Councilmember Kearney thanked everyone that spoke at the meeting tonight and commented that the Angel Tree Lighting event was fantastic.

Councilmember Suarez thanked everyone for attending the meeting tonight and commented that she would like to see the ALPR’s long-term data and statistics.

Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas thanked everyone that attended tonight’s meeting.

Mayor Pullen-Miles thanked everyone that attended tonight’s meeting, commented on the graffiti removal program, stated that he would like to see the ALPRs long-term data and statistics and commented on red light infractions.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR

1. Motion to read by title only and waive further reading of all ordinances listed on the Agenda
Recommendation: that the City Council approve.

2. Accounts Payable Register
Recommendation: that the City Council adopt Resolution No. CC-2312-050 authorizing the payment of certain claims and demands in the amount of $308,379.86.

3. Minutes of the Lawndale City Council Regular Meeting, November 20, 2023 Recommendation: that the City Council approve.

A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas and seconded by Councilmember Suarez to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.

G. PUBLIC HEARINGS

4. Selection of Projects for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 (50th) Program Year of the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Recommendation: that the City Council 1.) Conduct a public hearing; 2.) Adopt the FY 2024-25 budget for the CDBG program; and 3.) Adopt Resolution No. CC-2312-047 Approving the City’s participation in the FY 2024-25 CDBG Program.

Minutes - City Council
December 4, 2023

Page 3 ends

City Manager Moore informed the City Council that this item will be rescheduled to the next meeting due to a noticing requirement.

By consensus, the City Council postponed item No. G.4 9 to the next City Council meeting.

5. Case No. 23-19, Consideration and Adoption of a Comprehensive Update to the City’s General Plan (2045) and Adoption of an Associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Recommendation: that the City Council A.) Approve Resolution No. CC-2312-49 Approve and Certify the Final Environment Impact Report; and B.) Adopt Resolution No. CC-2312-048 recommending that the City Council approve the General Plan 2045 comprehensive update.

Community Development Manager Chavez introduced Principal Amanda Tropiano and Senior Planner Ashley Brodkin of De Novo Planning Group.

Principal Tropiano and Senior Planner Brodkin presented the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation.

Community Development Manager Chavez presented the staff recommendation.

City Manager Moore noted that adopting the General Plan and the final EIR together is appropriate.

Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas inquired if the 2019 potential build out number is a State of California requirement.

Senior Planner Brodkin responded that the build out numbers are based on the land use element and within the EIR, which is based on requirements.

Mayor Pullen-Miles requested an example of significant and unavoidable environmental impacts related to air quality and greenhouse gases and inquired what the goal is for environmental justice.

Senior Planner Brodkin responded that both air quality and greenhouse gases are viewed as being potentially significant and unavoidable impacts with a programmatic EIR because there is no specific project. She stated that the goal for environmental justice is to mitigate potential environmental justice impact issues by creating better access to healthy foods, better healthcare and public transportation to low income and disadvantaged communities.

Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas asked if a business is sold and the zoning is changed, does the business lose the zoning category.

Community Development Manager Chavez replied that there are no anticipated changes planned for the zoning update. She explained that if the zoning changes for a business, they would keep the same designation, but they would be non-conforming.

Minutes - City Council
December 4, 2023

Page 4 ends

Senior Planner Brodkin clarified that the General Plan updated the land use designations.

Mayor Pullen-Miles opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m.

Ross Donaldson, President and CEO of Critical Innovations LLC, introduced his company, commented on the proposed land use designation updates, requested that the General Plan Update and any future zoning updates continue to allow the currently permitted uses and thanked staff for being responsive to his inquiries.

Mayor Pullen-Miles closed the public hearing at 7:21 p.m.

Councilmember Suarez requested to continue this item to a future meeting to allow more time to review the General Plan and EIR.

City Attorney Murphy commented that a motion is necessary to continue this matter to the next City Council meeting.

A motion was made by Councilmember Suarez and seconded by Councilmember Hofmann Gorman to continue Item G.5. - Case No. 23-19, Consideration and Adoption of a Comprehensive Update to the City’s General Plan (2045) and Adoption of an Associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to the next City Council meeting of December 18, 2023. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.

H. ADMINISTRATION

6. Award One-Year On-Call Traffic Engineering Services Contract Recommendation: that the City Council award an On-Call Traffic Engineering Services agreement to W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc., Advantec Consulting Engineers, Inc., and Transtech Engineers, Inc. for a term of one-year, with an option to extend up to four one-year extensions.

Public Works Director Reis presented the staff report.

Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas asked if traffic related items brought forth will be presented to the City Council.

Public Works Director Reis responded that traffic reports are presented to the Traffic Commission and, when necessary, they will be presented to the City Council for discussion.

A motion was made by Councilmember Kearney and seconded by Councilmember Hofmann Gorman to award an On-Call Traffic Engineering Services agreement to W.G.

Zimmerman Engineering, Inc., Advantec Consulting Engineers, Inc., and Transtech Engineers, Inc. for a term of one-year, with an option to extend up to four one-year extensions. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.

Minutes - City Council
December 4, 2023

Page 5 ends

I. CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Moore thanked staff for a great Angel Tree Lighting event and commented that it was well attended.

J. ITEMS FROM CITY COUNCILMEMBERS

7. Discussion of Three (3) Letters Distributed at the November 16, 2023 South Bay Cities Council of Governments Board of Directors’ Meeting from Los Angeles County Board of Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell Regarding Metro C-Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project Funding Gap Requested by Councilmember Kearney Councilmember Kearney presented the three (3) letters distributed at the November 16, 2023, South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) Board of Directors’ Meeting and commented in opposition to the letters.

Mayor Pullen-Miles opened public comments.

Holly Osborne, Redondo Beach Resident, referenced a written comment she submitted in regard to the Metro C-Line (Green) Project.

Mayor Pullen-Miles closed public comments.

8. Mayor/City Councilmembers Report of Attendance at Meetings and/or Events Councilmember Hofmann Gorman attended the Angel Tree Lighting event and thanked staff for the event.

Councilmember Kearney attended Senator Bradford’s Drive Thru Turkey Giveaway, Angel Tree Lighting event, and The Experimentally Structured Museum of Art (ESMoA) Open-House.

Councilmember Suarez attended a Homeless Solutions Standing Committee meeting, and the Angel Tree Lighting event.

Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas attended a Homeless Solutions Standing Committee meeting, ESMoA Open-House, Angel Tree Lighting event, and asked if the snow and skating rink can be kept the day after the Angel tree Lighting event for the community to use. She thanked staff for their outreach efforts on working with the unhoused and for a great Angel Tree Lighting event.

City Manager Moore responded that having the snow and skating rink on the day after the Angel Tree Lighting event can be discussed during the next budget meeting.

Mayor Pullen-Miles attended the ESMoA Open-House, Angel Tree Lighting event, and thanked staff and volunteers for a great event.

Mayor Pro Tem Cuevas announced that Santa’s Sleigh will be visiting Lawndale on December 4-8, 2023, and December 11-14, 2023.

Minutes - City Council
December 4, 2023

Page 6 ends

K. CLOSED SESSION

9. Conference with Labor Negotiator
The City Council will conduct a closed session, pursuant to Government Code section 54957.6, with the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City's negotiators, regarding labor negotiations with Local 1895, Council 36, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, representing the City's mid-management and classified employees.

City Attorney Murphy read the aforementioned Closed Session matter by title only in conjunction with Closed Session Item No. K.10 and Closed Session Item No. K.11.

10. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation The City Council will conduct a closed session, pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1), to discuss existing litigation: Name of Case: Abdul R. Pasta V. The City of Lawndale, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23STLC07381.

11. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
The City Council will hold a closed session, pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b), to conduct an employee evaluation concerning the City Manager.

The City Council convened into closed session at 7:38 p.m.

The City Council reconvened from closed session at 8:56 p.m.

City Attorney Murphy announced that there was no reportable action for Closed Session Item No. K.9. Conference with Labor Negotiator, no reportable action for Closed Session Item No.

K.10. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation and no reportable action for Closed Session Item No. K.11. Public Employee Performance Evaluation.

L. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to conduct, the Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8:56 p.m. ________________________________________
Robert Pullen-Miles, Mayor
ATTEST:

Erica Harbison, City Clerk
Approved: 12/18/2023
4 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

LAWNDALE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

REGULAR MEETING
June 5, 2023
A. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Chair Pullen-Miles called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, California. The board met concurrently with the City Council; therefore, the minutes order and numbering reflect the concurrent meeting.

Members Present: Chair Robert Pullen-Miles, Vice Chair Sirley Cuevas, Member Bernadette Suarez, Member Pat Kearney, Member Rhonda
Hofmann Gorman
Other Participants: Executive Director Sean M. Moore, General Counsel Gregory M.

Murphy, Secretary Erica Harbison, Assistant Secretary Yvette Hall, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Sergeant Justin Smith, Los Angeles County Fire Department Battalion Chief Brian Kane, Municipal Services Director Michael Reyes, Finance Officer Hrant Manuelian, Community Development Manager
Jared Chavez, Interim Public Works Director Ahmad Ansari, Community Services Director Mike Estes
B. CEREMONIALS
Vice Chair Cuevas led the flag salute and Pastor George Magdalany of Hope Chapel Hawthorne provided the inspiration.

E. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (Public Comments) No public comment provided.

G. CONSENT CALENDAR

8. Minutes of the Successor Agency Meeting, January 6, 2020 Recommendation: that the Members approve.

9. Minutes of the Successor Agency Meeting, December 7, 2020 Recommendation: that the Members approve.

10. Minutes of the Successor Agency Meeting, June 21, 2022 Recommendation: that the Members approve.

11. Minutes of the Successor Agency Meeting, December 5, 2022 Recommendation: that the Members approve.

A motion was made by Member Kearney and seconded by Vice Chair Cuevas to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. 5 DRAFT Minutes – Successor Agency to the Lawndale Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting
June 5, 2023

Page 2 ends

H. ADMINISTRATION

SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ LAWNDALE HOUSING AUTHORITY

14. Annual Budget Fiscal Year 2023-24
Recommendation: that the Members adopt Resolution No. CC-2306-25, adopting the fiscal year 2023-24 operating and capital improvement budget; which includes the City of Lawndale, Lawndale Housing Authority, and Successor Agency to the Lawndale Redevelopment Agency.

Finance Officer Manuelian presented the staff report, which included a PowerPoint presentation.

Member Suarez requested information for a future budget discussion on how other cities fund their Community Development Department.

Finance Officer Manuelian pointed out that due to an oversight, the following community events were not included in the initial budget book: 1) National Night Out; 2) Neighborhood Watch; and 3) Public Safety Outreach events to be budgeted at $2,000 each.

Member Kearney commented on the uniforms worn by the PWD field staff. He opined that the transportation bus funding should not come from the General Fund. Member Kearney offered $1,000 of his discretionary fund to be used to fund the transportation bus.

Member Suarez commented that the transportation bus funding should come from the General Fund, because the residents will attend a meeting for a major infrastructure project that greatly impacts the City. She also made her discretionary funds available to offset the cost.

Chair Pullen-Miles stated that he concurs with Member Suarez’s comments about funding the transportation bus with the City’s General Fund and inquired about the estimated cost for the transportation bus.

Member Suarez requested that staff inquire with the City of Redondo Beach to possibly share the cost of the transportation bus for the Metro meeting.

Member Hofmann Gorman commented that she will make her discretionary funds available to offset the transportation cost and would like to ask the City of Redondo Beach if they would like to share this cost so their residents can attend the Metro meeting.

Member Kearney requested that $1,000 of his discretionary funds be allocated to the General Fund for the transportation bus.

Vice Chair Cuevas inquired about the National Night Out, Neighborhood Watch, and Public Safety Outreach events which were not included in the initial budget book.

Municipal Services Director Reyes clarified the costs for the Public Safety Outreach and Coffee with a Cop events. He explained the costs for the Neighborhood Watch event and explained that the cost is $500 per quarter.

DRAFT Minutes – Successor Agency to the Lawndale Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting
June 5, 2023

Page 3 ends

Chair Pullen-Miles asked about the cost for the Music Festival and stated that he supports keeping the Blues Festival.

Executive Director Moore commented that the recommendation is to combine both festivals to lower the cost.

Discussion ensued among the Members regarding the Blues Festival, Music Festival, attendees, musical expectations and securing sponsorships for the events.

By consensus, the Members agreed to budget $12,000 for the Blues Festival instead of the Music Festival and requested that a second music event be considered for next fiscal year.

A motion was made by Member Kearney and seconded by Member Suarez to adopt Resolution No. CC-2306-25, adopting the fiscal year 2023-24 operating and capital improvement budget, which includes the City of Lawndale, Lawndale Housing Authority, and Successor Agency to the Lawndale Redevelopment Agency, with an amendment to budget $12,000 for the Blues Festival instead of the Music Festival; and $2,000 each to the National Night Out, Neighborhood Watch, and Public Safety Outreach events. The motion passed 5-0.

E. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to conduct, the Chair adjourned the meeting at 9:34 p.m. _________________________________
Robert Pullen-Miles, Chair
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Erica Harbison, Secretary
Approved: 12/18/23
6 RESOLUTION NO. CC-2312-049

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF LAWNDALE, CALIFORNIA

ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND A

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS PERSUANT TO THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA), CERTIFYING THE GENERAL PLAN

UPDATE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (SCH #202212088).

WHEREAS, the City of Lawndale (the "City") proposes the Lawndale General Plan 2045 (the "Project), a comprehensive update to the City's existing General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Project amends and modifies the overarching policy document that guides land use, housing, transportation, open space, public safety, community services, and other policy decisions through the City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 210067 of the Public Resources Code, and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14 Section 15000 et. Se.), the City of Lawndale is the lead agency for the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, prior to the development of the project or environmental documents, the City conducted extensive public outreach hosted IO public workshops beginning in Februaiy 2021 tln·ough December 2021. Public workshops included 9 viliual workshops and I in person interactive workshop, and
WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City dete1mined that a Program Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") should be prepared in order to analyze all potential adverse environmental impacts that could potentially result from the adoption and implementation of the proposed Project; and 4.1.a Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution 23-07 (Lawndale General Plan 2045)
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines section 15082, on December 6, 2022, the City sent to the Office of Planning and Reseai-ch and each responsible and trnstee agency a Notice of Prepai·ation ("NOP") stating that an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number #202212088 would be prepared; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.9 and State CEQA Guidelines sections 15082( c) and I 5083, the City held a duly noticed Scoping Meeting on December 15, 2022, to solicit comments on the scope of the environmental review of the proposed Project, however, no comments were received during the Scoping Meeting; and
WHEREAS, a Draft Program EIR ("Draft EIR") was prepared, incorporating comments received in response to the NOP ("Exhibit A"); and
Resolution No. CC-2312-049

-1-

EXHIBIT A

CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
The California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”) requires that public agencies shall not approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report (“EIR”) has been certified that identifies one or more significant adverse environmental effects of a project unless the public agency makes one or more written Findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each Finding (State CEQA Guidelines [Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.], § 15091).

This document presents the CEQA Findings of Fact made by the City of Lawndale, in its capacity as the CEQA lead agency, regarding the Lawndale General Plan (“General Plan”), evaluated in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) and Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”) for the Project.

SECTION I

INTRODUCTION
Public Resources Code section 21002 states that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” Section 21002 further states that the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.”
Pursuant to section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, a public agency may only approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed that identifies any significant environmental effects if the agency makes one or more of the following written finding(s) for each of those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.

2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.

As indicated above, section 21002 requires an agency to “avoid or substantially lessen” significant adverse environmental impacts. Thus, mitigation measures that “substantially lessen” significant environmental impacts, even if not completely avoided, satisfy section 21002’s mandate. (Laurel Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521 [“CEQA does not mandate the choice of the environmentally best feasible project if through the imposition of feasible mitigation measures alone the appropriate public agency has reduced environmental damage from a project to an acceptable level”]; Las Virgenes Homeowners Fed., Inc. v. County of Findings

Page 2 of 264 ends

Los Angeles (1986) 177 Cal. App. 3d 300, 309 [“[t]here is no requirement that adverse impacts of a project be avoided completely or reduced to a level of insignificance . . . if such would render the project unfeasible”].)
While CEQA requires that lead agencies adopt feasible mitigation measures or alternatives to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts, an agency need not adopt infeasible mitigation measures or alternatives. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002.1(c) [if “economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects on the environment of a project, the project may nonetheless be carried out or approved at the discretion of a public agency”]; see also State CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.6(a) [an “EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible”].) CEQA defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21061.1.) The State CEQA Guidelines add “legal” considerations as another indicia of feasibility. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15364.) Project objectives also inform the determination of “feasibility.” (Jones v. U.C. Regents (2010) 183 Cal. App. 4th 818, 828-829.) “‘[F]easibility’ under CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.” (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401, 417; see also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715.) “Broader considerations of policy thus come into play when the decision making body is considering actual feasibility[.]” (Cal. Native Plant Soc’y v.

City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1000 (“Native Plant”); see also Pub. Resources Code, § 21081(a)(3) [“economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations” may justify rejecting mitigation and alternatives as infeasible] (emphasis added).) Environmental impacts that are less than significant do not require the imposition of mitigation measures. (Leonoff v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337, 1347.)
The California Supreme Court has stated, “[t]he wisdom of approving . . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced.” (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 576.) In addition, perfection in a project or a project’s environmental alternatives is not required; rather, the requirement is that sufficient information be produced “to permit a reasonable choice of alternatives so far as environmental aspects are concerned.” Outside agencies (including courts) are not to “impose unreasonable extremes or to interject [themselves] within the area of discretion as to the choice of the action to be taken.” (Residents Ad Hoc Stadium Com. v. Board of Trustees (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 274, 287.)
Findings

Page 3 of 264 ends

SECTION II

FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION
The City Council hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts of the General Plan are less than significant and therefore do not require the imposition of Mitigation Measures.

A. AESTHETICS

1. Scenic Vistas
Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact AES-1, pages 5.1-7 through 5.1- 9)
Explanation: Scenic views within the Planning Area include long-range views of the Palos Verdes Hills, Santa Monica Mountains, and San Gabriel Mountains.

Implementation of the Project would result in new development and intensification of existing urban uses along major corridors, including Hawthorne Boulevard. While the Project does not include any specific development proposals, the Project could facilitate future development projects at higher densities and intensities than currently exist. The City’s Zoning Code would regulate development within the City, including building heights, setbacks, massing, and design and architectural regulations.

Pursuant to Lawndale Municipal Code Chapter 17.30, future residential development projects would be reviewed for conformance with the City’s established design criteria. Each future development project would be subject to the City’s development standards, site plan and/or design review process to ensure conformance with the General Plan Update and the City’s established development standards. Future development within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) that is under the County’s land use control would be subject to the County’s entitlement requirements, regulations, and review processes.

The General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions are intended to ensure that new development and intensification of existing urban uses within the Planning Area would not result in substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista. Proposed Land Use Element Policy LU-3.1 requires that the compatibility of new development with surrounding uses and the ability of new development to enhance the character of the surrounding area be considered during the development review process. Policy LU-3.3 requires land use compatibility through adherence to the policies, standards, and regulations in the Municipal Code, Zoning Code, and other regulations or Findings

Page 4 of 264 ends

administrative procedures that manage the form and relationship of projects and uses. Policy LU-3.3 requires 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. Policy LU-4.2 directs the development and enforcement of 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. Policy LU-4.3 requires 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. Action LU-3a directs the City to prepare and adopt Objective Design Standards applicable to all new multi-family residential and mixed-use development. Action LU-3b ensures all projects are reviewed and processed per CEQA Guidelines. Action LU-4e implements the City’s existing development standards, or where not in place, creates new standards (either through an update to the Zoning Code or update to the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan or other regulating tool) to regulate new construction and revisions to existing buildings. In particular, new development standards would be created for higher density stand-alone residential projects and mixed-use projects to ensure that quality infill developments can be created within the areas identified for focused growth.

Although the potential for new residential development at higher densities could occur within the Planning Area, scenic vistas and resources do not readily occur within the Planning Area and long-range views are limited due to the existing topography and urbanized nature of the area. Thus, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and impacts would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Findings

Page 5 of 264 ends

Action LU-3a: Prepare and adopt Objective Design Standards applicable to all new multifamily residential and mixed-use development.

Action LU-3b: Ensure all projects are reviewed and processed per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Action 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 development standards shall be created for higher density stand-alone residential projects and mixed-use projects to promote quality infill development

2. Scenic Resources
Threshold: Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Finding: No Impact. (Draft EIR, Impact AES-2, page 5.1-9) Explanation: There are no Eligible or Designated State Scenic Highways within the Planning Area. The nearest officially designated State Scenic Highway is a portion of State Highway 2, located approximately 25 miles northeast of the Project site. Due to this distance, the Planning Area is not within the viewshed of this State Scenic Highway. The nearest eligible State Scenic Highway is a portion of State Highway 1, located approximately nine miles northwest of the Planning Area. Due to the distance and relatively flat intervening topography, the Planning Area is not within the viewshed of State Highway 1. As there are no officially designated or eligible scenic highways located within the viewshed of the Planning Area, implementation of the General Plan Update would not substantially damage scenic resources within a State scenic highway. No impact would occur in this regard.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no relevant proposed General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions.

Findings

Page 6 of 264 ends

3. Visual Character
Threshold: In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact AES-3, pages 5.1-9 through 5.1- 13)
Explanation: Public Resources Code Section 21071 defines an “Urbanized area” as an incorporated city that meets either of the following criteria: has a population of at least 100,000 persons; or has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons. According to the California Department of Finance, the City has a current (2023) population of 30,882.

The adjacent City of Torrance has a population of 143,057. Combined, the cities have a population of 173,939, which exceeds 100,000 persons; thus, the City qualifies as being within an “Urbanized Area.” Therefore, a significant impact would occur if a future development project associated with implementation of the Project conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

All construction activities related to the General Plan Update would be temporary in nature and all construction equipment would ultimately be removed from individual project sites following completion of construction activities. Therefore, changes to local visual character and quality associated with construction of future development would be temporary, and impacts would be less than significant.

The General Plan Update would support additional development beyond existing conditions. In general, the General Plan Update Land Use Element proposes an increase in building density and intensity areas along major corridors, including Hawthorne Boulevard, in accordance with State and regional housing and climate change goals. The General Plan Update incorporates consistent and compatible development intensities that would maintain and enhance the overall visual character/quality of the Planning Area. Specifically, the Land Use Element includes policies and actions, maps, and diagrams to control and direct the general distribution, location, and extent of land uses within the Planning Area. For example, Policy LU1.1 requires the provision of 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 Findings

Page 7 of 264 ends

compatibility between uses consistent with the land use designations identified in the Land Use Element and Land Use Map. Policy LU-4.2 directs the City to 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. Action LU-1a directs the City to create consistency between the City’s Zoning Code and Zoning Map as appropriate to ensure consistency with the Land Use Element and designations shown on the Land Use Map. Action LU-1b ensures the City updates the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan as appropriate to ensure consistency with the Land Use Element, designations shown on the Land Use Map, and the City’s adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element. Action LU1c directs the City to review the Zoning Code and update as appropriate to reflect Land Use goals, policies, and implementation actions included in the General Plan Update. Action LU-4e directs the implementation the City’s existing development standards, or where not in place, creates new standards to regulate new construction and revisions to existing buildings.

Guiding future growth and development based on the General Plan Update would ensure future development complements and protects the quality of the existing environment.

All future development would also be subject to conformance with applicable requirements in the Lawndale Municipal Code. The City’s Zoning Code (Title 17) would regulate maximum building height, building setbacks, parking and garage/carport placement, landscaping and screening requirements, and other development characteristics in place in each zoning district to protect the City’s long-term visual character. Pursuant to Chapter

17.30, future residential development projects would be subject to projectspecific design review to ensure compatibility with the site surrounding area, and consistency with design standards and guidelines. Future development within the SOI that is under the County’s land use control would be subject to the County’s entitlement requirements, regulations, and review processes. Additionally, applicable future land use and development review applications would undergo environmental review on a project-byproject basis prior to consideration by the decision-making authority. If necessary, mitigation would be recommended to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

The implementation of policies and actions contained in the General Plan Update and compliance with the Lawndale Municipal Code would ensure that new development in the Planning Area would be designed to enhance the visual quality of the area and be visually compatible with existing development and open space resources. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Update would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views or conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts would be less than Findings

Page 8 of 264 ends

significant in this regard.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy 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).

Action LU-1a: Create consistency between the City’s Zoning Code and Zoning Map and General Plan.

Action 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.

Action LU-1c: Review the Zoning Code and update as appropriate to reflect Land Use goals, policies, and implementation actions included in this Plan.

Action LU-1d: As part of development review process, ensure that residential and nonresidential developments fall within the minimum and maximum density requirements and/or allowed floor-area-ratios 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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) Findings

Page 9 of 264 ends

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.

Action 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.

4. Light and Glare
Threshold: Would the project 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, Impact AES-4, pages 5.1-13 through 5.1- 14)
Explanation: Future development accommodated through implementation of the General Plan Update could introduce new sources of light or glare with the potential to adversely affect day or nighttime views. Light and glare impacts could result from new light sources such as street lighting, interior and exterior building lighting (including for safety purposes), vehicle headlights, illuminated signage, and new glare sources such as reflective building materials, roofing materials, and windows. All lighting installed in future development projects as a result of the implementation of the General Plan Update would be subject to conformance with applicable Zoning Code requirements and guided by the General Plan Update Land Use Element, which includes policies and actions to reduce potential light and glare impacts. Land Use Element Policy LU-3.7 requires 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. Action LU-3c directs the City to evaluate development proposals for land use and transportation network compatibility with existing surrounding or abutting development and neighborhoods. Action LU-3d requires that the City 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. Action LU-3e requires as part of the development review process, the analysis of land use compatibility 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. In addition, pursuant to Section 17.72.071, Improvement of Parking Areas, projects abutting a residential zone or residential project must direct lighting to illuminate parking areas away from adjoining residential premises and adequately shield headlight glare. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in adverse light and glare impacts. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Findings

Page 10 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

1. Farmland Conversion
Threshold: Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Finding: No Impact. (Draft EIR, Impact AG-1, page 5.2-6) Explanation: The Planning Area is located within an urbanized area and is generally developed with a mix of residential and non-residential uses. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (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. Therefore, the Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. No impact would occur in this regard.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no relevant proposed General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions.

Findings

Page 11 of 264 ends

2. Williamson Act Lands
Threshold: Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Finding: No Impact. (Draft EIR, Impact AG-2, pages 5.2-6 through 5.2-7) Explanation: Although the General Plan Update does not include any zone changes at this time, a future zoning update is anticipated to bring zoning into compliance with the General Plan Update. However, since 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.

The Planning Area 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.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contact. No impact would occur in this regard.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no relevant proposed General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions.

3. Other Changes
Threshold: Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Finding: No Impact. (Draft EIR, Impact AG-3, page 5.2-7) Explanation: 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 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 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. Thus, the General Plan Update would not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur in Findings

Page 12 of 264 ends

this regard.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no relevant proposed General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions.

4. Forestland Zoning and Loss of Forest Land
Threshold: Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g), or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Finding: No Impact. (Draft EIR, page 5.2-6)
Explanation: There are no forest lands or timber lands located within the Planning Area.

There are also no parcels that are currently zoned as forest land, timber, or timber production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would have no impact on forest land, timber, or timber production.

C. AIR QUALITY

1. Air Quality Plans
Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact AQ-1, pages 5.3-26 through 5.3- 35)
Explanation: The Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to lead the Air Basin into compliance with several criteria air pollutant standards and other Federal requirements, while taking into account construction and operational emissions associated with population and economic growth projections provided by the Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG’s) 2020 RTP/SCS. CEQA requires that general plans be evaluated for consistency with the AQMP. Indicators of consistency include control strategies and growth projections.

Construction Emissions
Future development of individual projects under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with CARB’s requirements to minimize shortterm emissions from on-road and off-road diesel equipment, including the ATCM to limit heavy-duty diesel motor vehicle idling to no more than five minutes at any given time, and with SCAQMD’s regulations such as Rule Findings

Page 13 of 264 ends

403 for controlling fugitive dust and Rule 1113 for controlling VOC emissions from architectural coatings. Furthermore, as applicable to the type of growth, individual projects under the proposed General Plan Update would comply with fleet rules to reduce on-road truck emissions (i.e., 13 CCR, Section 2025 (CARB Truck and Bus regulation)). Compliance with these measures and requirements would be consistent with and meet or exceed the AQMP requirements for control strategies intended to reduce emissions from construction equipment and activities. Therefore, the construction anticipated by the proposed would be consistent with the AQMP under the control strategies indicator.

Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in an increase in short-term employment compared to existing conditions. However, these jobs would be temporary in nature. Therefore, the construction jobs generated by future development accommodated by the General Plan Update would not conflict with the long-term employment or population projections upon which the AQMPs are based.

Operational Emissions
Future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with CARB motor vehicle standards, SCAQMD regulations for stationary sources and architectural coatings, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and, to the extent applicable, the 2020 RTP/SCS.

Additionally, the location, design, and land uses of the growth anticipated by the General Plan Update would implement land use and transportation strategies related to reducing vehicle trips for residents and employees of the City by increasing commercial and residential density near public transit. 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. The availability of public transportation and the focus on increasing density relative to the existing public transportation, enables implementation of the General Plan Update to potentially reduce vehicle trips, VMT, and associated transportationrelated emissions per capita, compared to the existing conditions. Therefore, the proposed Project would be consistent with the AQMP under the control strategies indicator.

Future development in the City of Lawndale that is consistent with the General Plan Update could increase vehicle trips and VMT that would result in emissions of ozone precursors and particulate matter. Individual projects under the General Plan Update would be required to undergo subsequent environmental review pursuant to CEQA, and would be required to demonstrate compliance with the AQMP. Individual projects would also be required to demonstrate compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations governing air quality
Findings

Page 14 of 264 ends

The City of San 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 policies and actions to further minimize potential impacts to air quality in support of the AQMP. The proposed Resource Management Element includes Goal RM-4 of the General Plan Update Resources Management Element addresses potential air quality impacts by improving air quality in Lawndale and the region through reductions in air pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Also, Policy LU-1.1 of the General Plan Update Land Use Element promotes a land use pattern that would reduce pollution and air quality impacts. 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.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

Policy 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.

Policy LU-1.4: Commercial Corridors. Encourage development of well-maintained, functional, and appropriate commercial, retail, and employment opportunities in standalone and mixed-use formats, particularly along Hawthorne Boulevard, major arterials, and at major intersections where there is maximum visibility and access.

Policy 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.

Action LU-3b: Ensure all projects are reviewed and processed per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

Findings

Page 15 of 264 ends

MOBILITY ELEMENT
Policy M-3.1: 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).

Policy M-3.2: Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities, wherever feasible.

Action 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 contextsensitive manner. For example, it may be more appropriate to provide a Class I bike path instead of bike lanes along a major arterial.

Policy 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.

Action M-5a Continue on-going coordination with transit authorities toward the expansion of transit facilities.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy M-6.4: Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways.

Policy M-6.5: Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and non-residential 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.

Policy 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.

Findings

Page 16 of 264 ends

Action M-6a: As part of development review and specific plans, review any existing gaps in active transportation infrastructure that inhibit mobility.

Action M-6b: Implement of the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan when roadways are being rehabilitated or resurfaces, as funding allows.

Action 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.

Policy 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.

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.

Findings

Page 17 of 264 ends

Policy RM-4.8: Mitigation. Require the implementation of relevant mitigation measures for all future development upon identification of potential air quality impacts.

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: Mitigation. 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.

Findings

Page 18 of 264 ends

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 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 EPA 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.

Findings

Page 19 of 264 ends

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 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.

Findings

Page 20 of 264 ends

Policy RM-5.8: Public Education. Promote public education programs that advocate for reducing energy consumption, and promote renewable sources of energy.

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.

2. Other Adverse Emissions
Threshold: Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Findings

Page 21 of 264 ends

Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact AQ-4, pages 5.3-42 through 5.3- 43)
Explanation: According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, construction equipment is not a typical source of odors. Odors from the combustion of diesel fuel would be minimized by complying with the CARB ATCM that limits diesel-fueled commercial vehicle idling to five minutes at any given location, which was adopted in 2004. Future development accommodated by the General Plan Update would also comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), which prohibits the emissions of nuisance air contaminants or odorous compounds. Through adherence with mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules and State measures, construction activities and materials would not create objectionable odors. Construction of future development would not be expected to generate nuisance odors at nearby air quality sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts with respect to odors would be less than significant.

According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. Potential operational airborne odors could be created by commercial and industrial uses developed under the General Plan Update. However, compliance with the City’s Municipal Code, including Section 6.24.040 which prohibits animal premises from being a source of offensive odors, and SCAQMD’s Rule 402 (Nuisance), which prohibits the emissions of nuisance air contaminants or odorous compounds would reduce potential impacts. The other potential source of odors would be new waste receptacles within the Planning Area. The receptacles would be stored in areas and in containers, as required by City Municipal Code Chapter 8.32, Garbage Collection and Disposal, and be emptied on a regular basis, before potentially substantial odors have developed. Additionally, the policies included as part of the General Plan Update would reduce mobile and stationary source emissions and odors associated with diesel fuel by focusing on land use patterns that improve air quality, reduce air pollution from stationary sources, and encourage/enable increased transit behavior. Consequently, implementation of the General Plan Update would not create operational-related objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people within the City. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species
Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or Findings

Page 22 of 264 ends

regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact BIO-1, pages 5.4-12 through 5.4- 14)
Explanation: The Planning Area is located within an urbanized area and currently developed with residential and non-residential land uses. Pursuant to the special-status species search, four special-status plant species and nine special-status animal species have been identified within one mile of the Planning Area and are considered candidate, sensitive, or special status under FESA, CESA and/or CNPS/CRPR designation. There are no sensitive natural communities within the nine-quad search area.

Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in new development and intensification of existing urban uses primarily along major corridors including Hawthorne Boulevard and Redondo Beach Boulevard. The Project would redesignate seven acres of land which are existing public-school sites designated as Open Space in the 1992 General Plan to the Public Facilities land use designation. The General Plan Update would not modify the Open Space Land Use designation and would continue to provide for public parks, parks that are part of school sites, public and private outdoor recreational facilities, and landscaped open space areas. While the Project does not include any specific development proposals and would not result in significant direct impacts to existing biological resources, subsequent development projects under the proposed General Plan Update could result in direct impacts to certain species found present on an individual project site. For instance, 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 Compliance with applicable regulations at the time of future development would minimize adverse impacts to sensitive species. Additionally, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions to preserve and protect biological resources within the Planning Area. The proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-1.1 requires that the City provide for public recreational lands, trails, and open space. Policy RM-1.3 requires new residential development to incorporate on-site open areas or greenspace for resident use. Policy RM-1.7 directs the City to provide for the use of street trees along sidewalks and property frontages, consistent with the City’s Master Street Tree program. Policy RM-1.8 encourages the Findings

Page 23 of 264 ends

development of innovative non-traditional public and semi-public open space such as community gardens, parkways, and green space. Action RM1b directs the City to pursue funding for parkland acquisition, development, and maintenance. Action RM-1c directs the City to prepare and adopt a Master Parks Plan to set policies and standards for City parks and open space. Policy RM-6.3 encourages the City to work with the Los Angeles County Public Works Department and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to preserve and/or restore riparian communities along and within established flood control channels. Action RM-6a requires the implementation of BMPs and compliance with the City’s MS4 permit to control stormwater runoff and prevent water quality impairment. The proposed Public Safety Element Policy PS-7.3 directs the City to coordinate with Federal, State, and local agencies to establish ecological recovery programs. Adherence to these policies and actions during the discretionary review of future development projects would serve to minimize impacts to sensitive species. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations, and implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions, would reduce potential impacts to sensitive species to a less than significant level.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Goal RM-1: Parks, Recreation and Open Space. A community with attractive, safe and accessible parks, recreation, and open space areas.

Policy RM-1.1: Recreation Types. Provide residents a variety of useable and accessible public recreational lands, facilities, trails, open space, and amenities.

Policy 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.

Policy RM-1.7: Street Trees. Provide for the consistent use of street trees along all sidewalks and property frontages, consistent with the City’s Master Street Tree program.

Policy 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.

Action 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.

Findings

Page 24 of 264 ends

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Policy 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.

Action 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).

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Policy PS-7.3: Ecological Recovery. Coordinate with Federal, State, and local agencies to establish ecological recovery programs.

2. Riparian Habitat & Wetlands
Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
Findings

Page 25 of 264 ends

Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact BIO-2, pages 5.4-14 through 5.4- 16)
Explanation: The Planning Area is largely built-out and consists of a mixture of impervious surfaces and native and non-native species, typical of urban habitats. There are no sensitive natural communities within the nine-quad search area according to the California Natural Diversity Database. While not always documented as a sensitive natural community, streams, rivers, wet meadows, and vernal pools are of high concern because they provide unique aquatic habitat for many endemic species, including special status plants, birds, invertebrates, and amphibians. These aquatic habitats oftentimes qualify as protected wetlands or jurisdictional waters and are protected from disturbance through the Clean Water Act. There are no large water bodies or creeks within the Planning Area and no known vernal pools have been identified. A portion of the Dominguez Channel, a 15.7-milelong channelized watercourse, flows through the eastern portion of the Planning Area. No other aquatic resources exist within the Planning Area.

The General Plan Update is a planning document that enables additional development consistent with the proposed Land Use Map, but does not include any site-specific development proposals; therefore, adoption of the General Plan Update would not directly impact the environment. However, the Project could have an indirect change on the physical environment through subsequently approved projects that are consistent with the buildout under the General Plan Update. Individual projects within the Planning Area would require a detailed and site-specific review of the site to determine the presence or absence of water features. If water features are present and disturbance is required, Federal and State laws require measures to reduce, avoid, or compensate for impacts to these resources. The requirements of these Federal and State laws are implemented through the permit process. Additionally, the General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes policies and actions intended to protect sensitive natural communities and aquatic resources from adverse effects associated with future development and improvement projects within the Planning Area. The proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM6.3 directs the City to work with the Los Angeles County Public Works Department and the 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. Action RM-6a requires the implementation of BMPs and compliance with the City’s MS4 permit to control stormwater runoff and prevent water quality impairment.

Findings

Page 26 of 264 ends

Adherence to these policies and actions during the discretionary review of future development projects would serve to minimize impacts to sensitive species.

Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations, and implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions, would reduce potential impacts to aquatic resources to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive natural communities, including riparian habitat, or on State or Federally protected wetlands and impacts would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy 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.

3. Wildlife Movement
Threshold: Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact BIO-3, pages 5.4-16 through 5.4- 18)
Explanation: The City and surrounding area are highly urbanized and generally developed with urban uses. The Planning Area consists of developed and/or disturbed land that has been developed, paved, or landscaped, and existing Findings

Page 27 of 264 ends

vegetation consists of primarily ornamental and/or nonnative plant species.

Thus, the Planning Area does not provide for habitat linkages. The portion of the Dominguez Channel that flows through the eastern portion of the Planning Area is concrete-lined and considered to have low habitat value.

Although the channel could be used for wildlife movement, the Project does not propose site-specific development activities, nor does it involve any changes or modifications to the channel. Thus, the Project would not 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
The proposed General Plan Resource Management Element includes policies and actions intended to preserve ecological and biological resources. The proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-1.1 directs the City to provide for public recreational lands, trails, and open space. Policy RM-1.3 requires new residential development to incorporate on-site open areas or greenspace for resident use. Policy RM-1.7 directs the City to provide for the use of street trees along sidewalks and property frontages, consistent with the City’s Master Street Tree program. Policy RM-1.8 encourages the development of innovative non-traditional public and semi-public open space such as community gardens, parkways, and green space. Action RM-1b encourages the City to pursue funding for parkland acquisition, development, and maintenance. Action RM-1c directs the City to prepare and adopt a Master Parks Plan to set policies and standards for City parks and open space. Policy RM-6.3 directs the City to work with Los Angeles County Public Works Department and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to preserve and/or restore riparian communities along and within established flood control channels. Action RM-6a requires the implementation of BMPs and compliance with the City’s MS4 permit to control stormwater runoff and prevent water quality impairment. The proposed Public Safety Element Policy PS-7.3 directs the City to coordinate with Federal, State, and local agencies to establish ecological recovery programs. Adherence to these policies and actions would serve to protect potential biological resources and provide for trees and other vegetation consistent with wildlife habitat recovery. Thus, through compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations, and General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions, future development under the General Plan Update would have a less than significant impact associated with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

Findings

Page 28 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Goal RM-1: Parks, Recreation and Open Space. A community with attractive, safe and accessible parks, recreation, and open space areas.

Policy RM-1.1: Recreation Types. Provide residents a variety of useable and accessible public recreational lands, facilities, trails, open space, and amenities.

Policy 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.

Policy RM-1.7: Street Trees. Provide for the consistent use of street trees along all sidewalks and property frontages, consistent with the City’s Master Street Tree program.

Findings

Page 29 of 264 ends

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Policy PS-7.3: Ecological Recovery. Coordinate with Federal, State, and local agencies to establish ecological recovery programs.

4. Local Policies and Ordinances
Threshold: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact BIO-4, page 5.4-18 through 5.4- 19)
Explanation: Future development under the General Plan Update would be subject to all applicable Federal, State, regional, and local policies and regulations related to the protection of biological resources as outlined above. The City does not have a tree preservation policy or ordinance; however, Lawndale Municipal Code Chapter 12.28, Street Trees, addresses the City’s tree planting and master street tree plan and requires authorization for the planting, spraying, pruning, or removal of street trees or trees on public property. In addition, the General Plan Resource Management Element includes policies and actions intended to provide for additional trees within the City. For instance, Policy RM-1.7 requires the City to provide for the use of street trees along all sidewalks and property frontages, consistent with the City’s Master Street Tree program. Future development projects would be assessed for consistency with the Lawndale Municipal Code and General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions. Thus, the General Plan Update would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources and impacts would be less than significant tin this regard.

Findings

Page 30 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-1.7: Street Trees. Provide for the consistent use of street trees along all sidewalks and property frontages, consistent with the City’s Master Street Tree program.

5. Habitat Conservation Plans
Threshold: Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Finding: No impact. (Draft EIR, Impact BIO-5, pages 5.4-19) Explanation: The Planning Area is urbanized and 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 would not conflict with any of these plans and no impact would occur.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no General Plan Update goals, policies, or actions specific to habitat conservation plans.

E. CULTURAL RESOURCES

1. Historical Resources
Threshold: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.5? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact CUL-1, pages 5.5-11 through 5.5- 13)
Explanation: Known historic resource sites are located throughout the Planning Area and undiscovered or potentially eligible sites may be located in various areas of the Planning Area. According to officially recorded resources and other databases that were researched for the Project, 25 historic built environment resources are located within the City. While the General Plan Update does not directly propose any changes to any historic resources, future development allowed under the General Plan Update could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of known historical resources or unknown historical resources which have not yet been identified. The General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes goals, policies, and actions addressing heritage resources, including historical resources. Proposed Policy RM-3.1 requires the City to protect areas containing significant historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, as defined by the California Public Resources Code. Policy RM- Findings

Page 31 of 264 ends

3.2 encourages the City to 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. Policy RM-3.4 directs the City to include the public in efforts to preserve cultural assets, including techniques, incentives, and legal requirements for preservation. Policy RM-3.6 directs the City to 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. Policy RM-3.7 encourages the City to seek funding and support from public and private sources that aim to protect cultural and historic resources within the City. Action RM-3a requires the assessment of development proposals for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources pursuant to CEQA. Action RM-3b directs the City to 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. Action RM-3c directs the City to consider conducting a historic properties inventory that takes into consideration buildings, neighborhoods, and other features of historic, architectural, or cultural significance. Action RM-3d requires, for structures that potentially have historic significance, 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.

As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable State and local regulations relative to historic and potentially historic resources.

Subsequent development and infrastructure projects would also be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA, pursuant to the City’s entitlement review process. For structures that potentially have historical significance, the City would require preparation of a study by a qualified professional archaeologist or historian to determine the significance of the structure and potential impacts of the proposed development in compliance with CEQA. Therefore, compliance with the General Plan Update policies and actions and existing regulations, would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource and impacts would be less than significant.

Findings

Page 32 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-3.1: Preservation. Protect areas containing significant historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, as defined by the California Public Resources Code.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy RM-3.4: Public Education. Educate and actively involve the public in preserving cultural assets, including techniques, incentives, and legal requirements for preservation.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Action 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).

Action 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.

Action RM-3c: Consider conducting a historic properties inventory that takes into consideration buildings, neighborhoods, and other features of historic, architectural, or cultural significance.

Action 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.

Findings

Page 33 of 264 ends

Action 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.

2. Archeological Resources
Threshold: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact CUL-2, pages 5.5-13 through 5.5- 14)
Explanation: Although the records search conducted as part of the Project identifies no previously-recorded archaeological resources within the City, the Cultural Study concludes the lack of identifies resources is likely to be a consequence of development occurring prior to the implementation of CEQA, rather than a lack of archaeological sites. Effects on archaeological resources deemed to be significant could be considered adverse if they involve physical demolition, destruction, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a resource would be materially impaired. While the General Plan Update does not directly propose site-specific development with the potential to directly impact archaeological resources, future development allowed under the General Plan Update could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of previously undiscovered archaeological resources.

The General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes goals, policies, and actions addressing heritage resources, including archaeological resources. Proposed Policy RM-3.1 requires the City protect areas containing significant historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, as defined by the California Public Resources Code. Policy RM3.2 encourages the City to 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. Policy RM-3.4 directs the City to include the public in efforts to preserve cultural assets, including techniques, incentives, and legal requirements for preservation. Policy RM-3.7 encourages the City to seek funding and support from public and private sources that aim to protect cultural and historic resources within the City.

Action RM-3a requires that development proposals be assessed for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources pursuant to CEQA. Action RM-3e requires, for all development proposals within areas with the potential to contain Findings

Page 34 of 264 ends

prehistoric/historic resources, a study to be conducted by a professional archaeologist 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.

Archaeological resources are protected under Federal, State, and local regulations and implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce potential adverse impacts to archaeological resources associated with future development. Subsequent discretionary development and infrastructure projects would be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA, pursuant to the City’s entitlement review process. Compliance with the General Plan Update policies and actions and existing regulations would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource and impacts would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

Policy RM-3.4: Public Education. Educate and actively involve the public in preserving cultural assets, including techniques, incentives, and legal requirements for preservation.

Page 35 of 264 ends

modified to avoid the impacts, or require mitigation measures to mitigate the impacts.

Mitigation may involve archaeological investigation and resources recovery.

3. Human Remains
Threshold: Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact CUL-3, pages 5.5-16 through 5.5- 17)
Explanation: Future construction projects within the Planning Area could have the potential to disturb or destroy buried Native American human remains as well as other human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable State and local regulations. Subsequent discretionary development and infrastructure projects would also be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA. The General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes policies and actions addressing the potential discovery of human remains. Proposed Policy RM3.1 requires the City protect areas containing significant historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, as defined by the California Public Resources Code. Policy RM-3.5 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. Action RM-3g requires, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, that the City 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, no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains is permitted 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. Compliance with the General Plan Update policies and actions and existing regulations, including Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e), and PRC Section 5097.98, would ensure that potential impacts associated with the inadvertent discovery of human remains would be reduced to less than Findings

Page 36 of 264 ends

significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

Policy 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.

Action 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.

F. ENERGY

1. Energy
Threshold: Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation, or conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact EN-1 pages 5.6-9 through 5.6-18) Explanation: Buildout of the General Plan Update would use energy resources for the operation of buildings (electricity and natural gas), for on-road vehicle trips (e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel), and from off-road construction activities (e.g. diesel fuel) associated with 2045 buildout of the General Plan Update.

Each of these activities would require the use of energy resources.

Developers of individual projects within the Planning Area would be responsible for conserving energy, to the extent feasible, and would rely heavily on reducing per capita energy consumption to achieve this goal, Findings

Page 37 of 264 ends

including through Statewide and local measures. Buildout of the General Plan Update would be in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations regulating energy usage. The General Plan Update would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing energy use or increasing the use of renewable energy.

This is a less than significant impact in this regard.

The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to support energy conservation and renewable energy, as well as reducing energy use.

Specifically, Goal RM-5 promotes a community that safely manages its energy resources. Policy RM-5.1 requires the City to 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 ensures that new construction and major redevelopment complies with the most current version of the California Green Building Standards Code. Policy RM-5.3 requires the City to promote the development and use of renewable energy resources to reduce dependency on fossil fuels. Policy RM-5.4 requires the City to promote the use of energy-efficient materials, equipment, and design in public and private facilities and infrastructure. Policy RM-5.5 requires the City to promote energy conservation and recycling by the public and private sectors. Policy RM-5.6 requires the City to 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 requires the City to 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 requires the City to promote public education programs that advocate for reducing energy consumption, and promote renewable sources of energy.

Policy RM-5.9 requires the City to promote energy conservation by residents and businesses in existing structures, in close coordination with other agencies and local energy providers. Action RM-5a requires the City to implement energy conservation measures in public buildings through the following actions. Action RM-5b requires that 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-5 requires the City to 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 requires the City to 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 requires the City to identify and reduce Findings

Page 38 of 264 ends

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 requires the City to consider participation in a Community Choice Aggregation program, such as Clean Power Alliance, to help meet the City’s energy objectives. Action RM-5g requires the City to 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. Further, Action RM-5h requires the City to partner with SBCCOG and relevant utilities on outreach events and to obtain educational content and promote on the City’s website.

As a result, the General Plan Update would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to Project energy requirements, energy use inefficiencies, and/or the energy intensiveness of materials by amount and fuel type for during General Plan Update buildout, including during construction, operations, maintenance, and/or removal. The City of Lawndale would comply with all existing energy standards and would not result in significant adverse impacts on energy resources. For the reasons stated 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. This is a less than significant impact.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

Findings

Page 39 of 264 ends

Policy RM-4.8: Mitigation. Require the implementation of relevant mitigation measures for all future development upon identification of potential air quality impacts.

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.

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.

Findings

Page 40 of 264 ends

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-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.

Page 41 of 264 ends

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.

Goal RM-5: Energy Resources. A community that safely manages its energy resources.

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.

Findings

Page 42 of 264 ends

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-5.8: Public Education. Promote public education programs that advocate for reducing energy consumption, and promote renewable sources of energy.

Action RM-5f: Consider participation in a Community Choice Aggregation program, such as Clean Power Alliance, to help meet the City’s energy objectives.

Findings

Page 43 of 264 ends

Action RM-5h: Partner with SBCCOG and relevant utilities on outreach events and to obtain educational content and promote on the City’s website.

G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

1. Seismic Hazards
Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or landslides?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact GS-1 pages 5.7-14 through 5.7- 16)
Explanation: The Planning Area is situated within a seismically active region as the result of being located near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. There are no designated Alquist-Priolo fault zones within the Planning Area. While there are no major active faults within the Planning Area, major active and potentially active faults exist in the vicinity of the Planning Area, including the Newport-Inglewood Fault, San Andreas Fault, and Palos Verdes Fault. There are no areas within the Planning Area designated by the California Geological Survey as having the potential for liquefaction. Further, the City’s LHMP does not identify the Planning Area as being located within an area that is susceptible to liquefaction.

Additionally, there are no earthquake-induced landslide seismic hazard zones mapped within the Planning Area.

Future development projects would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), which requires development projects to perform geotechnical investigations in accordance with State law, engineer improvements to address potential seismic and ground failure issues, and use earthquake-resistant construction techniques to address potential earthquake loads when constructing buildings and improvements. As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the CBSC, General Plan, Lawndale Municipal Code, and other regulations. In addition to the requirements associated with the CBSC and the Municipal Code, the General Plan Update Public Safety Element includes goals, policies and actions to address potential impacts associated with seismic activity. Policy PS-2.1 requires that geotechnical hazard data is incorporated into in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards. Policy PS-2.2 requires the enforcement of State Findings

Page 44 of 264 ends

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. Policy PS-2.3 ensures that mitigation measures are monitored and enforced to reduce risks for projects where seismic and geologic hazards can be mitigated and prohibits development in areas where seismic and geologic hazards cannot be mitigated. Policy PS-2.4 encourages the City to educate the community to mitigate potential injury and damage associated with earthquakes. Action PS-2a directs the City to review and update the City’s geologic and seismic hazards maps at least annually. Action PS-2b ensures development proposals are reviewed 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. Action PS-2c ensures adoption and implementation of the latest version of the building codes adopted by the State. Action PS-2d requires surveys of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering Geologists and Civil Engineers during review of discretionary development and redevelopment proposals, where appropriate. When potential geologic impacts are identified, project applicants are required to mitigate the impacts per the recommendations contained within the geologic survey. Action PS-2e requires feasible mitigation measures for development projects to reduce the risk to the community from hazards related to geologic conditions and seismic activity.

Future development projects associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would be reviewed to identify and assess seismic safety issues and would be required to design and construct improvements in compliance with the applicable building codes and standards in place at the time to reduce the potential adverse effects associate with strong seismic ground shaking. With the implementation of the policies and actions in the General Plan, as well as applicable State and City codes, potential impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

Findings

Page 45 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-2: Geologic and Seismic Hazards. A community protected from loss of life or injury and damage to property due to geologic and seismic hazards.

Policy PS-2.1:Geologic Hazard Identification. Continue to incorporate geotechnical hazard data in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards.

Policy PS-2.2: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.

Policy PS-2.3: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.

Policy PS-2.4: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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Findings

Page 46 of 264 ends

2. Soil Erosion
Threshold: Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact GS-2, pages 5.7-16 through 5.67- 18)
Explanation: Implementation of the General Plan Update would provide for development and improvement projects that 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.

Construction-related erosion could result in the loss of a substantial amount of nonrenewable topsoil and could adversely affect water quality in nearby surface waters. As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the CBSC, General Plan, Lawndale Municipal Code, and other relevant regulations. In compliance with NPDES Permit regulations, the State of California 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 stormwater pollution prevention and monitoring plan (SWPPP), which must include erosioncontrol 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. Further, the General Plan Update includes a range of policies and actions related to best management practices, NPDES requirements, and minimizing discharge of materials (including eroded soils) into the storm drain system. Proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-6-2 encourages all 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. Action RM-6a requires new development and redevelopment projects to implement BMPs to reduce soil erosion and pollutants in urban runoff. Proposed Public Safety Element Action PS-2d requires surveys of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering Geologists and Civil Engineers during review of discretionary development and redevelopment proposals, where appropriate. When potential geologic impacts are identified, project applicants are required to mitigate the impacts per the recommendations contained within the geologic survey. Policy PS-5.4 encourages new developments that add substantial amounts of impervious surfaces to integrate LID BMPs to reduce stormwater runoff. Policy PS-5.6 directs the City to maintain and regularly assess the status of local storm drainage infrastructure to confirm that the system is functioning property. With the implementation of the policies and actions in the General Plan Update, as Findings

Page 47 of 264 ends

well as applicable State and City requirements, potential impacts associated with erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy 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.

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Action 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

3. Unstable Soils
Threshold: Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result Findings

Page 48 of 264 ends

in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Finding: Less than significant (Draft EIR, Impact GS-3, pages 5.7-18 through 5.7- 21)
Explanation: Future development anticipated by the General Plan Update could result in the exposure of people and structures to conditions that have the potential for adverse effects associated with ground instability or failure. The Planning Area is not susceptible to lateral spreading, subsidence, or liquefaction. The potential for landslide within the Planning Area is low.

The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to address geologic conditions within the Planning Area. Public Safety Element Policy PS-2.1 requires that geotechnical hazard data be incorporated in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards. Policy PS-2.2 enforces 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. Policy PS-2.3 requires mitigation measures be monitored and enforced to reduce risks for projects where seismic and geologic hazards can be mitigated and prohibits development in areas where seismic and geologic hazards cannot be mitigated. Policy PS-2.4 encourages the City to educate the community to mitigate potential injury and damage associated with earthquakes. Action PS-2a directs the City to review and update the City’s geologic and seismic hazards maps at least annually. Action PS-2b ensures development proposals are reviewed 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. Action PS-2c ensures adoption and implementation of the latest version of the building codes adopted by the State. Action PS-2d requires surveys of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering Geologists and Civil Engineers during review of discretionary development and redevelopment proposals, where appropriate. When potential geologic impacts are identified, project applicants are required to mitigate the impacts per the recommendations contained within the geologic survey. Action PS-2e requires feasible mitigation on development projects to reduce the risk to the community from hazards related to geologic conditions and seismic activity Future development and improvement projects would be required to prepare site-specific geotechnical studies to identify geologic and soil conditions specific to the site and provide design recommendations consistent with the requirements of State and City codes. Implementation of CBSC and the Municipal Code requirements related to seismic and geologic conditions and the General Plan Update policies and actions would ensure that future development projects are evaluated for potential geologic and seismic risks Findings

Page 49 of 264 ends

and that potential risks are adequately addressed. With the implementation of the policies and actions in the General Plan Update, as well as applicable State and City codes, potential impacts associated with unstable geologic conditions would be reduced to less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-2: Geologic and Seismic Hazards. A community protected from loss of life or injury and damage to property due to geologic and seismic hazards.

Policy PS-2.1: Geologic Hazard Identification. Continue to incorporate geotechnical hazard data in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards.

Policy PS-2.2: 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.

Policy PS-2.3: 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.

Policy PS-2.4: 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Page 50 of 264 ends

California Environmental Quality Act. Require measures to mitigate all identified significant public safety hazards.

4. Expansive Soils
Threshold: Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Tables 18-1- D of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact GS-4, pages 5.7-21 through 5.7- 23)
Explanation: The majority of the Planning Area has ‘Low to Medium’ expansive soils.

The areas with ‘Low to High’ expansive soils are in proximity to Dominguez Channel, within the City’s Sphere of Influence. The proposed Public Safety Element of the General Plan Update includes policies and actions that are designed to protect the City from geologic hazards, including expansive soils. Policy PS-2.1 incorporates geotechnical hazard data in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards. Policy PS-2.2 enforces 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. Policy PS-2.3 monitors and enforces mitigation measures to reduce risks for projects where seismic and geologic hazards can be mitigated and prohibits development in areas where seismic and geologic hazards cannot be mitigated. Action PS-2a directs the City to review and update the City’s geologic and seismic hazards maps at least annually.

Action PS-2b ensures development proposals are reviewed 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.

Action PS-2c ensures adoption and implementation of the latest version of the building codes adopted by the State. Action PS-2d requires surveys of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering Geologists and Civil Engineers during review of discretionary development and redevelopment proposals, where appropriate. When potential geologic impacts are identified, project applicants are required to mitigate the impacts per the recommendations contained within the geologic survey.

Action PS-2e reduces the risk to the community from hazards related to geologic conditions and seismic activity by requiring feasible mitigation of such impacts on development projects.

Future development and infrastructure projects considered by the City, would be evaluated for conformance with the CBSC, the General Plan Update policies and actions, Lawndale Municipal Code, and other regulations. Subsequent development and infrastructure projects requiring discretionary review would also be analyzed for potential environmental Findings

Page 51 of 264 ends

impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA. Future development and improvement projects would be required to prepare site-specific geotechnical studies to identify geologic and soil conditions specific to the site, including the potential for expansive soils. A site-specific geotechnical investigation would identify the potential for damage related to expansive soils and non-uniformly compacted fill and engineered fill. If a risk is identified, design criteria and specification options may include removal of the problematic soils, and replacement, as needed, with properly conditioned and compacted fill material that is designed to withstand the forces exerted during the expected shrink-swell cycles and settlements.

Design criteria and specifications set forth in the design-level geotechnical investigation would ensure impacts from problematic soils are minimized.

Thus, implementation of CBSC and the Municipal Code requirements related to on-site soil conditions and the General Plan Update policies and actions would ensure that future development projects are evaluated for potential risks associated with development on expansive soils, and that potential risks are adequately addressed. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-2: Geologic and Seismic Hazards. A community protected from loss of life or injury and damage to property due to geologic and seismic hazards.

Policy PS-2.1: Geologic Hazard Identification. Continue to incorporate geotechnical hazard data in future land use decision-making, site design, and construction standards.

Policy PS-2.2: 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.

Policy PS-2.3: 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Findings

Page 52 of 264 ends

Action 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.

5. Septic Tanks
Threshold: Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact GS-5, pages 5.7-23) Explanation: Wastewater service is provided to the Planning Area by the City and the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD). Local wastewater produced in the City connects to sewer mains maintained by the LACSD.

LACSD owns, operates, and maintains sewer lines that form the backbone of the regional wastewater conveyance system. 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.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no General Plan Update goals, policies, or actions specific to septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems.

6. Paleontological Resources
Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact GS-6, pages 5.7-23 through 5.7- 25)
Explanation: The City is underlain by two geologic units (Old alluvium and Old eolian deposits) that are considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity at surface and at depth. Although fossil localities have not been recorded within the Planning Area, deposits from the Pleistocene Epoch have produced two fossil localities within three miles of the Planning Area.

Therefore, it is possible that undiscovered paleontological resources could Findings

Page 53 of 264 ends

be encountered during ground-disturbing activities. Damage to or destruction of a paleontological resource would be considered a potentially significant impact under local, State, or Federal criteria. The proposed General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes policies and actions to protect significant paleontological resources within the Planning Area. Policy RM-3.1 requires the protection areas containing paleontological resources. Action RM-3a requires the City assess development proposals for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources pursuant to CEQA. Action RM-3f requires an assessment of the potential for development proposals to significantly impact paleontological resources pursuant to CEQA. 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.

With implementation of the General Plan Update policies and actions, potential impacts to paleontological resources associated with future development anticipated by the General Plan Update would be reduced to less than significant
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

Action 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.

Findings

Page 54 of 264 ends

H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

1. Transport, Use, and Disposal of Hazardous Materials
Threshold: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact HAZ-1, pages 5.9-14 through 5.9- 19)
Explanation: Implementation of the General Plan Update would accommodate the future development of both residential and non-residential uses within the Planning Area. Increased development could result in an increase in the routine transport, use, and storage of hazardous materials in the City, potentially resulting in accidental releases. Exposure of persons to hazardous materials could also occur through the operations of future developments associated with the improper handling of hazardous materials/wastes; transportation accident; environmentally unsound disposal methods; or fire, explosion, or other emergencies. The use, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials is regulated and monitored by local fire departments, CUPAs, Cal OSHA, and the DTSC consistent with the requirements of Federal, State, and local regulations and policies. Facilities that store hazardous materials on-site are required to maintain a Hazardous Materials Business Plan in accordance with State regulations. In addition to the requirements associated with Federal, State, and local regulations, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions to address potential impacts associated with hazardous materials among other issues. Proposed Mobility Element Policy M-7.1 directs the City to maintain a network of local truck routes to facilitate goods movement to regional roads and to discourage the use of residential roads. Public Safety Element Policy PS-3.1 requires 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. Policy PS-3.2 discourages the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses. Policy PS-3.3 directs the City to coordinate with Los Angeles County to review and update, as appropriate, the County’s EOP Hazardous Materials Annex so that the Plan adequately addresses and responds to potential hazardous materials incidents within the City. Policy PS-3.4 requires that developers coordinate with the Los Angeles Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division and the Los Angeles County Fire Department (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. Policy PS-3.5 directs the City to monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

Policy PS-3.6 promotes the routing of vehicles transporting hazardous Findings

Page 55 of 264 ends

materials to transportation corridors posing the minimum risk to the public and prohibits the parking of vehicles transporting hazardous materials on City streets. Policy PS-3.7 requires new pipelines or other similar facilities that would transport hazardous materials to avoid residential areas to the greatest extent possible. Policy PS-3.8 directs the City to 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. Policy PS-3.9 encourages the City to educate residents and businesses on how to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials and products as well as appropriate disposal methods. Action PS-3a requires, as part of the development review process, 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. Action PS-3b requires the submittal of information regarding hazardous materials manufacturing, storage, use, transport, and/or disposal by existing and proposed businesses and developments to LACoFD. Action PS-3c protects 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. Action PS-3d directs the City 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, and to provide informational materials about the County’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection program, collection facilities, drop-off centers, and the 24-hour Household Hazardous Waste hotline. The General Plan Update also includes policies and actions to ensure that the City has adequate emergency response plans and measures to respond in the event of an accidental release of a hazardous substance. Policy PS-1.3 requires the implementation 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.

Policy PS-1.5 directs the City to support policies and programs that facilitate the availability of adequate resources to respond to health, fire, and police emergencies. Action PS-1b directs the City to implement and update (as necessary) the City’s EOP. Compliance with the requirements of Federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the use and storage of hazardous materials would ensure that risks resulting from the routine transportation, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would be less than significant
Findings

Page 56 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

MOBILITY ELEMENT
Policy 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.

Action 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.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-2.3: 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.

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-1: Emergency Operations. A community prepared to provide effective response and recovery efforts in the event of an emergency.

Policy PS-1.1: Citywide Safety. Support projects, programs, policies, and regulations that help to mitigate potential impacts associated with natural and man-made hazards.

Policy 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 post-disaster response and recovery.

Policy 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.

Policy PS-1.4: Local Hazard Mitigation. Regularly maintain and update natural and manmade hazard information relevant to the Lawndale Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Policy PS-1.5: Resources. Support policies and programs that facilitate the availability of adequate resources to respond to health, fire, and police emergencies.

Policy PS-1.6: Emergency Access. Investigate and seek out opportunities to improve emergency access and circulation throughout the community.

Policy 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.

Findings

Page 57 of 264 ends

Policy PS-1.8: Cooperation. Collaborate with the school district, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and community members/groups to maintain safety throughout the City.

Action PS-1a: Regularly review and coordinate emergency response procedures with Los Angeles County and State emergency response procedures.

Action PS-1b: Continue to implement and update (when relevant) the City’s Emergency Operations Plan.

Action PS-1c: Continue to implement and update (at least every five years) the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Action 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.

Action PS-1e: Investigate and pursue available funding sources to fund safety programs, provide services, upgrade/construct facilities, and purchase equipment.

Action PS-1f: Promote after school programs, volunteer programs, and Business and Neighborhood Watch programs to help maintain a safe environment.

Goal PS-3: Hazardous Materials. A community protected from the harmful effects of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and environmental contamination.

Policy 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.

Policy PS-3.2: Safe Residential Uses. Discourage the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy PS-3.5: Monitoring. Monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

Policy 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.

Findings

Page 58 of 264 ends

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

Action 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.

2. Hazardous Materials Release
Threshold: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact HAZ-2, pages 5.9-19 through 5.9- 24)
Explanation: Short-Term Construction-Related Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials
Findings

Page 59 of 264 ends

The General Plan Update would enable development of new residential and non-residential uses within the Planning Area. Construction activities associated with new development could result in upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Future development accommodated through implementation of the General Plan Update could involve the demolition of existing structures and buildings as areas within the City are redeveloped. The presence of lead-based paint, asbestos-containing materials (ACM), and/or other contaminants are likely present in some structures. All demolition that could result in the release of ACMs or lead-based paint would be conducted according to federal and State regulations. In accordance with SCAQMD Rule 1403, if ACM material is found, abatement of asbestos would be required prior to any demolition activities. If paint is separated from building materials (chemically or physically) during demolition of the structures, the paint waste would be required to be evaluated independently from the building material by a qualified Environmental Professional in accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 1532.1. If lead-based paint is found, abatement would be required to be completed by a qualified Lead Specialist prior to any demolition activities. Compliance with existing regulations related to ACM and lead-based paint would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Future development accommodated through implementation of the General Plan Update could involve grading and excavation activities which could expose construction workers and the public to previously unknown hazardous substances present in the soil or groundwater. The public could also be exposed to hazardous materials if new development or redevelopment were to be located on a current or historical hazardous material site. Future development associated with implementation of the General Plan Update 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. In addition to the requirements associated with Federal, State, and local regulations, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions to address potential impacts associated with potentially contaminated sites.

Page 60 of 264 ends

the City to monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

PS-3a requires, as part of the development review process, 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.

Action PS-3b requires the submittal of information regarding hazardous materials manufacturing, storage, use, transport, and/or disposal by existing and proposed businesses and developments to LACoFD. Action PS-3c requires the protection of 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. Compliance with General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions, and existing regulations would reduce potential impacts involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment as a result of on-site contamination to a less than significant level.

Long-Term Operations-Related Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials Long-term operation activities associated with new development could result in upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The transport, storage, and handling of hazardous materials by developers, contractors, business owners, and others are required to comply with Federal, State, and local regulations during project construction and operation. Facilities that use hazardous materials are required to obtain permits from the EPA under the RCRA, which gives the EPA the authority to control the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. Additionally, the hazardous materials regulations included in Federal law govern the transportation of hazardous materials. Locally, the LACoFD Health Hazardous Materials Division is the CUPA for Los Angeles County and is responsible for consolidating, coordinating, and making consistent the administrative requirements, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities of State standards regarding the transportation, use, and disposal of hazardous materials in Los Angeles County, including the Planning Area. The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to address potential accidental exposure of individuals as a consequence of unknown existing environmental contaminants. Proposed Public Safety Element Policy PS3.1 requires 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. Policy PS-3.2 discourages the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses. Policy PS-3.3 coordinates with Los Angeles County to review and update, as appropriate, the County’s EOP Hazardous Materials Annex so that the Plan adequately addresses and responds to potential hazardous materials incidents within the City. Policy PS-3.4 requires that developers Findings

Page 61 of 264 ends

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. Policy PS-3.5 directs the City to monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

Policy PS-3.6 promotes the routing of vehicles transporting hazardous materials to transportation corridors posing the minimum risk to the public and prohibits the parking of vehicles transporting hazardous materials on City streets. Policy PS-3.7 requires new pipelines or other similar facilities that would transport hazardous materials to avoid residential areas to the greatest extent possible. Policy PS-3.8 directs the City to 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. Policy PS-3.9 encourages the City to educate residents and businesses on how to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials and products as well as appropriate disposal methods. Action PS-3a requires, as part of the development review process, 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. Action PS-3b requires the submittal of information regarding hazardous materials manufacturing, storage, use, transport, and/or disposal by existing and proposed businesses and developments to LACoFD. Action PS-3c requires the protection of 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. Action PS-3d directs the City 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, and to provide informational materials about the County’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection program, collection facilities, drop-off centers, and the 24-hour Household Hazardous Waste hotline. Proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-2.3 promotes the proper disposal of hazardous waste through education, monitoring, and enforcement of proper use, storage, handling, and disposal. Mobility Element Policy M-7.1 directs the City to maintain a network of local truck routes to facilitate goods movement to regional roads and to discourage the use of residential roads. Compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws related to the transport, storage, and handling of hazardous materials would reduce the likelihood and severity of accidents, and impacts involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant.

Findings

Page 62 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

MOBILITY ELEMENT
Policy 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.

Action 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.

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-3: Hazardous Materials. A community protected from the harmful effects of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and environmental contamination.

Policy PS-3.2: Safe Residential Uses. Discourage the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses.

Policy PS-3.5: Monitoring. Monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

Findings

Page 63 of 264 ends

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Action 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.

3. Hazards Near Schools
Threshold: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact HAZ-3, pages 5.9-24 through 5.9- 27)
Explanation: Future development within the Planning Area could potentially emit or handle hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. In addition to the requirements associated with Federal, State, and local regulations, the General Plan Update includes policies and Findings

Page 64 of 264 ends

actions to address potential impacts associated with hazardous materials.

Public Safety Element Policy PS-3.1 requires 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. Policy PS-3.2 discourages the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses. Policy PS-3.3 directs the City to coordinate with Los Angeles County to review and update, as appropriate, the County’s EOP Hazardous Materials Annex so that the Plan adequately addresses and responds to potential hazardous materials incidents within the City. Policy PS-3.4 requires 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. Policy PS-3.5 directs the City to monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials. Policy PS-3.6 promotes the routing of vehicles transporting hazardous materials to transportation corridors posing the minimum risk to the public and prohibits the parking of vehicles transporting hazardous materials on City streets. Policy PS-3.7 requires new pipelines or other similar facilities that would transport hazardous materials to avoid residential areas to the greatest extent possible.

Policy PS-3.8 directs the City to 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. Policy PS-3.9 educates residents and businesses on how to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials and products as well as appropriate disposal methods. Action PS-3a requires, as part of the development review process, 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. Action PS-3b requires the submittal of information regarding hazardous materials manufacturing, storage, use, transport, and/or disposal by existing and proposed businesses and developments to LACoFD. Action PS-3c requires the protection of 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. Action PS-3d directs the City 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, and to provide informational materials about the County’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection program, collection facilities, drop-off centers, and the 24-hour Household Hazardous Waste hotline. Mobility Element Action M-7a directs the City to 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 Findings

Page 65 of 264 ends

City. Implementation of the safety procedures and regulations mandated by applicable Federal, State, and local laws and the General Plan Update policies and actions would ensure that potential risks resulting from the routine transportation, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes in proximity to a school associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

MOBILITY ELEMENT
Policy 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.

Action 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.

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-3: Hazardous Materials. A community protected from the harmful effects of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and environmental contamination.

Policy PS-3.2: Safe Residential Uses. Discourage the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses.

Findings

Page 66 of 264 ends

Policy PS-3.5: Monitoring. Monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Policy 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.

Action 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.

4. Waste Sites
Threshold: Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Findings

Page 67 of 264 ends

Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact HAZ-4, pages 5.9-27 through 5.9- 29)
Explanation: There are no active hazardous waste facilities cleanup sites within the Planning Area listed in the EnviroStor database. There are three open LUST sites undergoing remediation within the Planning Area. Additionally, the Planning Area contains one active facility listed in the SWIS database.

These sites comprise the Cortese list, compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Future development associated with implementation of the General Plan Update 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 the DTSC and the Los Angeles RWQCB prior to construction. The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to address potential impacts associated with hazardous materials sites.

Proposed Public Safety Element Policy PS-3.1 requires 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. Policy PS-3.2 discourages the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses. Policy PS-3.3 directs the City to coordinate with Los Angeles County to review and update, as appropriate, the County’s EOP Hazardous Materials Annex so that the Plan adequately addresses and responds to potential hazardous materials incidents within the City. Policy PS-3.4 requires 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. Policy PS-3.5 directs the City to monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials. Action PS-3a requires, as part of the development review process, 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. Action PS-3b requires the submittal of information regarding hazardous materials manufacturing, storage, use, transport, and/or disposal by existing and proposed businesses and developments to LACoFD. Action PS-3c requires the protection of 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. Compliance with General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions, and existing regulations would reduce potential impacts involving the hazardous materials sites.

Findings

Page 68 of 264 ends

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-3: Hazardous Materials. A community protected from the harmful effects of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and environmental contamination.

Policy PS-3.2: Safe Residential Uses. Discourage the development of residential uses adjacent to or near potentially hazardous land uses.

Policy PS-3.5: Monitoring. Monitor through the planning and business permit processes the operations of businesses and individuals that handle hazardous materials.

5. Public Airports
Threshold: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact HAZ-5, pages 5.9-29) Findings

Page 69 of 264 ends

Explanation: There are no airports within the Planning Area. The closest airports to the Planning Area are the Hawthorne Municipal Airport, located approximately

1.5 miles to the northeast, and LAX, located approximately 2.5 miles to the northwest. According to the Los Angeles County ALUC, Lawndale is not located within the Hawthorne Municipal Airport Influence Area or the LAX Airport Influence Area. While the Planning Area is within two miles of a public use airport, it is not within the area identified in an airport land use plan as being adversely affected (i.e., within the Airport Influence Area).

As such, impacts with regard to safety hazards to people residing or working in the Planning Area would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS: There are no General Plan Update goals, policies, or actions specific to airports

6. Emergency Plans
Threshold: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact HAZ-6, pages 5.9-29 through 5.9- 32)
Explanation: The General Plan Update would allow a variety of new residential and nonresidential development, which would result in increased jobs and population in the Planning Area. 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. The EOP does not provide a specific evacuation route map, as evacuation measures would be implemented based on the specific emergency and area affected. The General Plan Update incorporates the City’s EOP by reference into the City of Lawndale’s Public Safety Element
The General Plan Update identifies major arterials as the primary routes for evacuation; however, evacuation routes would depend upon the emergency event and area affected. The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to address emergency response and evacuation. Proposed Public Safety Element Policy PS-1.3 requires the implementation 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.

Policy PS-1.5 encourages the support policies and programs that facilitate the availability of adequate resources to respond to health, fire, and police emergencies. Action PS-1b directs the City to implement and update (as Findings

Page 70 of 264 ends

necessary) the City’s EOP.

Future development within the Planning Area is not anticipated to result in the substantial modification of roadways surrounding specific development sites or the placement of any permanent physical barriers on adjacent roadways. There is the potential that traffic lanes located immediately adjacent to a development site may be temporarily closed or controlled by construction personnel during construction activities. However, any temporary construction activity would adhere to Municipal Code Section

17.36.220, which requires sidewalks, public streets, and, alleys adjacent to construction sites to be kept free of debris or other materials that could interfere with circulation for the duration of construction activities, as well as sixty days following substantial completion of such construction.

Additionally, 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 the proposed development 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.

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 Fire Department would ensure that construction and operation of future projects associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Primary access to all major roads would be maintained during construction of future developments within the Planning Area. As part of the site plan and design review process, future development projects would be reviewed for adequate infrastructure and access as well as consistency with adopted emergency and evacuation plans among many other environmental issues in order to ensure the safety of City residents and the physical environment.

Therefore, impacts associated with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans would be less than significant.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Goal PS-1: Emergency Operations. A community prepared to provide effective response and recovery efforts in the event of an emergency.

Policy PS-1.1: Citywide Safety. Support projects, programs, policies, and regulations that help to mitigate potential impacts associated with natural and man-made hazards.

Findings

Page 71 of 264 ends