Lomita City Council
October 17, 2023

1Special

CALL AND NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that pursuant to Government Code Section 54956, by delivery of this written notice as provided by law, the Mayor has called a special meeting of the Lomita City Council.

AGENDA

LOMITA CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING – STUDY SESSION
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2023
5:00 P.M.

UPSTAIRS ASSEMBLY ROOM

1. OPENING CEREMONIES
a) Call Meeting to Order
b) Roll Call

2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Persons wishing to speak on scheduled items are requested to do so at this time. In order to conduct a timely meeting, a three-minute time limit per person has been established.

Government Code Section 54954.2 prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on a specific item unless it appears on a posted agenda.

3. STUDY SESSION
a. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF LAND USE ALTERNATIVES FOR THE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Presented by Brianna Rindge, Community and Economic Development Director

4. ADJOURNMENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting at the following locations: Lomita City Hall lobby and outside bulletin board, Lomita Parks and Recreation, and uploaded to the City of Lomita website www.lomitacity.com.

LOMITA CITY HALL

UPSTAIRS ASSEMBLY ROOM
24300 Narbonne Avenue
Lomita, CA 90717
Phone: (310) 325-7110
Fax: (310) 325-4024
Barry Waite, Mayor
William Uphoff, Mayor Pro Tem
James Gazeley, Council Member
Cindy Segawa, Council Member
Mark A. Waronek, Council Member
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #1
Date Posted: October 12, 2023
________________________________
Linda E. Abbott, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, you should contact the office of the City Clerk at (310) 325-7110 (voice) or the California Relay Service. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to this meeting.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #2
TO: City Council
FROM: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Brianna Rindge, Community & Economic Development Director MEETING DATE: October 17, 2023 Special Meeting
SUBJECT: Discussion and Consideration of Land Use Alternatives for the General Plan Update

RECOMMENDATION
Recommend one of the conceptual Land Use Alternatives, a combination of Alternatives, or an Alternative with amendments, and direct the General Plan Update team to prepare the Preferred Land Use Plan.

DISCUSSION
In June of 2023, City Council selected De Novo Planning Group to update its twenty-fiveyear-old General Plan, the comprehensive guiding document for all future land use and physical development decisions within the city. The multi-year project is on track as originally planned and seeks direction from the Planning Commission and City Council prior to moving forward with the next steps of drafting the new General Plan.

This summer, the City conducted a series of public workshops attended by over 115 individuals, meetings of the 12-person General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), a community survey with approximately 150 responses, a Technical Advisory Committee workshop for subject matter experts from City and County staff, and public outreach at both Founder’s Day and National Night Out.

The General Plan Update team, led by De Novo Planning Group and Brianna Rindge, began with an analysis of the City’s existing General Plan adopted in 1998 and all other plans, ordinances, and policy documents adopted in the meantime. The consultant has prepared the attached Land Use Alternatives Report, which will aid in the preparation and refinement of the Preferred Land Use Plan. Based on community input, the GPAC made recommendations for land use and development intensity modifications to the current Land Use Plan (presented in the Alternatives Report as Alternative 1: Business as Usual), considering the concepts described and the areas identified in the Report. Next, City and County staff evaluated the GPAC’s input for feasibility as the subject matter experts Item No. 3a

CITY OF LOMITA

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #3
responsible for carrying out the General Plan. This item requests that City Council review the report, identify any recommended changes for consideration, and direct City staff and the consultant team to prepare the Preferred Land Use Plan. The final Preferred Land Use Plan informed by Planning Commission input on October 9, 2023 and City Council input on October 17, 2023 will be presented for confirmation by City Council around November 2023.

No draft documents should be construed as policy decisions or policy direction until such time as the required public hearings are complete and the City Council has made a decision on the draft documents.

The Planning Commission conveyed most interest in Alternative 2, with the nodal elements of Alternative 3. Alternative 2 received strong support for its success in implementing the adopted and certified Housing Element and Planning Commission expressed interest in expanding land use opportunities along Lomita Boulevard and Narbonne Avenue specifically.

Please refer to the Lomita Looking Up/General Plan Update website (lomita.generalplan.org) for additional information, including informative reports, community survey information, and details regarding upcoming meetings to discuss the Update.

OPTIONS

1. Provide specific direction regarding the Preferred Land Use Plan.

2. Provide staff with further direction.

ATTACHMENT

1. Land Use Alternatives Report
Reviewed by: Approved by:
_________________________
Gary Y. Sugano Ryan Smoot
Assistant City Manager City Manager
Reviewed by:
_________________________
Brianna Rindge, AICP
Community & Economic Development Director
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #4

LAND USE

ALTERNATIVES
REPORT
OCTOBER 2023
Attachment 1
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #5
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #6
PREPARED FOR:

CITY OF LOMITA
24300 Narbonne Avenue
Lomita, CA 90717
https://lomitacity.com/
https://lomita.generalplan.org/
Contact: Brianna Rindge, Director of Community & Economic Development 310-325-7110 x122 | [email protected]
PREPARED BY:

WITH

JZMK PARTNERS
KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC.

ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS

FUSCOE ENGINEERING

LAND USE

ALTERNATIVES
REPORT
OCTOBER 2023
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #7
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #8
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 1
OVERVIEW 03
PLANNING CONTEXT 11
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES 31
NEXT STEPS 49
APPENDIX A: ASSUMPTIONS A-1
APPENDIX B: FISCAL IMPACTS MEMO B-1
APPENDIX C: MOBILITY IMPACTS MEMO C-1
Tables
Table 1: Snapshot of Land Use Alternatives 6
Table 2: Existing Development Estimates 17
Table 3: Land Use Designations 20
Table 4: Acreage by Land Use Designations 33
Table 5: Summary of Potential Buildout Under Land Use Alternatives Percentage Comparison 34 Table 6: Residential Potential by Land Use Type 35
Table 7: Estimated Annual Fiscal Impacts of Net New Development at Buildout 44 Table 8: Costs and Revenues Per Person and Unit 45
Figures
Figure 1: Trade Area 12
Figure 2: Existing Conditions 16
Figure 3: Floor Area Ratio Example 19
Figure 4: Alternative 1, Business as Usual 36
Figure 5: Alternative 2, Baseline 38
Figure 6: Alternative 3, Core and Perimeter 40
Figure 7: Alternative 4, Neighborhood Nodes 42

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #9
2 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #10
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 3

OVERVIEW
The City of Lomita initiated its
General Plan Update process
in May 2023. The General Plan
provides policy guidance on land
use, housing, transportation,
infrastructure, community
design, conservation, and other
development-related topics.

State law requires every city and
county in California to prepare and
maintain a General Plan.

As part of the General Plan Update
process, the City will evaluate
the Land Use Plan (or “map”) and
determine if the land uses and
development patterns articulated
through the Land Use Plan best
reflect the community’s vision for
the future of Lomita. The Land Use
Plan is one of the General Plan’s
primary mechanisms for shaping
the city’s future development
pattern. The map assigns a land
use designation to each parcel
within the city, which describes
the range of uses allowed and the
development intensity permitted
on associated parcels.

The purpose of the Land Use
Alternatives Report is to provide
the City with a tool to consider
and evaluate areas of the city
where community members
recommended – through the
Visioning Workshops, online
visioning survey, and General Plan
Advisory Committee meetings –
that changes to land uses and/or
development patterns should be
studied.

The purpose of the Land Use
Alternatives Report is to provide
the City with a tool to consider
and evaluate potential land
use and development pattern
changes throughout Lomita
that may be desirable over the
next 20 years.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #11
4 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OVERVIEW
The Land Use Alternatives Report serves as one of
the key deliverables that the City and the consultant
team are preparing as part of the General Plan Update
process. This Report considers existing conditions and is intended to present land use ideas that implement the
Community Vision, described below.

Community Vision
The Community Vision includes a written description of
the Vision Statement that is supported by the following eight core values which define the community character:
• Small-town Feel
• Safe and Affordable
• Diverse Community
• High-quality Residential Neighborhoods
• Vibrant Downtown and Corridors
• Independent Businesses
• Walkable City
• Forward-thinking
The Community Vision was drafted based on direct
input received from Lomita residents and businesses at
Visioning Workshops, through an online survey, at popup events, as well as input provided by the GPAC.

Proposed Vision
The Lomita Community Vision is a statement that
describes the city in 2045.

Lomita is a unique and exceptional city where people
of all ages can live, work, and enjoy their lives in a
friendly and diverse community. The city’s smalltown atmosphere is reminiscent of its rustic past and is characterized by well-established residential
neighborhoods, thriving independent businesses,
and a charming and vibrant downtown.

While the city’s distinct sense of place is rooted
in its history, Lomita is focused on its future by
carefully planning for the needs of current and
new residents, growing business industries, and
emerging technologies. Residents of our attractive,
safe, affordable, and quiet neighborhoods enjoy
a diverse range of active and passive recreational
opportunities throughout the city. The city’s main
transportation corridors such as Pacific Coast
Highway, Lomita Boulevard, and Narbonne Avenue
are activated with a range of housing choices that
support commercial activity within Lomita and
promote walkability to everyday uses. Downtown
Lomita and the main corridors feature desirable
shopping and dining options and engaging and
memorable public spaces.

Lomita provides safe and efficient ways to get around
the community in a vehicle, walking, biking, and
other alternative transportation modes. Moreover,
the city’s enviable regional location and links to
major transportation systems allow our residents
to easily access many of southern California’s
employment centers and most beautiful natural
resources and destinations.

We also recognize that meaningful partnerships
with local and regional stakeholders – including
businesses, Los Angeles Unified School District,
utility providers, neighboring jurisdictions, and
public and nonprofit agencies – can help us achieve
our vision. We are committed to fostering a positive
atmosphere of civic collaboration so that Lomita
remains a desirable place to live, work, and recreate.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #12
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 5
Existing Conditions Report (In Progress)
The Existing Conditions Report (ECR) for Lomita is an
extensive analysis of existing City documents, utilizing available state and federal databases/maps, and
reviewing local, state, and federal laws to establish a comprehensive baseline of the current state of the city.

The ECR covers a wide array of topics including land use and development patterns, socio-economic landscape,
mobility trends, utilities and community services,
hazards and safety, natural resources conservation,
community health and wellness, and environmental
justice. This Report will support the General Plan Policy Document by containing most of the narrative that
provides the context for the City’s goals, policies, and actions – thereby allowing the Policy Document to be a
streamlined document inclusive of clear policy guidance.

General Plan Policy Document (Upcoming)
The General Plan Policy Document will contain the
goals, policies, and actions (strategies) related to various elements of the General Plan. The General Plan must
address at least seven elements. These state-mandated
elements include land use, circulation, housing, open
space, conservation, noise, and safety. The City may
also address other topics of community interest in
the General Plan, such as economic development,
community design, environmental justice, community
health and wellness, utilities, and/or community
services.

Through careful analysis and community engagement,
the General Plan Update sets out the goals, policies,
and strategies in each of these areas and serves as
a blueprint for how the City will make key planning
decisions over the next 20 years. It also identifies how the City will interact with the County of Los Angeles,
adjacent and nearby cities, and other local, regional,
state, and federal agencies on shared developmentrelated decisions and actions.

Environmental Impact Report
(Upcoming)
The General Plan Update process will require an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that will respond
to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). The preparation of an EIR will
address all potential environmental impacts associated
with the proposed General Plan Update and focused
updates to the Zoning Code, including the rezoning
program required by Program 14 of the City’s adopted
and certified Housing Element (see the following section, Planning Context, for more information on the City’s
Housing Element). The Planning Commission and City
Council will use the EIR during the General Plan Update process to understand the potential environmental
effects associated with implementing the General Plan.

The Program-level EIR will serve as a “tiering document” to facilitate streamlined environmental review of all
subsequent development, planning, and infrastructure
projects undertaken in the city, which are consistent
with the General Plan, including future updates to the
Zoning Code. The EIR will be prepared concurrently
with the Policy Document to facilitate the development
of a General Plan that is largely self-mitigating. In other words, as environmental impacts associated with
the General Plan are identified, goals, policies, and
action programs may be incorporated into the Policy
Document to reduce or avoid potential environmental
impacts.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #13
6 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

LAND USE ALTERNATIVES
To assist with consideration of possible change
scenarios within Lomita, four overarching citywide Land Use Alternatives have been prepared (selected from
a range of approximately eight initial internal ideas).

These include:
• Alternative 1: Business as Usual
• Alternative 2: Baseline
• Alternative 3: Core and Perimeter
• Alternative 4: Neighborhood Nodes
The various Land Use Alternatives are intended to serve as a starting point for discussion of different scenarios for Lomita and to provide context for citywide discussion regarding potential land use changes throughout Lomita.

Alternative 1, Business as Usual, reflects the land use direction provided by the currently adopted General Plan for Lomita. In other words, Alternative 1 illustrates where the city is headed should no changes be made to the
Land Use Plan (including failure to implement Program
14 of the City’s Adopted Housing Element). Alternative
2 (Baseline), Alternative 3 (Core and Perimeter), and
Alternative 4 (Neighborhood Nodes) all explore how the
City can strategically plan for its future by accommodating new residential and nonresidential development in
key locations throughout the community in different
ways that reflect the community’s vision for the future of Lomita. While the emphasis of each Alternative
is different, all Alternatives accommodate both
residential and nonresidential growth to varying
degrees. These Alternatives are explored in detail in
the Land Use Alternatives section of this Report; a brief snapshot of the land use statistics associated with the potential buildout of each of the four Alternatives is
shown here in Table 1.

Table 1: Snapshot of Land Use Alternatives
Existing
Development 1, 2, 3
Alternative 1:

Business as Usual
Alternative 2:

Baseline
Alternative 3:

Corridors
Alternative 4:

Nodes
Units 4 8,274 8,945 9,485 10,422 11,279
Population 4 21,843 23,616 25,040 27,513 29,777
Nonresidential SF 2,528,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 2,881,533 2,931,334 Jobs 3,036 3,217 3,415 3,601 3,663
(1) Existing population is based on the U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2021.
(2) Existing nonresidential square footage is based on information provided by the Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office, 2023. This figure has been crosschecked with available commercial real estate transaction data from CoStar which confirms the above estimate.
(3) Existing jobs estimates are based on 2020 Longitudinal Housing Employment Data prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau (note that 2020 represents the most recent data set for this source of employment information).
(4) See Appendix A for detailed assumptions by land use type, including densities, intensities, and average persons per household.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #14
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 7

PREFERRED LAND USE PLAN
The Planning Commission and the City Council will
review the information contained in this Land Use
Alternatives Report and provide their feedback on
which Alternative, components of the Alternatives, or
other development pattern for the city they believe best represents the community’s long-term vision.

This feedback will be assembled and consolidated into
a citywide map called the “Preferred Land Use Plan.” It is appropriate (and anticipated) that the Preferred Land Use Plan may include components of each Alternative
or other development patterns as determined by the
City Council, and be a variation of the presented Land
Use Alternatives.

Preparation of the Preferred Land Use Plan does
not reflect final policy direction or adoption of
a new Land Use Plan. Rather, the Preferred Land
Use Plan serves as a starting point for the project’s
environmental analysis. The Preferred Land Use Plan
will be comprehensively analyzed in an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) which will evaluate and document
all potential environmental impacts, identify ways to
mitigate those impacts, and disclose any significant
impacts associated with implementation of the
Preferred Land Use Plan that cannot be fully mitigated.

The EIR includes preparation of detailed technical
studies including a traffic impact analysis, infrastructure report, noise analysis, and air quality/greenhouse gas
emissions analysis. Additionally, a fiscal impact analysis of the Preferred Land Use Plan will also be prepared for consideration alongside the Policy Document and EIR.

The Planning Commission and City Council will review
the Proposed General Plan Policy Document and the
Environmental Impact Report (which will be based
on the Preferred Land Use Plan, as described above)
at a series of public hearings, which will include time for public comment. These hearings will be noticed in
accordance with all public hearing requirements, and
ample time will be devoted to considering the project
for adoption.

As part of the public hearing process, the City Council can make changes to the General Plan Policy Document,
including the Preferred Land Use Plan, prior to its
approval. Should the Council request significant
changes to the Preferred Land Use Plan, it is possible
additional technical or environmental analysis will be
necessary to ensure that all potential land use changes are adequately analyzed and considered.

The City of Lomita’s official Land Use Plan will only be updated upon City Council adoption of the General Plan
Policy Document and certification of the Environmental
Impact Report. Until such time, the City’s current Land Use Plan remains fully applicable.

LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

PURPOSE
The Land Use Alternatives Report evaluates each
citywide Alternative based on the following indicators:
• Land Use Totals (Housing, Population, Nonresidential
Development, and Jobs)
• Circulation
• Fiscal Impacts
• Infrastructure
The Report purposely omits recommendations regarding
how the City should proceed with modifications to
the Land Use Plan. Instead, it provides the necessary
information to facilitate the community’s discussion on important land use issues, culminating with possible
changes to the map.

The Report will be used by the Planning Commission and
City Council to craft the Preferred Land Use Plan. The
City anticipates that the Land Use Alternatives Report
will stimulate discussion and lead to confirmation and
selection of courses of action to be reflected on the
Preferred Land Use Plan and in the General Plan Policy
Document.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #15
8 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

LAND USE ALTERNATIVES

OUTREACH PROCESS
The areas of change identified and analyzed in the
Land Use Alternatives Report and resulting Land Use
Alternatives were developed through an extensive
outreach process that included public input received at community workshops, GPAC meetings, insight from City
departments and agencies affiliated with the City (e.g., LA County Sheriff’s Department and LA County Building
and Safety), and the results of an online survey. Key
phases of the outreach approach are described below
and are further documented in the Visioning Outreach
Summary Report available online on the Lomita Looking
Up | General Plan Update website (lomita.generalplan.
org).

Community Visioning Workshop Series
The City hosted three General Plan Update Visioning
Workshops from June through July 2023. Each in-person
Workshop focused on addressing a specific planning
topic. Each Workshop included a brief overview of the
General Plan Update process, including the importance
of a General Plan Update and background information
on the specific General Plan topic, and a series of
facilitated activities to solicit input on key topics or ideas. The topics explored in each Workshop along with
summaries of what the City heard from the community
are provided in the Visioning Outreach Summary
Report prepared for the General Plan Update, which
can be found on the Lomita Looking Up | General Plan
Update website (lomita.generalplan.org). The intent of
the Visioning Outreach Summary Report was to present
the information received from both the online survey
activity and in-person Workshop series without making
assumptions or recommendations.

The first Visioning Workshop was held on Tuesday,
June 27th, 2023. This workshop was focused on the
future overall vision of the city and over 50 individuals attended. The second Visioning Workshop was held on
Tuesday, July 11th, 2023, This workshop was focused
on the future mobility vision and over 30 individuals
attended. The third Visioning Workshop was held
on Tuesday, July 25th, 2023. This workshop revolved
around the land use design vision for the city and over 35 individuals attended.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #16
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 9
WE HEARD THAT THE LOMITA COMMUNITY VALUES...
• SMALL TOWN CHARACTER
• GOOD SCHOOLS
• A DIVERSE COMMUNITY
• COMMUNITY EVENTS SUCH AS FOUNDER’S DAY
• SAFE PLACE TO LIVE AND WORK
• WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS
• SUPPORT FOR SMALL BUSINESSES
• BEAUTIFUL HOMES AND NEIGHBORHOODS
• PROXIMITY TO THE BEACH AND ACCESSIBLE FREEWAYS
• POCKET PARKS
General Plan Advisory Committee
Monthly GPAC meetings are structured around specific
General Plan topics, with each meeting dedicated to
a specific area of focus. The GPAC meetings provide
a structured framework for in-depth discussions and
analysis for community stakeholder participation.

The General Plan topics discussed between June and
September 2023 include the following: vision, economics and market trends, land use and design, and mobility.

The kickoff GPAC meeting was held on June 13, 2023,
and the main topic was developing a vision for the city.

GPAC members identified the key assets and challenges
within the city. This activity intersected a variety of General Plan topics such as land use, mobility, housing, and community character. The GPAC members provided
their own vision of what they would like to see their city become over the next 20 years.

The second GPAC meeting held on July 13, 2023 focused
on the topic of economics and market trends. GPAC
members were presented with information detailing the
economic landscape of the city. This discussion focused on fostering long-term economic vibrancy within the
community, where GPAC members discussed strategies
to weave economic considerations seamlessly into the
fabric of the General Plan objectives and policies.

On August 8, 2023, the GPAC convened to discuss a series of land use alternatives presented by the consultant
team. This presentation included a comprehensive
overview of the current land use designations, the
Housing Element, and potential land use changes.

Eight distinct land use alternatives were presented to
the GPAC for their feedback. The insight from the GPAC
members helped shape the four land use alternatives
in this Report.

The GPAC meeting on September 12, 2023 focused
on mobility within the city. During this session, GPAC
members discussed a variety of mobility related issues
such as walkability and bike-friendly infrastructure.

During this meeting the consultant team also received
insight from the GPAC members on which specific
streets are known for congestion. After providing
the existing mobility landscape of the city, the GPAC
members provided ideas of how to create a safer
environment for all users and increase pedestrian
friendliness. In addition, the GPAC provided input on
how improvements to public transit could increase its
popularity.

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
The City has convened a Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) to provide data, information, and feedback at key points during the General Plan Update process, and
to ensure plan concepts can be achieved. The TAC is
comprised of technical experts from City departments
and partner agencies who implement policies addressed
by the General Plan. The first TAC meeting was held
on September 5, 2023 to specifically discuss land use
ideas that should potentially be reflected as part of
one or more Alternatives. City staff and representatives from the partnering agencies provided invaluable
information on City operations, conditions of assets
(e.g., roads and other infrastructure), and the feasibility of different ideas. Input received through this format
was considered as part of the Land Use Alternatives
development process.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #17
10 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
The requirements of the recently adopted and Statecertified 2021-2029 Lomita Housing Element are key to understanding the baseline (minimum) areas of change
reflected in Alternative 2: Baseline (and also reflected on Alternative 3: Corridors and Alternative 4: Nodes,
as well). The Housing Element contains a number of
Housing Programs that the City is required to implement over an 8-year planning period. Directly related to the Land Use Alternatives assignment, Housing Element
Program 14: Rezone Program, requires the City to
rezone specific identified sites to (1) accommodate a
shortfall for the lower-income Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (RHNA), (2) accommodate the remaining
moderate and above-moderate income RHNA need;
and (3) create a buffer of capacity for the lower and
moderate-income RHNA. Moreover, the City must adopt
any Zoning Code Amendment to implement the Rezone
Program by October 15, 2024, and the Zoning Code
Amendment must be consistent with the General Plan.

As is further elaborated on in Section 3 of this Report, the full implementation of Program 14 acts as a “lower
threshold” for changes to the land use designations
and the Land Use Plan, and implementation of the
rezoning commitments made in the Housing Element
is essentially reflected through Alternative 2: Baseline.

NEXT STEPS
Over time, the city’s population and the physical
landscape in which its residents live, work, and play
will change. To help ensure the City of Lomita General
Plan remains a valuable and relevant resource, the
Policy Document will require continuous monitoring
and periodic revisions to address the changing
sociodemographic conditions and evolving needs of the
community. One important aspect of this General Plan
Update process involves the revisiting and updating
of the City of Lomita Land Use Plan. The City Council,
Planning Commission, City staff, and the consultant
team will use this Report to prepare and refine the
Preferred Land Use Plan so that the City can move
forward with preparing the Policy Document and EIR.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #18
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 11

PLANNING CONTEXT

LOCAL AND REGIONAL TRENDS
Like many communities in Southern California, Lomita
is in a period of transition as it faces the challenge
of meeting new growth and repositioning itself in a
dynamic, competitive regional market. A significant
part of this challenge is in meeting the City’s housing commitments (i.e., accommodating a higher density
and range of housing choices) in an area that is almost entirely built-out, without losing Lomita’s “small-town” feel. The City is poised to take advantage of this
opportunity for more attainable infill development,
including the reuse and repositioning of vacant
and/or under-performing properties, to stimulate
investment and attract new residents and businesses
that drive economic growth. Like many maturing cities
with limited developable land, new growth in Lomita
will need to be accommodated primarily on smaller
infill sites through reuse and/or intensification.

Strong regional growth trends, combined with the
city’s desirable community attributes (as described
further herein), suggest that if built (and if the City is interested in this outcome), these infill opportunities are likely to be well received in the market (i.e., there appears to be strong consumer demand for a variety
of real estate product types).

Trade Area Comparisons
The General Plan Update process includes analysis of
socioeconomic, market, and fiscal trends for Lomita
compared to its regional neighbors – or Trade Area
(Figure 1) – in order to better understand the key
issues and challenges facing Lomita as it contemplates
its future. The Trade Area represents the geographic
region containing the market demand and supply
activity most relevant to the city’s economy. This
Trade Area includes the cities of Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills,
Rolling Hills Estates, and Torrance. It is important to note that although Lomita also shares an eastern
border with Harbor City, a community within the City
of Los Angeles, this neighborhood is excluded from
the Trade Area due to data limitations. All economic
activity relevant to Lomita is not contained within the Trade Area; destinations for employment, specialty
retail, and entertainment outside the boundaries also
play a significant role in regional economics.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #19
12 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT Figure 1: Trade Area
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #20
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 13
Growth and Demographics
Lomita, like the Trade Area and South Bay, is a slowgrowing and aging community. The city’s population has grown by just three percent since 2010, and regional
projections suggest it may grow even more slowly over
the next 20 years. The city also has relatively smaller household sizes, suggesting challenges in attracting
and accommodating families in the community. These
challenges include relatively smaller unit sizes and
lower-performing schools relative to surrounding
communities. While the city currently has the lowest
median age as compared to the Trade Area and South
Bay, its proportion of residents over the age of 55 years old has increased at a faster rate since 2010. If the city does not increase attainable housing opportunities and
amenities to bring in younger families, it will likely face a further shrinking of its working-age population and the economic opportunities that come with it.

Wages
Employed Lomita residents earn less income than both
the Trade Area and the Region on average for both
Trade Area and Region, in part reflecting lower levels
of educational attainment. Approximately 39 percent
of Lomita residents have bachelor’s or graduate/
professional degrees, compared to nearly 60 percent in
the Trade Area and 43 percent in the South Bay. These
lower levels of education are reflected in the industries in which residents are employed, including healthcare,
retail, education, and manufacturing, which have many
occupations not requiring secondary degrees. As a
result, the median wage for residents is approximately
15 percent lower than the median wage for South Bay
residents and nearly 50 percent lower than Trade Area
residents. Given the higher levels of education typically needed for higher-paying jobs, the City might consider
pursuing strategies that enhance education and
workforce development opportunities for residents,
so as to improve the overall economic strength of the
community.

Jobs
Although Lomita’s economy grew by about 10 percent
in the last decade, the city lost high-paying jobs while attracting more lower-paying jobs. The industries in
Lomita that experienced the most substantial increase
in total number of jobs since 2010 were healthcare/
social assistance and accommodation/food services,
both of which pay a median wage lower than the median
across all industries. At the same time, the city lost jobs in the wholesale trade, retail, information, finance and insurance, real estate, professional services, public
administration, and other services industries, most of
which generally have higher paying jobs. While shrinking in the city, information, finance and insurance, and real estate jobs increased in the Trade Area and the South
Bay Region, suggesting an opportunity both for job
growth in the city as well as improved job prospects for residents with appropriate education and workforce
development resources.

Residential Real Estate
While Lomita’s for-sale housing values are low compared to the surrounding area, the rental market is strong,
reflecting the city’s proximity to regional transportation facilities and its growing appeal to households who
cannot afford or are not seeking home ownership in
the expensive South Bay market. Lomita’s home values
are the lowest among the study geographies – about 33
percent below the Trade Area and 28 percent below the
South Bay in 2021. This trend is driven by high home values in the subregion’s coastal cities and Lomita’s smaller unit sizes compared to the Trade Area and South Bay. While
the majority of Lomita’s housing stock is single-family (61 percent), a large proportion is also renter-occupied (56 percent). Further challenging homeownership,
according to feedback from City staff, there is significant activity involving individuals from outside of Lomita
buying single-family homes in the city as investment
rental properties. Meanwhile, the city’s inventory of
professionally managed, primarily multifamily rental
units has grown by about 10 percent over the past decade, and has performed strongly compared to the South Bay
overall. Lomita’s appeal to renters can be attributed to its proximity to employment centers, amenities, and higherend neighboring communities like the Palos Verdes Peninsula, but at a more affordable price. Given the city’s built-out nature, future development of higher density
projects (e.g., townhomes, apartments, condos) will be a critical element of growing the overall housing stock.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #21
14 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Retail Market
The city is experiencing “leakage” in nearly all retail categories, suggesting opportunities for targeted growth in retail categories that serve residents of both the city and surrounding communities. With slightly more than

1.1 million square feet of space (about six percent of the Trade Area retail space), retail is the largest nonresidential land use in Lomita. However, due to the predominance
of larger retail centers located in neighboring cities, especially Torrance, the city is unable to capture much of the retail spending by Lomita residents or significant spending by residents of neighboring communities.

While the addition of a new Target and Grocery Outlet
will improve this dynamic, the city is unlikely to attract a major regional shopping center given the relatively
competitive regional landscape. That said, trends in
retail habits have included a move away from brick-andmortar shopping in favor of e-commerce for many types of goods. This has created new opportunities for retail growth in more experiential environments with a mix
of dining, entertainment, and local/small businesses,
bolstered by special programming and a sense of place.

The city’s strongest opportunities for creating this type of environment lie along Pacific Coast Highway and in
the Downtown Lomita area, particularly in the format of mixed-use buildings in a walkable environment.

Opportunities for Growth
Other future opportunities for growth in nonresidential land uses in the city include office space (particularly medical office) and hotel properties. While “traditional” central business district-focused office development has struggled in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic,
there are certain industries that continue to seek out
office space in smaller and more flexible formats.

These include creative and loft space, typically favored by tech and start-up companies; and medical office
space, particularly clustered around larger medical
centers. These types of office developments have
grown in the South Bay as a whole, and there may be
an opportunity for Lomita to participate in these trends over the long-term. On the medical office side, the City can leverage its existing healthcare employers to attract other healthcare-oriented businesses and providers.

In addition, development of a mixed-use downtown
environment could include the types of space and
amenities favored by users of creative office space.

The city’s existing hotel inventory is very modest,
particularly compared to neighboring cities and to
the region overall. However, its proximity to major
transportation corridors, including Pacific Coast
Highway, and to employment and tourism centers in the
South Bay, could present an opportunity to grow this
land use sector. This is likely to be a long-term strategy, given current challenges facing new hotel development,
but the City can lay the groundwork through the General Plan Update process to capture future opportunities as
they arise.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #22
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 15

HOUSING SITE IDENTIFICATION
California General Plan Housing Element law requires
local governments to adequately plan to meet existing
and projected housing needs, including accommodating
their fair share of the regional housing need. This share is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation
(RHNA) and is based on a Regional Housing Need
Allocation Plan (RHNA Plan) developed by each region’s
council of governments. The Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) is the lead agency
charged with developing the RHNA Plan for the area
that includes Los Angeles County and the City of Lomita.

As part of the region’s planning efforts during the
6th Cycle RHNA, which covers the planning period
October 2021 through October 2029, SCAG developed
a RHNA methodology to allocate housing units for each
jurisdiction consistent with projected household growth based on SCAG’s Connect SoCal Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)
Growth Forecast between 2020 and 2030. Based on
this methodology, the City of Lomita was allocated a
RHNA of 829 units for the 2021-2029 planning period.

The City of Lomita is not required to ensure that actual development to accommodate the RHNA occurs;
however, the City must facilitate housing production
by ensuring that land has the appropriate General Plan
and zoning designations to allow for development of the RHNA and that unnecessary development constraints
have been removed. The City of Lomita adopted its
6th Cycle Housing Element Update in December 2021,
which was subsequently revised and certified by the
State in October 2022.

The City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element includes Program
14, Rezone Program, which commits the City to rezoning
multiple parcels to high density mixed-use designations in order to accommodate its RHNA. Consistent with
State Housing Law, this rezone must occur no later than October 15, 2024. Specifically, the Rezone Program
consists of the following components:

Shortfall Rezone: The City will increase the allowable
density within the existing Mixed-Use Overlay to permit up to 30 dwelling units per acre with a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre, allowing exclusively
residential uses and requiring that at least 50 percent of the building floor area be dedicated to residential uses.

Remaining Moderate and Above-Moderate Income
Need Rezone: As described above, the City will rezone
to increase the allowable density within the existing
Mixed-Use Overlay to permit up to 30 dwelling units
per acre.

Buffer Rezone: To further expand housing
opportunities for within-resourced areas, the City will extend the Mixed-Use Overlay to additional sites not
already designated as mixed-use. This extension will
provide a buffer of housing capacity to ensure that
adequate capacity remains to accommodate the RHNA
throughout the planning period.

Development Standards: As described in Program 11
of the Housing Element, the City will pair the rezone
with new objective development and design standards
to allow multifamily development to be permitted
without discretion (i.e., by-right). Through the rezone and the development of the paired standards, the
City will perform site and design testing to ensure
that the development and design standards (including
maximum permitted heights) do not pose a constraint
to achieving the maximum permitted densities for each
respective site, including standards for those sites that fall under the MUO rezone. The City will also ensure
that covered parking is not required in the updated
standards for the MUO.

An update to the City’s Land Use Plan is required
to fulfill the commitments set forth in Program 14
(i.e., to accommodate the City’s RHNA) and maintain
consistency with the adopted Housing Element. The
Land Use Alternatives proposed as part of the General
Plan Update were designed with these objectives in
mind, and would position the City to meet its rezoning
deadline of October 15, 2024. Failure to complete the
required land use amendments by October 15, 2024
may result in decertification of the City’s Housing
Element and other penalties and fines allowed by State
Housing Law.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #23
16 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
W Lomita Blvd
W Anaheim St
Crenshaw Blvd
Western Ave
Palos Verdes Dr E
Skypark Dr
Western Ave
Crenshaw Blvd
Eshelman Ave
Lomita Blvd
Western Ave
Narbonne Ave
Palos Verdes Dr N
Alta Vista Ave
Oak St
Eshelman Ave
Walnut St
250th St
Pennsylvania Ave
253rd St
Cypress St
255th St
262nd St
243rd St
Ebony Ln
Doria Ave
245th St Woodward Ave
Appian Wy
Rolling Vista Dr
Viana Ave
Via
Desmonde
251st St
Via Marquette
254th St
263rdSt
Feijoa Ave
Andreo Ave
Fair v iew
Ave
247thPl
261st St
253rd Pl
240th St
248th St
241st St
247th St
Lucille Ave
256th St
Via MadonnaMonte Vista Ave
Regent Ave
252nd St
257th St
242nd St
249th St
246th St
246th Pl
1 Pacific Coast Hwy
T o r r a n c e
M u n i c i p a l
A i r p o r t
Los
Angeles
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Torrance
Rolling Hills
Estates
Torrance
Prepared for the City of Lomita by De Novo Planning Group, October 3, 2023.

Sources: Los Angeles County GIS.
0 500 1,000
Feet
LEGEND
Lomita City Boundary
Other Incorporated Area
Residential - Single Family
Residential - Duplex
Residential - Multi-Family
Residential - Mobile Home Park
Commercial
Commercial/Recreational
Industrial
Government - Educational Uses
Government - Public Facilities
Institutional
Miscellaneous/Utilities
Park
Figure 2: Existing Land Uses
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #24
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 17

EXISTING LAND USES
Lomita features well-established residential
neighborhoods, local businesses, and a charming
downtown which come together to create a special
sense of place and family-friendly community that
residents adore. The city’s size gives it a “small-town” feel and, along with City-sponsored events and ample
opportunities for social interaction, allows residents to create strong neighborhood connections, and facilitates a community culture that provides an outstanding
quality of life.

Lomita is located at the base of the Palos Verdes Hills in the South Bay region of the Los Angeles metropolitan
area. Regional access to the city is provided by Interstate 110 via Pacific Coast Highway, which provides access to Lomita and the greater Los Angeles region. Crenshaw
Boulevard and Western Avenue are major arterials
along the eastern and western borders of the city and
provide access to Interstate 405, approximately four
miles north of city limits.

When discussing land use, it is important to distinguish between existing land uses that reflect on-the-ground
development and planned land uses. The Los Angeles
County Assessor’s office maintains a database of
existing “on-the-ground” land uses on individual
parcels, including the number of dwelling units and
related improvements such as nonresidential building
square footage. However, it should be noted that the
Los Angeles County Assessor’s data does not always
accurately reflect existing on-the-ground conditions.

For the purposes of the City’s General Plan Update,
the Los Angeles County Assessor’s data was used as
a starting point for establishing baseline conditions
and updated and modified, where possible, to reflect
conditions more accurately. As reflected in the map
on the opposite page, Lomita is primarily composed
of low-density housing (e.g., single-family detached,
duplex/double unit). Commercial uses are primarily
located along the major corridors, such as Pacific Coast Highway, Lomita Boulevard, and Narbonne Avenue.

As noted, Lomita is almost entirely built-out, leaving
little to no flexibility for development on vacant sites.

Accessor’s parcel data reveals that 54 total parcels in Lomita are vacant. However, the majority of these sites are not available for development. Many of the sites are irregularly shaped parcels wedged behind developed
sites with no street access; some serve as rights-ofway; and others are parking lots, which do not meet the definition of a vacant site. Upon preparation of the General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report, all
baseline conditions will be updated to accurately reflect on-the-ground development at the time environmental
impacts are analyzed. Table 2 below represents the
existing development totals for the City of Lomita.

Table 2: Existing Development Estimates
Units 1 Population 1 Nonresidential Square
Footage (SF) 2 Jobs 3
8,274 21,843 2,528,297 3,036
(1) U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2021; Economic & Planning Systems. (2) Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office, 2023.
(3) Existing jobs estimates are based on 2020 Longitudinal Housing Employment Data prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau (note that 2020 represents the most recent data set for this source of employment information).

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #25
18 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
The City of Lomita General Plan Land Use Plan
designates land uses within the city. Residential land
uses are described based on allowable density and
nonresidential land uses are described based on
allowable intensity. “Density” is described in terms of dwelling units per net acre of land (du/ac). Development “intensity” refers to the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) for nonresidential development. FAR represents the
ratio of building square footage to lot size determined by dividing the total gross floor area of all buildings on a lot by the land area of that lot. Figure 3 provides an example of how the same FAR can look depending on
the number of floors and building configuration.

Current and New Land Use Designations
The Land Use Alternatives are based on the land use
designations in the current General Plan. However,
seven new mixed-use land use designations (Mixed-Use
– 40, Mixed-Use – 70, Mixed-Use – 90, ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use – 40, Manufacturing-Commercial Mixed-Use – 70, Manufacturing-Commercial Mixed-Use –
90, and Retail Mixed-Use) have been proposed to support the community’s vision for future development (note that the City’s Current Mixed-Use Overlay is renamed to MU
– 22 or MU – 30, depending on the Alternative, to reflect implementation of Program 14 of the Housing Element).

New designations proposed to be applied to some or all
of the alternatives are highlighted in yellow in Table 3.

Example images for the new land uses presented at the
end of this section. Some of these new uses only apply in limited ways to select Alternatives. If the Preferred Land Use Plan does not reflect one or more of the new land
uses anywhere in the city, that new land use designation would not be included in the new General Plan. All land use designations are subject to further refinement based on the Preferred Land Use Plan’s objectives.

New Land Use Designation Example
Illustrations
In the pages following the Land Use Designations (Table 3), the Report includes general representative pictures of project and building types that illustrate the vision for each of the new land use designations. These photos
should be used for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to represent required architecture or specific development standards (which would be defined in the
City’s Zoning Code, not the General Plan). Rather, these photos are intended to demonstrate how these new land
use designations could support development of vibrant
and dynamic activity centers in key locations throughout the community.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #26
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 19
Figure 3: Floor Area Ratio Example
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #27
20 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Table 3: Land Use Designations
Name Definition Notes
Residential Designations
Agricultural
0-10.89 du/ac
Provides for the development of residential uses of lower density and where the keeping of farm animals is generally permitted. Development densities of up to 10.89 units per net acre are permitted. Any new land division or subdivision must reflect the Low Density Residential intensity standards if the lot sizes for individual units are less than 10,000 square feet.

Streamlined
definition. No change
to density.

Low Density
Residential

5.8-10.89 du/ac
Provides for the development of single-family residential land uses. The allowable development density is 5.8 to 10.89 units per net acre.

Streamlined
definition. No change
to density.

Medium Density
Residential

10.9-19.8 du/ac
Provides for the development of a range of residential land uses, including single-family detached and attached, duplexes, multifamily dwellings, and mobile home communities. The allowable development density for this category is 10.9 to 19.8 units per net acre.

Updated definition.

No change to density.

High Density
Residential

19.8-43.6 du/ac
Provides for the development of a range of multifamily
dwellings and mobile home communities. The allowable
development density for this category is 19.8 to 43.6 units per net acre.

Streamlined
definition. No change
to density.

Nonresidential Designations
Commercial
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of retail, professional office, medical, service-oriented business activities, and hospitality facilities, many of which are roadway oriented and serve a community-wide area and population. The maximum intensity of development is a floor area ratio of 1:1.

Updated definition.

No change to
intensity.

Industrial/
Manufacturing
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for a range of medium and light industrial uses, such as manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, and other industrial uses that can be conducted indoors or behind effective screening. The maximum FAR for this designation is 1:1.

Updated definition.

No change to
intensity.

Publicly Owned
Land
Provides for facilities built and maintained for public uses such as the Civic Center, Fire Station, County Offices, Library, Museum, and Navy Fuel Storage facility. The designation also applies to schools, churches, parks, and often public and quasipublic uses.

Updated definition.

No change to
intensity.

Mixed-Use Designations
Neighborhood
Mixed-Use

10.89 du/ac
Maximum

0.50:1 Maximum
FAR
Provides for the development of small retail-commercial uses such as general stores, cafes, and bakeries in existing residential neighborhoods to serve the needs of local
residents. The NMU designation would permit the conversion of homes at certain locations to such uses.

Residential development densities of up to 10.89 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 0.50:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component.

New designation.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #28
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 21
Name Definition Notes
Mixed-Use – 22
22 du/ac Maximum
1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of residential and nonresidential development on the same project site in lower-intensity mixeduse formats, either vertically (such as when residential uses are located over commercial uses) or horizontally (such as when the street frontage of a site is devoted to commercial uses with residential uses behind). This designation is intended to support lower-scale development in the City’s historic center, with a focus on maintaining smaller-scale development.

Residential development densities of up to 22 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed; stand-alone residential projects should be in proximity to nonresidential development.

Renamed and
updated designation
description (formerly
“Mixed-Use Overlay”).

Mixed-Use – 30
20-30 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of residential and nonresidential development on the same project site in mixed-use formats, either vertically (such as when residential uses are located over commercial uses) or horizontally (such as when the street frontage of a site is devoted to commercial uses with residential uses behind). This designation is intended to support lower-scale development in the city’s historic center, with a focus on maintaining smaller-scale development.

Residential development densities of 20 to 30 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed; stand-alone residential projects should be in proximity to nonresidential development.

New designation.

Mixed-Use – 40
20-40 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of residential and nonresidential development on the same project site in mixed-use formats, either vertically (such as when residential uses are located over commercial uses) or horizontally (such as when the street frontage of a site is devoted to commercial uses with residential uses behind).

Residential development densities of 20 to 40 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed; stand-alone residential projects should be in proximity to nonresidential development.

New designation.

Mixed-Use – 70
20-70 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of residential and nonresidential development on the same project site in mixed-use formats, either vertically (such as when residential uses are located over commercial uses) or horizontally (such as when the street frontage of a site is devoted to commercial uses with residential uses behind).

Residential development densities of 20 to 70 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed; stand-alone residential projects should be in proximity to nonresidential development.

New designation.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #29
22 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Name Definition Notes
Mixed-Use – 90
20-90 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of residential and nonresidential development on the same project site in mixed-use formats, either vertically (such as when residential uses are located over commercial uses) or horizontally (such as when the street frontage of a site is devoted to commercial uses with residential uses behind).

Residential development densities of 20 to 90 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed; stand-alone residential projects should be in proximity to nonresidential development.

New designation.

ManufacturingCommercial MixedUse – 40
20-40 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of stand-alone industrial/ manufacturing, residential, and supportive uses in primarily “horizontal” formats. This designation allows for a gradual transformation of uses over time while allowing for the historic industrial/manufacturing development pattern to remain as an allowable and envisioned use within the designated area.

Residential development densities of 20 to 40 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed.

New designation.

ManufacturingCommercial MixedUse – 70
20-70 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of stand-alone industrial/ manufacturing, residential, and supportive uses in primarily “horizontal” formats. This designation allows for a gradual transformation of uses over time while allowing for the historic industrial/manufacturing development pattern to remain as an allowable and envisioned use within the designated area.

Residential development densities of 20 to 70 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed.

New designation.

ManufacturingCommercial MixedUse – 90
20-90 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
Provides for the development of stand-alone industrial/ manufacturing, residential, and supportive uses in primarily “horizontal” formats. This designation allows for a gradual transformation of uses over time while allowing for the historic industrial/manufacturing development pattern to remain as an allowable and envisioned use within the designated area.

Residential development densities of 20 to 90 units per net acre are permitted. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development is a floor area ratio of 1:1. For projects which include residential and nonresidential components, the density requirements shall apply to the residential component and the FAR shall apply to the nonresidential component. Single-use projects are allowed.

New designation.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #30
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 23
Neighborhood Mixed-Use

NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED-USE
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #31
24 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Mixed-Use 22/Mixed-Use 30
MU 22
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #32
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 25
Mixed-Use 40
MU 40
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #33
26 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Mixed-Use 70
MU 70
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #34
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 27
Mixed-Use 90
MU 90
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #35
28 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Manufacturing/Commercial Mixed-Use 40
MCMU 40
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #36
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 29
Manufacturing/Commercial Mixed-Use 70
MCMU 70
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #37
30 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Manufacturing/Commercial Mixed-Use 90
MCMU 90
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #38
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 31

LAND USE ALTERNATIVES

INTRODUCTION TO ALTERNATIVES
This section presents the four Land Use Alternatives
along with a comparative analysis addressing
projected growth, generation of new vehicular trips,
fiscal impacts, and infrastructure improvements. The
information presented in this analysis is intended
to foster informed discussions and decision-making
considering what to reflect in the Preferred Land Use
Plan.

Each Alternative is intended to present a different
approach to planning the future of Lomita. The Land
Use Alternatives are presented so that potential
impacts can be considered citywide. This provides
a comparative level of analysis of impacts and
the Alternatives should be considered alongside
the growth projections identified for the city, by
Alternative, as described in the prior section.

Each Land Use Alternative intends to meet the
following objectives formulated through public input:

1.Preserve, protect, and enhance the city’s existing
residential neighborhoods

2.Celebrate and enhance Downtown Lomita

3.Expand the range of housing choices to allow more
people to live and work in Lomita

4.Encourage new desirable uses in Lomita and
expand the local economy

5.Promote walkability to everyday uses

6.Create pedestrian-scaled environments

7.Target housing growth to support commercial
activity

8.Reinforce corridors with memorable places

9.Create a fiscally-sustainable land use plan
with balanced residential and nonresidential
development
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #39
32 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

LAND USE, HOUSING, AND
JOBS
One of the General Plan’s primary objectives
is to establish the reasonable long-term
buildout potential for housing units,
population, nonresidential building square
footage, and employment that could be
generated by the Land Use Plan. Buildout
capacity is calculated by three factors: 1) the
density and intensity (floor area ratio) allowed
per acre; 2) the number of acres of land that
can be developed as a particular land use;
and 3) the increases in units, population,
square footage, and employment associated
with new development at buildout.

As previously discussed, this Report does
not advocate for one Alternative over
another. Rather, the intent of presenting
four Alternatives is to better illustrate
comprehensive implications associated with
accommodating housing and job growth at
different densities and intensities in various
locations throughout the City.

In order to understand the comparison,
Table 4 identifies the distribution of acreage
by land use designation for each Alternative.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #40
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 33
Table 4: Acreage by Land Use Designation
Land Use Designation 1
Alternative 1:

Business as
Usual (BAU)
Alternative 2: Baseline Alternative 3: Core and
Perimeter
Alternative 4:

Neighborhood Nodes
Total Change
from BAU 2 Total Change
from BAU 2 Total Change from BAU 2
Residential Development Use
Agricultural 90 90 0% 90 0% 89 -1%
Low Density 506 506 0% 504 0% 487 -4%
Medium Density 66 66 0% 63 -5% 63 -5%
High Density 50 47 -6% 14 -72% 14 -72%
Nonresidential Development Use
Commercial 106 85 -20% 3 -97% 3 -97%
Neighborhood Mixed-Use - - - - - 18 100%
Mixed-Use - 22 55 - -100% - -100% - -100%
Mixed-Use - 30 - 15 100% 13 100% 13 100%
Mixed-Use - 40 - 63 100% 144 100% 94 100%
Mixed-Use - 70 - - - 41 100% 50 100%
Mixed-Use - 90 - - - - - 41 100%
MCMU - 40 - 15 100% 8 100% - 100%
MCMU - 70 - - - 7 100% 8 100%
MCMU - 90 - - - - - 7 100%
Industrial/Manufacturing 14 - -100% - -100% - -100%
Limited Development Uses
Publicly Owned Land 93 93 0% 93 0% 93 0%
Right-of-Way 243 243 0% 243 0% 243 0%
TOTAL 1,223 1,223 - 1,223 - 1,223 -
(1) Numbers may not add due to rounding
(2) For new land use designations where existing acreage is zero, Change from BAU is reflected as a 100% increase.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #41
34 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Potential Buildout
Table 5 compares the projected amount of housing and nonresidential development in the city in 2045 under each Alternative, with existing development (2023) included for reference. Using Alternative 1: Business as Usual (BAU) as a comparison, the Table also includes relative growth over BAU to assist with understanding land use, housing, and job implications associated with potential land use changes. The potential buildout numbers are based on assumed density and intensity levels for each land use type. The assumptions for densities and intensities by designation are presented in Appendix A for reference.

The potential buildout summary is not a goal; it simply represents the reasonable development potential that could occur within the community over the coming decades. It is used to help determine things such as roadway improvements, number of parks needed, potential environmental impacts, utility capacities, and mitigation (if any) required to offset impacts that could occur with implementation of the General Plan. The development potential of each individual parcel is influenced not only by the land use designation, but by market conditions, physical site characteristics, environmental constraints, infrastructure requirements, and detailed standards in the Zoning Code.

Therefore, we do not assume that all parcels will be redeveloped and we do not assume that parcels will develop to their maximum potential (end of the density or intensity range) because there is inherently some variation in development types within any given land use. The information contained in Table 5 below are estimates and further refinement of potential buildout will be prepared for the Preferred Land Use Plan.

Table 5: Summary of Potential Buildout Under Land Use Alternatives Percentage Comparison Existing
Development
1, 2, 3
Alternative
1: Business
as Usual
(BAU)
Alternative 2: Baseline Alternative 3: Core and
Perimeter
Alternative 4:

Neighborhood Nodes
Total
Change
from BAU
% Change
from BAU
Total
Change
from BAU
% Change
from BAU
Total
Change
from BAU
% Change
from BAU
Units 8,274 8,945 9,485 540 6% 10,422 1,477 17% 11,279 2,334 26% Single-Family 4,777 5,261 5,252 (9) 0% 5,371 110 2% 5,268 7 0% Multifamily 3,497 3,685 4,233 548 15% 5,050 1,365 37% 6,011 2,326 63% Population 21,843 23,616 25,040 1,424 6% 27,513 3,897 17% 29,777 6,161 26% Single-Family 12,611 13,888 13,867 (21) 0% 14,181 293 2% 13,907 19 0% Multifamily 9,232 9,727 11,174 1,447 15% 13,333 3,606 37% 15,869 6,142 63% Nonresidential
Square Feet 2,527,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 97,973 4% 2,875,327 240,169 9% 2,931,334 296,176 11% Jobs 3,036 3,217 3,415 198 6% 3,593 376 12% 3,633 416 13% (1) Existing population is based on the U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2021. (2) Existing nonresidential square footage is based on information provided by the Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office, 2023. This figure has been crosschecked with available commercial real estate transaction data from CoStar which confirms the above estimate. (3) Existing jobs estimates are based on 2020 Longitudinal Housing Employment Data prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau (note that 2020 represents the most recent data set for this source of employment information).

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #42
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 35
Residential Development
Each of the Alternatives acknowledges that the City of Lomita will grow over time and plans to accommodate varying degrees of growth over the next twenty years, primarily in mixed-use formats where new homes can be developed close to goods, services, and transportation facilities. The majority of new homes are anticipated to be multifamily development at densities generally between 30 du/ac and 90 du/ac. Homes at these densities and in these locations are more likely to be financially attainable for people like teachers, public safety officers, service workers, empty-nesters looking to downsize their homes, students of nearby colleges and universities, and employees of some of Lomita’s most important businesses.

Table 6 presents the estimated number of new housing units by land use type for each Alternative and the percentage they represent of the total for each Alternative. These estimates are based on the buildout assumptions customized for each land use designation as described in Appendix A.

Table 6: Residential Potential by Land Use Type
Alternative 1: Business
as Usual (BAU) Alternative 2: Baseline Alternative 3: Core and Perimeter Alternative 4:

Neighborhood Nodes
Total
Units
Percent of
Total
Total
Units
Percent of
Total
Total
Units
Percent of
Total
Total
Units
Percent of
Total
Residential Designations 8,337 93% 8,224 87% 6,773 65% 6,612 59% Agricultural 785 9% 785 8% 782 8% 776 7%
Low Density 4,410 49% 4,407 46% 4,392 42% 4,248 38%
Medium Density 1,181 13% 1,181 12% 1,127 11% 1,116 10%
High Density 1,961 22% 1,851 20% 472 5% 472 4%
Mixed-Use Designations 1 608 7% 1,261 13% 3,649 35% 4,667 41% Neighborhood Mixed-Use - 0% - 0% - 0% 155 1%
Mixed-Use - 22 608 7% - 0% - 0% - 0%
Mixed-Use - 30 - 0% 167 2% 141 1% 141 1%
Mixed-Use - 40 - 0% 887 9% 2,026 19% 1,328 12%
Mixed-Use - 70 - 0% - 0% 1,197 11% 1,196 11%
Mixed-Use - 90 - 0% - 0% - 0% 1,441 13%
MCMU - 40 - 0% 207 2% 105 1% - 0%
MCMU - 70 - 0% - 0% 180 2% 181 2%
MCMU - 90 - 0% - 0% - 0% 225 2%
Total 8,945 - 9,485 - 10,422 - 11,279 -
(1) Areas designated as Mixed-Use which allow for residential development may be developed with stand-alone residential uses, stand-alone nonresidential uses, or a combination of uses located in the same building (i.e., vertical mixed-use). For the purposes of this analysis, residential development at the assumed densities as defined in Appendix A have been applied consistently across all Mixed-Use acreage thereby representing the upper boundaries of the existing residential development. In all likelihood, not all parcels within a Mixed-Use land use designation will develop with residential uses.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #43
36 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
W Lomita Blvd
W Anaheim St
Crenshaw Blvd
Western Ave
Palos Verdes Dr E
Skypark Dr
Western Ave
Crenshaw Blvd
Eshelman Ave
Lomita Blvd
Western Ave
Narbonne Ave
Palos Verdes Dr N
Alta Vista Ave
Oak St
Eshelman Ave
Walnut St
250th St
Pennsylvania Ave
253rd St
Cypress St
255th St
262nd St
243rd St
Ebony Ln
Doria Ave
245th St Woodward Ave
Appian Wy
Rolling Vista Dr
Viana Ave
Via
Desmonde
251st St
Via Marquette
254th St
263rdSt
Feijoa Ave
Andreo Ave
Fair v iew
Ave
247thPl
261st St
253rd Pl
240th St
248th St
241st St
247th St
Lucille Ave
256th St
Via MadonnaMonte Vista Ave
Regent Ave
252nd St
257th St
242nd St
249th St
246th St
246th Pl
1 Pacific Coast Hwy
T o r r a n c e
M u n i c i p a l
A i r p o r t
Los
Angeles
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Torrance
Rolling Hills
Estates
Torrance
Prepared for the City of Lomita by De Novo Planning Group, October 3, 2023.

Sources: Los Angeles County GIS.
0 500 1,000
Feet
LEGEND
Lomita City Boundary
Other Incorporated Area
R-AG: Residential - Agriculture
R-LD: Residential - Low Density
R-MD: Residential - Medium Density
R-HD: Residential - High Density
C: Commercial
I/M: Industrial/Manufacturing
POL: Publicly Owned Land
MUO: Mixed-Use Overlay
Figure 4: Alternative 1, Business as Usual
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #44
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 37
ALTERNATIVE 1: BUSINESS AS
USUAL
Alternative 1, Business as Usual (BAU), describes the
existing land use setting for the City of Lomita which
was conceived in the current General Plan to enhance
livability, local employment, and fiscal stability by
promoting housing and economic activity. The land
uses are presently laid out in a traditional grid with
commercial and light industrial activity along major
thoroughfares running north/south and east/west,
and with residential uses, primarily low and medium
density housing, dominating the landscape. Lomita
is nestled into the base of the Palos Verdes Peninsula
and is largely defined by its dense urban environment,
predominantly residential development pattern, and
smaller town atmosphere.

Lomita was incorporated as a city in 1964 to halt
any further annexation by neighboring jurisdictions
and to promote a small-scale, low-rise development
pattern thought to be more suitable for families.

Although density and intensity have increased since
incorporation, Lomita’s residential development
pattern remains one of low density with 51% of housing
units in 2019 being one-unit detached dwellings.

Furthermore, the 2021-2029 Housing Element notes
that from 2010 to 2019, Lomita experienced significant
growth in one-unit detached units (approximately a 7%
increase) and in five or more units (approximately an 8% increase). This may indicate that there is a desirability in the market to develop both single-family and higher
density multifamily uses. However, given that there
is no minimum density requirement in Lomita and
opportunities for higher density development may be
limited, and given that zones that permit multifamily
development also permit single-family development,
there leaves fewer opportunities under the Business as
Usual Alternative for multifamily development.

Commercial uses and employment clusters are
concentrated along Pacific Coast Highway (PCH),
Lomita Boulevard, and Narbonne Avenue, and to a
lesser extent on Western Avenue, Palos Verdes Drive
North, and Crenshaw Boulevard. Generally, the city’s
commercial and employment activity are separated
from residential land uses and concentrated along the
major arterial roads. The major arterial roads also carry high volumes of regional traffic and act as significant corridors for the South Bay area (e.g., PCH). Although
the separated land uses may have been envisioned to
create a community defined by a balanced residential
environment with sufficient amenities, including
shopping and entertainment, the success of this
approach is questionable given the economic “leakage”
Lomita is experiencing in the retail industry categories, meaning the City is not capturing much of the retail
spending by Lomita residents or any significant spending by residents of neighboring communities under current
conditions.

This Business as Usual approach provides the City
with a choice on whether any land use change should
occur within Lomita, or if the City would like to continue down its current path. Based on the assumptions for
this Alternative, there continues to be some limited
development potential when comparing BAU against
existing development/conditions. However, this
potential growth is limited and if the City continues
with BAU, sporadic new development (residential or
nonresidential) would be anticipated.

If the Business as Usual approach is selected, the City will fall out of compliance with its recently adopted 2021- 2029 Housing Element and can expect future General
Plan Amendments (GPAs) in order to accommodate
growth projections in the adopted Housing Element
and for future growth to ensure compliance with
Housing Element Law. Every eight years, the State of
California quantifies the need for housing within each
local jurisdiction through the Regional Housing Needs
Assessment (RHNA) process, and a number of housing
units are allocated to each jurisdiction. While the City of Lomita does not build affordable housing, it is obligated to appropriately designate land in the General Plan to
accommodate the housing unit allocation. The City will
experience three Housing Element cycles by the 2045
horizon year of this General Plan and will be required
to have suitable General Plan land use designations in
place to accommodate its “fair share” of housing growth.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #45
38 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
W Lomita Blvd
W Anaheim St
Crenshaw Blvd
Western Ave
Palos Verdes Dr E
Skypark Dr
Western Ave
Crenshaw Blvd
Eshelman Ave
Lomita Blvd
Western Ave
Narbonne Ave
Palos Verdes Dr N
Alta Vista Ave
Oak St
Eshelman Ave
Walnut St
250th St
Pennsylvania Ave
253rd St
Cypress St
255th St
262nd St
243rd St
Ebony Ln
Doria Ave
245th St Woodward Ave
Appian Wy
Rolling Vista Dr
Viana Ave
Via
Desmonde
251st St
Via Marquette
254th St
263rdSt
Feijoa Ave
Andreo Ave
Fair v iew
Ave
247thPl
261st St
253rd Pl
240th St
248th St
241st St
247th St
Lucille Ave
256th St
Via MadonnaMonte Vista Ave
Regent Ave
252nd St
257th St
242nd St
249th St
246th St
246th Pl
1 Pacific Coast Hwy
T o r r a n c e
M u n i c i p a l
A i r p o r t
Los
Angeles
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Torrance
Rolling Hills
Estates
Torrance
Prepared for the City of Lomita by De Novo Planning Group, October 3, 2023.

Sources: Los Angeles County GIS.
0 500 1,000
Feet
LEGEND
Lomita City Boundary
Other Incorporated Area
R-AG: Residential -
Agriculture
R-LD: Residential -
Low Density
R-MD: Residential -
Medium Density
R-HD: Residential -
High Density
C: Commercial
I/M: Industrial/
Manufacturing
POL: Publicly Owned Land
MU30: Mixed-Use 30
MU40: Mixed-Use 40
MCMU40: ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use 40
Figure 5: Alternative 2, Baseline
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #46
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 39
ALTERNATIVE 2: BASELINE
Alternative 2, Baseline, envisions an expansion of
the housing choices in Lomita by allowing for the
development of multifamily housing affordable to lowerincome households in areas with access to resources and opportunity, particularly as part of mixed-use
development projects. Moreover, Alternative 2 would
accommodate the implementation of Housing Element
Program 14: Rezone Program, which requires the City
to rezone certain identified sites to (1) accommodate a shortfall for the lower-income RHNA, (2) accommodate
the remaining moderate and above-moderate income
RHNA need; and (3) create a buffer of capacity for the
lower and moderate-income RHNA.

By directing future development toward the
introduction of new housing options supported by a
mix of different uses, this Alternative envisions the city with additional housing choices that support diverse
community growth. The expanded housing options
depicted in this Alternative will support a wider range of housing densities from townhomes to stacked flats
and apartments where parking facilities can be hidden
from view (i.e., “wrapped”) by attractive units and
architecture.

At its heart, Alternative 2 preserves the smaller scale of Downtown Lomita, applying the Guiding Principle
of celebrating and enhancing the downtown. Density
in the downtown core would change only modestly to
30 du/ac for mixed-use projects (up from 22 du/ac).

Consistent with the adopted Housing Element, areas
along Lomita Boulevard (east and west) and Narbonne
Avenue (between Lomita Boulevard and PCH) would
be redesignated as either Mixed-Use – 40 (MU 40) or
Manufacturing-Commercial Mixed-Use (MCMU). MU
40 would permit mixed-use development at densities
between 30-40 du/ac and represent a land use
designation change on sites currently designated with
the Mixed-Use Overlay or as Commercial. Likewise, the
MCMU designation would permit mixed-use projects on
sites currently designated as Industrial/Manufacturing
and at densities up to 40 du/ac.

Alternative 2 can be construed as the option that
minimally meets the requirements of the 2021-2029
Housing Element, which specifically identified sites with the capacity for rezoning to accommodate the City’s
RHNA allocation. Note that the sites in the Housing
Element are not always adjacent and may be separated
by parcels not included in the Housing Element Sites
Inventory, but that the new land use designations
capture the identified sites within a defined, contiguous area and include both the Housing Element sites and
additional parcels that would logically make up the area (e.g., along an entire block face on Lomita Boulevard).

The changes offered in Alternative 2 will create attainable home choices that will foster the opportunity for a
range of people to call Lomita home. With new higher
density housing options, the city will attract young
professionals, students, and middle-income workers
within the South Bay area, while enabling empty-nesters and those looking to downsize to remain within their
current community. The expanded residential choices
will allow long-time and new residents to grow within
their community as they transition through different
life stages, thereby strengthening the community
core. Additionally, new housing opportunities will allow people currently working in Lomita to have housing
options closer to their jobs, thereby reducing commute
times, vehicle miles traveled, and impacts to local
infrastructure.

Moreover, the additional living options imagined in
Alternative 2 will be added near existing activity and
job clusters in the city. Concentrating the new housing options into identified key nodes and corridors will ensure that housing growth is focused in areas strategically
identified for change, thereby protecting the remainder of the city and existing residential neighborhoods. The range of new housing will be concentrated adjacent to
major transportation corridors to insulate the existing community from traffic complications associated with
new development and community growth. Alternative 2
works to supplement Lomita’s housing supply to bolster
the vitality of the community, and targets locations
to safeguard the city’s existing assets. Alternative 2
broadens and fortifies the housing market in Lomita.

The selection of Alternative 2, Baseline, would provide for new housing options in the city supported by a
mix of different uses. Moreover, Alternative 2 would
accommodate the implementation of Housing Element
Program 14: Rezone Program, which is required to be in
place by October 15, 2024.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #47
40 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
W Lomita Blvd
W Anaheim St
Crenshaw Blvd
Western Ave
Palos Verdes Dr E
Skypark Dr
Western Ave
Crenshaw Blvd
Eshelman Ave
Lomita Blvd
Western Ave
Narbonne Ave
Palos Verdes Dr N
Alta Vista Ave
Oak St
Eshelman Ave
Walnut St
250th St
Pennsylvania Ave
253rd St
Cypress St
255th St
262nd St
243rd St
Ebony Ln
Doria Ave
245th St Woodward Ave
Appian Wy
Rolling Vista Dr
Viana Ave
Via
Desmonde
251st St
Via Marquette
254th St
263rdSt
Feijoa Ave
Andreo Ave
Fair v iew
Ave
247thPl
261st St
253rd Pl
240th St
248th St
241st St
247th St
Lucille Ave
256th St
Via MadonnaMonte Vista Ave
Regent Ave
252nd St
257th St
242nd St
249th St
246th St
246th Pl
1 Pacific Coast Hwy
T o r r a n c e
M u n i c i p a l
A i r p o r t
Los
Angeles
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Torrance
Rolling Hills
Estates
Torrance
Prepared for the City of Lomita by De Novo Planning Group, October 3, 2023.

Sources: Los Angeles County GIS.
0 500 1,000
Feet
LEGEND
Lomita City Boundary
Other Incorporated Area
R-AG: Residential -
Agriculture
R-LD: Residential -
Low Density
R-MD: Residential -
Medium Density
R-HD: Residential -
High Density
C: Commercial
I/M: Industrial/
Manufacturing
POL: Publicly Owned Land
MU30: Mixed-Use 30
MU40: Mixed-Use 40
MU70: Mixed-Use 70
MCMU40: ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use 40
MCMU70: ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use 70
Figure 6: Alternative 3, Core and Perimeter
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #48
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 41
ALTERNATIVE 3: CORE AND

PERIMETER
Alternative 3, Core and Perimeter, builds on Baseline
and is perhaps the most transformational option relative to the city’s current development state. Alternative 3
provides the catalyst for revitalization along Pacific Coast Highway and at other key nodes in the city by expanding where higher density mixed-use development can occur
in Lomita. PCH, Lomita Boulevard, and Narbonne Avenue
are transformed into active and appealing corridors by
incorporating more intense mixed-use development
patterns which generate larger buildings, greater
housing options, more usable nonresidential square
footage, and additional employment opportunities. This
Alternative envisions Lomita attracting a more diverse
cross-section of households and encouraging new
desirable nonresidential uses to support the growing
housing market.

As with Alternative 2, Core and Perimeter continues to
preserve Downtown Lomita, maintaining the small town
feel of the downtown, and also protects the city’s existing lower density residential neighborhoods. Housing
growth is focused along the city’s main corridors with
allowable density gradually increasing towards three
key nodes in the city – at the east and west edges of
Lomita Boulevard and at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Narbonne Avenue. Lomita Boulevard
would be “bookended” by the newly constructed Kaia
South Bay Apartments on the western end of Lomita
Boulevard and a project(s) of similar scale on the eastern end of Lomita Boulevard. Likewise, the node at PCH
and Narbonne Avenue (which is already seeing new
commercial investment interest, such as from Target and Grocery Outlet) would permit mixed-use development at
densities of up to 70 du/ac, which would allow the node to gain enough critical mass to reinvigorate the area and help (re)create a walkable urban environment. Alternative 3 also emphasizes growth in the southern end of the city and would permit mixed-use development at densities
of up to 40 du/ac on sites along Palos Verdes Drive North and Western Avenue.

The intent of this Alternative is to re-envision and revitalize Lomita’s main corridors by incentivizing development on underutilized properties and creating environments in
the city that are memorable and have a “sense of place.” The increased density will provide an atmosphere for
commercial uses that may be missing from Lomita and
which will cater to the growing population. New mixed
residential-commercial development in Lomita will
bring improved economic benefits and allow the city to
compete with cities that currently dominate the regional retail and employment markets.

Alternative 3 imagines mixed-use development beyond
the downtown core with an emphasis on realizing the
development potential of the city’s main corridors
and injecting vitality into important areas such as
along Pacific Coast Highway. Key nodes would see
development at higher densities and intensities, which
would bring new life to the areas and promote walkable
urban places. Alternative 3 offers a range of new housing options while stimulating economic development in
areas that are visible and easily accessible to regional transportation, minimizing traffic within the city and
preventing negative externalities for the existing
lower density neighborhoods. The new growth will
simultaneously support existing businesses by creating
more attractive and productive economic centers at key
city locations, allowing for lively economic nodes.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #49
42 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
W Lomita Blvd
W Anaheim St
Crenshaw Blvd
Western Ave
Palos Verdes Dr E
Skypark Dr
Western Ave
Crenshaw Blvd
Eshelman Ave
Lomita Blvd
Western Ave
Narbonne Ave
Palos Verdes Dr N
Alta Vista Ave
Oak St
Eshelman Ave
Walnut St
250th St
Pennsylvania Ave
253rd St
Cypress St
255th St
262nd St
243rd St
Ebony Ln
Doria Ave
245th St Woodward Ave
Appian Wy
Rolling Vista Dr
Viana Ave
Via
Desmonde
251st St
Via Marquette
254th St
263rdSt
Feijoa Ave
Andreo Ave
Fair v iew
Ave
247thPl
261st St
253rd Pl
240th St
248th St
241st St
247th St
Lucille Ave
256th St
Via MadonnaMonte Vista Ave
Regent Ave
252nd St
257th St
242nd St
249th St
246th St
246th Pl
1 Pacific Coast Hwy
T o r r a n c e
M u n i c i p a l
A i r p o r t
Los
Angeles
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Torrance
Rolling Hills
Estates
Torrance
Prepared for the City of Lomita by De Novo Planning Group, October 3, 2023.

Sources: Los Angeles County GIS.
0 500 1,000
Feet
LEGEND
Lomita City Boundary
Other Incorporated Area
R-AG: Residential -
Agriculture
R-LD: Residential -
Low Density
R-MD: Residential -
Medium Density
R-HD: Residential -
High Density
C: Commercial
I/M: Industrial/
Manufacturing
POL: Publicly Owned Land
RMU: Residential Mixed-Use
MU30: Mixed-Use 30
MU40: Mixed-Use 40
MU70: Mixed-Use 70
MU90: Mixed-Use 90
MCMU40: ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use 40
MCMU70: ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use 70
MCMU90: ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use 90
Figure 7: Alternative 4, Neighborhood Nodes
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #50
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 43
ALTERNATIVE 4: NEIGHBORHOOD
NODES
Alternative 4, Neighborhood Nodes, offers a vision
for Lomita that maximizes housing growth over the
planning horizon of the General Plan and provides new
retail-commercial opportunities to serve the needs of
local residents. Alternative 4 allows for housing growth at proportions significantly greater than the Business
as Usual approach, and at densities and intensities
higher than allowed under BAU. Similar to Alternative
3, new housing and new employment uses would grow
in mixed-use formats along the main transportation
corridors in the community on a smaller scale.

This approach more than any other recognizes the
importance of expanded housing choices. Lomita is
imagined as a city with a full range of attractive, attainable, and affordable housing options complemented by
expanded employment opportunities. Alternative 4
builds from Alternative 3, Core and Perimeter, just as
Alternative 3 built on Alternative 2, Baseline – each
Alternative effectively adding a layer of density/intensity greater than the Alternative that preceded it.

Stemming from expressed public interest in walkability
and a desire to have neighborhood-serving commercial
uses within walking distance, Alternative 4 introduces
a Neighborhood Mixed-Use (NMU) designation that
would allow small businesses such as cafes, bakeries,
and specialty food stores at certain intersections
within the low-density residential neighborhoods. The
designation would permit the conversion of residential
structures to such uses to allow the businesses to blend in with the neighborhood and compliment the area. The
designation would not preclude single-family homes
from remaining single-family residential uses.

Mixed-use development for housing growth is maximized
in this Alternative and is strategically allocated along the city’s main corridors and at key nodes. As Lomita grows, Alternative 4 will focus that growth by increasing the
density and intensity within key locations to allow for stable growth and to minimize impacts on the existing
low-density residential neighborhoods. As new mixeduse activity centers develop over time and provide a range of new housing and employment choices,
residents will be better linked to their place of work
while providing businesses with a large clientele and a sufficient workforce nearby.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #51
44 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS
The fiscal impact analysis of General Plan land use
alternatives compares the expected increase in City
General Fund revenues with the increase in General
Fund costs from increased demand for public services
as a result of new development and the corresponding
growth in the City’s service population, which includes new residents and workers. As summarized in this
section and described in detail in Appendix B, the
analysis for Lomita’s General Plan considers the four
land use alternatives described previously in this Report.

While the impacts of the land use alternatives are
quantified based on a stabilized buildout outcome
(Buildout Potential), these impacts might evolve during buildout as well as subsequent years after completion.

Due to uncertainty about budgetary and economic
factors, this analysis does not consider the effect of
external changes affecting the City’s General Fund such as changes to State or federal laws affecting municipal budgets. In addition, the analysis is premised on the
City’s existing budgetary structure and assumes that
there will not be any significant changes in the way in which the City provides services or levies local tax and fee rates. Finally, the analysis assumes that the current City compensation structure remains constant in real
terms (e.g. adjusted for inflation).

It is also important to stress that net fiscal impacts
illustrated in this analysis (annual surpluses or deficits) are simply indicators of fiscal performance; they do not mean that the City will automatically have annual surplus revenues or deficits, because it must have a balanced
budget each year. Persistent shortfalls shown in a fiscal analysis may indicate the need to reduce service levels or obtain additional revenues; persistent surpluses will provide resources to reduce liabilities such as deferred maintenance, or to improve service levels.

The key findings presented in this section summarize
the analysis completed for the land use alternatives.

Detailed explanations of methodology for estimating
each revenue and expenditure category will be provided
as part of a separate report.

Key Findings
The key findings from the fiscal impact analysis
are summarized in Table 7 and Table 8 and further
described below. All results are expressed in constant
2023 dollars.

All four of the Alternatives are estimated to have a
positive net fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund
at buildout. As shown in Table 2, the net fiscal surplus associated with the land use alternatives is estimated to range between $725,000 and $1,800,000, representing
Table 7: Estimated Annual Fiscal Impacts of Net New Development at Buildout Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #52
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 45
an increase of approximately five to 13 percent over the General Fund’s current revenues. These net new fiscal
benefits would provide funds that the City could use to expand levels of public services and facilities. The level of estimated fiscal benefit increases along with projected service population across the alternatives. Therefore,
the Proposed Land Use Plan #3 (Neighborhood
Nodes), which includes the largest increase in new
service population, has the highest net fiscal benefit at buildout, followed by Proposed Land Use Plan #2 (Core
Perimeter) and Proposed Land Use Plan #1 (Baseline).

Buildout of the Current General Plan land use plan is
estimated to have the lowest net fiscal benefit.

The finding that General Fund revenues will increase
faster than costs, and therefore the net fiscal benefit will be higher with a greater increase in service population, stems in part from the assumption that many of the
City’s functions include a fixed cost component that
will accommodate growth without a proportional
increase in costs. For example, none of the Alternatives assume a major expansion in City owned or operated
infrastructure or facilities such as roads, parks, public safety or community buildings (e.g. police, fire, library, etc.) relative to baseline trends. In addition, many
City Departments include administrative components
that do not typically expand in proportion to service
population growth. While these results do not account
for major infrastructure investments or changes to
City policy that might impact municipal revenues or
costs (e.g., taxes or service levels), the positive results under these “business-as-usual” conditions suggests
that there is likely an opportunity as growth occurs for the City to make additional investments or changes in
service provision to serve community goals and needs
while still maintaining a balanced budget.

The analysis suggests that the net fiscal benefit per
resident is lower than the net fiscal benefit per worker, and that the net fiscal impact of single-family residential units are greater than that of multifamily units. While the property values of non-residential uses are lower
than those of residential uses, the relatively lower
impacts of workers on municipal services relative to
residents results in higher net fiscal benefits related to new workers, as shown in Table 8.

Within residential uses, both multifamily and singlefamily units have a positive net fiscal impact. However, the net fiscal impact of single-family units is estimated to be over 2.5 times greater than that of multifamily
units. This is driven primarily by the higher property
values associated with single-family units. However,
while this analysis assumes the same household size
for both types of units, it is likely that new multifamily units are likely to be smaller in size and have smaller household sizes than single-family units. This differential in household size will result in lower municipal service costs associated with multifamily units relative to singlefamily units and decrease the gap between their relative fiscal benefits.

While single-family development is likely to have a more favorable fiscal impact on a per unit basis, this is not necessarily the case on a per acre basis. For example,
the fiscal benefits of a townhome project with 20 units per acre, will would be comparable to a single-family
project with 8 units per acre, all else equal. This is an important consideration given the relatively built-out
nature of the City and limited opportunity for singlefamily development.

Table 8: Costs and Revenues Per Person and Unit
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #53
46 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT

MOBILITY CONSIDERATIONS
This section provides a summary mobility assessment
of land use alternatives for the City of Lomita General Plan Update (see Appendix C for the complete technical
report). This analysis was prepared to assist with
consideration of possible land use scenarios within the City of Lomita, in terms of their anticipated effect on the transportation network. For this effort, weekday daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour trips were estimated
for the land use alternatives utilizing industry-standard trip generation rates published in the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
Handbook, 11th Edition.

The City of Lomita General Plan Land Use Plan designates the permitted land uses within the city. For each land
use plan alternative under consideration for the General Plan Update, the aggregate of trips from existing and
future land uses were calculated. In addition, a trip
comparison is provided between existing and proposed
land uses to illustrate the added trips with each land
use plan alternative. This information was prepared to
support the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives
Report, which will be used by the City to select the land use plan to represent the community’s long-term vision
in the City’s General Plan Update.

Trip GeneraITE trip generation rates were used to
develop weekday daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour
trip generation for residential and non-residential land uses under each land use alternative. Trip rates were
multiplied by the anticipated development quantity
to estimate the associated number of trips with the
implementation of each land use plan alternative.

Detailed trip generation worksheets are provided in
Appendix 1. It should be noted that the trip generation estimates for the land use alternatives do not take into account trip internalization (i.e., trips that stay within a site rather than vehicle trips external to a site) and switching to non-vehicle modes which can result from
intensifying a mix of uses that is encouraged by mixeduse land use designations. However, the estimated are appropriate to compare the number of trips with each
land use plan and the relative differences between
alternatives.

Key transportation findings for this land use alternatives comparison are presented below:
• Trips from non-residential land uses are higher
compared to trips from residential land uses on a
daily basis and during the weekday PM peak hour.
• Alternative 1 (Baseline) is estimated to increase daily and peak hour trips in the city only by approximately
4 percent when compared to business-as-usual
scenario.
• Alternative 2 (Core and Perimeter) is estimated to
increase daily and peak hour trips in the city ranging
from 10 to 11 percent when compared to businessas-usual scenario. • Alternative 3 (Neighborhood Nodes) is estimated to
increase daily and peak hour trips ranging from 14
to 16 percent when compared to business-as-usual
scenario.
• The greatest changes in trips are a result of
added multi-family housing. The proposed singlefamily housing would result in little change in trip generation.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #54
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 47

INFRASTRUCTURE

CONSIDERATIONS
All Land Use Alternatives anticipate increased growth
through redevelopment of existing areas; increased
growth and redevelopment would, in turn, result in
impacts to the city’s infrastructure system.

Development identified as part of the Alternatives would be distributed throughout the city, primarily along
the major corridors. Stormwater and storm drainage
facilities are the responsibility of the City in every case.

Likewise, the City of Lomita’s Public Works Department
maintains the local water infrastructure throughout
the city, except for a small percentage of the city’s
population that is serviced by California Water Service.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles County Public Works maintains
the city’s local sewer facilities through a Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSDM).

Potential impacts and recommendations for evaluations
for each of the Land Use Alternatives are discussed
below.

Alternative 1: Business as Usual
Under Alternative 1, Business as Usual (BAU), the existing land use setting in Lomita would remain unchanged.

Nonetheless, there would continue to be some limited
development potential with Alternative 1 although this
potential growth is anticipated to be sporadic new infill development (residential or nonresidential).

The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for
the current General Plan (1998) estimated buildout
projections of 8,770 dwelling units and 9.4 million
square feet of commercial uses. Based on existing
development estimates and under Business as
Unusual, a total of 8,945 dwelling units and 2.6 million square feet of nonresidential uses are anticipated over the next 20 years – only a 2 percent increase in current buildout projections for housing but significantly less square footage for nonresidential uses. Existing water, sewer, and stormwater infrastructure all have sufficient capacity under Business as Usual to accommodate
growth with this Alternative.

Alternative 2: Baseline
Alternative 2, Baseline, reflects a scenario that can fully implement the 2021-2029 Lomita Housing Element and
its required housing programs. Consistent with the
adopted Housing Element, areas along Lomita Boulevard
(east and west) and Narbonne Avenue (between Lomita
Boulevard and PCH) would be redesignated for mixeduse development. The allowable density and intensity of development would increase on the affected parcels
and along the identified corridors under Alternative 2.

During the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update process,
infrastructure capacity/constraints were analyzed
for housing growth. Per the analysis in the Housing
Element, most future housing production will occur
from denser redevelopment due to the city’s built-out
nature. Assuming that the new units will be apartments
or condos (in a mixed-use format), if all of the identified sites in the Housing Element are redeveloped at their
full capacity, this would create an additional demand for water of 230,000 gallons per day (258 acre-feet annually), which the City’s water system has the capacity to satisfy.

Sewage is treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control
Plant (JWPCP) in Carson, which has a design capacity of 400 million gallons per day (MGD) and currently treats
280 MGD. Therefore, the JWPCP has a remaining capacity
of approximately 120 MGD, which can accommodate
the projected growth under Alternative 2. The City’s
existing storm drain infrastructure can accommodate
the projected runoff from the potential development
anticipated for Alternative 2. The projected stormwater runoff is not anticipated to significantly increase with future residential development given the nature and
extent of existing impervious surfaces within the city
and its built-out nature.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #55
48 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Alternative 3: Core and Perimeter
Alternative 3 provides for mixed-use development
beyond the downtown core with an emphasis on realizing
the development potential of the city’s main corridors, including Pacific Coast Highway, Lomita Boulevard,
Narbonne Avenue, Western Avenue, and Palos Verdes
Drive North. As well, key nodes would see development
at higher densities and intensities. Alternative 3
anticipates the replacement of approximately 116
acres of Commercial and Industrial land uses with a
combination of Mixed-Use (MU) and ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use (MCMU) land uses.

Due to the built-out nature of the city and the fact that any new mixed-use development would be infill, the
change in land use will have little impact on surface
drainage compared to existing conditions, and the
stormwater impacts will be marginal. The City has a
storm drain system comprised of catch basins and
storm drain lines that convey stormwater runoff within
roadways and underground before discharging into Los
Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) regional conveyance facilities. The City and LACFCD monitor
and maintain their respective infrastructure to ensure
the system functions effectively. Furthermore, the City of Lomita has a 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
Master Plan in place, which includes a plan for future
stormwater projects. Please note that these findings
apply to Alternative 4 as well.

Although the water and wastewater characteristics
of this Alternative will need to be determined, it
is anticipated that water demand and wastewater
generation will likely be increased beyond that
projected for the current land uses. The City of Lomita’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) did not
identify the land uses anticipated in this Alternative, and therefore the water and wastewater impacts
have not been evaluated. An Infrastructure Technical
Report to support the technical analysis included in
the Environmental Impact Report will be prepared to
determine water and wastewater impacts. Please note
that these findings apply to Alternative 4 as well.

Alternative 4: Neighborhood Nodes
Alternative 4 maximizes housing growth over the
planning horizon of the General Plan and provides new
retail-commercial opportunities to serve the needs of
local residents. The city’s main corridors, including Pacific Coast Highway, Lomita Boulevard, Narbonne Avenue,
Western Avenue, and Palos Verdes Drive North would
see development at higher densities and intensities
and a new Neighborhood Mixed-Use designation would
allow commercial uses at certain intersections within
the low-density residential neighborhoods. Alternative
4 anticipates the replacement of approximately 116
acres of Commercial and Industrial land uses with a
combination of Mixed-Use (MU) and ManufacturingCommercial Mixed-Use (MCMU) land uses. Furthermore, this Alternative anticipates the replacement of
approximately 16 acres of Low Density residential land
uses with Neighborhood Mixed-Use (NMU) land uses.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #56
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / 49

NEXT STEPS

PREFERRED LAND USE PLAN
The City Council, Planning Commission, GPAC, City
staff, and the consultant team will use this Report
to prepare and refine the Preferred Land Use Plan.

First, the GPAC will make recommendations for land
use and development intensity modifications to
the Current Land Use Plan (Alternative 1: Business
as Usual), considering the concepts described
and the areas identified in this Report. Next, the
Planning Commission and City Council will review
the GPAC’s input and recommendations, identify any
recommended changes for consideration, and direct
City staff and the consultant team to prepare the
Preferred Land Use Plan.

As the map evolves in the coming weeks, and the
Preferred Land Use Plan is developed, all materials
will be posted on the project’s website. Please refer to the Lomita Looking Up | General Plan Update website
(lomita.generalplan.org) for additional information,
including documents prepared for the project,
community surveys, and information regarding
upcoming meetings to discuss the project.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including all
necessary technical studies, will be prepared for the
General Plan Update and will analyze potential impacts
associated with implementation of the General Plan.

This analysis will be based on the buildout potential
tied to the Preferred Land Use Plan, as described
above. The EIR will clearly and comprehensively
evaluate potential environmental impacts, identify
mitigation measures and project alternatives that can
reduce impacts to a less than significant level, and
identify those impacts that cannot be reduced to a
less than significant level, stated as “significant and unavoidable.”
The EIR will serve as a “tiering document” to facilitate streamlined environmental review of all subsequent
development and infrastructure projects undertaken
in the city, which are consistent with the General Plan.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Preparation of the Draft General Plan Policy
Document and Draft Environmental Impact Report
will take several months after the Preferred Land Use
Plan is developed. Upon completion of these draft
documents, the City will begin a public review period
of the draft documents so that community members
and other stakeholders may comment on the General
Plan Update work products.

All material will be posted to the project website and
the City will host an open house in early 2024 at the
Civic Center so that community members can learn
more about the General Plan Update, the Draft Policy
Document, and any environmental impacts associated
with the project. All community feedback on the draft
documents will be summarized and delivered to
the Planning Commission and City Council for their
consideration alongside the draft documents.

The Draft General Plan and Draft EIR will be presented
to the Planning Commission and City Council during
the public review period to provide the community
further opportunities to comment on the documents.

Following completion of the Final EIR and revised
Draft General Plan Policy Document, these documents
will be brought to the Planning Commission for a
recommendation and to City Council for consideration
of adoption.

The City Council can, at any time, request modifications to the draft documents, including the Preferred Land
Use Plan; however, any significant deviations from the
Preferred Land Use Plan may necessitate additional
technical analysis to ensure all potential impacts are
adequately analyzed.

No draft documents should be construed as policy
decisions or policy direction until such time as
the required public hearings are complete and
the City Council has made a decision on the draft
documents.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #57
50 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #58
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / A-1

APPENDIX A

ASSUMPTIONS
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #59
A-2 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #60
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / A-3
Table A-1: General Plan Land Use Assumptions
General Plan Designation Allowable Density and/
or Floor Area Ratio
Effective Target
Density and/or Floor
Area Ratio 1
Persons Per
Household 2
Jobs Ratio
(SF/Job)
Residential
Distribution Single-Family Multifamily
Residential Designation
Agricultural 0-10.89 du/ac 8.71 du/ac 2.64 - 100% -
Low Density 5.8-10.89 du/ac 8.71 du/ac 2.64 - 90% 10%
Medium Density 10.9-19.8 du/ac 17.8 du/ac 2.64 - 25% 75% High Density 19.8-43.6 du/ac 34.8 du/ac - - 100%
Nonresidential Designations
Commercial 1:1 Maximum FAR 0.40 FAR 2.64 800 - -
Neighborhood Mixed-Use
0-10.89 du/ac

0.50:1 Maximum FAR

8.71 du/ac

0.20 FAR

2.64 800 100% -
Mixed-Use - 22
22 du/ac Maximum
1:1 Maximum FAR
11 du/ac

0.35 FAR

2.64 800 25% 75%
Mixed-Use - 30
20-30 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
11 du/ac

0.35 FAR

2.64 800 25% 75%
Mixed-Use - 40
20-40 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
14 du/ac

0.30 FAR

2.64 800 15% 85%
Mixed-Use - 70
20-70 du/ac
1:1Maximum FAR
24 du/ac

0.30 FAR

2.64 800 - 100%
Mixed-Use - 90
20-90 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
30 du/ac

0.25 FAR

2.64 800 - 100%
MCMU - 40
20-40 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
14 du/ac

0.30 FAR

2.64 800 15% 85%
MCMU - 70
20-70 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
24 du/ac

0.30 FAR

2.64 800 - 100%
MCMU - 90
20-90 du/ac
1:1 Maximum FAR
30 du/ac

0.25 FAR

2.64 800 - 100%
Industrial/Manufacturing 1:1 Maximum FAR 0.50 FAR - 1,000 - - Limited Development Designations
Publicly Owned Land - - - - - -
Right-of-Way - - - - - -
(1) The effective target density and/or floor area ratio represents a realistic average density or intensity of development across all designated acreage of a specific land use type and reflects the expectation that not all parcels will redevelop during the planning period (based on past experience and market trends, the City might expect to see 10-15% of parcels redevelop). These figures reflect reasonable expectations of development patterns in Lomita based on past development trends, market demand, land use objectives, and the percentage of parcels expected to be redeveloped during the planning period.

Parcels may develop above or below the effective target density or intensity. For land use designations where residential and nonresidential development are allowed (Mixed-Use designations), the density represents the effective number of dwelling units assumed per acre across all acreage associated with that land use designation and the FAR represents the amount of nonresidential development (i.e., nonresidential development in addition to residential units). For example, the potential development projected for a 2 acre site designated MU-40 would be 28 units and 26,136 square feet of nonresidential development.
(2) Economic and Planning Systems, 2023.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #61
A-4 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #62
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / B-1

APPENDIX B

FISCAL IMPACT MEMO
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #63
B-2 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #64

M EMORANDUM
To: City of Lomita
From: Economic & Planning Systems
Subject: Overview of Fiscal Trends and Fiscal Impact Analysis of Proposed General Plan Land Use Alternatives
Date: October 3, 2023
Introduction
This memorandum provides an overview of budgetary trends in the City of Lomita (City) and of the fiscal impacts associated with the proposed land use alternatives being considered as part of the Lomita General Plan Update. It has been prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) as part of a consultant team hired by the City and led by De Novo Planning Group to complete the General Plan Update.

A General Plan Update can alter the trajectory of a city’s budget resources and needs, particularly through changes in land use growth patterns, service standards, and facility needs. Changes and growth in land use in Lomita will impact both major General Fund revenue sources, such as property and sales taxes, and major expenditure categories, such as public safety, public works, and community and economic development.

The analysis contained within this memo compares projected changes in City General Fund revenues and expenditures
attributable to new development and the corresponding growth in the City’s service population (i.e., new residents and workers). The analysis evaluates the impacts of potential new buildouts associated with three Proposed Land Use Plan Alternatives, as well as the impact associated with the buildout projected in the City’s Current Land Use Plan. This analysis is intended to inform the City’s consideration of the Land Use Alternatives, as well as General Plan goals that address fiscal sustainability. The findings presented in this memorandum are at the summary level, and additional details on the methodology behind the analysis will be provided in a separate document.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #65
To provide further context for these considerations, EPS has conducted a review of recent fiscal trends in the City. The review identifies the current distribution of revenue and expenditure categories in the City’s General Fund and trends in those categories over the past decade, highlighting areas of fiscal opportunities or challenges that may be affected by the General Plan. This review is provided in the first section of this memorandum, followed by the summary of projected fiscal impacts of the proposed General Plan Land Use Alternatives.

Review of General Fund Fiscal Trends
The review in this section details the current distribution of and trends in those sources and uses, and highlights areas of fiscal opportunities or challenges that will be affected by the General Plan.

Revenue and Expenditure Categories
This section considers the distribution of General Fund revenues and expenditures in the City’s fiscal year 2023/24 adopted budget (as reported in the City’s FY Adopted Biennial Operating & Capital Improvement Budget for the fiscal years 2022-2024), focusing on categories that will be most directly impacted by the land use decisions made through the General Plan process.

General Fund Revenues
Major General Fund revenues sources that are most likely to be impacted by changes in land use include property tax, motor vehicle in-lieu fee, sales tax, transient occupancy tax (TOT)1, franchise taxes, and licenses fees. In Lomita, sales tax is a significant contributor to the City’s General Fund, representing 34 percent of revenue in FY 2023/24 adopted budget, followed by the motor vehicle in-lieu fee at 19 percent, and property tax at nearly 14 percent. The remaining major revenue sources contribute relatively lower proportions of the total revenue, including TOT at one percent, franchise taxes at two percent, and licenses fees at nearly five percent. Figure 1 displays the City’s General Fund revenue distribution grouped by the following categories: Property Tax, Sales Tax, Motor Vehicle In-Lieu Fee, Transient Occupancy Tax, Other Taxes, Fines and Fees, Use of Money and Property, Revenue from Other Agencies, Miscellaneous, and Funds Transferred.2
1 Transient occupancy tax (TOT) is tax levied on hotel rooms. 2 The Other Taxes category consists of Development Tax, Business License Tax, Franchise Tax and Refuse Tax.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #66
Figure 1 Lomita General Fund Revenue Distribution by Category, FY23/24 Key factors affecting potential growth in these sources include the following:
• Property Tax: Lomita receives less than seven percent of total property tax revenue collected within the City limits, a relatively modest allocation compared to the Countywide average. While there are limitations on the City’s ability to change the property tax rate or tax allocation factor, which is regulated by State law, the General Plan Update can consider opportunities to grow the City’s overall assessed value, which drives property tax generation.

An additional consideration is that growth in assessed value for any given property is limited to 2 percent per year, absent a market transaction or significant physical alteration. Consequently, any growth in property tax above 2 percent annually requires new development, redevelopment of existing properties, and/or property ownership turn-over through market transactions. The General Plan can have a direct impact on supporting new development, through changes in zoning and stated commitments to supporting a variety of land use types. The Plan’s influence on property reinvestment and turnover is less direct; however, the land use plan and its implied priorities can impact property values and drive market activity around Property Tax
14%
Sales Tax
34%
Transient Occupancy
Tax
1%
Other Taxes
10%
Fines and Fees
12%
Use of Money and
Property
3%
Revenue from Other
Agencies
2%
Miscellaneous
1%
Motor Vehicle in Lieu
Fee
19%
Funds Transferred
4%
Source: City of Lomita Adopted Biennial Operating and Capital Improvement Budget Fiscal Year 2022-2024 Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #67
existing development. In general, to drive property tax revenue growth, the City would need to adopt plans and policies that support new development and / or the redevelopment and reuse of property that is under-utilized. • Sales Tax: Retail trade is Lomita’s third largest employment segment by share, and its largest General Fund revenue generator. In addition to the one-percent statewide Bradley-Burns tax, the City also levies an additional ¾-cent local sales tax (Measure L), which has had a significant impact on sales tax revenue generation for the City since its adoption. In general, though, the City faces substantial competition for retail sales from neighboring jurisdictions, such as Torrance, which has more 24 shopping centers containing over 100,000 square feet. In addition, national changes in consumer behavior, such as the growth of e-commerce, will affect long-term trends in taxable sales. The General Plan can highlight a variety of policies that can help the retail sector strategically adapt to external forces.
• Transient Occupancy Tax: The City’s hotel sector is quite modest, and TOT is a minor contributor to the General Fund. Looking ahead, there is opportunity, particularly along the Pacific Coast Highway, for the City to capture a greater portion of the regional visitor market given its proximity to Los Angeles International Airport and other tourist attractions. The General Plan can play a role in driving this land use sector through land use policy, initiatives that expand the local economy, and the provision and support of attractive community amenities that complement hospitality uses.
• Property Tax in Lieu of Vehicle License Fee (PTILVLF): Motor vehicle license fees (VLF) are an annual tax levied on motor vehicles operating in the State of California, based on vehicle value. Since 2004, when the State reduced the VLF rate, cities and counties have received compensation from the State to offset the associated revenue loss. Each jurisdictions’ allocation increases annually in proportion of the growth of its gross assessed value. PTILVLF (referred to as Motor Vehicle InLieu Fee in the City budget) represents 19 percent of Lomita’s General Fund revenue in FY 2023/24, the City’s second largest revenue source. While it is not typical for PTILVLF to be such a major contributor to cities’ General Fund revenues, the relatively modest revenues generated in Lomita from property tax and TOT for reasons described above, has elevated VLF to become a major revenue source for the City. As assessed value in the City grows through new development or redevelopment, revenues from PTILVLF will also increase. As such, the policies of the General Plan can affect the trend in PTILVLF in a similar way to how they affects trends in property tax revenues.
• Franchise Tax and Licenses Fee: The franchise tax and licenses fee category includes franchise fees (primarily paid by utility companies), business permit and license fees, and developer fees. New development and business activity, and associated growth in resident and worker population, drive these fees. Therefore, a land use plan that involves significant new development will have a positive impact on these sources.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #68
General Fund Expenditures
The General Fund is the primary fund used to pay for basic city services, programs, and daily operations of the City. Figure 2 shows General Fund expenditures in the City grouped by the following categories: General Government, Public Safety, Community and Economic Development, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and Transfers to Other Funds.

In FY 2023-24, a third of the General Fund budget is allocated to public safety, including police and fire services. About 21 percent is allocated to general government, which includes policy, management, and administration; about 14 percent is allocated to parks and recreation; and about 9 percent is allocated to community and economic development, which includes planning, building and safety, and code enforcement.

A relatively small portion of General Fund expenditures are dedicated to public works, as infrastructure projects are typically funded by one-time revenues (such as grants) or dedicated City revenue funds separate from the General Fund.

Of these categories, public safety will be most significantly impacted by changes and growth in land use patterns. New development and new populations put additional burden on law enforcement and fire departments, particularly if the growth involves a larger service area. To a lesser extent, growth in land use patterns will also impact park and recreation services, as growing service population burdens the City’s existing recreation facilities. Community development will also be impacted, although more modestly, by changes in land use patterns. Planning, building and safety, and code enforcement divisions all provide services to support new growth, and the need for these services will increase as new development accelerates, although these costs can be recovered at least in part through various building and permit fees. Policy, management, and administration would experience the least impact from a change in land use patterns, as these divisions tend to have more fixed staffing and operations costs that are not as directly sensitive to an increase in resident and worker populations.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #69
Figure 2 Lomita General Fund Expenditure Distribution by Category, FY23/24 Revenue and Expenditure Trends
From 2018 to 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused a dip in the General Fund revenues, specifically in the categories of Sales Tax, Franchise Tax and Licenses, and Other Revenue. Overall, however, the City’s General Fund revenues and expenditures have been on a steady upward trajectory since 2014, as shown in Figure 3. Revenues increased by nearly 64 percent—an annual growth rate of 5.6 percent, faster than the regional inflation of 3.5 percent annually over the same period.3 Most revenue categories have remained generally stable in their relative contributions to the General Fund, except for sales tax, which increased significantly with the adoption of Measure L in 2020. In contrast, annual property tax generation has remained relatively stagnant, increasingly only about 8 percent since 2014—an annual growth rate of less than 1 percent, significantly slower than the rate of regional inflation over the same period. This trend reflects low property turnover rates and limited new development in the City over the past decade.
3 In this analysis, to measure inflation, EPS used the Consumer Price Index for all goods in the West region.

General Government
21%
Public Safety
33%
Community and
Economic Development
9%
Public Works
5%
Parks and Recreation
18%
Transfers to Other
Funds
14%
Source: City of Lomita Adopted Biennial Operating and Capital Improvement Budget Fiscal Year 2022-2024 Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #70
Figure 3 Trend in Lomita General Fund Revenues, FY14/15 to FY23/24 General Fund annual expenditures have grown more quickly than revenues—by about 79 percent, or 6.7 percent on average annually, as shown in Figure 4. While public safety has been the largest expenditure category throughout the past decade, expenditures for public works have grown fastest. These two expenditure categories are also likely to be the most impacted by new development and related new service population. At the same time, parks and recreation expenditures saw the slowest growth over the past decade, followed by community and economic development. While this trend may reflect greater efficiencies in providing these services, it is also a trend that should be monitored to ensure that the quality of City parks and recreation services and community development services are maintained at a desired level, particularly as the City continues to grow. In general, while the City has maintained a small budget surplus over the past decade, trends in revenue growth versus expenditure growth further underline the needs to act strategically in the near-term to expand revenue opportunities and create thoughtful efficiencies in expenditures.
$-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 Property Tax Sales Tax Transient Occupancy Tax
Other Taxes Fines and Fees Use of Money and Property
Revenue from Other Agencies Miscellaneous Funds Transferred Motor Vehicle in Lieu Fee
Source: City of Lomita Adopted Budgets
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #71
Figure 4 Trend in Lomita General Fund Expenditures, FY14/15 to FY23/24 Conclusion
While the City’s General Fund has a diversity of revenue sources, it has been relatively reliant on sales tax revenue, a source that has become even more prominent since the adoption of Measure L. Recent developments in the City, such as the new Target on Pacific Coast Highway, suggest that retail sales will continue to be strong in the City.

However, given the uncertain trends in the retail sector overall, the City should continue to look for ways to further diversify revenue sources as much as possible, including pursuing grant opportunities and supporting growth in lesser performing revenuegenerating sectors such as hospitality. In addition, as the General Plan is implemented and drives new development, the associated growth has the potential to increase the General Fund’s other major revenue sources, particularly property tax, along with sales tax.

At the same time, more growth will bring greater needs for public safety, public infrastructure, and parks and recreation and community development services. While increased revenues will offset these expenditures in part, it will be important for the City to assess the public service costs of new projects upfront as much as possible and to take steps to manage these costs over time.
$-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 General Government Public Safety
Community and Economic Development Public Works
Parks and Recreation Transfers to Other Funds
Source: City of Lomita Adopted Budgets
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #72
Fiscal Impact Analysis of Land Use
Alternatives
The fiscal impact analysis of General Plan land use alternatives compares the expected increase in City General Fund revenues with the increase in General Fund costs from increased demand for public services as a result of new development and the corresponding growth in the City’s service population, which includes new residents and workers. As summarized in this section, the analysis for Lomita’s General Plan considers four land use alternatives under consideration for the Land Use Plan. The alternatives represent varying levels of potential new residential and non-residential land use development types. The first three alternatives— “Baseline”, “Core Perimeter”, and “Neighborhood Nodes”—represent new direction for the City’s land use plan, while the fourth alternative reflects the buildout projected in the City’s current General Plan Land Use Plan. The residential and employee growth over existing conditions that would result from the alternatives is summarized in Table 1.

While the impacts of the land use alternatives are quantified based on a stabilized buildout outcome (Buildout Potential), these impacts might evolve during buildout as well as subsequent years after completion. Due to uncertainty about budgetary and economic factors, this analysis does not consider the effect of external changes affecting the City’s General Fund such as changes to State or federal laws affecting municipal budgets. In addition, the analysis is premised on the City’s existing budgetary structure and assumes that there will not be any significant changes in the way in which the City provides services or levies local tax and fee rates. Finally, the analysis assumes that the current City compensation structure remains constant in real terms (e.g. adjusted for inflation).

It is also important to stress that net fiscal impacts illustrated in this analysis (annual surpluses or deficits) are simply indicators of fiscal performance; they do not mean that the City will automatically have annual surplus revenues or deficits, because it must have a balanced budget each year. Persistent shortfalls shown in a fiscal analysis may indicate the need to reduce service levels or obtain additional revenues; persistent surpluses will provide resources to reduce liabilities such as deferred maintenance, or to improve service levels.

The key findings presented in this section summarize the analysis completed for the land use alternatives. Detailed explanations of methodology for estimating each revenue and expenditure category will be provided as part of a separate report.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #73
Table 1 Growth over Existing Development by Development Theme Buildout
Potential
Growth from
Existing
Percent
Growth
Buildout
Potential
Growth from
Existing
Percent
Growth
Buildout
Potential
Growth from
Existing
Percent
Growth
Buildout
Potential
Growth from
Existing
Percent
Growth
Development Space
Housing Units 8,274 9,485 1,211 14.6% 10,421 2,147 25.9% 11,279 3,005 36.3% 8,946 672 8.1% SF Units 4,777 5,252 475 9.9% 5,371 594 12.4% 5,268 491 10.3% 5,261 484 10.1% MF Units 3,497 4,233 736 21.0% 5,050 1,553 44.4% 6,011 2,514 71.9% 3,685 188 5.4% Nonresidential Space (Sq.

Ft.) [1] 2,528,297 2,733,131 204,834 8.1% 2,881,533 353,236 14.0% 2,931,334 403,037 15.9% 2,635,158 106,861 4.2% Retail Sq. Ft. 1,597,965 1,750,566 152,601 9.5% 1,861,125 263,161 16.5% 1,898,227 300,263 18.8% 1,677,576 79,611 5.0% Office Sq. Ft. 375,361 411,207 35,846 9.5% 437,177 61,816 16.5% 445,892 70,531 18.8% 394,062 18,701 5.0% Industrial Sq. Ft. 92,232 101,039 8,808 9.5% 107,421 15,189 16.5% 109,562 17,331 18.8% 96,827 4,595 5.0% Hotel Sq. Ft. 79,362 86,941 7,579 9.5% 92,432 13,070 16.5% 94,274 14,912 18.8% 83,316 3,954 5.0% Govt./Inst./Rec Sq. Ft. 383,378 383,378 - 0.0% 383,378 - 0.0% 383,378 - 0.0% 383,378 - 0.0% Population
Residents 21,843 25,040 3,197 14.6% 27,513 5,670 26.0% 29,777 7,933 36.3% 23,616 1,772 8.1% SF Residents 12,611 13,867 1,255 10.0% 14,181 1,569 12.4% 13,907 1,296 10.3% 13,888 1,277 10.1% MF Residents 9,232 11,174 1,942 21.0% 13,333 4,101 44.4% 15,869 6,637 71.9% 9,727 495 5.4% Jobs 3,036 3,415 379 12.5% 3,601 565 18.6% 3,663 627 20.7% 3,217 181 6.0% Total Service Population 23,027 26,372 3,345 14.5% 28,918 5,890 25.6% 31,205 8,178 35.5% 24,870 1,843 8.0% Proposed Land Use Plan #2: Core
Perimeter
Proposed Land Use Plan #1:

Baseline Existing
Development
Source: DeNovo Planning Group; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

Summary of Land Use Plans
Current General Plan Proposed Land Use Plan #3:

Neighborhood Nodes
[1] The distribution of non-residential space among different use types in the Alternatives is based on the current distribution in the City.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #74
Key Findings
The key findings from the fiscal impact analysis are summarized in Table 2 and Table 3 and further described below. All results are expressed in constant 2023 dollars. • All four of the Alternatives are estimated to have a positive net fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund at buildout. As shown in Table 2, the net fiscal surplus associated with the land use alternatives is estimated to range between $725,000 and $1,800,000, representing an increase of approximately five to 13 percent over the General Fund’s current revenues. These net new fiscal benefits would provide funds that the City could use to expand levels of public services and facilities. The level of estimated fiscal benefit increases along with projected service population across the alternatives. Therefore, the Proposed Land Use Plan #3 (Neighborhood Nodes), which includes the largest increase in new service population, has the highest net fiscal benefit at buildout, followed by Proposed Land Use Plan #2 (Core Perimeter) and Proposed Land Use Plan #1 (Baseline). Buildout of the Current General Plan land use plan is estimated to have the lowest net fiscal benefit.

The finding that General Fund revenues will increase faster than costs, and therefore the net fiscal benefit will be higher with a greater increase in service population, stems in part from the assumption that many of the City’s functions include a fixed cost component that will accommodate growth without a proportional increase in costs. For example, none of the Alternatives assume a major expansion in City owned or operated infrastructure or facilities such as roads, parks, public safety or community buildings (e.g. police, fire, library, etc.) relative to baseline trends. In addition, many City Departments include administrative components that do not typically expand in proportion to service population growth. While these results do not account for major infrastructure investments or changes to City policy that might impact municipal revenues or costs (e.g., taxes or service levels), the positive results under these “business-as-usual” conditions suggests that there is likely an opportunity as growth occurs for the City to make additional investments or changes in service provision to serve community goals and needs while still maintaining a balanced budget.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #75
Table 2 Estimated Annual Fiscal Impacts of Net New Development at Buildout • The analysis suggests that the net fiscal benefit per resident is lower than the net fiscal benefit per worker, and that the net fiscal impact of singlefamily residential units are greater than that of multifamily units. While the property values of non-residential uses are lower than those of residential uses, the relatively lower impacts of workers on municipal services relative to residents results in higher net fiscal benefits related to new workers, as shown in Table 3.

Within residential uses, both multifamily and single-family units have a positive net fiscal impact. However, the net fiscal impact of single-family units is estimated to be over 2.5 times greater than that of multifamily units. This is driven primarily by the higher property values associated with single family units. However, while this analysis assumes the same household size for both types of units, it is likely that new multifamily units are likely to be smaller in size and have smaller household sizes than single-family units. This differential in household size will result in lower municipal service costs associated with multifamily units relative to single-family units and decrease the gap between their relative fiscal benefits.

While single-family development is likely to have a more favorable fiscal impact on a per unit basis, this is not necessarily the case on a per acre basis. For example, the fiscal benefits of a townhome project with 20 units per acre, will would be comparable to a single-family project with 8 units per acre, all else equal. This is an important consideration given the relatively built-out nature of the City and limited opportunity for single-family development.

Proposed Land
Use Plan #1
Proposed Land
Use Plan #2
Proposed Land
Use Plan #3
Current Land
Use Plan
Annual Increase in General Fund Revenues $2,040,771 $3,391,464 $4,374,745 $1,305,561 Property Tax $512,830 $821,245 $1,004,364 $357,808
Transfer Tax $32,821 $49,568 $56,057 $26,336
Sales Tax $310,270 $541,339 $744,280 $169,776
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu Fee $673,142 $1,077,968 $1,318,330 $469,659 Other Revenues $511,707 $901,345 $1,251,715 $281,982
Annual Increase in General Fund Expenditures $1,053,389 $1,855,028 $2,575,407 $580,357 General Government $79,197 $139,466 $193,627 $43,633
Public Safety $476,688 $839,453 $1,165,445 $262,628
Community and Economic Development $182,358 $321,135 $445,844 $100,469 Public Works $72,441 $127,569 $177,108 $39,911
Parks and Recreation $242,704 $427,405 $593,382 $133,716 Annual Net Fiscal Impact of Proposed Growth $987,382 $1,536,436 $1,799,338 $725,204 % of Current GF Revenues 7% 11% 13% 5%
Sources: City of Lomita Adopted Biennial Operating & Capital Improvement Budget FY 2022-2024; DeNovo Planning Group; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #76
Table 3 Costs and Revenues Per Person and Unit
Category Density Sales Tax
Property
Tax [1]
Transfer
Tax [1]
Motor
Vehicle InLieu Fee [1]
All Other
GF
Revenue
Per Person
or Unit
Net Fiscal
Impact Per
Person or
Unit
Residents PPH $315 $87 $164 $140 $216 $176 $782 $467
Single Family 2.64 $831 $231 $578 $478 $759 $464 $2,509 $1,678 Multi-Family 2.64 $831 $231 $236 $219 $310 $464 $1,460 $628 Employees $315 $91 $271 $222 $343 $176 $1,103 $788
Revenue Per Person or Unit By GF Category
[1] The per person revenue for property tax, transfer tax, and motor vehicle in-lieu fee is based on a weighted average of distribution of land uses under existing conditions. This factor will be different under different land use mix scenarios.

Cost Per
Person or Unit
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #77
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #78
LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT / C-1

APPENDIX C

MOBILITY IMPACT MEMO
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #79
C-2 / LAND USE ALTERNATIVES REPORT
This page intentionally left blank.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #80

MEMORANDUM
Date: October 3, 2023 Project #: 28980
To: Amanda Tropiano and Perry Banner; De Novo Planning Group From: Fernando Sotelo and Bincy Koshy; Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

Project: City of Lomita General Plan Update
Subject: Land Use Alternatives Trip Generation Assessment This memorandum documents an assessment of land use alternatives for the City of Lomita General Plan Update. This analysis was prepared to assist with consideration of possible land use scenarios within the City of Lomita, in terms of their anticipated effect on the transportation network. For this effort, weekday daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour trips were estimated for the land use alternatives utilizing industry-standard trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook, 11th Edition.

The City of Lomita General Plan Land Use Plan designates the permitted land uses within the city. For each land use plan alternative under consideration for the General Plan Update, the aggregate of trips from existing and future land uses were calculated. In addition, a trip comparison is provided between existing and proposed land uses to illustrate the added trips with each land use plan alternative. This information was prepared to support the preparation of the Land Use Alternatives Report, which will be used by the City to select the land use plan to represent the community’s long-term vision in the City’s General Plan Update.

LAND USE ALTERNATIVES
Four Land Use Alternatives have been developed by the project team:
• Alternative 1 (Current General Plan)
• Alternative 2 (Baseline)
• Alternative 3 (Core and Perimeter)
• Alternative 4 (Neighborhood Nodes)
These Land Use Alternatives are intended to serve as a starting point for discussion of different scenarios for the City and to provide context for citywide discussion regarding potential land use changes throughout Lomita. Potential development under each land use theme, plus the existing land use mix, is provided in Table 1. Alternative 1 (Current GP) reflects the land use direction provided by the currently adopted General Plan for Lomita. Alternative 2 (Baseline), Alternative 3 (Core and Perimeter), and Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #81
Alternative 4 (Neighborhood Nodes) all explore how the City can strategically plan for its future by accommodating new residential and nonresidential development in key locations throughout the community in different ways that reflect the community’s vision for the future of Lomita.

Table 1 – Summary of Land Use Alternatives
Uses Existing
Conditions Current GP Baseline Core & Perimeter
Neighborhood
Nodes
Residential Units 8,274 8,945 9,485 10,422 11,279
Population 21,843 23,616 25,040 27,513 29,777
Nonresidential (SF) 2,528,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 2,881,533 2,931,334 Jobs 3,036 3,217 3,415 3,601 3,663
Source: De Novo Planning Group, October 2, 2023.

Notes: SF= Square feet
Table 2 compares the projected amount of housing and nonresidential development in the city by 2045 under each Alternative, with existing development (2023) included for reference. The potential buildout numbers are based on expected density and intensity levels for each land use type, as described in the Land Use Alternatives Report.

Table 2 – Summary of Potential Buildout Under Land Use Alternatives Uses Existing
Conditions Current GP Baseline Core & Perimeter
Neighborhood
Nodes
Single-Family
Housing Units 4,777 5,261 5,252 5,371 5,268
Multi-Family
Housing Units 3,497 3,685 4,233 5,050 6,011
Nonresidential
(square feet) 2,528,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 2,881,533 2,931,334 Source: De Novo Planning Group, October 2, 2023.

TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
ITE trip generation rates were used to develop weekday daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour trip generation for residential and non-residential land uses under each land use alternative. Trip rates were multiplied by the anticipated development quantity to estimate the associated number of trips with the implementation of each land use plan alternative. Detailed trip generation worksheets are provided in Appendix 1. It should be noted that the trip generation estimates for the land use alternatives do not take into account trip internalization (i.e., trips that stay within a site rather than vehicle trips external to a site) and switching to non-vehicle modes which can result from intensifying a mix of uses that is encouraged by mixed-use land use designations. However, the estimated are appropriate to compare the number of trips with each land use plan and the relative differences between alternatives.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #82
Tables 3 presents the weekday daily trip generation for existing conditions and each land use plan alternative. Overall, the number of daily trips from non-residential uses are higher compared to residential uses.

Table 3 – Weekday Daily Trip Generation Summary
Land Use/Code Existing Current GP Baseline Core &
Perimeter
Neighborhood
Nodes
Single-family Housing 45,047 49,609 49,531 50,653 49,677 Multi-family Housing 23,570 24,834 28,528 34,039 40,515 Nonresidential 93,572 97,527 101,153 106,646 108,489
Total Trips 162,189 171,970 179,211 191,337 198,681
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2023.

Table 4 shows the percentage increase in trips compared to the Alternative 1, which is the current general plan land use plan. The comparison of trips shown in Table 4 shows that when compared to the current General Plan, the Baseline alternative is estimated to increase daily trips and peak hour trips in the city by approximately 4 percent. In addition, the Core and Perimeter alternative is estimated to increase daily and peak hour trips in the city by approximately 11 percent and the Neighborhood Nodes alternative is estimated to increase daily trips and peak hour trips in the city by approximately 16 percent.

Table 4 – Weekday Trip Generation Daily Comparison with Current GP Land Use/Code Baseline Core & Perimeter Neighborhood Nodes Single-family Housing +0% +2% +0%
Multi-family Housing +15% +37% +63%
Nonresidential +4% +9% +11%
Total Trips +4% +11% +16%
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2023.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #83
Tables 5 and 6 present a summary of the weekday AM peak hour trips for each land use plan alternative, and their respective increases over the current GP land use plan. During the weekday AM peak hour, the number of trips from residential uses are higher compared to non-residential uses. The comparison of trips shown in Table 6 shows that compared to the current General Plan, the Baseline scenario is estimated to increase weekday AM peak hour trips in the city by approximately 4 percent. In addition, the Core and Perimeter scenario is estimated to increase weekday AM peak hour trips in the city by approximately 11 percent and the Neighborhood Nodes scenario is estimated to increase weekday AM peak hour trips in the city by approximately 16 percent. These increases are consistent with those on a daily basis.

Table 5 – Weekday AM Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary
Land Use/Code Existing Current GP Baseline Core &
Perimeter
Neighborhood
Nodes
Single-family Housing 3,344 3,683 3,677 3,760 3,688
Multi-family Housing 1,399 1,474 1,693 2,020 2,404
Nonresidential 2,124 2,214 2,296 2,420 2,462
Total Trips 6,866 7,370 7,666 8,201 8,554
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2023.

Table 6 – Weekday AM Peak Hour Trip Generation Comparison with Current GP Land Use/Code Baseline Core & Perimeter Neighborhood Nodes Single-family Housing 0% 2% 0%
Multi-family Housing 15% 37% 63%
Nonresidential 4% 9% 11%
Total Trips 4% 11% 16%
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2023.

Tables 7 and 8 present a summary of the weekday PM peak hour trips for each land use plan alternative, and their respective increases over the current GP land use plan. The number of weekday PM peak hour trips from non-residential uses are higher compared to residential uses. The comparison of trips shown in Table 8 shows that when compared to the current General Plan, the Baseline alternative is estimated to increase weekday PM peak hour trips in the city by approximately 4 percent. In addition, the Core and Perimeter alternative is estimated to increase weekday PM peak hour trips in the city by approximately 10 percent and the Neighborhood Nodes scenario is estimated to increase weekday PM peak hour trips in the city by approximately 14 percent. These are slightly lower (1 to 2 percent) than on a daily basis.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #84
Table 7 – Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary
Land Use/Code Existing Current GP Baseline Core &
Perimeter
Neighborhood
Nodes
Single-family Housing 4,490 4,945 4,937 5,049 4,952
Multi-family Housing 1,783 1,879 2,159 2,576 3,066
Nonresidential 8,596 8,960 9,293 9,797 9,967
Total Trips 14,870 15,784 16,389 17,422 17,984
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2023.

Table 8 – Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Comparison with Current GP Land Use/Code Baseline Core &
Perimeter
Neighborhood
Nodes
Single-family Housing 0% 2% 0%
Multi-family Housing 15% 37% 63%
Nonresidential 4% 9% 11%
Total Trips 4% 10% 14%
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2023.

KEY FINDINGS
Key transportation findings for this land use alternatives comparison are presented below:
• Trips from non-residential land uses are higher compared to trips from residential land uses on a daily basis and during the weekday PM peak hour.
• Alternative 1 (Baseline) is estimated to increase daily and peak hour trips in the city only by approximately 4 percent when compared to business-as-usual scenario. • Alternative 2 (Core and Perimeter) is estimated to increase daily and peak hour trips in the city ranging from 10 to 11 percent when compared to business-as-usual scenario. • Alternative 3 (Neighborhood Nodes) is estimated to increase daily and peak hour trips ranging from 14 to 16 percent when compared to business-as-usual scenario. • The greatest changes in trips are a result of added multi-family housing. The proposed singlefamily housing would result in little change in trip generation.

Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #85
Appendix 1 Detailed Trip Generation Tables
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #86
Statistical Comparison
Existing Current GP/BAU 1: Baseline 2: Core
Perimeter 3: Neighborhood Nodes
1000
Units 8,274 8,945 9,485 10,422 11,279
Single Family 4,777 5,261 5,252 5,371 5,268
Multifamily 3,497 3,685 4,233 5,050 6,011
Population 21,843 23,616 25,040 27,513 29,777
Single Family 12,611 13,888 13,867 14,181 13,907
Multifamily 9,232 9,727 11,174 13,333 15,869
Nonresidential SF 2,528,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 2,881,533 2,931,334 Jobs 3,036 3,217 3,415 3,601 3,663
Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Single Family Detached Housing 210 9.43 Ln(T)=0.92*L
n(x)+2.68 45,047 35,378 49,609 38,661 49,531 38,605 50,653 39,409 49,677 38,710 Single Family Attached Housing 215 7.20 T=7.62*(x)-

50.48 34,394 36,350 37,877 40,036 37,818 39,973 38,674 40,880 37,929 40,091 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 220 6.74 T=6.41*(x)+7

5.31 23,570 22,491 24,834 23,694 28,528 27,206 34,039 32,448 40,515 38,607 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 221 4.54 T=4.77*(x)-

46.46 15,876 16,634 16,728 17,529 19,216 20,143 22,929 24,044 27,291 28,627 Shopping Center 820 37.01 T=26.11*(x)+
5863.73 93,572 71,698 97,527 74,488 101,153 77,046 106,646 80,921 108,489 82,221 162,189 129,567 171,970 136,843 179,211 142,857 191,337 152,778 198,681 159,538 Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve 210 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
215 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
220 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
221 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
820 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4% 9% 11%
N/A N/A N/A N/A 4% 11% 16%

UPDATED TABLES
Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units 2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units Single Family Detached Housing 49,609 45,047 49,531 50,653 49,677 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 24,834 23,570 28,528 34,039 40,515 Shopping Center 97,527 93,572 101,153 106,646 108,489
171,970 162,189 179,211 191,337 198,681
Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units 2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units Single Family Detached Housing N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
Shopping Center N/A N/A 4% 9% 11%
N/A N/A 4% 11% 16%
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)
Shopping Center
Trip Generation Estimates - Daily % Change Compared to Current GP/BAU Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units 2: Core Perimeter Units Total
Trip Generation Estimates - Daily
3: Neighborhood Nodes Units Land Use/Code
Single Family Detached Housing
Single Family Attached Housing
2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units Land Use/Code Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation
Total
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)
210
220
820
Total
Trip Generation Estimates - Daily
Land Use/Code
Total
210
220
820
Trip Generation Estimates - Daily % Change Compared to Current GP/BAU Land Use/Code
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #87
Statistical Comparison
Existing Current GP/BAU 1: Baseline 2: Core
Perimeter
3: Neighborhood
Nodes 1000
Units 8,274 8,945 9,485 10,422 11,279
Single Family 4,777 5,261 5,252 5,371 5,268
Multifamily 3,497 3,685 4,233 5,050 6,011
Population 21,843 23,616 25,040 27,513 29,777
Single Family 12,611 13,888 13,867 14,181 13,907
Multifamily 9,232 9,727 11,174 13,333 15,869
Nonresidential SF 2,528,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 2,881,533 2,931,334 Jobs 3,036 3,217 3,415 3,601 3,663
Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Single Family Detached Housing 210 0.7 Ln(T)=0.91*Ln(x)+

0.12 3,344 2,513 3,683 2,743 2,739 3,677 3,760 2,796 3,688 2,747 Single Family Attached Housing 215 0.48 T=0.52*(x)-5.70 2,293 2,478 2,525 2,730 2,521 2,726 2,578 2,787 2,529 2,734 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 220 0.4 T=0.31*(x)+22.85 1,399 1,107 1,474 1,165 1,693 1,335 2,020 1,588 2,404 1,886 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 221 0.37 T=0.44*(x)-11.61 1,294 1,527 1,363 1,610 1,566 1,851 1,869 2,211 2,224 2,633 Shopping Center 820 0.84 T=0.59*(x)+133.55 2,124 1,625 2,214 1,688 2,296 1,746 2,420 1,834 2,462 1,863 6,866 7,370 5,245 5,596 7,666 5,820 8,201 6,218 8,554 6,496 Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve 210 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
215 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
220 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
221 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
820 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4% 9% 11%
N/A N/A N/A N/A 4% 11% 16%

UPDATED TABLES
Existing Units urrent GP/BAU Un 1: Baseline UnitsCore Perimeter Unghborhood Nodes Units Single Family Detached Housing 3,344 3,683 3,677 3,760 3,688 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 1,399 1,474 1,693 2,020 2,404 Shopping Center 2,124 2,214 2,296 2,420 2,462
6,866 7,370 7,666 8,201 8,554
Existing Units urrent GP/BAU Un 1: Baseline UnitsCore Perimeter Unghborhood Nodes Units Single Family Detached Housing N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
Shopping Center N/A N/A 4% 9% 11%
N/A N/A 4% 11% 16%
Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units 2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units Single Family Detached Housing
820
Trip Generation Estimates - AM % Change Compared to Current GP/BAU Land Use/Code
210
220
Trip Generation Estimates - AM
Land Use/Code
210
220
820
Single Family Attached Housing
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)
Shopping Center
Total
Total
Total
Trip Generation Estimates - AM
Land Use/Code Average Rate Fitted Curve
Equation
Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units 2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units Trip Generation Estimates - AM % Change Compared to Current GP/BAU Land Use/Code Existing Units
Total
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #88
Statistical Comparison
Existing Current GP/BAU 1: Baseline 2: Core
Perimeter
3: Neighborhood
Nodes 1000
Units 8,274 8,945 9,485 10,422 11,279
Single Family 4,777 5,261 5,252 5,371 5,268
Multifamily 3,497 3,685 4,233 5,050 6,011
Population 21,843 23,616 25,040 27,513 29,777
Single Family 12,611 13,888 13,867 14,181 13,907
Multifamily 9,232 9,727 11,174 13,333 15,869
Nonresidential SF 2,528,297 2,635,158 2,733,131 2,881,533 2,931,334 Jobs 3,036 3,217 3,415 3,601 3,663
Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Single Family
Detached Housing 210 0.94 Ln(T)=0.94*Ln(x)+0.27 3,764 4,490 4,945 4,121 4,937 4,115 5,049 4,203 4,952 4,127 Single Family
Attached Housing 215 0.57 T=0.60*(x)-3.93 2,723 2,862 2,999 3,153 2,994 3,148 3,062 3,219 3,003 3,157 Multifamily Housing
(Low-Rise) 220 0.51 T=0.43*(x)+20.55 1,783 1,524 1,879 1,605 2,159 1,841 2,576 2,192 3,066 2,605 Multifamily Housing
(Mid-Rise) 221 0.39 T=0.39*(x)+0.34 1,364 1,364 1,437 1,437 1,651 1,651 1,970 1,970 2,344 2,345 Shopping Center 820 3.4 Ln(T)=0.72*Ln(x)+

3.02 5,776 8,596 8,960 5,950 9,293 6,109 9,797 6,346 9,967 6,425 11,064 14,870 15,784 11,676 16,389 12,065 17,422 12,741 17,984 13,157 Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve 210 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
215 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
220 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
221 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
820 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4% 9% 11%
N/A N/A N/A N/A 4% 10% 14%

UPDATED TABLES
Existing Units urrent GP/BAU Un 1: Baseline UnitsCore Perimeter Unghborhood Nodes Units Single Family
Detached Housing 4,945 4,490 4,937 5,049 4,952
Multifamily Housing
(Low-Rise) 1,879 1,783 2,159 2,576 3,066
Shopping Center 8,960 8,596 9,293 9,797 9,967
15,784 14,870 16,389 17,422 17,984
Existing Units urrent GP/BAU Un 1: Baseline UnitsCore Perimeter Unghborhood Nodes Units Single Family
Detached Housing N/A N/A 0% 2% 0%
Multifamily Housing
(Low-Rise) N/A N/A 15% 37% 63%
Shopping Center N/A N/A 4% 9% 11%
N/A N/A 4% 10% 14%
2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units
Single Family Detached Housing
Single Family Attached Housing
Total
Total
Total
Trip Generation Estimates - PM % Change Compared to Current GP/BAU Land Use/Code Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units
210
Trip Generation Estimates - PM
Land Use/Code
220
820
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)
Shopping Center
1: Baseline Units
Trip Generation Estimates - PM
Land Use/Code Average Rate Fitted Curve
Equation
Existing Units Current GP/BAU Units 1: Baseline Units 2: Core Perimeter Units 3: Neighborhood Nodes Units 820
Total
210
Trip Generation Estimates - PM % Change Compared to Current GP/BAU Land Use/Code
220
Oct. 17, 2023 SP CC Mtg., Page #89