Policy LU-5.3: Active Transportation. Promote land use patterns that facilitate active transportation to encourage healthy and active lifestyles, as well as improve overall physical health for residents.
Action LU-5a: Create and maintain an inventory of the city’s pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks, street crossings, lighting, shade trees, and benches, in order to improve pedestrian mobility in all areas of the city.
MOBILITY ELEMENT
Goal M-1: Local Circulation System. A community served by a safe and balanced circulation system that meets the needs of all users.
Policy M-1.1: Arterial Roadway Network. Implement and maintain the roadway network based on the classifications mapped in Figure M-1.
Policy M-1.4: Development-Related Traffic Impacts. Impose conditions on new development to provide appropriate and feasible improvements to enhance and/or prevent any impediment to traffic flow, parking, ADA accessibility, and roadway operations.
Policy M-1.7: Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Use traffic calming strategies such as signage, speed radar feedback signs, curb extensions, and deflections, as recommended in the City’s Traffic Calming Toolkit, to create a pedestrian-friendly circulation system and promote safety, while not reducing parking supply.
Policy M-1.9: New Connections. Explore new connections within the grid system, either non-vehicular or vehicular.
Action M-1a: As funding for studies becomes available, periodically review and assess the vehicular level of service along city facilities to determine what, if any, improvements are warranted to maintain a safe and efficient flow of traffic throughout Lomita. Based on a thorough review of facility operations and funding availability, improvements should be included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan and/or required as part of project approval through the development review process.
Action M-1b: Continue to update and implement projects in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan to maintain and repair roadways, and construct and improve roadways to build out the roadway network to ensure adequate levels of service.
Action M-1f: Evaluate the applicability of traffic calming tools to minimize cut-through traffic on local streets, especially in residential areas and near schools, and implement improvements as necessary.
Goal M-3: Complete Streets. A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users
Findings
Policy M-3.1: Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply complete streets principles to all transportation improvement projects (e.g., safety, intelligent transportation systems, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities) to accommodate the needs of street users of all ages and abilities.
Policy M-3.2: Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities.
Policy M-3.3: Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety, including street lighting, wayfinding, street trees, and other nonvehicular infrastructure.
Policy M-3.6: Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement, and incentives to support Safe Routes to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.
Action M-3a: Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/long-term parking, especially along major corridors.
Goal M-5: Transit. A community connected to a comprehensive public transit system.
Policy M-5.1: Transit Use. Support programs encouraging public transit use by people living in, working in, or visiting Lomita.
Policy M-5.2: Improve Local Public Transit Service. Work with Metro, Torrance Transit, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the city.
Policy M-5.3: Transit Facilities. Require new developments to construct, when appropriate, transit facilities, including bus turn-outs, bus stop infrastructure, and route information signage.
Action M-5a: Continue on-going coordination with transit authorities toward the expansion of transit facilities.
Action M-5b: Work with transit providers to increase transit service frequency, speed, and reliability and increase ridership and to strengthen linkages and access to key destinations.
Action M-5c: Explore new intracity transit options such as a Lomita trolley to transport individuals between commercial areas, residential areas, and parks.
Goal M-6: Active Transportation. A community with a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourages active transportation.
Policy M-6.1: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an Findings
alternative to automobiles, including the Plan’s facility recommendations as shown in Figure M-2.
Policy M-6.2: Local Travel Network. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote local micromobility modes by implementing the Local Travel Network plan and supporting efforts to integrate the network with adjacent cities, as shown in Figure M-3.
Policy M-6.3: Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways, evaluating the adequacy of existing urban trails, and prioritizing sidewalk maintenance.
Policy M-6.4: Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and non-residential developments in the city to provide safe and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture, landscaping, and other improvements.
Action M-6a: As part of development review and specific plans, require land development projects to provide connectivity and accessibility to a mix of uses such as schools, parks, work, and shopping destinations that meet residents’ daily needs including secure parking and safety measures.
Action M-6b: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code, as necessary, to consider bicycle and pedestrian access as part of the site plan review for new development projects.
Action M-6c: Dedicate capital improvement funding for citywide projects including pedestrian refuge islands, raised crosswalks, or other relevant crosswalk enhancements as they become available.
Action M-6d: Require that all roadway resurfacing projects and land development projects with impacts to roadways be subject to a review process that considers lane reconfiguration and other opportunities to improve the bicycle and pedestrian network.
Action M-6e: Establish a sidewalk maintenance schedule to improve accessibility and include repair of cracks from tree roots, etc., and clearance of sidewalk space through colocation or undergrounding of utilities and moving signage.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-1.5: Safe Routes. Provide safe pedestrian and bicycle pathways to parks, recreational facilities, and schools to foster a sense of community well-being and to promote active lifestyles.
Action RM-1c: Install adequate lighting, designated crosswalks, clear signage, and other nonvehicular infrastructure to improve pedestrian and bicycle connections between residential and open space areas. (Also refer to Mobility Element.)
2. Design Features
Findings
Threshold: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact TR-3, pages 4.14-28 through 4.13- 31)
Explanation: Implementation of the General Plan Update would involve the alteration, intensification, and redistribution of land uses. Geometric design features would generally be limited to individual projects’ internal roadway networks, as well as driveways along city roads. Hazards are typically assessed at the individual project level when an actual design and construction of a circulation facility is proposed. The City would review site-specific developments to ensure the provision of adequate ingress and egress and that site distance standards would be implemented.
The types of uses included as part of the General Plan Update are generally similar to existing and surrounding uses and thereby are compatible with the existing uses in the Planning Area and in the surrounding area. In addition, the proposed Mobility Element developed as part of the General Plan Update contains policies in support of roadway network safety and reducing design hazards. This includes Policy M-3.5 and Action M-3e which promotes managing and improving the City’s transportation network to be safe, accessible and consistent with ADA and to include ADA accessible features as part of roadway infrastructure projects. Policy M-3.4 encourages roadway design to include traffic calming measures to maintain safe vehicular speeds. Policy LU-2.2 requires compatibility between adjacent land uses to enhance livability and promote healthy lifestyles. The implementation of goals, policies and actions contained in the General Plan Update and compliance with the Lomita Municipal Code would ensure that new development in the Planning Area would not substantially increase hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses. Therefore, the impact of the Project with respect to design and incompatible use hazards would be considered less than significant.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy LU-1.1: Land Use Planning. Promote a comprehensive approach to land use planning that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable; enhances community livability and public health; offers choices in housing, jobs, amenities, and transportation; reduces pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and the expenditure of nonrenewable resources; and provides opportunities for meaningful public engagement in land use decisions.
Findings
Policy LU-2.2: Compatible Uses. Require compatibility between adjacent land uses to enhance livability and promote healthy lifestyles.
Policy LU-2.5: Mixed-Use Design Integration. Require residential and nonresidential portions of mixed-use buildings and sites to be well-integrated through site and building design that ensures compatibility among different uses on the same site.
Action LU-5a: Create and maintain an inventory of the city’s pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks, street crossings, lighting, shade trees, and benches, in order to improve pedestrian mobility in all areas of the city.
MOBILITY ELEMENT
Policy M-1.6: Promote Safe Streets. Use a safe systems approach for transportation planning, street design, operations, emergency response, and maintenance that proactively identifies opportunities to improve safety where conflicts between users exist to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries in our roadways.
Policy M-1.7: Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Use traffic calming strategies such as signage, speed radar feedback signs, curb extensions, and deflections, as recommended in the City’s Traffic Calming Toolkit, to create a pedestrian-friendly circulation system and promote safety, while not reducing parking supply.
Action M-1f: Evaluate the applicability of traffic calming tools to minimize cut-through traffic on local streets, especially in residential areas and near schools, and implement improvements as necessary.
Goal M-3: Complete Streets. A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users
Policy M-3.1: Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply complete streets principles to all transportation improvement projects (e.g., safety, intelligent transportation systems, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities) to accommodate the needs of street users of all ages and abilities.
Policy M-3.2: Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities.
Policy M-3.3 Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety, including street lighting, wayfinding, street trees, and other nonvehicular infrastructure.
Policy M-3.4: Traffic Calming on Residential Streets. Encourage traffic calming strategies and incorporation of traffic calming design in residential areas to slow traffic and promote safety.
Findings
Policy M-3.5: ADA Accessibility. Implement a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), to allow mobility-impaired users, such as disabled persons and seniors, to safely travel within the city.
Policy M-3.6: Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement, and incentives to support Safe Routes to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.
Action M-3a: When planning roadway facilities, incorporate the concept of complete streets, while considering the land use and design context of the surrounding areas.
Action M-3c: Partner with Lomita school administrators to improve traffic and parking conditions in school areas, especially during school drop-off and pick-up periods.
Action M-3d: Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/long-term parking, especially along major corridors.
Action M-3e: Comply with ADA requirements and design projects to remove physical barriers to accessibility in transportation systems and facilities for people with disabilities.
Policy M-9.5: Intermodal Safety. Ensure intermodal safety through development review and mitigate impediments to driveway sightlines. This may include right-of-way redesign, appropriate building orientation, driveway orientation, signage placement and size, sidewalk infrastructure such as bus stops or utility boxes, and nonstandard encroachments.
Action M-9d: Codify Public Works Right-of-Way Standards by ordinance or resolution to unify streets, remove nonstandard encroachments to improve safety, and improve sightlines. Ensure the Right-of-Way Standards are met during the entitlement process and consider proactive code enforcement.
4. Emergency Access
Threshold: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact 4.14-31 through 4.14-32) Explanation: Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in increased development which would result in new roadways and would increase the number of users on the City’s transportation system. There will be a need to ensure that adequate emergency access provisions are made to accommodate increased population and growth. Future development within the Planning Area is not anticipated to result in the substantial modification of roadways surrounding specific development sites or the placement of any permanent physical barriers on adjacent roadways. There is the potential for temporary closure of traffic lanes located immediately adjacent to a development site or otherwise controlled by construction personnel during Findings
construction activities. However, the applicant of any proposed development would be required to submit appropriate plans for plan review to ensure compliance with zoning, building, and fire codes prior to the issuance of a building permit. Proposed developments would be required to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements and would submit construction plans to the LACoFD’s Engineering Building Plan Check Unit for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permit.
Approval by LACoFD would ensure that construction and operation of future projects associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in inadequate emergency access. In addition, the existing Safety Element and the proposed Mobility Elements developed as part of the General Plan Update contain policies in support of emergency access along local roads.
Safety Element Policy 4.3 requires that the City prioritize Capital Improvement Projects that function as evacuation routes. Action 4.3a directs the City to maintain emergency evacuation routes by ensuring that street widths, paving, and grades meet the requirements of the California State Fire Code and the Los Angeles County Fire Codes. Additionally, Mobility Element Policy M-1.6 promotes using a safe system approach to transportation planning, street design, operations, emergency response, and maintenance to improve safety on roadways. Policy M-3.5 and Action M3e promote managing and improving the City’s transportation network to be safe, accessible and consistent with ADA and to include ADA accessible features as part of roadway infrastructure projects. Policy M-9.5 ensures that the City consider intermodal safety through development review and mitigate impediments to driveway sightlines.
The implementation of goals, policies and actions contained in the General Plan Safety Element and the General Plan Update, as well as compliance with the Lomita Municipal Code would ensure that new development in the Planning Area would not result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, the impact of the General Plan Update with respect to emergency access would be considered less than significant.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
MOBILITY ELEMENT
Goal M-1: Local Circulation System. A community served by a safe and balanced circulation system that meets the needs of all users.
Policy M-1.6: Promote Safe Streets. Use a safe systems approach for transportation planning, street design, operations, emergency response, and maintenance that proactively identifies opportunities to improve safety where conflicts between users exist to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries in our roadways.
Findings
Policy M-2.1: Agency Coordination: Coordinate with neighboring cities, transportation providers, and regional agencies such as Caltrans, the County of Los Angeles, South Bay Cities Council of Governments, and Metro to meet the mobility needs of people living in, working in, or visiting Lomita.
Policy M-3.5: ADA Accessibility. Implement a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), to allow mobility-impaired users, such as disabled persons and seniors, to safely travel within the city.
Action M-3d: Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/long-term parking, especially along major corridors.
Action M-3e: Comply with ADA requirements and design projects to remove physical barriers to accessibility in transportation systems and facilities for people with disabilities.
Policy M-9.5: Intermodal Safety. Ensure intermodal safety through development review and mitigate impediments to driveway sightlines. This may include right-of-way redesign, appropriate building orientation, driveway orientation, signage placement and size, sidewalk infrastructure such as bus stops or utility boxes, and nonstandard encroachments.
Action M-9d: Codify Public Works Right-of-Way Standards by ordinance or resolution to unify streets, remove nonstandard encroachments to improve safety, and improve sightlines. Ensure the Right-of-Way Standards are met during the entitlement process and consider proactive code enforcement.
P. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
• Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
• A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Findings
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impacts TCR-1 and TCR-2, pages 4.15-7 through 4.15-9)
Explanation: Effects on tribal cultural resources deemed to be significant could be considered adverse, if they involve physical demolition, destruction, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings, such that the significance of a resource would be materially impaired. While the General Plan Update does not directly propose site-specific development with the potential to directly impact a tribal cultural resource, future development allowed under the General Plan Update could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of previously undiscovered tribal cultural resources. This is considered a potentially significant impact. As part of the AB 52 consultation process, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation requested to be notified of any planned ground disturbances associated with future implementation of the General Plan Update.
The General Plan Update Resource Management Element includes goals, policies, and actions addressing tribal cultural resources. Policy RM-2.1 directs the City to ensure the preservation of the City’s historical past.
Policy RM-2.2 requires the City to consult with Native American tribes that may be impacted by future development and land use policy changes.
Action RM-2a requires the City to assess development proposals for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources pursuant to CEQA. Action RM-2d requires the City notify appropriate tribes for consultation for the purposes of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural places located on land within the City’s jurisdiction that may be affected by the proposed adoption, amendment to the General Plan or a specific plan. Action RM-2f requires that development proposals located in areas assessed to have moderate or high sensitivity for archaeological resources conduct a study to determine if significant archaeological resources are potentially present and if so, to identify mitigation measure to mitigate potential impacts, or to require full-time monitoring during ground disturbing activities by an archaeologist and Native American monitor. Action RM-2g requires, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, that the City halt excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County Coroner has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the remains are of Native American origin, no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains is permitted until the descendants from the deceased Native Americans have made a recommendation to the landowner or the persons responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods, as provided in PRC Section 5097.98, or the NAHC was unable to identify a descendant or Findings
the descendant failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being granted access to the site.
Potential impacts to tribal cultural resources associated with future development would be reduced through implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions. Subsequent development and infrastructure projects would be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA, pursuant to the City’s entitlement review process. Subsequent discretionary projects implemented in accordance with the General Plan Update would be subject to the provisions of AB 52 and may require tribal consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Planning Area and who have previously requested AB 52 consultations with the City. Future AB 52 consultation may identify tribal cultural resources not yet found and formally recorded that could be impacted by subsequent projects.
Compliance with the General Plan Update policies and actions and existing regulations would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, and impacts would be less than significant.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-2.1: Preservation. Ensure the preservation of the city’s historical past.
Policy RM-2.3: Tribal Consultation. In accordance with state, local, and tribal intergovernmental consultation requirements, consult with Native American tribes that may be impacted by proposed development and land use policy changes, as necessary.
Action RM-2a: Assess development proposals for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Action RM-2f : For all development proposals within areas assessed to have moderate or high sensitivity for archaeological resources, the City shall require either a study to be conducted by a professional archaeologist or to have full-time monitoring during grounddisturbing activities by an archaeologist and a Native American monitor. The objective of the study will be to determine if significant archaeological resources are potentially present and if the project will significantly impact these resources. If significant impacts are identified, the City may require the project to be modified to avoid the impacts, or require mitigation measures to mitigate the impacts. Mitigation may involve archaeological investigation and resources recovery.
Action RM-2g: In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the City shall halt excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County Coroner has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the Findings
cause of death is required. If the remains are of Native American origin, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the descendants from the deceased Native Americans have made a recommendation to the landowner or the persons responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98, or the Native American Heritage Commission was unable to identify a descendant or the descendant failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being granted access to the site.
Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
1. Utilities and Service Systems
Threshold: Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact USS-1, pages 4.16-23 through
4.16-29)
Explanation: Water
With respect to water facilities, the General Plan Update is expected to result in population and employment growth within the Planning Area, and thus, an overall increase in demand on water supply, which would necessitate construction of future water supply infrastructure. Buildout under the General Plan Update could yield a net change over existing conditions of an additional 2,885 housing units, an additional population of 7,616 people, an additional 583,431 square feet of non-residential building square footage, and an additional 853 jobs within the Planning Area. This increased demand for water infrastructure would primarily be located within areas that are already developed and serviced by the City’s Water Division.
Since no specific development projects are proposed as part of the General Plan Update, the environmental effects from constructing or expanding facilities are unknown at this time. All water infrastructure construction activities associated with future development would be subject to compliance with existing local, State, and federal laws, ordinances, and regulations, which would ensure impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. The City’s Water Division would continue to ensure adequate water distribution facilities are available to serve future development.
Furthermore, these future water facilities would be subject to General Plan Update policies and actions intended to protect the environment. Policy Findings
RM-6.1 directs the City to coordinate with the Los Angeles RWQCB to help maintain and improve the quality of both surface water and groundwater resources. Policy RM-6.2 directs the City to promote water conservation and efficiency through education, innovation, regulation, and incentives that target all aspects of water consumption. Policy RM-6.4 encourages the City to collaborate with community partners to promote water conservation and to cultivate an understanding and appreciation of water conservation practices. Policy RM-6.6 instructs the City to invest and devote resources toward the City’s Water Division to minimize reliance on imported water and strive to develop a more effective water production and distribution system in the city. Action RM-6a directs the City to work closely with the California State Division of Drinking Water, the Los Angeles RWQCB, and other agencies to identify the potential source of benzene contamination detected at Well No. 5 through extensive testing. Action RM-6b directs the City to implement regular monitoring and reporting procedures to track water consumption trends, identify inefficiencies, and gauge the impact of water conservation measures. Action RM-6d directs the City to conduct feasibility studies to evaluate the potential for expanding recycled water infrastructure within the city. Action RM-6f directs the City to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the current water distribution system and identity areas in need of improvement to guide the development of a more efficient water distribution system. The implementation of existing regulations and General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities to a less than significant level.
Wastewater
With respect to wastewater, the General Plan Update is expected to result in increased population and employment growth within the Planning Area, and thus, an overall increase in demand on the existing sewer system associated with increased sewage flows. The General Plan Update does not include specific development proposals; therefore, the environmental effects of future wastewater collection systems are unknown at this time. At the time future projects are proposed, they would be required to ensure sufficient local and trunk sewer capacity exists to serve the specific development. Pursuant to Lomita Municipal Code Section 5-2, Sanitary Sewers and Industrial Waste, adopts Title 20, Division 2 of the Los Angeles County Code as the Sanitary Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinance for the City of Lomita. The ordinance regulates discharges of wastewater, including industrial waste discharges, into sanitary sewers within the city.
The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to ensure adequate wastewater services and facilities are available, and that potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of new or expanded infrastructure would be reduced. Proposed Resource Findings
Management Element Policy RM-6.1 directs the City to coordinate with the Los Angeles RWQCB to help maintain and improve the quality of both surface water and groundwater resources. Action RM-6a directs the City to work closely with the California State Division of Drinking Water, the Los Angeles RWQCB, and other agencies to identify the potential source of benzene contamination detected at Well No. 5 through extensive testing.
The implementation of existing regulations and General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities to a level that is less than significant. The implementation of existing regulations and General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities to a less than significant level.
Stormwater
Development under the proposed General Plan Update would result in increased areas of impervious surfaces throughout the Planning Area, resulting in the need for additional or expanded stormwater drainage, conveyance and retention infrastructure. Storm drain infrastructure in the city is jointly owned and operated by the City and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD). The infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve new growth would involve development of some facilities on-site within new development projects, some facilities off-site on appropriately designated land, and may also involve improvements to existing facilities and disturbance of existing rights-of-way. The specific impacts of providing new and expanded drainage facilities cannot be determined at this time, as the General Plan Update does not propose or approve any specific development project nor does it designate specific sites for new or expanded public facilities.
Stormwater drainage and conveyance facilities would be evaluated at the project-level in association with subsequent development projects.
However, the facilities would be primarily provided on sites with land use designations that allow such uses and the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the facilities would likely be similar to those associated with new development, redevelopment, and infrastructure projects under the General Plan. As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project will be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations. Subsequent development and infrastructure projects would also be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA. As such, this is a less than significant impact and no additional mitigation is required.
The General Plan Update policies and actions would further ensure that there is adequate stormwater drainage and flood control infrastructure to Findings
serve future development under the General Plan Update and would ensure that future drainage and flood control infrastructure projects do not result in adverse environmental impacts. Policy RM-6.3 requires the City to continue the coordination with local water agencies to ensure efficient and effective management of stormwater runoff and to protect stormwater quality, in accordance with the NPDES permit. Policy RM-6.5 encourages the City to develop drought resistant landscaping for new residential and nonresidential development projects to decrease water demand, prevent erosion, reduce flooding, and limit pollutants. Action RM-6c encourages the City to conduct outreach to inform residents and businesses about the importance of stormwater management, including providing practical tips and resources to reduce local runoffs. Action RM-6e encourages the City to consider adoption of drought resistant landscape guidelines in the Zoning Code. The implementation of existing regulations and General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded stormwater facilities to a level that is less than significant.
Electrical, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
With respect to electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication services, the Planning Area is within the service areas of Southern California Edison (SCE), SoCalGas, and various telecommunication providers. New growth anticipated by the General Plan Update would require increased electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services, potentially resulting in the new construction or relocation of facilities through 2045. The environmental effects of future expansions of electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities would be evaluated with each development proposal and would require a separate environmental review related to the construction and operation of new electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure. Future implementing projects under the General Plan Update would have to coordinate with each utility provider to establish service, provide any necessary extensions of facilities, and comply with regulations in existence at that time.
As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project will be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations. Furthermore, these future facilities would be subject to General Plan Update goals and policies intended to protect the environment. Policy RM-5.1 directs the City to promote the development and use of renewable energy sources for city, residential, and business facilities. Policy RM-5.2 directs the City to promote home energy audits with regional programs, such as Energy Upgrade California or other State programs. Policy RM-5.3 directs the City to coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments and other organizations for outreach events to promote energy awareness and existing Findings
programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency. Policy RM5.4 requires the City to ensure that residential and nonresidential development projects comply with the most current version of CALGreen.
Proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-5.5 encourages property owners to participate in solar retrofit and other energy-efficient home improvement projects to reduce reliance on traditional energy sources. Action RM-5a directs the City to use renewable energy sources at City facilities, as feasible. Action RM-5b directs the City to organize and conduct educational workshops with utility companies informing the public of the benefits of home energy audits and energy saving practices. Action RM-5d directs the City to review development projects to ensure that all new residential and nonresidential development complies with local and state regulations regarding energy efficiency. Action RM-5e encourages the City consider adopting minimum energy efficiency requirements in the Zoning Code. The implementation of existing regulations and General Plan Update policies and actions would reduce impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities to a less than significant level.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-5.1: Renewable Energy Production. Promote the development and use of renewable energy sources for city, residential, and business facilities.
Policy RM-5.2: Energy Audits. Promote home energy audits with regional programs such as Energy Upgrade California or other state programs.
Policy RM-5.3: Regional Partnerships. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments and other organizations for outreach events to promote energy awareness and existing programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency.
Policy RM-5.4: Green Building Standards. Ensure that residential and nonresidential development projects comply with the most current version of the California Green Building Standards Code.
Policy RM-5.5: Energy Upgrades. Encourage property owners to participate in solar retrofit and other energy-efficient home improvement projects to reduce reliance on traditional energy sources.
Action RM-5a: As feasible, use renewable energy sources at City facilities.
Action RM-5b: Organize and conduct educational workshops with utility companies informing the public of the benefits of home energy audits and energy saving practices.
Findings
Action RM-5c: Conduct outreach events with the SBCCOG to inform residents and businesses about existing programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency.
Action RM-5d: Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new residential and nonresidential development complies with local and state regulations regarding energy efficiency.
Action RM-5e: Consider adopting minimum energy efficiency requirements in the Zoning Code.
Policy RM-6.1: Regional Coordination. Continue to coordinate with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to help maintain and improve the quality of both surface water and groundwater resources.
Policy RM-6.2: Conservation Management. Promote water conservation and efficiency through education, innovation, regulation, and incentives that target all aspects of water consumption.
Policy RM-6.3: Stormwater. Coordinate with local water agencies to ensure efficient and effective management of stormwater runoff and to protect stormwater quality, in accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
Policy RM-6.4: Education. Collaborate with community partners to promote water conservation and to cultivate an understanding and appreciation of water conservation practices.
Policy RM-6.5: Landscaping. Encourage drought resistant landscaping for new residential and nonresidential development projects to decrease water demand, prevent erosion, reduce flooding, and limit pollutants.
Policy RM-6.6: Water Division. Continue to invest and devote resources toward the City’s Water Division to minimize reliance on imported water, and strive to develop a more effective water production and distribution system in the city.
Action RM-6a: Continue to work closely with the California State Division of Drinking Water, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, and other agencies to identify the potential source of benzene contamination detected at Well No.5 through extensive testing. This testing may include identification and investigation of potential sources both inside and outside the city, extensive sampling, boring, and monitoring of likely sources in the area, and ongoing monitoring of soil and water levels.
Action RM-6b: Implement regular monitoring and reporting procedures to track water consumption trends, identify inefficiencies, and gauge the impact of water conservation measures.
Action RM-6c: Conduct public outreach to inform residents and businesses about the importance of stormwater management, including providing practical tips and resources to reduce local runoffs.
Findings
Action RM-6d: Conduct feasibility studies to evaluate the potential for expanding recycled water infrastructure within the city.
Action RM-6e: Consider adopting the drought resistant landscape guidelines in the Zoning Code.
Action RM-6f: Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the current water distribution system, and identity areas in need of improvement to guide the development of a more efficient water distribution system.
Action RM-1i: Establish minimum open space and/or maximum lot coverage standards in the Zoning Code for new development in the city.
2. Water Supplies
Threshold: Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact USS-2, pages 4.16-29 through
4.16-31)
Explanation: The General Plan Update is expected to result in increased population and employment growth within the Planning Area, and a corresponding increase in the demand for additional water supplies. Buildout under the General Plan could yield a net change over existing conditions of an additional 2,885 housing units, an additional population of 7,616 people, an additional 583,431 square feet of non-residential building square footage, and an additional 853 jobs within the Planning Area. Water service is provided by the City’s Water Division, along with California Water Service (CWS) for a small portion at the southwest corner of the city. The City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) concluded they will be able to meet projected future water demands under normal, dry, and multiple dry water years through 2045.
For future qualifying projects, a Water Supply Assessment would be required pursuant to SB 610 for inclusion in the project’s CEQA analysis.
The Water Supply Assessment discerns whether the expected demand from the development being proposed has been accounted for in the forecasted demands in the most recent UWMP. A Written Verification of Supply per SB 221 is prepared as a condition of approval for a subdivision map of 500 units or more. Considered a fail-safe mechanism to provide sufficient evidence that adequate water supplies are available before construction begins, the Written Verification of Supply is also prepared/adopted by the water supplier and approved by the land use authority. Depending on the project, one or both of these analyses may be required. Development proposals that may not warrant a Water Supply Assessment and/or Written Findings
Verification of Supply, but meet the definition of a project under CEQA, would still require an analysis of sufficient water supplies in the CEQA process.
Additionally, the General Plan Update includes goals, policies, and actions to ensure that adequate water supply, treatment, and distribution capacity is available to meet the needs of the proposed development without negatively impacting the existing community. Policy RM-6.1 directs the City to coordinate with the Los Angeles RWQCB to help maintain and improve the quality of both surface water and groundwater resources. Policy RM-6.2 directs the City to promote water conservation and efficiency through education, innovation, regulation, and incentives that target all aspects of water consumption. Policy RM-6.4 encourages the City to collaborate with community partners to promote water conservation and to cultivate an understanding and appreciation of water conservation practices. Policy RM6.6 instructs the City’s to invest and devout resources toward the City’s Water Division to minimize reliance on imported water and strive to develop a more effective water production and distribution system in the city. Action RM-6a directs the City to work closely with the California State Division of Drinking Water, the Los Angeles RWQCB, and other agencies to identify the potential source of benzene contamination detected at Well No. 5 through extensive testing. Action RM-6b directs the City to implement regular monitoring and reporting procedures to track water consumption trends, identify inefficiencies, and gauge the impact of water conservation measures. Action RM-6d directs the City to conduct feasibility studies to evaluate the potential for expanding recycled water infrastructure within the city. Action RM-6f directs the City to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the current water distribution system, and identity areas in need of improvement to guide the development of a more efficient water distribution system. Through implementation of existing federal, State, and local regulations and the General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions, the environmental impacts related to water supplies would be less than significant.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-6.1: Regional Coordination. Continue to coordinate with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to help maintain and improve the quality of both surface water and groundwater resources.
Policy RM-6.2: Conservation Management. Promote water conservation and efficiency through education, innovation, regulation, and incentives that target all aspects of water consumption.
Findings
Policy RM-6.4: Education. Collaborate with community partners to promote water conservation and to cultivate an understanding and appreciation of water conservation practices.
Policy RM-6.6: Water Division. Continue to invest and devote resources toward the City’s Water Division to minimize reliance on imported water, and strive to develop a more effective water production and distribution system in the city.
Action RM-6a: Continue to work closely with the California State Division of Drinking Water, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, and other agencies to identify the potential source of benzene contamination detected at Well No.5 through extensive testing. This testing may include identification and investigation of potential sources both inside and outside the city, extensive sampling, boring, and monitoring of likely sources in the area, and ongoing monitoring of soil and water levels.
Action RM-6b: Implement regular monitoring and reporting procedures to track water consumption trends, identify inefficiencies, and gauge the impact of water conservation measures.
Action RM-6d: Conduct feasibility studies to evaluate the potential for expanding recycled water infrastructure within the city.
Action RM-6f: Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the current water distribution system, and identity areas in need of improvement to guide the development of a more efficient water distribution system.
3. Wastewater Capacity
Threshold: Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact USS-3, pages 4.16-30 through
4.16-31)
Explanation: The City’s local sewes discharge into Los Angeles County Sanitation District (LACSD) facilities and are conveyed for treatment at LACSD’s Warren Water Resource Facility, with a design capacity of 400 and serving a population of approximately 4.8 million people throughout Los Angeles County. The City’s proposed land use changes will produce an estimated sewer flow increase of 850 AFY (758,500 GPD). The LACSD continues to monitor and adjust its projected flows and would expand treatment capacity as needed based on these updates. The General Plan Update enables additional development but does not include specific development proposals. At the time future projects are proposed, they would require environmental review and compliance with regulations in existence at that Findings
time to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity exists.
Additionally, the General Plan Update includes goals, policies, and actions to ensure adequate wastewater facilities capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand. Policy LU-4.1 directs the city to coordinate capital improvement projects and prioritize infrastructure investments that best meet the City’s critical needs. Proposed Land Use Element Policy LU-4.3 directs the City to maintain and implement public facility master plans, in collaboration with appropriate regional, State, and federal laws, to identify infrastructure needs, funding sources, and to implement improvements for public facilities and services in Lomita. The implementation of existing federal, State, and local regulations and the General Plan Update policies and actions would ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity and impacts would be less than significant.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy LU-4.1: Capital Improvements. Coordinate capital improvement projects and prioritize infrastructure investments that best meet the city’s most critical needs and add value to the community.
Policy LU-4.3: Public Facility Plans. Maintain and implement public facility master plans, in collaboration with appropriate regional, state, and federal laws, to identify infrastructure needs, funding sources, and to implement improvements for public facilities and services in Lomita.
4. Solid Waste Generation
Threshold: Would the Project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact USS-4, page 4.16-32 through
4.16-34)
Explanation: Future development of projects as contemplated under the General Plan Update may increase the population within the Planning Area by an additional 7,616 people. The City of Lomita has achieved a disposal rate of
2.9 PPD per resident in 2022. Assuming these disposal rates remain constant throughout the life of the General Plan Update, the new growth under General Plan buildout would result in a net increase of approximately 22,086.4 PPD of solid waste over existing conditions, which equals 11 net TPD or 4,029.6 net tons of solid waste per year. The city’s projected increase in solid waste generation associated with 2045 buildout under the General Plan Update is within the permitted capacity of the Olinda Alpha Findings
Landfill and El Sobrante Landfill, where the vast majority of waste from the city was disposed of in 2019. Olinda Alpha Landfill has a remaining capacity of approximately 17.5 million cubic yards as of 2020, has a permitted a maximum throughput of 8,000 TPD, and has enough projected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2036. El Sobrante Landfill has a remaining capacity of approximately 143,977,170 cubic yards as of 2018, has a permitted a maximum throughput of 16,054 TPD and has enough projected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2051, beyond the 20-year planning horizon of the General Plan Update. In addition, the City disposes solid waste to a number of other landfills. Conservatively assuming the Olinda Alpha Landfill reach full capacity during the 20-year planning horizon of the General Plan Update, the El Sobrante Landfill would have adequate capacity to accommodate the City’s projected solid waste generation of approximately 11 TPD through the planning horizon. Further, it is more likely that future solid waste would be distributed to the other landfills serving the City.
The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to responsibly manage and reduce solid waste. Policy RM- 7.1 directs the City to comply with local, regional, and State regulations regarding waste diversion, source reduction, recycling, and composting. RM-7.2 directs the City to provide adequate solid waste disposal, recycling, and refuse services for current and future residents and businesses. Policy RM-7.4 encourages development projects to divert most of their construction waste debris away from landfills. Policy RM-7.5 directs the City to work with appropriate service providers to collect and compost green waste. Policy RM-7.6 encourages collaboration with community partners to promote waste reduction strategies to the community. Action RM-7a directs the City to comply with State law to ensure solid waste collection activities, operation of waste reduction and recycling programs, and household hazardous waste disposal and education programs are consistent with the Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. Action RM-7b directs the City to regularly monitor the level of services provided by waste and recycling collection contractors to ensure that service levels meet the terms of the contract. Action RM-7d encourages the City to coordinate with developers and contractors to identify opportunities for waste diversion and recycling during the project construction phase. Action RM-7e encourages the City to work with the school district, community organizations, and businesses to develop educational programs on waste reduction strategies. Through compliance with applicable regulations, including those related to recycling and solid waste diversion, as well as implementation of regulations and policies included in the General Plan Update, Project implementation would be consistent with solid waste reduction statutes and regulations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant impact, and no mitigation measures are required.
Findings
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-7.1: Compliance. Ensure compliance with local, regional, and state regulations regarding waste diversion, source reduction, recycling, and composting.
Policy RM-7.2: Solid Waste Collection. Ensure adequate solid waste disposal, recycling, and refuse services for current and future residents and businesses.
Policy RM-7.4: Construction Waste Reduction. Encourage development projects to divert most of their construction waste debris away from landfills.
Policy RM-7.5: Organic Waste. Work with appropriate service providers to collect and compost green waste.
Policy RM-7.6: Education. Collaborate with community partners to promote waste reduction strategies to the community.
Action RM-7a: Continue to comply with state law to ensure solid waste collection activities, operation of waste reduction and recycling programs, and household hazardous waste disposal and education programs are consistent with the Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan.
Action RM-7b: Regularly monitor the level of services provided by waste and recycling collection contractors to ensure that service levels meet the terms of the contract.
Action RM-7d: Coordinate with developers and contractors to identify opportunities for waste diversion and recycling during the project construction phase.
Action RM-7e: Work with the school district, community organizations, and businesses to develop educational programs on waste reduction strategies.
5. Solid Waste Regulations
Threshold: Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Finding: Less than significant. (Draft EIR, Impact USS-5, pages 4.16-34 through
4.16-36)
Explanation: Lomita Municipal Code Section 5-5.05, WMP Compliance Report, lists the diversion requirements for construction and demolition debris that will ensure the City to be compliant with CALGreen and allow the City to better document diversion efforts in compliance with AB 939. Additionally, Lomita Municipal Code Section 5-3, Integrated Waste Management, establishes mandatory solid waste and recycling collection to comply with the requirements of AB 939. The City has also established disposal and Findings
mandatory recycling requirements for commercial facilities, single family residential, and multifamily residential premises to comply with State law diversion requirements. As permitted by AB 939, the City authorizes a private solid waste franchisee (i.e., Athens Services) to handle the city’s solid waste and requires Athens Services to cooperate in the preparation of solid waste disposal characterization studies and the preparation of waste stream audits. Athens Services and the City work together to submit information to meet the reporting requirements of AB 939, local diversion requirements, or any other law or regulation, to reach the solid waste and recycling goals mandated by AB 939.
The General Plan Update includes policies and actions to responsibly manage and reduce solid waste in compliance with federal, State, and local regulations. Policy RM- 7.1 directs the City comply with local, regional, and State regulations regarding waste diversion, source reduction, recycling, and composting. Policy RM-7.2 directs the City to provide adequate solid waste disposal, recycling, and refuse services for current and future residents and businesses. Policy RM-7.3 encourages the City to promote the proper disposal of hazardous waste through education, monitoring, and enforcement of proper use, storage, handling, and disposal.
Policy RM-7.4 encourages development projects to divert most of their construction waste debris away from landfills. Policy RM-7.5 directs the City to work with appropriate service providers to collect and compost green waste. Policy RM-7.6 encourages collaboration with community partners to promote waste reduction strategies to the community. Action RM-7a directs the City to comply with State law to ensure solid waste collection activities, operation of waste reduction and recycling programs, and household hazardous waste disposal and education programs are consistent with the Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. Action RM-7b directs the City to regularly monitor the level of services provided by waste and recycling collection contractors to ensure that service levels meet the terms of the contract. Action RM-7c directs the City to use educational flyers and workshops to inform residents of the proper method to dispose hazardous waste that includes paint, tires, medications, medical sharps, infectious waste, asbestos waste, construction waste, and electronic waste. Action RM-7d encourages the City to coordinate with developers and contractors to identify opportunities for waste diversion and recycling during the project construction phase. Action RM-7e encourages the City to work with the school district, community organizations, and businesses to develop educational programs on waste reduction strategies. Through compliance with existing regulations and the General Plan Update policies and actions, future development implemented by the General Plan Update would be required to comply with management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and impacts would be less than significant.
Findings
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-7.1: Compliance. Ensure compliance with local, regional, and state regulations regarding waste diversion, source reduction, recycling, and composting.
Policy RM-7.2: Solid Waste Collection. Ensure adequate solid waste disposal, recycling, and refuse services for current and future residents and businesses.
Policy RM-7.3: Hazardous Waste. Promote the proper disposal of hazardous waste through education, monitoring, and enforcement of proper use, storage, handling, and disposal.
Policy RM-7.4: Construction Waste Reduction. Encourage development projects to divert most of their construction waste debris away from landfills.
Policy RM-7.5: Organic Waste. Work with appropriate service providers to collect and compost green waste.
Policy RM-7.6: Education. Collaborate with community partners to promote waste reduction strategies to the community.
Action RM-7a: Continue to comply with state law to ensure solid waste collection activities, operation of waste reduction and recycling programs, and household hazardous waste disposal and education programs are consistent with the Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan.
Action RM-7b: Regularly monitor the level of services provided by waste and recycling collection contractors to ensure that service levels meet the terms of the contract.
Action RM-7c: Use educational flyers and workshops to inform residents of the proper method to dispose hazardous waste that includes paint, tires, medications, medical sharps, infectious waste, asbestos waste, construction waste, and electronic waste.
Action RM-7d: Coordinate with developers and contractors to identify opportunities for waste diversion and recycling during the project construction phase.
Action RM-7e: Work with the school district, community organizations, and businesses to develop educational programs on waste reduction strategies.
R. WILDFIRE
Threshold: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Findings
Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Finding: No Impact. (Draft EIR, pages 7.0-3 through 7.0-4) Explanation: The Planning Area is not located within an State Responsibility Area (“SRA”) and is not located within a VHFHSZ within an Local Responsibility Area (“LRA”). The site of the Cypress Water Production Facility is within a recommended VHFHSZ. The Planning Area and surrounding area are relatively flat and do not contain any slopes or features that would exacerbate wildfire risks. The Planning Area is urbanized and developed. Potential residential development would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. No impact would occur in this regard.
Findings
SECTION III
IMPACTS THAT ARE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION
INCORPORATED
There are no impacts that require mitigation above and beyond implementation of the policies and actions included in the General Plan.
SECTION IV
IMPACTS THAN CANNOT BE FULLY MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The City Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of General Plan goals, policies, and actions identified in the EIR and in these Findings, the following environmental impacts cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is therefore included herein:
A. AIR QUALITY
1. Cumulatively Considerable Pollutant Emissions
Threshold: Would the project result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under the applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Impact AQ-2, pages 4.2-39 through 4.2-46)
Explanation: The SCAQMD has established numerical significance thresholds for regional emissions during construction and operation. Daily emissions were estimated for the construction of the land uses provided in the General Plan Update. The calculations used to develop construction emissions incorporate compliance with applicable dust control measures required to be implemented during each phase of construction by SCAQMD Rule 403 (Control of Fugitive Dust), and fugitive VOC control measures required to be implemented by architectural coating emission factors based on SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings); however, the constructionrelated daily emissions would exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Therefore, short-term regional construction emissions would be potentially significant. Additionally, operation of future development accommodated by the General Plan Update would generate criteria air pollutant emissions from project-generated vehicle trips traveling within the City, energy sources such as natural gas combustion, and area sources such as landscaping equipment and consumer products usage. Operational emissions for future development accommodated by the General Plan Update would exceed regulatory thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. While these thresholds are the only thresholds available for numerically determining significance, it Findings
should be noted that these thresholds were specifically developed for use in determining significance for individual projects and not for program-level documents, such as the General Plan Update. However, as emissions for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 exceed regulatory thresholds, the regional operational emissions would be potentially significant. With respect to operational emissions, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the General Plan Update’s policies and actions. The proposed policies and actions of the General Plan Update listed below would potentially reduce emissions, which could potentially address impacts related to conflicts with an applicable air quality plan. For instance, the General Plan Update includes:
proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-3.1, which directs to the City to coordinate with State and regional agencies, such as the SCAQMD, SCAG, SBCCOG, and CARB to address air quality issues; Policy RM-3.2, which requires the City to reduce concentrated air pollution and the incidence of respiratory illness through the land use planning process by diversifying the land use mix, bringing compatible uses closer together, reducing VMT, and applying other similar measures; and the policies under the proposed General Plan Update Land Use Element Goal LU-1, which promotes balanced land use patterns. These policies and actions are oriented toward the reduction of the air quality impacts of individual projects.
With respect to operational emissions, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with the AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the General Plan Update’s policies and actions. However, as there is no way to determine the effectiveness of such regulations, policies, and actions for individual projects, it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below regulatory thresholds. For construction emissions, the policies and actions of the General Plan listed below would reduce operational emissions. For example, the General Plan Update includes Policy LU-1.1 through Policy LU-1.8, which encourage a balanced land use pattern that would promote a reduction in overall vehicle trips and VMT.
Mobility Element Goal M-1 and the policies under it would promote a multi-modal circulation system, which would encourage a reduction on single-occupancy vehicle trips. Goal M-6 promotes pedestrian and bicycle transportation as alternative transportation options. Policy M-9.2 promotes TDM to further reduce operational VMT. Proposed Resource Management Element Policy RM-4.4 promotes continued investment in public infrastructure that supports the use of energy efficient or low-emission transportation. The policies under Goal RM-5 promote more careful and efficient use of energy resources, including Policy RM-5.1, which promotes renewable energy production.
Findings
There are no feasible criteria air pollutant reduction measures beyond those identified within the policies and actions listed above and those listed below, that would reduce impacts. While implementation of these General Plan Updated goals, policies, and actions would reduce criteria pollutant emissions, the extent of impact reduction would be determined on a projectby-project basis, as necessary. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
LAND USE ELEMENT
Goal LU-1: Balanced Land Use Pattern. Preserve a balanced land use pattern that meets the diverse needs of Lomita’s residents and businesses, providing a range of housing options, offering a variety of employment and recreation opportunities, and promoting a robust local economy.
Policy LU-1.1: Land Planning. Promote a comprehensive approach to land use planning that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable; enhances community livability and public health; offers choices in housing, jobs, amenities, and transportation; reduces pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and the expenditure of non-renewable resources; and provides opportunities for meaningful public engagement in land use decisions.
Policy LU-1.2: Focused Growth. Focus new higher density mixed-use development along major corridors and within key activity nodes to expand housing opportunity, preserve the character of existing single-family neighborhoods, promote active transportation options, and enhance economic vitality.
Policy LU-1.3: Employment/Housing Balance. Strive to balance levels of employment and housing within the community to provide more opportunities for residents to work locally, reduce commute times, and improve air quality.
Policy LU-1.4: Thriving Downtown. Promote economic opportunities in Downtown Lomita through a mixture of housing, destination-type commercial uses, eateries, entertainment, and civic uses such as cultural and performing arts facilities. Support pedestrian-friendly and human-scaled development within the downtown area to reduce vehicle trips and parking demand.
Policy LU-1.5: Neighborhood-Serving Uses. Support the development of neighborhoodscaled retail and service uses nearby residences to meet daily needs and reduce vehicle trips.
Policy LU-1.6: Capture Local Spending. Encourage the development of a broad range of commercial uses that capture a greater share of local spending and reduce residents’ reliance upon travel to nearby communities.
Findings
Policy LU-1.8: Mixed-Use. Create opportunities for development projects that mix housing with commercial uses to enable Lomita’s residents to live close to businesses and employment, improving multi-modal travel and increasing social interaction.
Action LU-1a: Update the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title XI, Chapter 1 of the Lomita Municipal Code) and Zoning Map as appropriate to ensure consistency with this Land Use Element and designations shown on the Land Use Map (Figure LU-1). As part of the update, address the following items:
a. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include new mixed-use zones and associated development standards and land use regulations, to implement the MU30, MU40, and MU70 land use designations and reflect the development densities and intensities of those designations. Moreover, amend the Zoning Map to apply the new zones to specific parcels within the city.
b. Reevaluate the permitted uses in the Downtown, Commercial (D-C) zone to ensure that they reflect the mix of retail, commercial, restaurant, office, service, etc. uses desired by the community for the downtown.
c. Ensure that minimum lot sizes for new mixed-use developments are adhered to.
MOBILITY ELEMENT
Goal M-1: Local Circulation System. A community served by a safe and balanced circulation system that meets the needs of all users.
Policy M-1.6: Promote Safe Streets. Use a safe systems approach for transportation planning, street design, operations, emergency response, and maintenance that proactively identifies opportunities to improve safety where conflicts between users exist to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries in our roadways.
Policy M-1.7: Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Use traffic calming strategies such as signage, speed radar feedback signs, curb extensions, and deflections, as recommended in the City’s Traffic Calming Toolkit, to create a pedestrianfriendly circulation system and promote safety, while not reducing parking supply.
Policy M-1.8: Transportation Demand Management. Encourage the preparation of Transportation Demand Management plans for all major developments or facility expansions to encourage ride-sharing and other improvements, thereby reducing vehicle trips.
Action M-1e: Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential local effects on vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities and operations, and seek funding to invest in associated infrastructure and technologies such as Traffic System Management (TSM) and traffic signal synchronization.
Findings
Action M-1f: Evaluate the applicability of traffic calming tools to minimize cut-through traffic on local streets, especially in residential areas and near schools, and implement improvements as necessary.
Goal M-3: Complete Streets. A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users.
Policy M-3.1: Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply complete streets principles to all transportation improvement projects (e.g., safety, intelligent transportation systems, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities) to accommodate the needs of street users of all ages and abilities.
Policy M-3.2: Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities.
Policy M-3.3: Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety, including street lighting, wayfinding, street trees, and other nonvehicular infrastructure.
Policy M-3.4: Traffic Calming on Residential Streets. Encourage traffic calming strategies and incorporation of traffic calming design in residential areas to slow traffic and promote safety.
Policy M-3.5: ADA Accessibility. Implement a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), to allow mobility-impaired users, such as disabled persons and seniors, to safely travel within the city.
Policy M-3.6: Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement, and incentives to support Safe Routes to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.
Policy M-3.7: Right-of-Way Design. Ensure the City is fully utilizing legal right-of-way to provide space for an appropriate mix of streetscape elements.
Action M-3a: When planning roadway facilities, incorporate the concept of complete streets, while considering the land use and design context of the surrounding areas.
Action M-3b: Periodically review and update the City’s Right-of-Way Standards to ensure that the standards reflect the City’s goals and policies for the circulation system.
Action M-3c: Partner with Lomita school administrators to improve traffic and parking conditions in school areas, especially during school drop-off and pick-up periods.
Findings
Action M-3d: Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/long-term parking, especially along major corridors.
Goal M-5: Transit. A community connected to a comprehensive public transportation system.
Policy M-5.1: Transit Use. Support programs encouraging public transit use by people living in, working in, or visiting Lomita.
Policy M-5.2: Improve Local Public Transit Service. Work with Metro, Torrance Transit, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the city.
Policy M-5.3: Transit Facilities. Require new developments to construct, when appropriate, transit facilities, including bus turn-outs, bus stop infrastructure, and route information signage.
Policy M-5.4: Effects of New Technologies on Transit Use. Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential effects on transit demand and how users access public transit.
Action M-5a: Continue on-going coordination with transit authorities toward the expansion of transit facilities.
Action M-5b: Work with transit providers to increase transit service frequency, speed, and reliability and increase ridership and to strengthen linkages and access to key destinations.
Action M-5c: Explore new intracity transit options such as a Lomita trolley to transport individuals between commercial areas, residential areas, and parks.
Goal M-6: Active Transportation. A community with a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourages active transportation.
Policy M-6.1: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles, including the Plan’s facility recommendations as shown in Figure M-2.
Policy M-6.2: Local Travel Network. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote local micromobility modes by implementing the Local Travel Network plan and supporting efforts to integrate the network with adjacent cities, as shown in Figure M-3.
Policy M-6.3: Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways, evaluating the adequacy of existing urban trails, and prioritizing sidewalk maintenance.
Findings
Policy M-6.4: Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and non-residential developments in the city to provide safe and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture, landscaping, and other improvements.
Policy M-6.5: Effects of New Technologies on Active Transportation. Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential effects on designing a transportation network that accommodates all modes and users.
Action M-6a: As part of development review and specific plans, require land development projects to provide connectivity and accessibility to a mix of uses such as schools, parks, work, and shopping destinations that meet residents’ daily needs including secure parking and safety measures.
Action M-6b: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code, as necessary, to consider bicycle and pedestrian access as part of the site plan review for new development projects.
Action M-6c: Dedicate capital improvement funding for citywide projects including pedestrian refuge islands, raised crosswalks, or other relevant crosswalk enhancements as they become available.
Action M-6d: Require that all roadway resurfacing projects and land development projects with impacts to roadways be subject to a review process that considers lane reconfiguration and other opportunities to improve the bicycle and pedestrian network.
Goal M-9: Transportation Management. A community with transportation management strategies that contribute to achieving regional and statewide greenhouse gas emissions targets.
Policy M-9.1: Vehicle Miles Traveled Guidelines. Require vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City shall continue to maintain Level of Service (LOS) standards for the purposes of planning and designing street improvements.
Policy M-9.2: Transportation Demand Management. Require transportation demand management (TDM) strategies as mitigation measures for new projects that exceed the City’s VMT impact thresholds.
Policy M-9.3: Regional Coordination. Encourage regional agencies such as Metro, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote TDM programs that reduce single-occupancy vehicle travel.
Policy M-9.4: New Development. Work with developers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
Findings
Action M-9a: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code and related implementation documents, as necessary, to reflect TDM best practices.
Action M-9b: Require developments that are approved based on TDM plans to incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets as part of those plans.
Action M-9c: Consider adoption of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) guidelines and thresholds for transportation analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Goal RM-3: Air Quality. Improve air quality and reduce air pollutant emissions.
Policy RM-3.1: Regional Air Quality. Coordinate with state and regional agencies such as the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to address air quality issues.
Policy RM-3.2: Land Use Planning. Reduce concentrated air pollution and the incidence of respiratory illness through the land use planning process by diversifying the land use mix, bringing compatible uses closer together, reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), and applying other similar measures.
Policy RM-3.3: Stationary and Mobile Sources. Seek to reduce air pollutant emissions through regulation of stationary and mobile sources of air pollution, as feasible.
Policy RM-3.4: Sustainable Technology. Encourage new and emerging technologies that could decrease air pollution.
Policy RM-3.5: Public Education. Raise public awareness of the impacts of air pollution on physical health and the environment.
Policy RM-3.6: Grant Funding. Explore grant funding from state, federal, and nongovernmental organizations for clean air projects to improve air quality and decrease air pollutant emissions.
Action M-3a: Coordinate with the SCAQMD to further reduce smog pollution and mitigate major stationary sources of air pollution in the city.
Action M-3b: As applicable, review new residential and nonresidential development projects during the CEQA process for potential air quality impacts to residences and other sensitive receptors.
Action M-3c: Integrate smart technology equipment into urban infrastructure that can monitor and provide real time air quality data.
Findings
Action M-3d: Conduct educational outreach to residential and business community stakeholders about air quality standards, air pollution impact on physical health and the environment, and best practices to improve overall air quality.
Action M-3e: Identify state, federal, and non-governmental organizations that provide grant funding for clean air projects.
Goal RM-4: Greenhouse Gas Reduction. Commit to reducing municipal greenhouse gas emissions and achieving a low carbon future.
Policy RM-4.1: Low-carbon Municipality. Demonstrate environmental leadership and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from municipal facilities and operations by at least 49% below 2005 levels by 2035, in conjunction with the City’s 2018 Climate Action Plan (CAP).
Policy RM-4.2: GHG Inventory. Update the community and municipal GHG inventories every five years to track progress toward achieving the City’s GHG reduction goal.
Policy RM-4.3: Development Standards. Require residential and nonresidential development projects to implement sustainable development standards to decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
Policy RM-4.4: Sustainable Infrastructure. Continue to invest in public infrastructure that supports the use of energy efficient or low-emission transportation.
Policy RM-4.5: State and Federal Targets. Review existing City practices to identify methods to decrease overall greenhouse gas emissions.
Policy RM-4.6: City Contractors. Encourage contractors to use low-emission equipment and vehicles for City construction projects.
Action RM-4a: Implement the local GHG reduction measures identified in the City of Lomita 2018 Climate Action Plan (CAP) and perform on-going monitoring and reporting of GHG reduction impacts.
Action RM-4b: Continue to participate in the South Bay Cities Council of Governments’ (SBCCOG) climate action planning process and update Lomita’s CAP at least every five years.
Action RM-4c: Explore incentives for city contractors who invest in and use low-emission equipment and vehicles for city infrastructure projects or establish minimum requirements in the Municipal Code.
Goal RM-5: Sustainability/Energy Resources. Carefully and safely manage energy resources, embracing sustainable practices for long-term vitality.
Policy RM-5.1: Renewable Energy Production. Promote the development and use of renewable energy sources for city, residential, and business facilities.
Findings
Policy RM-5.2: Energy Audits. Promote home energy audits with regional programs such as Energy Upgrade California or other state programs.
Policy RM-5.3: Regional Partnerships. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments and other organizations for outreach events to promote energy awareness and existing programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency.
Policy RM-5.4: Green Building Standards. Ensure that residential and nonresidential development projects comply with the most current version of the California Green Building Standards Code.
Policy RM-5.5: Energy Upgrades. Encourage property owners to participate in solar retrofit and other energy-efficient home improvement projects to reduce reliance on traditional energy sources.
Action RM-5a: As feasible, use renewable energy sources at City facilities.
Action RM-5b: Organize and conduct educational workshops with utility companies informing the public of the benefits of home energy audits and energy saving practices.
Action RM-5c: Conduct outreach events with the SBCCOG to inform residents and businesses about existing programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency.
Action RM-5d: Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new residential and nonresidential development complies with local and state regulations regarding energy efficiency.
Action RM-5e: Consider adopting minimum energy efficiency requirements in the Zoning Code.
2. Sensitive Receptors
Threshold: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Impact AQ-3, pages 4.2-43 through 4.2-45)
Explanation: Criteria air pollutant emissions have the potential to result in health impacts on sensitive receptors located near new development within the Planning Area. Based on the nature and extent of new development, nearby sensitive receptors could be exposed to levels of toxic air contaminants that could result in a potential increase in cancer, acute, and/or chronic risk. Because the exact nature, location, and operation of the future developments are unknown, and because health risk impacts from TACs are cumulative over the life of the nearby receptors, quantification of potential health risks would be speculative. However, as construction and operation of these future developments would occur within close proximity to sensitive Findings
receptors, there is the potential for risk to exceed regulatory levels.
Additionally, without knowing the exact specifications for all projects that may be developed under the General Plan Update, there is no way to accurately calculate the potential for health impacts from the overall General Plan Update. Individual projects would be required to provide their own environmental assessments to determine health impacts from the construction and operation of their projects. The proposed policies of the General Plan Update would potentially reduce emissions, which could potentially reduce impacts related to conflicts with an applicable air quality plan. Goal LU-1 requires the City to implement a balanced land use pattern.
Policy LU-1.1 requires the City to promote a comprehensive approach to land use planning that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable. Policy LU-1.2 requires the City to focus new higher density mixed-use development along major corridors and within key activity nodes to expand housing opportunity, preserve the character of existing singlefamily neighborhoods, promote active transportation options, and enhance economic vitality. Policy M-1.8 encourages the preparation of TDM plans for all major developments or facility expansions to encourage ride-sharing and other improvements, thereby reducing vehicle trips. Goal M-3 encourages the development of complete streets. Policy M-5.1 requires the City to work with Metro, Torrance Transit, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the city. Policy M-6.1 encourages the City to implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles.
Policy M-9.4 encourages the City to work with developers to reduce GHG emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
However, the exact location, type, nature, and size of future projects that may expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations cannot be calculated at this time, as the details of potential future projects are not currently known. As such, there is no way to determine the extent to which these regulations will be, or need to be, implemented, and it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below regulatory thresholds. Additionally, there are no feasible mitigation measures beyond the policies and actions listed in the General Plan Update. Therefore, localized operational impacts, construction and operational health and toxic air impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
Refer to the General Plan Update goals, policies and actions listed above under Impact Statement AQ-2, Cumulatively Considerable Pollutant Emissions.
Findings
B. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1. Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Impacts GHG-1 and GHG-2, pages 4.7-21 through 4.7-40)
Explanation: Implementation of the proposed Project would contribute to increases of GHG emissions that are associated with global climate change. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to future development would be primarily associated with increases of CO2 and other GHG pollutants, such as methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), from mobile sources and utility usage. Lomita’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) includes quantification of baseline GHG emissions, the establishment of GHG emissions targets that demonstrate a level at which the contribution of GHG emissions from activities covered by the CAP would not be cumulatively considerable, and forecasts for future year GHG emissions.
In 2015, the City set GHG emission reduction goals consistent with the State’s AB 32 GHG emission reduction targets. The City’s target was calculated as a 15 percent decrease from 2005 levels by 2020 as recommended in the B 32 Scoping Plan. A longer-term goal was established for 2035 to reduce emissions by 49 percent below 2005 levels. These goals put the City on a path towards helping the State meet its long-term 2050 goal to reduce emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels.
Compliance with applicable State standards would ensure consistency with State and regional GHG reduction planning efforts. The goals stated in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS helped determine consistency with the planning efforts previously stated. The proposed Project would be consistent with the stated goals of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts or interfere with SCAG’s ability to achieve the region’s post-2020 mobile source GHG reduction targets.
In order to further reduce GHG emissions associated with buildout of the General Plan Update, the City has included numerous goals, policies and actions in the General Plan Update aimed at reducing GHG emissions and promoting sustainability in the Planning Area. The General Plan Update proposes goals, policies and actions that are relevant to climate change and GHG emissions, including encouraging land use patterns that reduce mobile energy consumption within the Planning Area. Land Use Element Goal LU- Findings
1 requires the City to implement a balanced land use pattern. Policy LU-1.1 requires the City to promote a comprehensive approach to land use planning that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable. Policy LU1.2 requires the City to focus new higher density mixed-use development along major corridors and within key activity nodes to expand housing opportunity, preserve the character of existing single-family neighborhoods, promote active transportation options, and enhance economic vitality. Proposed Mobility Element Policy M-1.8 encourages the preparation of TDM plans for all major developments or facility expansions to encourage ride-sharing and other improvements, thereby reducing vehicle trips. Goal M-3 encourages the development of complete streets.
Policy M-5.1 requires the City to work with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority (Metro), Torrance Transit, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the city. Policy M-6.1 encourages the City to implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles.
Policy M-9.4, which encourages the City to work with developers to reduce GHG emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
Furthermore, numerous policies and programs other avenues for reducing GHGs in the Planning Area. Resource Management Element Policy RM3.4 encourages new and emerging technologies that could decrease air pollution (including GHGs). Goal RM-4 commits the City to reducing municipal GHG emissions and achieving a low carbon future. Further, Policy RM-4.1 requires the City to demonstrate environmental leadership and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from municipal facilities and operations by at least 49 percent below 2005 levels by 2035, in conjunction with the City’s 2018 CAP. Additionally, Policy RM-4.2 requires the City to update the community and municipal GHG inventories every five years to track progress toward achieving the City’s GHG reduction goal. Moreover, Policy RM-4.3 requires residential and nonresidential development projects to implement sustainable development standards to decrease GHG emissions. Action RM-4a requires the City to implement the local GHG reduction measures identified in the City of Lomita 2018 CAP and perform on-going monitoring and reporting of GHG reduction impacts. Goal RM-5 further requires the City to carefully and safely manage energy resources, embracing sustainable practices for long-term vitality. Policy RM-5.1 promotes the development and use of renewable energy sources for city, residential, and business facilities. Other policies and actions that would reduce GHGs are provided below.
Overall, the proposed Project would be required to comply with regulations imposed by the State of California and the SCAQMD aimed at the reduction Findings
of air pollutant emissions, as described above. While compliance with relevant regulations and implementation of the proposed General Plan Updates’ goals, policies and actions would reduce GHG emissions, the associated reductions of GHG emissions are not quantifiable. Therefore, it cannot be guaranteed that the implementation of the General Plan Update, as well as the individual development projects associated with implementation of the proposed Project, would generate emissions consistent with the State’s long-term goals for reducing GHG emissions in the State of California, particularly the net-zero target as promulgated under AB 1279. As such, the City cannot state with certainty whether implementation of the General Plan Update would meet the State’s community emissions target. The proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable adverse impact related to GHG emissions.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
LAND USE ELEMENT
Goal LU-1: Balanced Land Use Pattern. Preserve a balanced land use pattern that meets the diverse needs of Lomita’s residents and businesses, providing a range of housing options, offering a variety of employment and recreation opportunities, and promoting a robust local economy.
Policy LU-1.1: Land Planning. Promote a comprehensive approach to land use planning that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable; enhances community livability and public health; offers choices in housing, jobs, amenities, and transportation; reduces pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and the expenditure of non-renewable resources; and provides opportunities for meaningful public engagement in land use decisions.
Policy LU-1.2: Focused Growth. Focus new higher density mixed-use development along major corridors and within key activity nodes to expand housing opportunity, preserve the character of existing single-family neighborhoods, promote active transportation options, and enhance economic vitality.
Policy LU-1.3: Employment/Housing Balance. Strive to balance levels of employment and housing within the community to provide more opportunities for residents to work locally, reduce commute times, and improve air quality.
Policy LU-1.4: Thriving Downtown. Promote economic opportunities in Downtown Lomita through a mixture of housing, destination-type commercial uses, eateries, entertainment, and civic uses such as cultural and performing arts facilities. Support pedestrian-friendly and human-scaled development within the downtown area to reduce vehicle trips and parking demand.
Findings
Policy LU-1.5: Neighborhood-Serving Uses. Support the development of neighborhoodscaled retail and service uses nearby residences to meet daily needs and reduce vehicle trips.
Policy LU-1.6: Capture Local Spending. Encourage the development of a broad range of commercial uses that capture a greater share of local spending and reduce residents’ reliance upon travel to nearby communities.
Policy LU-1.8: Mixed-Use. Create opportunities for development projects that mix housing with commercial uses to enable Lomita’s residents to live close to businesses and employment, improving multi-modal travel and increasing social interaction.
Action LU-1a: Update the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title XI, Chapter 1 of the Lomita Municipal Code) and Zoning Map as appropriate to ensure consistency with this Land Use Element and designations shown on the Land Use Map (Figure LU-1). As part of the update, address the following items:
a. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include new mixed-use zones and associated development standards and land use regulations, to implement the MU30, MU40, and MU70 land use designations and reflect the development densities and intensities of those designations. Moreover, amend the Zoning Map to apply the new zones to specific parcels within the city.
b. Reevaluate the permitted uses in the Downtown, Commercial (D-C) zone to ensure that they reflect the mix of retail, commercial, restaurant, office, service, etc. uses desired by the community for the downtown.
c. Ensure that minimum lot sizes for new mixed-use developments are adhered to.
MOBILITY ELEMENT
Goal M-1: Local Circulation System. A community served by a safe and balanced circulation system that meets the needs of all users.
Policy M-1.6: Promote Safe Streets. Use a safe systems approach for transportation planning, street design, operations, emergency response, and maintenance that proactively identifies opportunities to improve safety where conflicts between users exist to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries in our roadways.
Policy M-1.7: Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Use traffic calming strategies such as signage, speed radar feedback signs, curb extensions, and deflections, as recommended in the City’s Traffic Calming Toolkit, to create a pedestrianfriendly circulation system and promote safety, while not reducing parking supply.
Policy M-1.8: Transportation Demand Management. Encourage the preparation of Transportation Demand Management plans for all major developments or facility expansions to encourage ride-sharing and other improvements, thereby reducing vehicle trips.
Findings
Action M-1e: Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential local effects on vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities and operations, and seek funding to invest in associated infrastructure and technologies such as Traffic System Management (TSM) and traffic signal synchronization.
Action M-1f: Evaluate the applicability of traffic calming tools to minimize cut-through traffic on local streets, especially in residential areas and near schools, and implement improvements as necessary.
Goal M-3: Complete Streets. A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users.
Policy M-3.1: Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply complete streets principles to all transportation improvement projects (e.g., safety, intelligent transportation systems, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities) to accommodate the needs of street users of all ages and abilities.
Policy M-3.2: Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities.
Policy M-3.3: Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety, including street lighting, wayfinding, street trees, and other nonvehicular infrastructure.
Policy M-3.4: Traffic Calming on Residential Streets. Encourage traffic calming strategies and incorporation of traffic calming design in residential areas to slow traffic and promote safety.
Policy M-3.5: ADA Accessibility. Implement a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), to allow mobility-impaired users, such as disabled persons and seniors, to safely travel within the city.
Policy M-3.6: Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement, and incentives to support Safe Routes to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.
Policy M-3.7: Right-of-Way Design. Ensure the City is fully utilizing legal right-of-way to provide space for an appropriate mix of streetscape elements.
Action M-3a: When planning roadway facilities, incorporate the concept of complete streets, while considering the land use and design context of the surrounding areas.
Action M-3b: Periodically review and update the City’s Right-of-Way Standards to ensure that the standards reflect the City’s goals and policies for the circulation system.
Findings
Action M-3c: Partner with Lomita school administrators to improve traffic and parking conditions in school areas, especially during school drop-off and pick-up periods.
Action M-3d: Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/long-term parking, especially along major corridors.
Goal M-5: Transit. A community connected to a comprehensive public transportation system.
Policy M-5.1: Transit Use. Support programs encouraging public transit use by people living in, working in, or visiting Lomita.
Policy M-5.2: Improve Local Public Transit Service. Work with Metro, Torrance Transit, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the city.
Policy M-5.3: Transit Facilities. Require new developments to construct, when appropriate, transit facilities, including bus turn-outs, bus stop infrastructure, and route information signage.
Policy M-5.4: Effects of New Technologies on Transit Use. Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential effects on transit demand and how users access public transit.
Action M-5a: Continue on-going coordination with transit authorities toward the expansion of transit facilities.
Action M-5b: Work with transit providers to increase transit service frequency, speed, and reliability and increase ridership and to strengthen linkages and access to key destinations.
Action M-5c: Explore new intracity transit options such as a Lomita trolley to transport individuals between commercial areas, residential areas, and parks.
Goal M-6: Active Transportation. A community with a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourages active transportation.
Policy M-6.1: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles, including the Plan’s facility recommendations as shown in Figure M-2.
Policy M-6.2: Local Travel Network. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote local micromobility modes by implementing the Local Travel Network plan and supporting efforts to integrate the network with adjacent cities, as shown in Figure M-3.
Findings
Policy M-6.3: Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways, evaluating the adequacy of existing urban trails, and prioritizing sidewalk maintenance.
Policy M-6.4: Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and non-residential developments in the city to provide safe and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture, landscaping, and other improvements.
Policy M-6.5: Effects of New Technologies on Active Transportation. Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential effects on designing a transportation network that accommodates all modes and users.
Action M-6a: As part of development review and specific plans, require land development projects to provide connectivity and accessibility to a mix of uses such as schools, parks, work, and shopping destinations that meet residents’ daily needs including secure parking and safety measures.
Action M-6b: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code, as necessary, to consider bicycle and pedestrian access as part of the site plan review for new development projects.
Action M-6c: Dedicate capital improvement funding for citywide projects including pedestrian refuge islands, raised crosswalks, or other relevant crosswalk enhancements as they become available.
Action M-6d: Require that all roadway resurfacing projects and land development projects with impacts to roadways be subject to a review process that considers lane reconfiguration and other opportunities to improve the bicycle and pedestrian network.
Goal M-9: Transportation Management. A community with transportation management strategies that contribute to achieving regional and statewide greenhouse gas emissions targets.
Policy M-9.1: Vehicle Miles Traveled Guidelines. Require vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City shall continue to maintain Level of Service (LOS) standards for the purposes of planning and designing street improvements.
Policy M-9.2: Transportation Demand Management. Require transportation demand management (TDM) strategies as mitigation measures for new projects that exceed the City’s VMT impact thresholds.
Policy M-9.3: Regional Coordination. Encourage regional agencies such as Metro, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote TDM programs that reduce single-occupancy vehicle travel.
Findings
Policy M-9.4: New Development. Work with developers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
Action M-9a: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code and related implementation documents, as necessary, to reflect TDM best practices.
Action M-9b: Require developments that are approved based on TDM plans to incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets as part of those plans.
Action M-9c: Consider adoption of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) guidelines and thresholds for transportation analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-3.2: Land Use Planning. Reduce concentrated air pollution and the incidence of respiratory illness through the land use planning process by diversifying the land use mix, bringing compatible uses closer together, reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), and applying other similar measures.
Policy RM-3.4: Sustainable Technology. Encourage new and emerging technologies that could decrease air pollution.
Goal RM-4: Greenhouse Gas Reduction. Commit to reducing municipal greenhouse gas emissions and achieving a low carbon future.
Policy RM-4.1: Low-carbon Municipality. Demonstrate environmental leadership and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from municipal facilities and operations by at least 49% below 2005 levels by 2035, in conjunction with the City’s 2018 Climate Action Plan (CAP).
Policy RM-4.2: GHG Inventory. Update the community and municipal GHG inventories every five years to track progress toward achieving the City’s GHG reduction goal.
Policy RM-4.3: Development Standards. Require residential and nonresidential development projects to implement sustainable development standards to decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
Policy RM-4.4: Sustainable Infrastructure. Continue to invest in public infrastructure that supports the use of energy efficient or low-emission transportation.
Policy RM-4.5: State and Federal Targets. Review existing City practices to identify methods to decrease overall greenhouse gas emissions.
Policy RM-4.6: City Contractors. Encourage contractors to use low-emission equipment and vehicles for City construction projects.
Findings
Action RM-4a: Implement the local GHG reduction measures identified in the City of Lomita 2018 Climate Action Plan (CAP) and perform on-going monitoring and reporting of GHG reduction impacts.
Action RM-4b: Continue to participate in the South Bay Cities Council of Governments’ (SBCCOG) climate action planning process and update Lomita’s CAP at least every five years.
Action RM-4c: Explore incentives for city contractors who invest in and use low-emission equipment and vehicles for city infrastructure projects or establish minimum requirements in the Municipal Code.
Goal RM-5: Sustainability/Energy Resources. Carefully and safely manage energy resources, embracing sustainable practices for long-term vitality.
Policy RM-5.1: Renewable Energy Production. Promote the development and use of renewable energy sources for city, residential, and business facilities.
Policy RM-5.2: Energy Audits. Promote home energy audits with regional programs such as Energy Upgrade California or other state programs.
Policy RM-5.3: Regional Partnerships. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments and other organizations for outreach events to promote energy awareness and existing programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency.
Policy RM-5.4: Green Building Standards. Ensure that residential and nonresidential development projects comply with the most current version of the California Green Building Standards Code.
Policy RM-5.5: Energy Upgrades. Encourage property owners to participate in solar retrofit and other energy-efficient home improvement projects to reduce reliance on traditional energy sources.
Action RM-5a: As feasible, use renewable energy sources at City facilities.
Action RM-5b: Organize and conduct educational workshops with utility companies informing the public of the benefits of home audits and energy saving practices.
Action RM-5c: Conduct outreach events with the SBCCOG to inform residents and businesses about existing programs and incentives that are offered for energy efficiency.
Action RM-5d: Continue to review development projects to ensure that all new residential and nonresidential development complies with local and state regulations regarding energy efficiency.
Action RM-5e: Consider adopting minimum energy efficiency requirements in the Zoning Code.
Findings
C. TRANSPORTATION
1. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Impacts
Threshold: Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Impact TR-2, pages 4.14-22 through 4.14-28)
Explanation: Future conditions with the Project would result in decreased VMT per employee and increased VMT per capita in comparison to existing conditions. The 2045 Project VMT per capita is approximately two percent higher than existing conditions and the 2045 Project VMT per employee would be three percent lower than existing conditions. Thus, the proposed General Plan Update would exceed 15 percent below the existing Los Angeles countywide average VMT per capita and VMT per employee and therefore would result in a significant Project VMT impact.
The reductions from 2023 Existing Conditions to 2045 Project Conditions indicate that future development, in particular planned mixed-use development, would provide more opportunities for Lomita residents and employees to access jobs and services within shorter distances. The shorter trip distances reduce VMT by vehicles, and also increase the likelihood that trips will be made by non-auto modes such as bicycling and walking.
Improved transit service and accessibility to transit also help to reduce VMT even as travel activity increases.
Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in higher VMT per capita and lower VMT per employee compared to 2023 Existing Conditions. Mitigation of VMT impacts requires reduction of vehicle trips per capita and per employee through increased use of travel modes other than driving alone, and/or shortening of trip lengths through providing a critical mass of complementary land uses near each other. Additional TDM measures (such as funding for supplemental transit services to increase frequency and speed, considering carpooling or vanpooling (ride-matching services), encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules, increasing mix of land uses within the Project or within the Project’s surroundings, and providing pedestrian network and low-stress bicycle network improvements) may be applicable for additional mitigation. The Land Use and Mobility elements developed as part of the General Plan Update includes policies to support the reduction of VMT, including increasing the balanced mix of residential and employment opportunities within the city with the proposed land uses.
Additionally, future development projects under the General Plan update would also be required to complete project-specific VMT analyses based on Findings
VMT policies and thresholds established by the City of Lomita, including TDM measures designed to reduce VMT. While such measures are likely to result in less-than-significant VMT impacts when considered at an individual project level, they cannot be guaranteed and are not possible to fully quantify or mitigate at a citywide level as part of this programmatic analysis. Hence, it cannot be demonstrated that additional TDM measures could reduce VMT per capita or per employee by the amounts needed to meet the impact thresholds. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS:
LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy LU-1.1: Land Use Planning. Promote a comprehensive approach to land use planning that is socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable; enhances community livability and public health; offers choices in housing, jobs, amenities, and transportation; reduces pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and the expenditure of nonrenewable resources; and provides opportunities for meaningful public engagement in land use decisions.
Policy LU-1.2: Focused Growth. Focus new higher density mixed-use development along major corridors and within key activity nodes to expand housing opportunity, preserve the character of existing single-family neighborhoods, promote active transportation options, and enhance economic vitality.
Policy LU-1.3: Employment/Housing Balance. Strive to balance levels of employment and housing within the community to provide more opportunities for residents to work locally, reduce commute times, and improve air quality.
Policy LU-3.6: Active Streetscapes. Create safe, inviting, and beautiful streetscapes that facilitate social interaction and improve active transportation along corridors.
Policy LU-5.3: Active Transportation. Promote land use patterns that facilitate active transportation to encourage healthy and active lifestyles, as well as improve overall physical health for residents.
Action LU-5a: Create and maintain an inventory of the city’s pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks, street crossings, lighting, shade trees, and benches, in order to improve pedestrian mobility in all areas of the city.
MOBILITY ELEMENT
Goal M-1: Local Circulation System. A community served by a safe and balanced circulation system that meets the needs of all users.
Policy M-1.7: Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Use traffic calming strategies such as signage, speed radar feedback signs, curb extensions, and deflections, as recommended in Findings
the City’s Traffic Calming Toolkit, to create a pedestrian-friendly circulation system and promote safety, while not reducing parking supply.
Policy M-1.8: Transportation Demand Management. Encourage the preparation of Transportation Demand Management plans for all major developments or facility expansions to encourage ride-sharing and other improvements, thereby reducing vehicle trips.
Policy M-1.9: New Connections. Explore new connections within the grid system, either non-vehicular or vehicular.
Action M-1e: Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential local effects on vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities and operations, and seek funding to invest in associated infrastructure and technologies such as Traffic System Management (TSM) and traffic signal synchronization.
Action M-1f: Evaluate the applicability of traffic calming tools to minimize cut-through traffic on local streets, especially in residential areas and near schools, and implement improvements as necessary.
Goal M-3: Complete Streets. A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users
Policy M-3.1: Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply complete streets principles to all transportation improvement projects (e.g., safety, intelligent transportation systems, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities) to accommodate the needs of street users of all ages and abilities.
Policy M-3.2: Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities.
Policy M-3.3: Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety, including street lighting, wayfinding, street trees, and other nonvehicular infrastructure.
Policy M-3.4: Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement, and incentives to support Safe Routes to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.
Action M-3a: When planning roadway facilities, incorporate the concept of complete streets, while considering the land use and design context of the surrounding areas.
Action M-3d: Develop strategies and guidelines to set curb use priorities that consider the needs of through traffic, transit stops, bus turnouts, passenger drop-off/pick-up, deliveries, and short-term/long-term parking, especially along major corridors.
Findings
Goal M-5: Transit. A community connected to a comprehensive public transit system.
Policy M-5.1: Improve Local Public Transit Service. Work with Metro, Torrance Transit, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the city.
Policy M-5.3: Transit Facilities. Require new developments to construct, when appropriate, transit facilities, including bus turn-outs, bus stop infrastructure, and route information signage.
Action M-5a: Explore new intracity transit options such as a Lomita trolley to transport individuals between commercial areas, residential areas, and parks.
Goal M-6: Active Transportation. A community with a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourages active transportation.
Policy M-6.1: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles, including the Plan’s facility recommendations as shown in Figure M-2.
Policy M-6.2: Local Travel Network. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote local micromobility modes by implementing the Local Travel Network plan and supporting efforts to integrate the network with adjacent cities, as shown in Figure M-3.
Policy M-6.3: Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways, evaluating the adequacy of existing urban trails, and prioritizing sidewalk maintenance.
Policy M-6.4: Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and non-residential developments in the city to provide safe and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture, landscaping, and other improvements.
Action M-6a: As part of development review and specific plans, require land development projects to provide connectivity and accessibility to a mix of uses such as schools, parks, work, and shopping destinations that meet residents’ daily needs including secure parking and safety measures.
Action M-6b: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code, as necessary, to consider bicycle and pedestrian access as part of the site plan review for new development projects.
Action M-6c: Dedicate capital improvement funding for citywide projects including pedestrian refuge islands, raised crosswalks, or other relevant crosswalk enhancements as they become available.
Findings
Action M-6d: Require that all roadway resurfacing projects and land development projects with impacts to roadways be subject to a review process that considers lane reconfiguration and other opportunities to improve the bicycle and pedestrian network.
Action M-6e: Establish a sidewalk maintenance schedule to improve accessibility and include repair of cracks from tree roots, etc., and clearance of sidewalk space through colocation or undergrounding of utilities and moving signage.
Goal M-9: Transportation Management. A community with transportation management strategies that contribute to achieving regional and statewide greenhouse gas emissions targets
Policy M-9.1: Vehicle Miles Traveled Guidelines. Require vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City shall continue to maintain Level of Service (LOS) standards for the purposes of planning and designing street improvements.
Policy M-9.2: Transportation Demand Management. Require transportation demand management (TDM) strategies as mitigation measures for new projects that exceed the City’s VMT impact thresholds.
Policy M-9.3: Regional Coordination. Encourage regional agencies such as Metro, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote TDM programs that reduce single-occupancy vehicle travel.
Policy M-9.4: New Development. Work with developers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.
Action M-9a: Review and update the City’s Municipal Code and related implementation documents, as necessary, to reflect TDM best practices.
Action M-9b: Require developments that are approved based on TDM plans to incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets as part of those plans.
Action M-9c: Consider adoption of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) guidelines and thresholds for transportation analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Policy RM-1.5: Safe Routes. Provide safe pedestrian and bicycle pathways to parks, recreational facilities, and schools to foster a sense of community well-being and to promote active lifestyles.
Findings
Action RM-1c: Install adequate lighting, designated crosswalks, clear signage, and other nonvehicular infrastructure to improve pedestrian and bicycle connections between residential and open space areas. (Also refer to Mobility Element.) Findings
SECTION V
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Regarding the General Plan’s potential to result in cumulative impacts, the City hereby finds as follows:
A. AESTHETICS
Threshold: Would future development associated with implementation of the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable aesthetic and light/glare impacts?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.1.6, pages 4.1- 16 through 4.1-18)
Explanation: The General Plan Update would support additional development beyond existing conditions and could increase residential densities and nonresidential land use intensities in specific areas within the Planning Area.
This new development may result in changes to the skyline throughout the Planning Area, which may obstruct or interfere with views of surrounding visual features. Furthermore, 2045 buildout under the proposed General Plan Update has the potential to result in new and expanded development along highway corridors with high scenic values, even though these corridors are not officially designated as State Scenic Highways. Regional growth has and will continue to result in a cumulative aesthetic effect by converting undeveloped land into developed and occupied areas, and increasing overall levels of nighttime lighting. In general, the General Plan Update Land Use Element proposes an increase in building density and intensity, which could increase the number and distribution of dwelling units and other buildings, as well as supporting infrastructure. This is considered a potentially significant cumulative impact. Subsequent projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be required to be consistent with the General Plan Update policies and actions and adopted regulations pertaining to aesthetics and lighting in Lomita. With implementation of the adopted policies and regulations described above, the proposed General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to permanent changes in visual character, such as obstruction of scenic views, conversion of existing visual character, and increased lighting resulting in a substantial degradation. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Lomita Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on visual character to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to aesthetic impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Findings
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to agricultural or forestry resources?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 7.0, pages 7.0-1 through 7.0-2)
Explanation: The City does not have any zoning classifications for agricultural, forestland, timberland, or timberland production zones, nor does the Planning Area include any agricultural or forestland; therefore, the General Plan Update would not contribute to a significant impact relative to agriculture, forestland, timberland or timberland production zones. It was determined that there was no impact related to these topics. Therefore, impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
C. AIR QUALITY
Threshold: Would the project, combined with other related cumulative projects, result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to air quality? Finding: Considerable Contribution and Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.2.6, pages 4.2-47 through 4.2-49)
Explanation: The City of Lomita continues to coordinate with SCAQMD and SCAG to ensure citywide growth projections, land use planning efforts, and local development patterns are accounted for in the regional planning and air quality planning processes. Additionally, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions to further minimize potential impacts to air quality in support of the AQMP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, these impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
Construction of the growth anticipated by the General Plan Update has the potential to temporarily emit criteria air pollutant emissions through the use of heavy-duty construction equipment, and through vehicle trips generated by workers and haul trucks. In addition, fugitive dust emissions would result from demolition and various soil-handling activities. Mobile source emissions, primarily NOx and PM emissions (i.e., PM10 and PM2.5), would result from the use of diesel-powered on- and off-road vehicles and equipment. Construction emissions can vary substantially from day-to-day, depending on the level of activity and the specific type of construction activity. As shown in Table 4.2-6 in Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR, construction-related daily emissions would exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for NOx. Additionally, as shown in Table 4.2-7 in Findings
Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR, potential operational emissions for the proposed Project would also exceed regulatory thresholds (for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5). Feasible mitigation measures are incorporated into the policies and actions included within the General Plan Update. However, there are no feasible criteria air pollutant reduction measures beyond those identified within the policies and actions identified, that would reduce impacts. While implementation of these policies and actions would reduce criteria pollutant emissions, the extent to which the impacts would be generated by future development and infrastructure projects have to be determined on a project-by-project basis, as necessary.
Moreover, with respect to local air quality emissions, toxic air contaminant emissions, and health impacts, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. Implementation of the policies and actions listed above would mitigate and reduce such emissions. However, as there is no way to determine the extent to which these regulations would be, or need to be, implemented, it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below regulatory thresholds because the details and potential emissions levels of future development projects is not known at this time, as there are no specific development projects proposed as part of the General Plan Update. Additionally, there are no feasible mitigation measures beyond the policies and actions listed above Therefore, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative localized operational impacts, construction and operational health, and TAC impacts would be cumulatively considerable.
With respect to exposure to sensitive receptors, future development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with AQMP, SIP, CARB, SCAQMD regulations, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. However, as there is no way to determine the extent to which these regulations would be, or need to be, implemented, it is impossible to determine if potential impacts would be reduced to below regulatory thresholds. There are no feasible mitigation measures except for those listed in above. Based on these impacts, the General Plan Update would contribute to a cumulative impact with regard to air quality in the region and within the air basin (i.e. the South Coast Air Basin) as a whole. Therefore, the Project’s incremental contribution to other emissions would be cumulatively considerable.
ith respect to potential sources that may emit odors during construction and operations, future development projects resulting from implementation of the General Plan Update would be required to comply with the CARB requirements, SCAQMD rules, the City of Lomita’s Municipal Code, and the proposed General Plan Update policies and actions. As a result, the Findings
implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative odor impacts.
Additionally, adherence to SCAQMD rules and regulations would alleviate potential impacts related to cumulative conditions on a project-by-project basis. Project implementation would not contribute to cumulatively considerable objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people within the city.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to biological resources? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.3.6, pages 4.3- 15 through 4.3-17)
Explanation: The potential for the Project to have a substantial adverse effect on any special status species, riparian habitat, sensitive natural community, or wetlands is less than significant, as these resources do not generally occur within the Planning Area. Future development projects would be required to adhere to applicable federal, State, and local regulations that provide for sensitive species as part of the discretionary approval process for sitespecific development projects. . Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental effects related to special status plant or wildlife species, riparian habitats or other sensitive natural community, or any State or federally protected wetlands, would not be cumulatively considerable.
The Planning Area consists primarily of disturbed land that has been developed, paved, or landscaped, and existing vegetation consists of primarily ornamental and/or nonnative plant species. As such, the Planning Area does not provide for habitat linkages. Therefore, the Project would not interfere substantially with the movement of: any native, resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors; or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. The General Plan Update would not considerably contribute to interference of wildlife movement nor impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites, would not be cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative development within the region would be required to comply with any agency-specific policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Future development within the city and cumulative development would be assessed for consistency with the agency-specific Municipal Code and General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions. Since the Project would Findings
not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, the Project’s incremental effects would not be cumulatively considerable in this regard.
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to cultural resources? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 5.5.6, pages 5.5- 30 through 5.5-31)
Explanation: Construction of individual development projects allowed under the land use designations of General Plan Update may result in the discovery and removal of cultural resources, including historic and archaeological resources, as well as the inadvertent discovery of human remains. The General Plan Update policies and actions, as well as federal, State, and local regulations, would reduce the risk to resources in the region. Adherence to the General Plan Update policies and actions, and existing federal, State, and local regulations would avoid and/or minimize a cumulative loss of these important resources if they are identified during project-specific surveys or construction activities. Therefore, the General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to cumulative cultural resource impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to cultural resources? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.4.6, pages 4.4- 19 through 4.4-20))
Explanation: As with the Project, the related cumulative projects would undergo environmental review pursuant to CEQA to evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources. This would include studies of historical, archaeological and buried resources that are present or could be present within a specific development site. Additionally, related projects would be subject to compliance with the established State and local regulatory framework, including the General Plan Update policies and actions, concerning the discovery of buried resources or human remains on a project-by-project basis. Where significant or potentially significant impacts are identified, implementation of all feasible site-specific mitigation would be required to avoid or reduce impacts. Compliance with General Plan Update polices and actions and existing regulatory requirements would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on cultural resources to a less than significant level. Based on the above, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative historical resource impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Findings
F. ENERGY
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to energy? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.5.6, pages 4.5- 21 through 4.5-22)
Explanation: As future development projects are received and reviewed by the City in subsequent years, those projects would be reviewed for consistency with the General Plan Update and all relevant State-level programs and requirements. All future projects must implement the most current version of the Title 24 energy efficiency requirements, as required by State law.
Consistency with the General Plan Update and other mandatory State-level programs would ensure that future project-level contributions to inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary energy use would be less than significant.
Moreover, buildout of the General Plan Update would not be expected cause an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources nor conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. As a result, the proposed General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to cumulative energy impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to geologic resources? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.6.6, pages 4.6- 24 through 4.6-28)
Explanation: Seismic, geologic, and soil conditions within the City of Lomita would vary by location and site-specific suitability for development would not be uniform. Geologic and seismic hazards would be reduced to less than significant levels following conformance with the established regulatory framework (i.e., CBC and Municipal Code requirements). If determined necessary, project-specific mitigation would be incorporated to reduce cumulative seismic, geologic, and soil impacts to a less than significant level. If a specific site were determined to create a significant impact that could not be feasibly mitigated, the site would not be appropriate for development. These processes, along with compliance with federal and State laws, local building codes, and public safety standards, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts related to potential seismic, geologic, and soil hazards. As a result, implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts involving Findings
seismic and geologic hazards
H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update and cumulative development result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions?
Finding: Considerable Contribution and Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.7.6, page 4.7-40)
Explanation: The topic of GHG emissions is inherently a cumulative impact. Though significance thresholds can be developed by air districts, as well as State and federal regulatory agencies, these thresholds and their related goals are ultimately designed to effect change at a global level. As demonstrated in the analysis in Section 4.7 of the Draft EIR, it cannot be guaranteed that the proposed Project would be consistent with the 2045 GHG target for the State of California and would therefore have a significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impact, even with the implementation of General Plan Update goals, policies and actions.
I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to hazardous materials? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.8.6, pages 4.8- 30 through 4.8-35)
Explanation: Construction of individual development projects allowed under the land use designations of the General Plan Update may involve the transportation, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials, which may involve the use of equipment that contains hazardous materials (e.g., solvents and fuels or diesel-fueled equipment), or the transportation of excavated soil and/or groundwater containing contaminants from areas that are identified as being contaminated. Furthermore, because of the regional nature of the General Plan Update, some future land uses could transport or use hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school, or other sensitive receptors such as hospitals and residences. As with specific projects resulting from implementation of the General Plan Update, cumulative development would be required to evaluate individual hazards and hazardous materials impacts at the project-level. While some cumulative impacts would potentially occur in the region as individual projects are constructed, the General Plan Update policies and actions, as well as local, State, and federal regulations would reduce the risk to people associated with hazards and hazardous materials in the region. Considering the protection granted by local, State, and federal agencies and their requirements for the use of Findings
hazardous materials and other potential hazards in the region, as described above, the overall cumulative impact for hazards impacts would not be significant. As a result, the General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update and cumulative development result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to hydrologic resources?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.9.6, pages 4.9- 27 through 4.9-33)
Explanation: The General Plan Update does not propose site-specific development and would not significantly impact drainage courses and hydrologic flows throughout the City. Construction of the individual development projects allowed under the land use designations of the proposed General Plan Update has the potential to result in construction-related water quality impacts and operational-related impacts to groundwater recharge, and cause flooding, erosion, or siltation from the alteration of drainage patterns.
Individual projects would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to ensure compliance with the General Plan Update policies and actions, as well as federal, State, and local regulations to reduce hydrology and water quality impacts. Subsequent development projects under the General Plan Update would result in new impervious surfaces and could reduce rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge; however, the General Plan Update would not appreciably add to the volume of imperious surfaces in the Planning Area. As individual projects are constructed, the General Plan Update policies and actions, as well as federal, State, and local regulations, would substantially reduce potential cumulative impacts. Considering the protection granted by local, State, and federal agencies and their permit and monitoring requirements, as discussed above, and with implementation of the policies and actions included within the General Plan Update, the overall cumulative impact would not be significant. As a result, the General Plan Update's incremental contribution to cumulative hydrology impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
K. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update and cumulative development result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to land use and planning?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.10.6, pages
4.10-15 through 4.10-16)
Findings
Explanation: Development of cumulative projects in the City of Lomita would be required to mitigate land use impacts on a project-by-project basis. Each project would be evaluated for consistency with the project site’s General Plan land use designation and zoning, adopted General Plan goals, policies, and actions, and other applicable regional land use plans, such as SCAG’s RTP/SCS. As analyzed in Section 4.10 of the Draft EIR, the proposed General Plan Update would result in less than significant impact related to land use and relevant planning. Therefore, the incremental impact of the proposed Project, when considered in combination with development within the City and region, would not result in cumulatively considerable land use impacts.
The land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan Update provide opportunities for cohesive new growth at infill locations within existing urbanized areas, as well as new growth adjacent to existing urbanized areas within the Planning Area but would not create physical division within existing communities. New development and redevelopment projects would be designed to complement the character of existing neighborhoods and provide connectivity between existing development and new development within the cumulative analysis area. The proposed General Plan Update does not include any new roadways, infrastructure, or other features that would divide existing communities. Moreover, with implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth, the land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan Update, the infrastructure anticipated to accommodate proposed land uses, and the goal and policy framework would not induce growth that would exceed adopted thresholds. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update's incremental contribution to cumulative land use and population impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
L. MINERAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to mineral resources? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 7.0, page 7.0-2) Explanation: The Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource considered of value to the region or a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, and no impact would occur in this regard. The Planning Area does not possess any mineral resource recovery sites. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Update would not contribute to a cumulative impact related to mineral resources.
Findings
M. NOISE
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to noise?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable (Draft EIR, Section 4.11.6, pages
4.11-30 through 4.11-32)
Explanation: Draft EIR Table 4.11-11 shows the cumulative noise levels associated with traffic on the local roadway network, including projects within the Planning Area. Cumulative conditions include traffic due to 2045 buildout of the General Plan Update in addition to pass-through traffic from other jurisdictions. By the year 2045, existing land uses adjacent to the studied roadways would be exposed to noise levels that exceed the City's exterior standards of 65 dBA CNEL for sensitive uses. A significant impact would occur if the Project resulted in levels higher than 65 dBA CNEL and increased the overall roadway noise level by three dBA CNEL, which is a noticeable change in noise level. As shown in Draft EIR Table 4.11-12, compared to existing traffic noise levels, 2045 with Project traffic volumes are expected to be up to 1.3 dBA CNEL louder than existing ambient noise levels at existing land uses and would result in inaudible increases in ambient noise. Implementation of the Project would therefore not result in a cumulatively considerable impact relative to traffic noise.
While the Project does not explicitly propose any new noise-generating uses, implementation of the Project could result in the future development of land uses that generate noise levels in excess of applicable city noise standards for non-transportation noise sources. Implementation of land use planning and policies and actions can minimize cumulative noise impacts related to stationary sources by avoiding the placement of noise generating equipment near noise-sensitive land uses and where unavoidable, including design measures to the degree practicable to avoid violating the noise criteria presented in Table PS-1 of the General Plan Update and the Lomita Municipal Code. The General Plan Update includes policies and actions that are intended to reduce noise associated with stationary sources. Applicants of future development projects would be required to demonstrate compliance with the City of Lomita’s Noise Ordinance and the policies and actions in the proposed General Plan Update Noise Element, including Policies N-1.3 through N-1.6, N-2.1 and proposed Actions N-1c, N-1d, N1e and N-2a. Conformance with the existing regulatory framework would reduce cumulative noise impacts from stationary noise sources to a less than significant level. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with stationary noise would not be cumulatively considerable.
Short-term construction noise and vibration is a localized activity and would affect only land uses that are immediately adjacent to a specific project site.
Findings
Each construction project would have to comply with the local noise ordinance and General Plan Update policies and actions, including Noise Element Policy N-2.4, requiring construction activities to minimize noise and vibration impacts to reduce the disturbance from new development and enforce limits on construction hours as included in the Lomita Municipal Code, and Action M-2c, which directs the City to dedicate code enforcement resources to ensuring all construction activity complies with the limits established in the Lomita Municipal Code. In order to reduce potentially significant impacts related to groundborne vibration associated with construction activities of future site-specific development, project applicants would be required to comply with proposed General Plan Update Noise Element Policy N-2.7 and Action N-2f, which require vibration impact studies when construction utilizes pile drivers or vibratory rollers near existing buildings. Additionally, future development projects would comply with mitigation measures that may be prescribed pursuant to CEQA provisions that require significant impacts to be reduced to the extent feasible. Further, it is unlikely that all construction projects would occur simultaneously within the city. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with construction noise would not be cumulatively considerable.
N. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to population and housing? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.12.6, pages
4.12-15 through 4.12-16)
Explanation: The land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan Update provide opportunities for cohesive new growth in key locations in the Planning Area but would not create physical division within existing communities. New development and redevelopment projects would be designed to complement the character of existing neighborhoods and provide connectivity between existing development and new development within the cumulative analysis area. The proposed General Plan Update does not include any new roadways, infrastructure, or other features that would divide existing communities. Moreover, with implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth, the land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan Update, the infrastructure anticipated to accommodate proposed land uses, and the goal and policy framework would not induce growth that would exceed adopted thresholds. Lastly, General Plan Update implementation would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere Therefore, the proposed General Plan Findings
Update's incremental contribution to cumulative land use and population impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
O. PUBLIC SERVICES
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to public services, including parks and recreational facilities?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.13.5, pages
4.13-26 through 4.13-30)
Explanation: Development and growth facilitated by the General Plan Update would result in increased demand for public services, including fire protection, law enforcement, schools, parks, libraries, and other public and governmental services. As the demand for public services and recreation increases throughout the 2045 buildout, there will likely be a need to address acceptable service ratios, response times, and other performance standards.
New or expanded service structures (e.g., offices, maintenance and administrative buildings, schools, parks, fire facilities, libraries, etc.) may be needed to provide for adequate staffing, equipment, and appropriate facilities to serve growth within the cumulative analysis area. The General Plan Update includes a range of policies and actions that would ensure that public services are provided in a timely fashion, are adequately funded and staffed, are coordinated between the City and appropriate service agency, and that new development funds its fair share of services. The General Plan Update includes policies to ensure that fire protection and law enforcement services keep pace with new development and that school, library, and governmental services are adequately planned and provided. Payment of applicable impact fees, and ongoing revenues that would come from property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by the future projects, would ensure that the City maintains acceptable service ratios. The proposed General Plan Update's incremental contribution to cumulative public services and recreation impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Furthermore, Compliance with established local regulations would assure newly constructed or expanded recreational facilities resulting from implementation of the General Plan Update, including cumulative projects, would result in a less than significant physical effect on the environment.
Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving increased use of existing parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration would occur or be accelerated, would not be cumulatively considerable.
Findings
P. TRANSPORTATION
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update and cumulative development result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to transportation?
Finding: Considerable Contribution and Significant and Unavoidable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.14.6, pages 4.14-32 through 4.14-35)
Explanation: A significant cumulative impact would occur if the Project and cumulative projects conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Overall, the Project is a programmatic land use plan and does not propose any changes to the circulation system. Any future development within the city would be assessed for consistency with local policies and ordinances, including the Municipal Code and General Plan goals and policies, as appropriate. Therefore, the Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts related to transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
With respect to VMT impacts, with implementation of the General Plan Update under the City’s cumulative buildout conditions, the 2045 Project VMT per capita is approximately two percent higher than existing conditions and the 2045 Project VMT per employee would be three percent lower than existing conditions. With implementation of the Project, the City’s VMT per capita would exceed 15 percent below the Los Angeles countywide average. Implementation of the Project would, therefore, result in a cumulatively considerable impact relative to VMT. Future development projects under the General Plan Update would also be required to complete VMT analyses based on VMT policies and thresholds established by the City of Lomita, including TDM measures designed to reduce VMT. While such measures are likely to result in less-than-significant VMT impacts when considered at an individual project level, they cannot be guaranteed and are not possible to fully quantify or mitigate at a citywide level as part of this programmatic analysis. Hence, it cannot be demonstrated that additional TDM measures could reduce VMT per capita or per employee by the amounts needed to meet the impact thresholds. Therefore, this impact would remain cumulatively considerable.
The types of uses that would be allowed as part of Project implementation are generally similar to existing and surrounding uses and thereby are compatible with the existing uses in the Planning Area and in the surrounding area. Additionally, the City would review site-specific developments to ensure the provision of adequate ingress and egress and that site distance standards would be implemented. Implementation of the Project would therefore not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact relative to an increase in hazards due to a geometric design feature.
Findings
The Project does not propose changes to the citywide roadway network and configuration that would affect local emergency access. The proposed Project along with the cumulative development projects could result in the temporary closure or control of traffic lanes located immediately adjacent to a development site during construction activities. Any temporary closure would be required to comply with the Lomita Municipal Code. Similarly, the applicant of any proposed development would be required to submit appropriate plans for plan review to ensure compliance with zoning, building, and fire codes prior to the issuance of a building permit. LACoFD would review all development projects for access requirements, minimum driveway widths, fire apparatus access roads, fire lanes, signage, access devices and gates, access walkways, among other requirements to ensure adequate emergency access would be provided to and within the site.
Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts relative to emergency access would not be cumulatively considerable.
Q. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update and cumulative development result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to tribal cultural resources?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.15.6, pages
4.15-9 through 4.15-10)
Explanation: Tribal cultural resource impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts. Construction of the individual development projects allowed under the land use designations of General Plan Update may result in the discovery and removal of tribal cultural resources. The General Plan Update policies and actions, as well as federal, State, and local regulations, would reduce the risk to tribal cultural resources in the region. As discussed above, site-specific development with the potential to impact tribal cultural resources would require a resource assessment and coordination with the tribes to determine the potential for tribal cultural resources and identification of mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the proposed development. Adherence to the General Plan Update policies and actions, and existing federal, State and local regulations would avoid and/or minimize a cumulative loss of tribal cultural resources. Therefore, the General Plan Update’s incremental contribution to cumulative tribal cultural resource impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Findings
R. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update and cumulative development result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to utilities and service systems?
Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 4.16.6, pages
4.16-36 through 4.16-40)
Explanation: Implementation of the General Plan Update along with other cumulative projects would increase demand for water, wastewater, stormwater, solid waste, electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services within the Planning Area.
Water
Implementation of the General Plan Update along with other cumulative projects would result in increased population growth in the Project Area and a corresponding increase in the demand for additional water supplies.
Similar to future development associated with Project implementation, cumulative development projects would also be required to demonstrate the availability of sufficient water supplies through provisions in SB 610 and/or the CEQA process. Additionally, future development associated with the Project and cumulative projects would be required to comply with existing federal, State, and local regulations, including the Municipal Code, to conserve water and ensure the efficient use of available water supplies.
Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to the provision of utilities and water conservation which cumulative projects would also be required to comply with. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on water supplies to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to water supplies would not be cumulatively considerable.
Wastewater
Implementation of the General Plan Update along with other cumulative projects would increase demand for wastewater services within the sewer service area. the Project enables additional development but does not include specific development proposals. At the time future projects are proposed, they would be required to ensure their own adequate wastewater treatment capacity. Additionally, LACSD charges annual wastewater sewer fees through its Wastewater Treatment Surcharge Program, as well as sewer connection fees through its Connection Fee Program, in order to maintain and expand wastewater services, including wastewater treatment. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to wastewater would not be cumulatively considerable.
Findings
Stormwater
Implementation of the General Plan Update along with other cumulative projects would increase demand for stormwater services within the Planning Area. As discussed above, the General Plan Update does not include specific development proposals; therefore, the environmental effects of future storm water drainage facilities are unknown at this time. At the time future stormwater facilities are proposed, they would require a separate environmental review and compliance with regulations in existence at that time would address potential environmental impacts related to the construction and operation of new stormwater facilities.
Additionally, the General Plan Update includes goals, policies, and actions to ensure adequate stormwater service and facilities. Therefore, cumulative impacts to stormwater services and facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
Solid Waste
Implementation of the General Plan Update along with other cumulative projects would increase demand for solid waste collection and disposal services. All future development associated with the Project and cumulative projects would be required to comply with existing solid waste diversion requirements, including the Municipal Code, related to solid waste, thereby further reducing cumulative solid waste in the Planning Area. Further, the General Plan Update includes policies and actions related to solid waste, including source reduction. The polices and actions included within the General Plan Update and compliance with the Zoning Code would reduce the cumulative effect of the General Plan Update on solid waste to a less than significant level. Thus, the Project’s incremental impacts to solid waste would not be cumulatively considerable.
Electric Power, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
Implementation of the General Plan Update along with other cumulative projects would increase demand for electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services within the Planning Area. As noted above, the General Plan Update does not include specific development proposals; individual development projects would be required to verify that electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications usage generated with the new development would not create significant environmental impacts.
Therefore, the contribution of the General Plan Update to cumulative impacts associated with increased electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications would not be cumulatively considerable.
Findings
S. WILDFIRE
Threshold: Would future development associated with the General Plan Update result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to wildfire? Finding: Less than Cumulatively Considerable. (Draft EIR, Section 7.0, pages 7.0-3 through 7.0-4)
Explanation: The Planning Area is not located within a SRA and is not located within a VHFHSZ within a LRA. The site of the Cypress Water Production Facility is within a recommended VHFHSZ. The Planning Area and surrounding area are relatively flat and do not contain any slopes or features that would exacerbate wildfire risks. The Planning Area is urbanized and developed.
Potential residential development would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. The Project would not expose people or structures to significant risk associated with wildfires.
Therefore, as there were no impacts related to wildfire identified in the Draft EIR, there would be no cumulatively considerable impacts.
Findings
SECTION VI
FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL
CHANGES
Sections 15126(c) and 15126.2(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, require that an EIR address any significant irreversible environmental changes that would occur should the project be implemented. Generally, a project would result in significant irreversible environmental changes if any of the following would occur:
• The project would involve a large commitment of non-renewable resources; • The primary and secondary impacts of the project would generally commit future generations to similar uses;
• The project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents; or
• The proposed consumption of resources is not justified.
Consumption of Nonrenewable Resources
Future development would consume limited, slowly renewable and non-renewable resources. This consumption would occur during each individual project’s construction phase and would continue throughout its operational lifetime. Future development would require a commitment of resources that would include: (1) building materials; (2) fuel and operational materials/resources; and (3) the transportation of goods and persons to and from individual development sites. Construction would require the consumption of resources that are not renewable or which may renew so slowly as to be considered non-renewable. These resources would include the following construction supplies: lumber and other forest products; aggregate materials used in concrete and asphalt; metals; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be consumed to power construction vehicles and equipment.
Development accommodated through implementation of the General Plan Update would consume resources which would be similar to those currently consumed within the City (i.e., energy resources such as electricity and natural gas, petroleum-based fuels required for vehicletrips, fossil fuels, and water). Fossil fuels would represent the primary energy source associated with both construction and ongoing operation, and the existing, finite supplies of these natural resources would be incrementally reduced. Future development operations would occur in accordance with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6, which sets forth conservation practices that would limit energy consumption. Nonetheless, the proposed Project’s energy requirements would represent a long-term commitment of essentially non-renewable resources.
Construction activities associated with implementation of the General Plan Update could release hazardous materials into the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions; refer to Section 4.8 in the Draft EIR. All potential demolition, grading, and excavation activities would be subject to the established regulatory framework to ensure that Findings
hazardous materials are not released into the environment. Compliance with the established regulatory framework and mitigation measures would protect against a significant and irreversible environmental change resulting from the accidental release of hazardous materials. In addition, there is the potential that individual future development projects would use and store limited amounts of potentially hazardous materials typical. All future development activities requiring the routine use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials would be subject to all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations and standards in place for hazardous materials. Compliance with these regulations and standards would protect against significant and irreversible environmental changes due to the accidental release of hazardous materials.
In conclusion, future construction and operations would result in the irretrievable commitment of limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources, which would limit the availability of these resource quantities for future generations or for other uses during the life of the individual developments. It is noted that the continued use of such resources would be on a relatively small scale in a regional context.
Irretrievable Commitments/Irreversible Physical Changes Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in a commitment of land uses designated for the foreseeable future. Land use and development consistent with the General Plan Update would result in irretrievable commitments by introducing development onto sites that are presently undeveloped. The conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses would result in an irretrievable loss of agricultural land, wildlife habitat, and open space. Additionally, development would physically change the environment in terms of aesthetics, air emission, noise, traffic, open space, and natural resources. These physical changes are irreversible after development occurs.
Therefore, the General Plan Update would result in changes in land use within the Planning Area that would commit future generations to these uses.
In summary, the General Plan Update includes an extensive policy framework that is designed to address land use and environmental issues to the greatest extent feasible, while allowing growth and economic prosperity for the City. However, even with the policies and actions that would serve to reduce potential significant impacts, future development associated with implementation of the General Plan Update would result in significant irreversible changes. This impact is considered a significant and unavoidable impact under CEQA.
Findings
SECTION VII
GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
Section 15126.2(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires a Draft EIR to discuss the ways the Project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d), a Project would be considered to have a growth-inducing effect if it would:
• Directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing in the surrounding environment;
• Remove obstacles to population growth (e.g., construction of an infrastructure expansion to allow for more construction in service areas); • Tax existing community service facilities, requiring the construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects; or
• Encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.
In addition, CEQA Guidelines state that growth inducement must not be assumed.
The General Plan Update accommodates future growth in Lomita, including new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, and new residential uses. Infrastructure and services would need to accommodate future growth. The General Plan Update is oriented toward the economic growth of the City, with emphasis given to encouraging development of a broader array of businesses, increasing local employment opportunities, and providing residential development as necessary to serve economic growth.
As shown in Table 2-4 of the Draft EIR, buildout of the General Plan Update through 2045 could yield up to 11,159 housing units and 3,110,728 square feet of non-residential building square footage within the Planning Area.
With implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth, the land uses allowed under the General Plan Update, the infrastructure anticipated to accommodate proposed land uses, and the goal and policy framework would not induce growth that would exceed adopted thresholds.
Therefore, population and housing growth associated with the General Plan Update would result a less than significant impact.
Findings
SECTION VIII
ALTERNATIVES
A. BACKGROUND
The Draft EIR analyzed two alternatives to the Project as proposed and evaluated these alternatives for their ability to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects while also meeting the majority of the Project’s objectives. This section sets forth the potential alternatives to the Project analyzed in the EIR and evaluates them in light of the Project objectives, as required by CEQA.
Where significant impacts are identified, section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires EIRs to consider and discuss alternatives to the proposed actions. Subsection (a) states:
(a) An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.
Subsection 15126.6(b) states the purpose of the alternatives analysis:
(b) Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21002.1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.
In subsection 15126.6(c), the State CEQA Guidelines describe the selection process for a range of reasonable alternatives:
(c) The range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the Project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed. The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination.
Findings
Additional information explaining the choice of alternatives may be included in the administrative record. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
The range of alternatives required is governed by a “rule of reason” that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The EIR shall include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed Project. Alternatives are limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project.
B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives have been established for the Project:
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. Expand the range of high-quality housing options;
7. Create pedestrian-scaled environments;
8. Target housing growth to support commercial activity;
9. Reinforce corridors with memorable places;
10. Create a fiscally-sustainable land use plan with balanced residential and nonresidential development; and
11. Address new requirements of State law.
C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED FROM DETAILED
ANALYSIS
Section 15126.6(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that an EIR should (1) identify alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were eliminated from detailed consideration because they were determined to be infeasible during the scoping process; and (2) briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet Findings
most of the basic project objectives; (ii) infeasibility; and/or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
There were no alternatives considered but rejected from detailed analysis in the EIR.
D. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS
The alternatives selected for further detailed review within the EIR focus on alternatives that could potentially reduce the Project’s significant environmental impacts, while still meeting most of the basic Project objectives. Those alternatives include:
• Alternative 1: No Project Alternative (Draft EIR, pages 6-4 through 6-15) • Alternative 2: Reduced Growth Alternative (Draft EIR, pages 6-15 through 6- 25)
1. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
Description: Under Alternative 1, the City would not adopt the General Plan Update. The existing Lomita General Plan would continue to be in effect and no changes to the General Plan, including the Land Use Map, goals, policies, or actions would occur. This Alternative assumes that ultimate development of the 1998 General Plan, with subsequent amendments including the updated Safety Element (adopted 2021) and Housing Element (adopted 2021), would occur and the 1998 General Plan would continue to provide outdated information regarding several issues, including projections and policy direction identified in the 1990s that are not reflective of the existing socioeconomic data and anticipated development patterns. Subsequent projects, such as amending the Municipal Code (including the zoning map), would not occur. Furthermore, under Alternative 1, the City would not be in compliance with California Department of Housing and Community Development requirements regarding the implementation of the City’s Housing Element and the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA).
Alternative 1 would result in the continuation of existing conditions and development levels. New growth would be allowed as envisioned under the existing General Plan, with land uses required to be consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use Map.
Alternative 1 (No Project Alternative) would result in significantly less development within the City compared to the proposed Project. Under Alternative 1, the existing General Plan policy framework would still be in effect, which would constitute a status quo approach to land use regulation in the City. The Proposed Land Use Map, along with the policy framework proposed by the General Plan Update, encourages and aims to achieve a community with a balanced land use pattern that meets the City’s long-term housing, employment, and civic needs. The land uses allowed under the General Plan Update would provide opportunities for cohesive new growth at in-fill locations within existing urbanized areas of the City, as well as new growth adjacent to existing urbanized areas and along transportation corridors. A mix and balance of uses to provide an improved ratio of local jobs to population, would ensure that development pays its fair-share of necessary roadway, public service, and other infrastructure improvements, and that increased protection of natural resources would occur. The proposed General Plan Update was Findings
prepared in conformance with State laws and regulations associated with the preparation of general plans, including requirements for environmental protection.
Alternative 1 would not include updated policies, particularly those related to housing, greenhouse gases, hazards, complete streets, and environmental justice to address environmental health concerns for disadvantaged communities, as required by State law.
This alternative would not include policies proposed in the General Plan Update to ensure protection of environmental resources, both at a project level and under cumulative conditions, consistent with the objectives of CEQA.
Impacts: As shown in Draft EIR Table 6-4, Alternative 1 would result in the same impacts as the proposed project for the environmental issues of: Agricultural Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Transportation, and Wildfire. Alternative 1 would result in greater impacts as compared to the proposed Project related to Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, Public Services and Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Irreversible Effects, Alternative 1 would result in decreased impacts to Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Population and Housing, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources. This alternative would fail to reduce any significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level.
Attainment of Project Objectives: This alternative fails to meet almost all of the project objectives, including the following: celebrate and enhance Downtown Lomita; expand the range of housing choices to allow more people to live and work in Lomita; encourage new desirable uses in Lomita and expand the local economy; promote walkability to everyday uses; expand the range of high-quality housing options; create pedestrian-scaled environments; target housing growth to support commercial activity; reinforce corridors with memorable places; create a fiscally-sustainable land use plan with balanced residential and non-residential development; and address new requirements of State law.
Finding: The City Council rejects Alternative 1: No Project Alternative, on the following ground, which provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative fails to meet almost all of the Project objectives; and (2) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level.
2. Alternative 2: Reduced Growth Alternative
Description: Alternative 2 (Reduced Growth Alternative), the City would adopt the updated General Plan policy document, but with less residential and mixed-use growth than reflected in the proposed General Plan Update. This Alternative reflects the following changes from the General Plan Update:
1. Alternative 2 would not include the proposed land use designation of Mixed-Use 70, which permits residential development densities of 20 to 70 units per net acre.
2. Reduction in the amount of residential development anticipated along major corridors including Crenshaw Boulevard, Pacific Coast Highway, Palos Verdes Findings
Drive North and Western Avenue; in Alternative 2, the parcels along these corridors would remain designated for non-residential uses, and no action to increase the residential development capacity of the area by redesignating the parcels residential mixed-use would occur.
Alternative 2 would result in approximately 1,674 fewer housing units and 4,419 fewer residents, as well as 377,597 less square feet of non-residential development and 473 fewer jobs within the Planning Area compared to the proposed General Plan Land Use Map.
Under Alternative 2, non-residential development potential and anticipated job growth would be less compared to the General Plan Update, due to the reduction in allowed development intensity. This alternative continues to allow for mixed-use opportunities with less residential development potential than allowed under the General Plan Update. This alternative’s purpose is to potentially reduce the severity of potential impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and total vehicle miles traveled, as overall development of residential uses would be less than what could develop under the Project.
Impacts: As shown in Draft EIR Table 6-4, Alternative 2 would result in the same impacts as the proposed project for the environmental issues of: Aesthetics, Agricultural Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Wildfire. Alternative 2 result in lesser impacts as compared to the proposed Project related Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Public Services and Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Irreversible Effects. Alternative 2 would result in increased impacts to Transportation, as compared to the proposed Project. This alternative would fail to reduce any significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level.
Attainment of Project Objectives: Alternative 2 fails to meet several of the basic project objectives, including the following: expand the range of housing choices to allow more people to live and work in Lomita; promote walkability to everyday uses; target housing growth to support commercial activity; and reinforce corridors with memorable places.
Finding: The City Council rejects Alternative 2: Reduced Growth Alternative, on the following ground, which provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative:
(1) the alternative fails to meet several of the basic the Project objectives; and (2) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level.
E. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines indicates that an analysis of alternatives to a proposed Project shall identify an environmentally superior alternative among the alternatives evaluated in an EIR. Based on the alternatives analysis contained within the Draft EIR, Alternative 2 (Reduced Growth Alternative) is identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
Findings
Alternative 2 (Reduced Growth Alternative) is the environmentally superior alternative as it is the most effective in terms of overall reductions of impacts compared to the proposed General Plan Update and all other alternatives. Alternative 2 meets many of the project objectives. Like the proposed project, Alternative 2 reflects many of the current goals and vision expressed by city residents, businesses, decision-makers, and other stakeholders, including the following: preserve, protect, and enhance the city’s existing residential neighborhoods; celebrate and enhance Downtown Lomita; Encourage new desirable uses in Lomita and expand the local economy; encourage new desirable uses in Lomita and expand the local economy; expand the range of highquality housing options; create pedestrian-scaled environments; create a fiscally-sustainable land use plan with balanced residential and non-residential development; and address new requirements of state law. Although Alternative 2 would address new requirements of State law, would fail to reduce any significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, City Council rejects the environmentally superior alternative.
Findings
SECTION IX
ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a), the City Council must balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the Project. If the specific benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those environmental effects may be considered acceptable.
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible through the implementation of the General Plan Update goals, policies, and actions; having considered the entire administrative record on the Project; the City Council has weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation with regards to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation. While recognizing that the unavoidable adverse impacts are significant under CEQA thresholds, the City Council nonetheless finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from the Project are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the Project.
In making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the Project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City Council would be able to stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference into this section, and in the documents found in the Records of Proceeding.
The City Council therefore finds that for each of the significant impacts which are subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project, independent of the other benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts and render acceptable each and every one of these unavoidable adverse environmental impacts:
1. The General Plan Update promotes more compact, environmentally-sustainable, and equitable development through goals, policies, and actions that balance the need for adequate infrastructure, housing, economic vitality, and environmental justice with the need for resource management, environmental protection, and preservation of quality of life for Lomita residents.
2. The General Plan Update implements principles of sustainable growth by concentrating new urban development around existing urban development, and along key commercial and transportation corridors; thereby minimizing land consumption while maintaining open space, habitat, and recreation uses throughout the Planning Area.
3. The General Plan Update provides a land use map that accounts for existing development, physical constraints, economic development, hazards, and incompatible uses and assigns Findings
densities and use types accordingly to enhance the safety, livability, and economic vitality of Lomita.
4. The General Plan Update improves mobility options through the development of a multimodal transportation network that enhances connectivity, supports community development patterns, limits traffic congestion, promotes public and alternative transportation methods, and supports the goals of adopted regional transportation plans.
5. The General Plan Update directs the preservation and environmental stewardship of the vast array of natural, cultural and historic resources that uniquely define the character and ecological importance of the City and greater region.
6. The General Plan Update addresses adverse environmental effects associated with global climate change by facilitating sustainable development, promoting energy efficiency, and promoting development that reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
7. The General Plan Update enhances the local economy and provides opportunities for future jobs and business development commensurate with forecasted growth by planning for commercial and industrial development near existing urbanized areas and transportation corridors.
8. The General Plan Update is the product of a comprehensive public planning effort driven by members of the public, city stakeholders, the Planning Commission and the City Council through a series of public meetings, hearings and workshops that resulted in a thoughtful balance of community, economic, social, and environmental interests.