Lot width means the horizontal distance between the midpoints of the side lot lines, measured at right angles to the line measuring lot depth. Therefore, the eastward adjustment of the lot line parallel to Shopkeeper Road would not change the defined width of APN: 7237-020-041 (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway). The adjusted width APN: 7237-020-050 (6615 East Pacific Coast Highway) would increase as part of the proposed adjustment. Therefore, the proposed adjustment would result in both properties maintaining the same or increased width consistent with the surrounding parcels.
The proposed lot line adjustment would not result in the creation of new lots (three existing parcels and three parcels would result of the adjustment), and the proposed lots would be fundamentally consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
2. NO ZONING VIOLATIONS SHALL RESULT FROM THE ADJUSTMENT; Upon adjustment of the lot lines, the resulting lot size of APN: 7237-020-041 (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway) would be 68,691 square feet. The existing office building and surface parking at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway would remain in place. The proposed adjustment would remove parking that was held on a shared use basis under the recorded Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) in place for the Marketplace Shopping Center, Marketplace Office Park (project applicant), and City-owned parcel. The required parking for the office building to remain at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway is 132 vehicular parking spaces. The rear building maintains existing surface parking onsite (57 parking spaces) and within established parking areas along Studebaker Road and Shopkeeper Road (54 parking spaces). Under the CC&Rs, the rear building also presently has access to surface parking on the City parcel. As conditioned, to ensure the maintenance of required parking, the CC&Rs are to be amended to include the specific reservation of parking spaces in perpetuity to maintain access to a minimum of 132 parking spaces.
Two rows of surface parking lot areas would remain between the adjusted lot line, which would ensure the maintenance of adequate setbacks pursuant to SEASP.
Since the adjustment occurs within the shared surface parking area, there would be no reduction in onsite open space for the office building to remain at APN: 7237- 020-041 (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway). Furthermore, the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is defined on the block level in SEASP. Therefore, the adjustment of the lot line and parcel sizes would have no effect on compliance with that development standard.
Findings
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application No. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
Under existing conditions, the parcel at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway (APN:
7237-020-041) does not maintain direct vehicular access to Studebaker Road as a portion of the public right-of-way that abuts the parcel remains unbuilt. The proposed project would construct roadway improvements within the Studebaker Road existing public right-of-way to include a center median, sidewalk, vehicle lanes, and bicycle lane. Studebaker Roadway improvements would provide access to the existing office building at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway and associated parking areas. Vehicular access would be directly connected from the Studebaker Road right-of-way to the rear office building at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway and ultimately to the City-owned parcel (APN 7237-020-041). A roundabout feature would be installed at the terminus of Studebaker Road within the public right-of-way limits. An ingress-egress driveway would extend north from the roundabout to provide access to a two-way drive aisle that would extend onto parcel APN 7237-020-041, north of the proposed building. The proposed improvements to the Studebaker Road public right-of-way would bring the site into greater compliance with the access requirements under the Subdivision Map Act and Title 20 of the Long Beach Municipal Code.
The adjustment would increase the size of APN: 7237-020-050 (6615 East Pacific Coast Highway) to 125,221 square feet in compliance with SEASP. This site would be cleared of all structures and merged with APN: 7237-020-040 (6695 East Pacific Coast Highway) to facilitate the construction of the mixed-use project in conformance with SEASP.
The proposed lot line adjustment is proposed to ensure the potential for completion of Shopkeeper Road connection could be undertaken in the future in conformance with the SEASP policies. The location of the adjusted lot line would prevent nonconformities with the SEASP development standards for the proposed mixed-use project as the setbacks are measured from the adjusted lot line.
3. INDIVIDUAL SEWER CONNECTIONS ARE AVAILABLE TO EACH ADJUSTED
LOT, OR NECESSARY EASEMENTS ARE PROVIDED TO THE
SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS;
Existing sanitary sewer connections are in place in the Marketplace Office Park addressed as 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway. New sewer lines would be installed for the proposed mixed-use project that would connect to existing infrastructure. Existing sewer lines to serve the existing office building at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway would remain in place. Existing 10-foot water utility easements would be modified with construction of the proposed project. As conditioned, all required utility easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the applicable department, agency, or utility company.
Findings
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application No. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
The project will comply with all applicable sections of Title 15, Public Utilities, of the Long Beach Municipal Code.
4. ALL DRAINAGE ACROSS THE ADJUSTED LOT LINE SHALL BE ELIMINATED
OR NECESSARY EASEMENTS ARE PROVIDED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS; AND
As conditioned, the applicant shall provide easements to the City of Long Beach for existing and/or proposed public utility facilities to the satisfaction of the concerned City department or public agency.
The proposed project would include the construction of a new mixed-use building on the merged westernmost parcels and maintain the existing office building at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway on a separate parcel. All new construction shall be required to comply with current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Los Angeles County MS4 permit regulations and would also include storm water Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs). Additionally, the project would comply with Chapter 18.74 of the Long Beach Municipal Code which regulates the implementation of the LIDs and BMPs for projects in the City of Long Beach.
5. A PROCESSING FEE FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT SHALL BE PAID TO
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AS PROVIDED FOR IN THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES.
As conditioned, the applicant will submit application and fees to Public Works for final mapping processing.
L.L.A. 22-002
www.fuscoe.com
tel 949.474.1960 fax 949.474.5315
Irvine, California 92606
16795 Von Karman, Suite 100
E N G I N E E R I N G
FINAL PLOT PLAN FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BEING AN ADJUSTMENT OF THE BOUNDARY COMMON TO PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 7470, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 121, PAGES 36 THROUGH 39 OF MAPS AND PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 19212 , AS PER MAP RECORDED BOOK IN 260, PAGES 93 AND 94 OF MAPS, SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 996-14, RECORDED JANUARY 25, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 00-0112750, OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDED OF SAID COUNTY.
THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF MARYANNE CRONIN ON JUNE 13, 2023.
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE:
THIS PLAT WAS EXAMINED FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 20.20 OF THE LONG BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE THIS _____________________ DAY OF__________________________ 2023.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS CERTIFICATE:
THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE BEARING OF THE CENTERLINE OF PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 19212, BOOK 260, PAGE 93 & 94 OF MAPS, AND IS SHOWN AS N37°52'23"W ON SAID MAP.
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
L.L.A. 22-002
6/16/2023
Attachment G
AREA= 163,249 S.F.
www.fuscoe.com
tel 949.474.1960 fax 949.474.5315
Irvine, California 92606
16795 Von Karman, Suite 100
E N G I N E E R I N G
L.L.A. 22-002
FINAL PLOT PLAN FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
L.L.A. 22-002
AREA= 68,691 S.F.
www.fuscoe.com
tel 949.474.1960 fax 949.474.5315
Irvine, California 92606
16795 Von Karman, Suite 100
E N G I N E E R I N G
L.L.A. 22-002
FINAL PLOT PLAN FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
L.L.A. 22-002
L.L.A. 22-002
www.fuscoe.com
tel 949.474.1960 fax 949.474.5315
Irvine, California 92606
16795 Von Karman, Suite 100
E N G I N E E R I N G
FINAL PLOT PLAN FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ALLOF "PARCEL1- PARCELMAP7470" AND"PARCEL1-PARCELMAP19212",TOGETHERWITHA PORTIONOF "PARCEL 2-PARCELMAP19212",INTHECITYOFLONGBEACH,COUNTYOFLOSANGELES,STATEOFCALIFORNIA,ASSHOWNON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTNO. 9906-14RECORDEDJANUARY25, 2000 AS INSTRUMENTNO. 00-0112750OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS,INTHEOFFICEOFTHECOUNTYRECORDEROFSAIDCOUNTY,LYINGSOUTHWESTERLYOFTHEFOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID "PARCEL 1-PARCEL MAP 19212"; THENCEALONGTHE SOUTHEASTERLYLINESOF SAID"PARCEL1-PARCELMAP 19212"AND "PARCEL2-PARCELMAP 19212", N52°07'37"E, 431.99' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCELEAVINGSAIDSOUTHEASTERLYLINE N37°46'47"W,191.10'TOTHE GENERALNORTHWESTERLYLINEOFSAID PARCEL 2 .
CONTAINS 163,249 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.
PROPOSED PARCEL A:
L.L.A. 22-002
A PORTION OF "PARCEL 2-PARCEL MAP 19212", IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 9906-14 RECORDED JANUARY 25, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 00-0112750 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID "PARCEL 1-PARCEL MAP 19212"; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINES OF SAID "PARCEL 1-PARCEL MAP 19212" AND "PARCEL 2-PARCEL MAP 19212", N52°07'37"E, 431.99' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE N37°46'47"W 191.10' TO THE GENERAL NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2.
CONTAINS 68,691 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.
PROPOSED PARCEL B:
Attachment H
SITE PLAN REVIEW, LOCAL COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT, LOT MERGER, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application No. 2208-10 (SPR22-082, LCDP22-049, LMG22-012) Application No. 2201-12 (LLA22-002)
July 20, 2023
Revised
Special Conditions:
1. The following approvals are granted for this project:
a. Site Plan Review for a project consisting of the demolition of all existing structures on the site, and the construction of a new 6-story mixed-use project consisting of 390 residential dwelling units (seventeen [17] of which are affordable [very low income]), 5,351 square feet of commercial/retail space in a building with 576 vehicular parking spaces in an above-grade structure, 196 bicycle parking spaces, and 45,141 square feet of public and private open space area within the Mixed-Use Community Core (MU-CC) designation of the Southeast Area Specific Plan (SP-2) located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway.
b. Per State Density Bonus law, the proposed development shall have and maintain a minimum of seventeen (17) units for rent to very low-income households pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 50105.
Rents for these units shall be set at an affordable rent, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50053.
c. Per State Density Bonus Law, one incentive and four waivers/concessions have been granted by the Site Plan Review Committee enabling the project to:
1. Include one building in lieu of multiple buildings encouraged by the SEASP (incentive)
2. Exceed maximum height of 80 feet to allow for the sixth floor and rooftop amenities (waiver)
3. Exceed the building height requirements along Pacific Coast Highway (limited to 5 stories) and Shopkeeper Road [limited to 3 stories, the first 30 feet) (waiver)
4. Allow six stories within the 30 feet adjacent to Shopkeeper Road fronting the wetlands (limited to 3 stories, the first 30 feet) (waiver)
5. Allow the project to include buildings at maximum height (waiver). d. Lot Line Adjustment to reposition the eastern property line between two parcels (APNs: 7237-020-050 and 7237-020-041).
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
e. Lot Merger to combine two (2) lots (APNs: 7237-020-050 and 7237-020-040) into a single 163,249-square-foot (3.75-acre) lot.
f. Local Coastal Development Permit for the scope of work covered under the Site Plan Review, Lot Merger, and Lot Line Adjustment on a property that is located within the Coastal Zone; and
g. Acceptance and approval of a Compliance Checklist (PECC 03-23) to the Southeast Area Specific Plan Program EIR (PEIR) (SCH#2015101075) determining that the project will not result in any new significant impacts that exceed those already analyzed in the SEASP PEIR, and requiring this project to comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting program of the SEASP PEIR.
2. The Applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures and project design features of the Southeast Area Specific Plan Program EIR and its Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), as detailed in the EIR (SCH2015101075) prepared for this project. The MMRP is attached to these conditions of approval and by this reference made a part hereof.
3. The Applicant shall provide a minimum of seventeen (17) dwelling units, within the project as affordable housing for very low-income households. The availability and affordable status of these units shall be guaranteed as required by the California Government Code Subsection 65915, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services for a period not less than 55 years.
4. The affordable housing units provided through State Density Bonus law shall be evenly distributed throughout the residential levels shown in the plan set, including the upper floors, and shall be generally reflective of the mix of unit sizes and number of bedrooms in the overall project. Applicant shall indicate which units will be designated as the affordable units on the plan set submitted for plan check. The approved breakdown of very-low income affordable units are comprised of:
a. Four (4) studio units;
b. Eight (8) 1-bedroom units;
c. Four (4) 2-bedroom units; and
d. One (1) 3-bedroom unit
5. Affordable housing units shall be comparable to market-rate units in terms of design, interior finishes and accessibility to common interior and exterior open space areas.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
6. Affordable units shall have equal access to all of the on-site amenities.
7. The Applicant and the City will enter into an Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, that memorializes the Affordable Housing requirements to be imposed on a Rental Residential Development.
8. The Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement must be recorded in first lien position on legal title to the Rental Residential Development prior to the approval of any final or parcel map or Building Permit for the Rental Residential Development, whichever occurs first.
9. The Applicant will be responsible for having the Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement notarized and recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office.
The Applicant will be responsible for paying any fees imposed by the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office to record the Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement.
The Applicant must provide a certified copy of the recorded Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement to the City within 48 hours of being recorded at the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office.
10. Applicant shall coordinate with the City of Long Beach Housing & Neighborhood Services Bureau to market the affordable units to promote equitable access. This includes conducting marketing activities that may be required by the City, such as advertisements, language translation of promotional/application materials, and/or community outreach activities.
11. The Applicant shall pay the annual review and monitoring fee required for monitoring of the affordable units, per the fee resolution adopted by the City Council.
12. The Applicant shall be responsible for determining eligible affordable household status of each prospective tenant prior to occupancy, and recertify annually thereafter, and provide tenant verification documentation to the City for review and approval.
13. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall amend the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that addresses parking and access requirements of the parcels owned by the Marketplace Shopping Center, CV IV Marketplace, LLC (project applicant), and City. The final CC&Rs shall include explicit allocations of parking allowed for each entity with access to existing shared parking areas.
14. A minimum of 132 parking spaces shall be maintained for the building at 6621 E Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
Pacific Coast Highway pursuant to Chapter 21.41 of the Certified Municipal Code.
The configuration of the required parking can be accommodated onsite, within existing approved parking areas used by the existing building, and offsite pursuant to the effective CC&Rs.
15. Applicant shall comply with the SEASP policies, as applicable, referenced and included in the Compliance Checklist (PECC 03-23) to the Southeast Area Specific Plan Program EIR (PEIR) (SCH#2015101075).
16. The applicant shall record a Notice of Lot Merger and Lot Line Adjustment with the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder’s office prior to the issuance of building permits.
17. The applicant shall submit the application and fees to the Department of Public Works for final review and processing of the Lot Line Adjustment.
18. A minimum of 576 parking stalls shall be permanently maintained and operational within the parking structure and onsite. The number of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations and spaces shall meet California Green Building Standards Code Chapter 5 Section 5.106.5.3 requirements.
19. Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits, the project applicant shall submit an amended Post-Closure Land Use Proposal (PCLUP) for the Project to the County of Los Angeles Solid Waste Management Program. The amended PCLUP shall depict the final design for project construction and operation. A copy of the approved and amended PCLUP shall be provided to the Department of Development Services prior to the initiation of any construction activities.
20. The project shall be developed in substantial conformance with the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 20, 2023, except as amended herein. Each project component shall be designed and constructed as depicted on these plans, maintaining the same architectural style, quality of materials, and consistency of design. Minor changes to the approved project design consistent with the project approval shall require, at a minimum, an additional review by Planning staff for Substantial Conformance to the approved plan set, or review by the Director of Development Services for the approval of minor modifications. Significant alterations (as defined in Section 21.21.405) shall require additional review by the Planning Commission.
21. Architecture, design, and materials of the project as a whole shall comply with the following:
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
a. No rough-finish stucco is permitted, and all stucco finish shall be the smooth plaster finish per the elevations in the most recent plan set. Hand application stucco is encouraged and preferred on enhanced elevations and on community buildings.
b. All windows shall consist of high-quality materials. White vinyl windows shall be off-white color and matte finish.
c. Windows and doors should have an inset as shown on plans presented to the Planning Commission on July 20, 2023 and approved by the Site Plan Review Committee, to create sufficient shadow reading on elevations. c. No low-quality or inauthentic architectural detail elements are permitted.
Details shall be high-quality materials and shall be consistent with the tradition of the selected architectural styles.
d. The parking garage openings shall be filled with decorative perforated metal panels, or equivalent decorative treatment.
22. The residential building and dwelling unit shall be designed and constructed to maintain a 45 dBA community noise exposure level (CNEL) or less in building interiors.
23. All forms of barbed wire and razor wire shall be prohibited on the site.
24. The Applicant shall provide for the construction of trash receptacle areas of sufficient number and size to meet all reasonably foreseeable refuse needs of the residential units, commercial space, common areas, amenities, and public areas of the project. All trash receptacle areas shall be located and constructed in accordance with Section 21.45.167 of the Zoning Regulations.
25. All trash receptacles, including receptacles for recycling and for organics, shall be stored in the designated trash areas shown on approved plans. Trash receptacles shall be moved to the exterior pickup location only on collection day(s) and shall not be stored or kept outside or in the public right-of-way except as needed on collection day(s).
26. All bicycle racks on-site and in off-site improvements shall conform to the guidance in “Essentials of Bike Parking” by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals.
27.Any exterior on-site newsstands and racks (including free publications, classifieds, etc.), vending machines, donation bins, and publicly-accessible telephones shall be prohibited, and any existing ones shall be removed.
28. Any trees removed or replaced on the development site shall be replaced at a ratio of no less than two-to-one (2:1) to the greatest extent feasible.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
29. Street trees shall be provided on all street frontages adjacent to the project site, at a tree spacing of not more than 25 feet on-center. Street trees shall be of a species approved by the Department of Public Works in accordance with the tree species requirements for that segment of Pacific Coast Highway. Street trees shall be installed under a right-of-way permit from the Department of Public Works and/or the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans).
30. All on-site landscaping and improvements and all off-site improvements shall be completed prior to approval of a final building inspection or certificate(s) of occupancy for any residential units in the final phase of the development.
31. The use of insecticides, herbicides, anticoagulant rodenticides or any toxic chemical substance that has the potential to significantly degrade biological resources shall be prohibited, except where necessary to protect or enhance the habitat itself, such as for eradication of invasive plant species or habitat restoration, and where there are no feasible alternatives that would result in fewer adverse effects to the habitat value of the site. Application of such chemical substances shall not take place during the winter season or when rain is predicted within a week of application. Herbicide application necessary to prevent regrowth of highly invasive exotic vegetation such as giant reed/cane (Arundo donax) shall be restricted to the best available and least-toxic product and method in order to minimize adverse impacts to wildlife and the potential for introduction of herbicide into the aquatic environment or onto adjacent non-targeted vegetation. In no instance shall herbicide application occur if wind speeds on site are greater than five miles per hour or 48 hours prior to predicted rain. In the event that rain does occur, herbicide application shall not resume again until 72 hours after rain.
32. Prior to issuance of a grading or demolition permit (whichever occurs first), the Applicant shall submit a proposed haul route/trucking route for all construction truck trips for review by the Director of Development Services and the City Engineer. The Director of Development Services and/or City Engineer may modify this proposed haul route/trucking route prior to its approval, as they deem necessary to protect the public safety and welfare, and to prevent negative impacts upon neighboring uses. Said modifications (if any), approval, and enforcement shall be binding upon all hauling activities and construction truck trips by the Applicant.
33. The Applicant shall abide by and enforce the haul route/trucking route approved by the Director of Development Services and City Engineer. Failure to do so shall cause the City to issue a stop work order and withhold issuance of further construction permits, inspections, or certificates of occupancy, until such time as the Director of Development Services and City Engineer determine the Applicant’s hauling practices to be remedied.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
34. Minor changes to these approved plans, in keeping with the intent and spirit of the project approvals, may be approved at the discretion of the Director of Development Services. For any major changes, including changes to building/architectural materials, on-site improvements, site plan or layout, landscaping, or other significant items (including deviations from any of these conditions of approval), the Applicant shall be required to submit an application for a Modification of Approved Permit – Site Plan Review Committee Approval level.
35. All groundcover and shrubs shall be drought-tolerant and low-water requirement species. The project landscaping shall comply with the Water Efficient Landscaping standards of Chapter 21.42 of the Zoning Regulations.
36. All refuse collection from the building shall take place within the site. Refuse collection and the movement of trash receptacles on Pacific Coast Highway shall be prohibited. Trash receptacles shall be collected and serviced with the frequency needed to avoid an unsightly and undesirable buildup of refuse at each trash receptacle.
37. All move in and deliveries to the building shall take place within the existing building envelope and designated loading space. Parking of delivery vehicles on Pacific Coast Highway shall be prohibited.
38. The applicant shall inform all tenants of restrictions regarding loading activities by means of incorporating said language into leasing agreements.
39. One or several central satellite television/data receiver dish(es) shall be located on the roof of the building or in another utility area so that a separate satellite receiver dish is not needed for each residential and commercial unit.
40. The project shall be developed in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the Planning Commission on July 20, 2023. Each project component shall be designed and constructed as depicted on these plans, maintaining the same architectural style, quality of materials, and consistency of design, including, but not limited to, the following items:
a. Metal Cladding
b. Smooth Stucco
c. Wood-like Fiber Cement Siding
d. Metal Awnings
e. Metal Railing
f. Glass Railings
g. Recessed Vinyl Windows
h. Glass Storefront System
i. Perforated Metal Screens
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
41. No portion of the exterior cladding, siding or building components shall have siding with a reflective surface that produces glare.
42. Pursuant to SEASP requirements, all new structures shall demonstrate eligibility for and conformity with the United States Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification. Prior to issuance of any project-related building permits, the applicant shall submit proof of registration with USGBC and a password allowing staff access to said registration, or provide proof by a third party as meeting the intent of LEED at the level required.
43. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, proof of payment of the Sensitive Coastal Resource Impact Fee as outlined in Chapter 18.19 of the Long Beach Municipal Code (Ordinance No. ORD-22-0032).
44. Native American Monitoring shall be consistent with and in compliance with the mitigation measures as noted in the SEASP Program EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program.
45. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant and/or property owner shall submit a final public areas management program, subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator, that protects the rights of the public to enter and use the public open space areas. The program shall incorporate the following:
a. Public Access Signage Plan. The signage plan shall clearly describe, at a minimum, the dimensions, material(s), text, and font of each sign and/or stencil and a site plan depicting the location of each sign and/or stencil. The signs shall facilitate, manage, and provide public access to the public open space areas, including identification of all public features that will be provided on the site (seating, picnic areas, etc.) and allowable uses of the public areas. The signs shall be conspicuously sited to maximize visibility from the public walkways abutting the project site without adversely impacting public views and visual resources.
b. The final plans shall provide a mechanism for the Zoning Administrator to review and approve minor sign changes. Changes may only be granted if such changes will not adversely impact, and/or will enhance coastal resources, including coastal access (e.g., modifying the signage to be clearer to the public and/or more aesthetically pleasing) c. The signage plan shall include wayfinding signage that includes, but is not limited to, uniform wall signs and/or painted walkway signs along the public access areas.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
46. The use of amplified music shall not be permitted from the open space areas, including the roof deck.
47. To ensure notification of all interested parties and successors in interest, that the City of Long Beach issued an approval of a Local Coastal Development Permit at the subject property, the current property owner shall record the conditions of approval on the property title, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's office prior to the issuance of building permits. The Notice of Restriction shall include a complete property description, the conditions of approval as an exhibit, and contain the notarized signature of the property owner(s). The Notice shall not be removed or amended without the prior written approval of the Director of Development Services.
48. The applicant shall submit an application for a Sign Program for the project. No permanent on-site signs requiring a sign permit shall be installed prior to approval of a Sign Program. The Sign Program shall include signage for all vehicular access and loading areas. The Sign Program for the site shall include wayfinding signage consistent with City design standards for public space. This wayfinding signage shall clearly indicate public open space areas.
49. SEASP Projects that will generate more than 50 peak hour trips shall join the Transportation Management Association (TMA).
50. The building shall contain all electric appliances within the interior/indoor residential units only.
51. The Applicant shall provide the following in accordance with the Green Building Standards of Section 21.45.400 of the Zoning Regulations:
a. Canopy trees shall provide shade coverage, after five (5) years of growth, of forty percent (40%) of the total area dedicated to parking stalls and associated vehicular circulation, or paving materials with a solar reflectance index of at least twenty-nine (29) shall be used on a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of paving surfaces dedicated to parking stalls and associated vehicular circulation.
b. Bicycle parking shall be provided at a minimum of one (1) space for every five (5) residential units, one (1) space for each five thousand (5,000) square feet of commercial building area, one (1) space for each seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet of retail building area and one (1) space for each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of industrial building area. Fractions shall be rounded up to whole numbers;
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
c. Roofs shall be designed to be solar-ready subject to all applicable state and local construction codes and provide conduit from the electrical panel to the roof; and
d. A designated area for the collection of recyclables and organics shall be provided adjacent to the area for the collection of waste.
52. The use of invasive plant species, such as those listed by the California Invasive Plant Council, shall be prohibited in the Coastal Zone.
53. To the greatest extent feasible, the Applicant shall incorporate ecologically responsible pest control methods.
54. The final plant schedule shall comply with the approved plant palette for the Southeast Area Specific Plan (SEASP Appendix D).
a. To the greatest extent feasible, the landscaping selected for installation shall be selected to maximize the capacity to support habitat for species common to the Los Cerritos Wetlands area.
b. Landscaping within natural areas shall consist of California native species or varieties that will not invade habitat or hybridize with existing native vegetation to create a more seamless transition between the natural wetlands and the development (per CalGreen and Cal IPC standards).
55. The Applicant shall install street trees and landscaping within the public right-ofway in conformance with Section 21.42.050 of the Municipal Code, SEASP Section
8.2.4, Streetscape Amenities, and SEASP Appendix D, Plant Palette.
56. All on-site landscaping and improvements and all off-site improvements shall be completed prior to approval of a final building inspection or certificate(s) of occupancy for the development.
57. The final selection of window and door systems shall be in compliance with the Bird-Safe Treatment requirements in Section 8.3.14 of the Southeast Area Specific Plan document. The final plans shall include final details and specifications for the proposed treatments.
58. No portion of the exterior door and window systems or building components shall have a reflective surface that produces glare in exceedance of what is explicitly stated in the SEASP Program EIR and/or Specific Plan document.
59. All tree removal and modifications shall be completed in conformance with SEASP Policy 5.31.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
60. During construction, the Applicant shall implement Best Management Construction methods minimize water runoff and debris in accordance with all applicable state, regional, and local requirements.
61. To the greatest extent feasible, the recommendation contained in the Sea Level Rise Analysis by Moffatt & Nichol, dated June 2023, shall be incorporated and implemented into the project.
62. Construction staging, equipment, and materials shall not impede public access to the coast at all locations for vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.
63. The Applicant shall provide a construction staging plan to the Director of Development Services for review and approval prior to the issuance permits for each phase of construction, including demolition/site preparation, rough grading, precise grading, and each phase of building permits.
64. Any streetlights, pedestrian lights, parking lot lights, and other exterior lights to be provided within the development or adjacent public rights-of-way shall be subject to review by the Director of Development Services prior to issuance of building and electrical permits. All lights shall be adequately shielded so as to prevent the intrusion of light and glare upon any adjacent property or structure, in compliance with the appropriate backlight/uplight/glare (BUG) rating requirements of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) equivalent to the previous standard for certified full-cutoff fixtures, or meeting IESNA specifications for full-cutoff fixtures.
a. A final photometric plan per SEASP development standards shall demonstrate the project lighting will be designed and shielded in accordance with plan requirements.
65. All trucks, construction vehicles, and equipment not actively in use on the project site, including those queueing off-site, shall be prohibited from engine idling for more than 5 minutes, and the Applicant shall utilize best management practices (BMPs) and best available technology to achieve this. The Applicant shall post a clearly-legible sign on the exterior construction fencing with the phone number of a construction site complaint/issues coordinator responsible for managing truck and equipment idling. Complaints of violations regarding truck and equipment idling shall be resolved within 24 hours of the receipt of the complaint. The Director of Development Services is authorized to issue stop work orders and withhold the issuance of building permits if the Applicant fails to remedy engine idling violations as required, until such time as the violations are remedied.
66. All equipment reverse signal alarms utilized by construction vehicles and equipment on the site, as required per OSHA regulations and provided in Code of Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1926.601(b)(4) and 1926.602(a)(9), shall not be of the single-tone high-pitch type. Alternate pitch, broad-spectrum sound, or other non-single-tone non-high-pitch alarms meeting the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.601(b)(4) and 1926.602(a)(9) shall be utilized instead.
67. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall depict all utility apparatus, such as, but not limited to, backflow devices and Edison transformers, on both the site plan and the landscape plan. Wherever feasible, these devices shall not be located in any front, side, or rear yard area that is adjacent to a street.
Furthermore, these devices shall be screened to the greatest extent feasible by landscaping or another screening method approved by the Director of Development Services.
68. The Applicant is hereby advised that sea level rise could potentially cause physical hazards, such as beach erosion, flooding, and saltwater intrusion upon the subject property. This condition of approval serves in an advisory capacity, and does not constitute a vulnerability assessment. The Applicant is encouraged to include adaptive capacity in development with measures such as waterproofing, flood shields, water tight doors, moveable flood walls, partitions, and other flood proofing techniques.
69. Vehicles used for the project construction workers shall not be parked in the Alamitos Bay Marina parking lots and workers shall be informed that no parking will occur in the Alamitos Bay Marina parking lot.
70. Dedicated loading zones will be provided subject to approval by Public Works.
71. As a part of the residential lease agreement, residents shall be provided a decal identifying their vehicle and shall be notified that parking is restricted in the Alamitos Bay Marina Parking lots and that residents shall not park in the marina parking lot.
72. Employees of the residential and commercial component of the development shall park within the on-site parking without cost.
73. On-site directional signage to resident parking and loading areas shall be provided to all residents.
74. Tenants shall sign documentation acknowledging their understanding of the rules and regulations for the Alamitos Bay Marina, including, for example, restrictions on swimming and that no trespassing is allowed onto private boats. This documentation shall provide a background about the Long Beach Marina System, how the marina system and its improvements are generally funded, expectations when using the marina, a list of all applicable rules and regulations, and how the Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
rules and regulations are enforced. The Applicant shall use the guiding documentation dated July 19, 2023 from the Long Beach Boat Owner’s Association to Hunter Weaver and Will Cipes to prepare the documentation for tenant signature.
Building and Safety Conditions
75. The applicant shall comply with all comments from the Long Beach Building and Safety Bureau dated September 23, 2022.
Long Beach Energy Resources Conditions
76. The applicant shall comply with all comments from the Long Beach Energy Resources (LBER) Department dated September 21, 2022.
77. The Developer shall coordinate with LBER in advance to understand what is required for new gas services, and the cost and schedule impacts associated.
78. The developer shall review and obtain approval for proposed meter(s) locations and gas line routing for this development with LBER.
Long Beach Transit Conditions
79. The applicant shall comply with all comments from Long Beach Transit dated September 6, 2022.
Police Department Conditions
80. The applicant shall provide for all CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design) recommendations issued for the project by the Long Beach Police Department, in the memo dated October 5, 2022, attached to these conditions of approval and by this reference made a part hereof.
Orange County Transportation Authority Conditions
81. The applicant shall comply with all comments from Orange County Transportation Authority dated September 19, 2022.
Water Department Conditions
82. The applicant shall comply with all comments from the Long Beach Water Department dated January 6, 2022, and October 5, 2022.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
Department of Public Works Conditions
83. The developer shall provide for the following to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works:
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
a. Prior to the start of ANY demolition, excavation, or construction, the Developer shall,
i. Submit a construction plan for pedestrian protection, construction staging, scaffolding and excavations, and
ii. Submit a traffic control plan with street lane closures and routing of construction vehicles (excavation hauling, concrete and other deliveries, etc.) prepared by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer in the State of California, with wet seal and signature, and
iii. Submit a plan for construction area and/or site perimeter fencing with custom printed screen(s),
iv. All for review and approval by the Department of Public Works and installed in accordance with the latest version of the Public Works Development Guideline.
Work, including hauling soils or other debris, is not allowed within the right-of-way without a valid Public Works permit. The Developer shall comply with all requirements outlined within the latest version of the Public Works Development Guideline and all referenced standards at the time of application submittal. b. The Developer may be subject to street restoration requirements if an adjacent street/alley affected by the project is under a street cut moratorium that is active at any point through the completion of construction. Although a street cut moratorium may not be in place at the time of these conditions, one may be in effect at a later date that the project shall adhere to. The Developer shall provide written approval from the City to implement any street improvements prior to the end of the moratorium, in the form of a discretionary permit for excavation. Any work within a street under moratorium requires a complete grind and overlay from block to block. c. Doors and/or gates shall not swing or project into the public right-of-way. All door openings swinging into public rights-of-way shall be eliminated, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
d. All proposed refuse and recycling structures and receptacles must be placed entirely on private property, outside of the public right-of-way. The Developer and/ or successors shall be responsible for the cleanliness of the sidewalk/roadway adjacent to the refuse and recycling area and the overall development.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
e. All off-site improvements shall provide a minimum of 5 feet clear dedicated rightof-way between any and all obstructions for pedestrian travel purposes compliant with the most recent ADA standards. All hardscape shall be constructed with Portland cement concrete. All removal limits shall consist of entire panel replacements (from joint line to joint line).
f. The Developer shall construct all off-site improvements needed to provide full ADA accessibility compliance within the adjacent public right-of-way, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. If a dedication of additional right-of-way is necessary to satisfy ADA requirements, as determined during the plan check process, the right-of-way dedication way shall be provided. g. Any proposed signage shall be located entirely on site, on private property, completely out of the public right-of-way. Any signage initially proposed in public rights-of-way shall be eliminated, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
h. Public improvements shall be constructed in accordance with Public Works construction standards, and per plans reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. Detailed off-site improvement plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer, stamped, signed and submitted to the Public Works counter at the Permit Center on the 2nd Floor of City Hall (411 W. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802), for review and approval. The City’s Public Works Engineering Standard Plans are available online at
www.longbeach.gov/pw/resources/engineering/standard-plans. This is in addition to, and separate from, any plan check required by the Department of Development Services, Building & Safety Bureau.
i. All conditions of approval, including cover letter signed by the Planning Officer and Case Planner, must be printed verbatim on all plans submitted for plan review to the Department of Public Works.
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
j. A 10 foot public access easement along Pacific Coast Highway shall be granted to the City of Long Beach for additional parkway and dining/retail purposes consistent with the SEASP. Developer shall process all necessary documents and applicable fees for said easement.
k. The Developer shall construct all off-site improvements needed to provide full ADA accessibility compliance within the adjacent public right-of-way to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. If a dedication of additional right-of-way is necessary to satisfy ADA requirements, the right-of-way dedication way shall be provided.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
l. The Developer shall provide easements to the City of Long Beach for any proposed or required public utility facilities, to the satisfaction of the concerned City Department or public agency.
m. The Developer shall be responsible for resolving all matters of easement(s) and/ or utilities encroachment to the satisfaction of the interested agency, City Department, and the Director of Public Works.
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
n. A portion of Pacific Coast Highway is under Caltrans jurisdiction. A street improvement encroachment permit from Caltrans will be required for all work within Caltrans right-of-way. The Applicant shall contact Caltrans to request additional information regarding its permitting process and provide a copy of the approved permit and design plans to the Department of Public Works. o. Developer shall improve the full right-of-way width (110 feet) of Studebaker Road from Pacific Coast Highway to the eastern limit of the proposed property based on the concept depicted in the entitlement drawings, including a turnaround and raised median. It is understood that a traffic analysis to analyze queuing for the site is to be conducted by the Developer to determine if a left turn pocket into the site from east bound Studebaker Road would be acceptable to incorporate into the final design. Pending the results of said study, the final design may vary from the design shown in the entitlement drawings. The final design is subject to revisions during the plan check process to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer and the Director of Public Works. Studebaker Road shall be designed and constructed to allow for future connectivity to the conceptual connection to the existing Shopkeeper Road. A signage and striping plan shall be provided to the Transportation Mobility Bureau for review and approval. p. Per previous conditions, the Developer is required to construct the full right-of-way width of Studebaker Road. Developer may apply for a credit toward the required Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) for the cost of the improvements south of the Studebaker Road centerline. The credit request is subject to review and approval of the Director of Public Works, Director of Development Services and City Council. q. Developer shall contribute a fair share fee to the City of Long Beach to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer and Director of Public Works to conform to the most current revision of Figure 7-7 of the SEASP for Pacific Coast Highway.
Fair share fee shall account for the cost to construct the following improvements, including but not limited to: a raised street median, a raised bike lane and buffer, a Portland Cement Concrete sidewalk, a transit boarding island separating buses from bicyclists per Long Beach Transit standards, landscaped and irrigated Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
parkways, street trees and root barriers, street restoration, and signage and striping. The proposed improvements shown for the final Pacific Coast Highway street section as presented in the SEASP and, as applicable, the latest Bicycle Master Plan, are subject to Caltrans review and approval. Right of way improvements, dedications and easements conditioned in this document are subject to change pending Caltrans review.
Note: The City project schedule for the Pacific Coast Highway improvements is not contingent upon the construction schedule or anticipated Certificate of Occupancy of the proposed Private Development Project. The City project construction shall commence independent of the private development project and may occur before or after the construction of the private development project is complete. r. The Developer shall provide for new street trees with root barriers along Studebaker Road, per Section 21.42.050 and Section 14.28.020 of the Long Beach Municipal Code. Where physical obstructions do not allow for the required number of street trees to be planted, an in-lieu fee may be assessed by the City Arborist and paid by the Applicant for each required street tree that is not provided.
Furthermore, in the case of any existing street tree removal, an additional fee will be collected for each removed tree to allow for the planting of one additional tree elsewhere. All proposed street tree removals must be approved by the City Arborist and shall follow the tree removal procedure as outlined in the Public Works Tree Maintenance Policy. Applicant and/or successors shall water and maintain all street trees, landscaping and sprinkler systems required in connection with this project. If required, street tree removals and in-lieu tree planting fees shall be coordinated directly with the Street Tree Division of the Department of Public Works, at (562) 570-2770, prior to issuance of permit. The Street Tree Division will assist with the size, type and manner in which the street trees are to be installed. s. Applicant shall contact the Street Tree Division prior to beginning the tree planting, landscaping, and any irrigation system work.
t. The Developer shall check with the Long Beach Water Department at (562) 570- 2300 and the Energy Resources Department at (562) 570-2000 for scheduled main replacement work prior to submitting any improvement plans to the Department of Public Works.
u. The Developer proposes improvements that may impact existing under- and above-ground utilities adjacent to the project site, including, but not limited to, a fire hydrant, traffic signal poles, street light conduits, and utility cabinets, along the perimeter streets adjacent to the project site. The Developer shall be responsible for all design, applicable utility approval, permitting, relocation work, easements relocation and commissioning as required by the interested agency and shall work with each utility directly.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
v. The Developer shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair and replacement of off-site improvements abutting the project boundary during construction of the on-site improvements, until final inspection of the on-site improvements by the City.
All off-site improvements adjacent to the development site, and/or along the truck delivery route found damaged as a result of construction activities, shall be reconstructed or replaced by the Developer, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
w. The Developer shall provide for the resetting to grade of existing manholes, pull boxes, and meters in conjunction with the required off-site improvements, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
x. The Developer shall install Custom Printed Flex Mesh screen(s) along the perimeter of the development site, such as FenceScreen.com Series 311, or equivalent, fence screening, and provide for the printed graphic to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The graphics shall depict positive images of the City or other artistic concepts. Prior to submitting the graphic design for printing, the Developer shall consult with the Department of Public Works to review and approve.
y. Public Works review and approval is required for on-site grading and drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit from Development Services. The Developer shall submit a grading plan with hydrology and hydraulic calculations showing building elevations and drainage pattern and slopes, for review and approval by the Director of Planning and Building Services and the Director of Public Works, prior to approval of the map and/or release of any building permit. z. Public improvements shall be constructed in accordance with Public Works construction standards, and per plans reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The City’s Public Works Engineering Standard Plans are available online at www.longbeach.gov/pw/resources/engineering/standard-plans. Prior to issuance of a building permit, detailed off-site improvement plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer, stamped, signed and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. This is in addition to any plan check required by the Department of Development Services. Work, including hauling soils or other debris, is not allowed within the right of way without a valid Public Works permit. aa.All conditions of approval, including cover letter signed by the Planning Officer and Case Planner, must be printed verbatim on all plans submitted for plan review to the Department of Public Works.
bb.Prior to approving an engineering plan, all projects greater than 1 acre in size must demonstrate coverage under the State Construction General NPDES Permit. To Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
meet this requirement, the Developer must submit a copy of the letter from the State Water Resource Control Board acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Intent (NOI) and a certification from the developer or engineer that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been prepared. Should you have any questions regarding the State Construction General NPDES Permit or wish to obtain an application, please call the State Regional Board Office at (213) 576- 6600 or visit their website for complete instructions at www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
cc. The Developer shall provide a trip generation and trip distribution analysis. Based on these studies, a traffic impact analysis may be required. Any conditions generated by the analysis shall be made a part of these conditions. dd.The Applicant shall contribute a fee for their fair share of traffic signal improvements at the intersection of Studebaker Road and Pacific Coast Highway to the latest Caltrans standards, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. ee.The Developer shall install all necessary traffic signal improvements directly related to the proposed improvements, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer and Caltrans.
Note: This intersection and associated traffic signals are within Caltrans jurisdiction. Caltrans shall have full authority on the review and approval of the traffic signal improvements.
ff. At the discretion of the City Traffic Engineer, the developer shall provide a connection between the planned bike path along the east side of future Shopkeeper Road and Pacific Coast Highway via a bike path along Studebaker Road.
gg.The Developer shall contact Long Beach Transit prior to the commencement of work to coordinate design and construction issues and to ensure that construction does not interfere with transit bus operations at the existing bus stop on Pacific Coast Highway. Contact Christopher MacKechnie at (562) 489 -8466. hh.The size and configuration of all proposed driveways serving the project site shall be subject to review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. Driveways greater than 28 feet require a variance; contact the Traffic and Transportation Bureau at (562) 570-6331 to request additional information regarding driveway construction requirements.
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
ii. The Developer shall obtain a Caltrans encroachment permit for the proposed driveway along Pacific Coast Highway.
jj. The Developer shall salvage and reinstall all traffic signs that require temporary removal to accommodate new construction within the public right-of-way. All traffic signs shall be reinstalled to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. kk. The Developer shall replace all traffic signs and mounting poles damaged or misplaced as result of construction activities to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
ll. The Developer shall repaint all traffic markings obliterated or defaced by construction activities to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. mm. The Developer shall contact the Traffic & Transportation Bureau, at (562) 570-6331, to modify any existing curb marking zones adjacent to the project site. nn.All bike racks and bike rack placement must follow the guidance in “Essentials of Bike Parking” by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals.
Standard Conditions – General:
84.As provided in Section 21.21.406 of the Long Beach Municipal Code, every right or privilege authorized under this permit shall terminate three (3) years after the granting of the request and be of no further force and effect if the right or privilege has not been commenced within that three-year period. The termination will take effect without further City action if a timely request for extension of time has not been made or is denied. Any interruption or cessation necessitated by publicly declared emergency, fire, flood, earthquake or act of war or vandalism or cessation shall not result in the termination of the right or privilege.
85.This permit shall be invalid if the owner(s) and/or Applicant(s) have failed to return written acknowledgment of their acceptance of the conditions of approval on the Conditions of Approval Acknowledgment Form supplied by the Planning Bureau.
This acknowledgment shall be submitted within 30 days from the effective date of approval (final action date or, if in the appealable area of the Coastal Zone, 21 days after the local final action date).
86.This approval is required to comply with these conditions of approval as long as the use is on the subject site. As such, the site shall allow periodic re-inspections, at the discretion of city officials, to verify compliance. The property owner shall reimburse the City for the inspection cost as per the special building inspection specifications established by City Council (Sec. 21.25.412, 21.25.212).
Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
87.In the event of transfer of ownership of the property involved in this application, the new owner shall be fully informed of the permitted use and development of said property as set forth by this permit together with all conditions that are a part thereof. These specific requirements shall be recorded with all title conveyance documents at time of closing escrow.
88.Approval of this development project is expressly conditioned upon payment (prior to building permit issuance or prior to Certificate of Occupancy, as specified in the applicable Ordinance or Resolution for the specific fee) of impact fees, connection fees and other similar fees based upon additional facilities needed to accommodate new development at established City service level standards, including, but not limited to, sewer capacity charges, Park Fees and Transportation Impact Fees. No publicly accessible telephones shall be maintained on the exterior of the premises. Any existing publicly accessible telephones shall be removed.
89.The property shall be developed and maintained in a neat, quiet, and orderly condition and operated in a manner so as not to be detrimental to adjacent properties and occupants.
90.The operator of the approved use shall prevent loitering in all parking and landscaping areas serving the use during and after hours of operation. The operator shall clean the parking and landscaping areas of trash and debris on a daily basis. Failure to do so shall be grounds for permit revocation. If loitering problems develop, the Director of Development Services may require additional preventative measures such as but not limited to, additional lighting or private security guards.
91.Exterior security bars and roll-up doors applied to windows and pedestrian building entrances shall be prohibited.
92.Any graffiti found on site shall be removed within 24 hours of its appearance.
93.All required utility easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the concerned department, agency, or utility company.
94.All trash and refuse containers shall be fully screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services.
95.As a condition of any City approval, the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against City or its agents, officers, and employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of City concerning the processing of the proposal/entitlement or any action relating to, or arising out of, such approval. At Conditions of Approval
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Application Nos. 2208-10 and 2201-12
July 20, 2023
the discretion of the City and with the approval of the City Attorney, a deposit of funds by the applicant may be required in an amount sufficient to cover the anticipated litigation costs.
ATTACHMENT I
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR
THE SOUTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
EIR 02-16
The SEASP EIR is available on the Environmental Reports Webpage of the City of Long Beach’s website.
STEP 1: To access he document double click the link below or copy and paste the URL address into your web browser:
https://longbeach.gov/lbds/planning/environmental/reports/ STEP 2: Once on the Environmental Reports Webpage scroll down to the “Approved/Certified” header:
STEP 3: Then in the Search Box located on the right-side of the input “SEASP” and the document will populate.
July 2023 | Compliance Checklist
MARKETPLACE MIXED-USE PROJECT AT
6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
City of Long Beach
Prepared for:
City of Long Beach
Development Services Department
Contact: Amy Harbin, AICP, Planner
411 W. Ocean Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Long Beach, California 90802
562.570.6872
Prepared by:
PlaceWorks
Contact: Addie Farrell, Principal
700 S. Flower Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, California 90017
213.623.1443 ext. 2119
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com
Attachment J
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Table of Contents
July 2023 Page i
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..................................................................................................... 2
1.3 CEQA HISTORY............................................................................................................................... 13
1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................. 13
1.5 SEASP BUILDOUT AND DENSITY.......................................................................................... 24
2. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST....................................................................................27
2.1 PROJECT INFORMATION........................................................................................................... 27
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED.......................................... 30
2.3 DETERMINATION......................................................................................................................... 30
2.4 FORMAT AND EVALUATION OF IMPACTS......................................................................... 31
3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ......................................................................................34
3.1 AESTHETICS .................................................................................................................................... 34
3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES.................................................................. 43
3.3 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................................... 45
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................................................... 59
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................. 73
3.6 ENERGY............................................................................................................................................. 85
3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS................................................................................................................ 90
3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................................................. 97
3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ..................................................................... 111
3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY................................................................................ 121
3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING................................................................................................... 132
3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................................. 145
3.13 NOISE................................................................................................................................................ 147
3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING............................................................................................... 157
3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES........................................................................................................................ 159
3.16 RECREATION ................................................................................................................................ 162
3.17 TRANSPORTATION..................................................................................................................... 164
3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES........................................................................................... 179
3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS..................................................................................... 181
3.20 WILDFIRE........................................................................................................................................ 189
4. SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES...................................................................191
5. REFERENCES..............................................................................................................200
6. LIST OF PREPARERS .................................................................................................205 CITY OF LONG BEACH (LEAD AGENCY)........................................................................................ 205 PLACEWORKS .............................................................................................................................................. 205 CP VI MARKETPLACE, LLC (APPLICANT)........................................................................................ 205 M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks
APPENDICES
Appendix A MMRP
Appendix B Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Appendix C Biological Technical Report
Appendix D Historic Evaluation
Appendix E Geotechnical Investigation Report
Appendix F LID Feasibility Screening Memorandum
Appendix G Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix H Sea Level Rise Analysis
Appendix I Construction Noise Modeling
Appendix J Transportation Memorandum
Appendix K Sewer Area Study
Appendix L Will Serve Letter, Long Beach Water Department Appendix M Will Serve Letter, Long Beach Energy Resources Appendix N Will Serve Letter, Southern California Edison M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Table of Contents
July 2023 Page iii
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1 Regional Location ................................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2 Local Vicinity......................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3 Aerial Photograph................................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 4 Project Location in the Southeast Area Specific Plan...................................................................11 Figure 5 Site Plan…….......................................................................................................................................15 Figure 6a Elevations – South and North..........................................................................................................17 Figure 6b Elevations – West and East...............................................................................................................19 Figure 7 Photometric Plan ................................................................................................................................41 Figure 8 Existing Vegetation Map ...................................................................................................................63 List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1 Southeast Area Specific Plan Land Use Summary.........................................................................13 Table 2 MU-CC Block FAR............................................................................................................................24 Table 3 Southeast Area Specific Plan Remaining Capacity ........................................................................25 Table 4 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions......................................................................52 Table 5 Maximum Daily On-Site Localized Construction Emissions......................................................55 Table 6 Summary of Vegetation/Land Use Types for the Project Site....................................................62 Table 7 City of Long Beach CAP GHG Reduction Actions Consistency Checklist...........................100 Table 8 Consistency Analysis with the City of Long Beach CAP Actions............................................105 Table 9 Project Operational GHG Emissions (Year 2027) .....................................................................110 Table 10 Water Levels Associated with each Analyzed Sea Level Rise and Storm Scenario................129 Table 11 SEASP Policy Consistency Analysis..............................................................................................134 Table 12 Worst-Case Annoyance Vibration Levels from Construction Equipment .............................153 Table 13 Vibration Damage Levels for Typical Construction Equipment..............................................154 Table 14 Trip Generation Estimate................................................................................................................169 Table 15 Trip Budget by Quadrant ................................................................................................................170 Table 16 Mitigation Measures from the Certified SEASP EIR that are Applicable to the Proposed Project ..........................................................................................................................191 M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Page ii PlaceWorks
µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter
AAQS ambient air quality standards
AB Assembly Bill
ACM asbestos-containing materials
afy acre-foot per year
amsl above mean sea level
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
AQMP air quality management plan
ARP archaeological research plan
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BMP best management practices
CAC certified asbestos consultant
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
Cal-IPC California Invasive Plant Council
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CBSC California Building Standards Code
CCC California Coastal Commission
CDPH California Department of Public Health
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDP Coastal Development Permit
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CHWR Coastal Habitat/Wetlands/Recreation
CGP construction general permit
CIP capital improvement plan
CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL community noise equivalent level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO carbon monoxide
Corps US Army Corps of Engineers
CRC California Residential Code
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Abbreviations and Acronyms
July 2023 Page iii
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR environmental impact report
EO executive order
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ESA environmental site assessment
ESHA environmentally sensitive habitat area
EVCS electric vehicle charging station
FAR floor area ratio
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GHG greenhouse gas
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HRA health risk assessment
IRA identified resource areas
in/sec inches per second
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
JFTB joint forces training base
JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
kBTU kilo-British Thermal Units
kWhr kilowatt-hours
LACDPW Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
LACSD Los Angeles County Sanitation District
LAX Los Angeles International Airport
LBFD Long Beach Fire Department
LBMC Long Beach Municipal Code
LBPD Long Beach Police Department
LBPL Long Beach Public Library
LBPRM Long Beach Parks, Recreation and Marine Department LBT Long Beach Transit
LBUSD Long Beach Unified School District
LBWD Long Beach Water Department
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Page iv PlaceWorks
LBWRP Long Beach Water Reclamation Plant
LB CAP Long Beach Climate Action Plan
LCP local coastal program
LCPA local coastal program amendment
LCWC Los Cerritos Wetlands Complex
LED light emitting diode
LEED United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LFG landfill gas
LID low impact development
Lmax maximum noise level
LOS level of service
LST localized significance threshold
LUD Land Use District
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
mgd million gallons per day
MLD Most Likely Descendants
MMRP mitigation monitoring and reporting program
MRZ mineral resource zone
MS4 municipal separate storm sewer system
MTCO2e metric tons of carbon-dioxide-equivalent emissions MU-CC Mixed-Use Community Core
MXD mixed-use development
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
OBL obligate
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
OHP California Office of Historic Preservation
OPC State of California Ocean Protection Council
OPR State of California’s Governor’s Office of Planning and Research OTD offer to dedicate
PAR property analysis record
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Abbreviations and Acronyms
July 2023 Page v
Pb lead
PCH Pacific Coast Highway
PDF project design feature
PEIR program environmental impact report
PM2.5 fine particulate matter
ppm parts per million
PPV peak particle velocity
REC recognized environmental condition
RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RTP/SCS regional transportation plan/sustainable communities strategy RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCE Southern California Edison
SEASP Southeast Area Specific Plan
SLR sea level rise
SMP soil management plan
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
SR state route
SRA source receptor area [or state responsibility area] SUSMP Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SZ scientific resource zone
TAZ transportation analysis zone
TCR tribal cultural resources
TDFM SCAG’s Travel Demand Model
TDM transportation demand management
TMA Transportation Management Association
UPL upland
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Page vi PlaceWorks
UWMP urban water management plan
VdB velocity decibels
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound
VSC Vibro Stone Columns
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
Abbreviations and Acronyms
July 2023 Page vii
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2023 Page 1
1. Introduction
The project applicant, (CP VI Marketplace, LLC), is seeking approval from the City of Long Beach (City) for construction and operation of a mixed-use project at 6615-6695 East Pacific Coast Highway (proposed project) within the Southeast Area Specific Plan (SEASP). The SEASP area spans 1,481 acres in the southeast portion of the City. The SEASP consists of the area south of 7th Street, east of Bellflower Boulevard, east of the Long Beach Marine Stadium and Alamitos Bay docks, south of Colorado Street, and north and west of Long Beach’s southern boundary. The SEASP was established to provide a long-term and sustainable vision for the area that has undeveloped wetlands and several underutilized properties that are substantial in size, aging, and near the end of their useful economic life. The purpose of SEASP is to provide a regulatory framework for the area that “includes customized land uses and development standards, provides expanded multimodal transportation choices, and identifies locations for future development potential that maintain and preserve valuable natural resources” (Long Beach 2017a).
Section 10.1.3 of the SEASP outlines environmental clearance procedures for development projects within its boundaries. The section identifies the use of environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning, for development projects that are consistent with certified Program Environmental Impact report (PEIR). As defined by CEQA Section 21083.3 and Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, projects consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. In compliance with CEQA, the City of Long Beach, as lead agency, prepared this compliance checklist to determine whether approval of the proposed project and requested discretionary actions would be within the scope of the SEASP and PEIR, State Clearinghouse No. 2015101075. This compliance checklist demonstrates that the proposed project complies with the allowable density for the project site established by the SEASP, is within the scope of the PEIR, and would therefore qualify for environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located at 6615-6695 East Pacific Coast Highway in the City of Long Beach in Los Angeles County, which is surrounded by the cities of Los Angeles, Carson, Compton, Paramount, Bellflower, Lakewood, Hawaiian Gardens, Signal Hill, Seal Beach, Alamitos, and Cypress and unincorporated communities in Los Angeles and Orange Counties (see Figure 1, Regional Location). Pacific Coast Highway, which borders the project site to the west, provides primary regional and local access to the project site. Regional access to the project site is also provided by State Route (SR) 22, SR-19, Interstate (I) 405, and I-605. Local access is also provided by Studebaker Road to the south of the project site.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
The project site is located in the southeast side of the City and of the SEASP area, near the border with Orange County (see Figure 2, Local Vicinity). The project site encompasses private property and public right-of-way (approximately 253,636 square feet or approximately 5.8 acres) and is comprised of two full parcels with assessor parcel numbers (APN) 7237-020-040 and -050, a portion of parcel with APN 7237-020-041, the sidewalk and bike lane along Pacific Coast Highway, and Studebaker Road right-of-way. The proposed development of the mixed-use project would occur on 3.7 acres of the 5.8-acre site. The remaining 2.1 acres would include right-of-way improvements. The project site is bordered by surface parking and commercial uses to the north; an existing two-story office building on parcel with APN 7237-020-041, a City of Long Beach Property Site (Marketplace Marsh), the Los Cerritos Wetlands to the northeast; a vacant lot (“Pumpkin Patch site”) that is currently used for occasional events and holidays to the south; and Pacific Coast Highway to the west. The City of Long Beach Property Site is 194 feet northeast of the project site. The San Gabriel River is approximately 520 feet south of the project site, and a commercial shopping mall is across Pacific Coast Highway (see Figure 3, Aerial Photograph).
Long Beach Transit (LBT) and Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) operate bus lines along Pacific Coast Highway, near the project site. Four bus stops are within 0.25 miles of the project site along Pacific Coast Highway. These bus lines include LBT Route 171 and OCTA Route 1. The closest bus stop is on Pacific Coast Highway along the western boundary of the project site. Pacific Coast Highway and Marina Drive have existing Class II bicycle lanes in the vicinity of the project site (Long Beach 2023a). The SEASP shows that Class II bicycle lane is proposed along Shopkeeper Road and Studebaker east of Pacific Coast Highway. The SEASP identifies the portion of Studebaker Road between Marina Drive and Pacific Coast Highway as “to be determined” (Long Beach 2017a).
1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1.2.1 Existing Land Use Designations and Zoning
The 5.8-acre project site is currently developed with two two‐story office buildings with surface parking throughout, limited landscaping, and the Studebaker Road right-of-way. Office buildings located at 6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway were constructed in 1979 and 1980, respectively (Los Angeles County 2023), and are approximately 45,955 and 15,538 square feet, respectively (see Figure 3, Aerial Photograph). The existing 45,955-square-foot two-story office building and surface parking lot at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway was constructed in 1982.
The project site is generally flat. Studebaker Road provides ingress-egress access to the project site and terminates on the project site. Access to the project site is also provided from the commercial properties and parking lots from the north via a driveway on Pacific Coast Highway.
The applicable zoning for the project site is established in the SEASP. Within SEASP, the project site is in the Mixed‐Use Community Core (MU-CC) designation. See Figure 4, Project Location within the Southeast Area Specific Plan. The project site has a Land Use District (LUD) No. 7, Mixed Uses, based on the 1989 General Plan Land M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
July 2023 Page 3
Use designation, which identifies this land use district as a valuable resource for a mix of uses.1 Additionally, the 2019 General Plan land use designation (PlaceType) is Regional Serving Facilities (RSF).
1.2.2 Surrounding Land Use Designations and Zoning
The project site is surrounded by commercial uses and open space. As shown in Figure 4, all surrounding properties of the project site are within the SEASP area. The commercial properties to the north and east (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway) of the project site are within the SEASP MU-CC designation and in LUD No. 7 of the 1989 General Plan Land Use Element. The Los Cerritos Wetlands to the northeast of the project site are designated as Coastal Habitat/Wetlands/Recreation (CHWR) in the SEASP and were previously in an area of deferred assignment/certification. The Pumpkin Patch site south of the project site, has a SEASP designation of Industrial (I) and in LUD No. 7 of the 1989 General Plan Land Use Element. 1 The General Plan Land Use Element was updated in 2019 and has not yet been certified as part of the City’s Local Coastal Program.
Therefore, the 1989 General Plan Land Use Element (1989) designation of Land Use District (LUD) No. 7 remains applicable in the coastal zone including the project site.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
Pacifi c Ocean
San Pedro Bay
Los Angeles
Signal
Hill
Hawaiian
Gardens
Lakewood
Artesia
Long Beach
Carson
La Mirada
Bellflower
Norwalk
Santa Fe
Springs
Paramount
Compton
Lynwood
South Gate
Cypress
Stanton
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Anaheim
Fullerton
La Habra
Fountain
Valley
Costa
Mesa
Westminster
Buena Park
La
Palma
Seal Beach
Huntington
Beach
0 3
Scale (Miles) Source: ESRI, 2022
Figure XX - Figure Title Here
1. Introduction
PROJECT NAME HERE
CITY OF PROJECT HERE
PlaceWorks
Figure 1 - Regional Location
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Source: Generated using Arcmap, 2023.
1. Introduction
0 Scale (Miles)
3 Note: Unincorporated county areas are shown in white.
County of Los Angeles
County of Orange
Los Angeles River
22 CALIFORNIA
5 405
5 405
22 CALIFORNIA
605
110
710
105
91 CALIFORNIA
1 CALIFORNIA
1 CALIFORNIA
Project Site
County Boundary
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
PlaceWorks
Figure 2 - Local Vicinity
Source: Generated using Arcmap, 2023.
1. Introduction
0 Scale (Feet)
2,000 County Boundary
1 CALIFORNIA
1 CALIFORNIA
1 CALIFORNIA
22 CALIFORNIA
San Gabriel River
Project Boundary
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
PlaceWorks
Figure 3 - Aerial Photograph
Source: Nearmap, Inc., 2022.
1. Introduction
0 Scale (Feet)
235
Project Boundary
County Boundary
San Gabriel River
1 CALIFORNIA
Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach
Vacant Lot
(Pumpkin Patch Site)
Seal
Beach
N Studebaker Rd
E Marina Dr
Commercial Shopping Center
Commercial Shopping Center
Shopkeeper Rd
Commercial
Los Cerritos
Wetlands
Los Cerritos
Wetlands
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Office Building
to Remain
Alamitos Bay
Marina
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
§¨¦
£[
£[
Los Cerritos
Wetlands
Los Cerritos
Wetlands
Los Cerritos
Wetlands
VA Medical
Center
Cal State
Long Beach
2ND ST
E PACIFIC COAST HWY E 7TH ST
STUDEBAKER RD
ELIOT ST
E OCEAN BLVD
APPIAN WAY
COLORADO ST
WESTMINSTER BLVD
LOYNES DR
BIXBY
VILLAGE
D
R
SEAL BEACH BLVD
BOATHOUSE LN
SHOPKEEPER
RD
E
PACIFIC
COAST
HWY
GARDEN GROVE FWY
B
E
L
L
F
LOWER
B
LVD
E MARINA DR
N
MARINA
DR
Alamitos Bay
Bixby Village
Golf Course
Kettering
Elementary
School
Cerritos
Bahia
Marina
Retention
Basin
Sims' Pond
Jack Dunster
Marine Reserve
Chan
n
e
l
Vi
e
w
P
a
r
k
Los Cerritos Channel
San Gabriel River
Marine Stadium
22 1
405
LEISURE
WORLD
BOEING
NAPLES
BELMONT
SHORE
Recreation
Park
Marina
Vista Park
Marine
Stadium Park
Colorado
Lagoon
Jack Nichol
Park
Will Rogers
Mini Park
Single-Family ResidentialMultifamily ResidentialMobile HomesCommercial - NeighborhoodMixed-Use Community CoreMixed-Use MarinaIndustrialCoastal Habitat/Wetlands/Recreation*Open Space/RecreationPublicChannel/Marina/WaterwayDedicated Right of Way (not built)**Right of Way/Caltrans Open SpaceRight of WaySpecific Plan BoundaryCity Boundary 0 400 800 1,200
Feet
Figure 4-4 Land Use Plan
Ʌ127(6
Ʉ
3DUFHOERXQGDULHVZLWKLQWKH&RDVWDO+DELWDW:HWODQGV 5HFUHDWLRQODQGXVHGHVLJQDWLRQLQFOXGHRZQHGSDUFHOVWKDWPD\QRWKDYHDGHOLQHDWHGZHWODQGSXUVXDQWWRWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVRI
86$UP\&RUSVRI(QJLQHHUV
&RUSV
MXULVGLFWLRQSXUVXDQWWR6HFWLRQRIWKH&OHDQ:DWHU$FWDQG6HFWLRQRIWKH5LYHUVDQG+DUERUV$FW
&'):MXULVGLFWLRQSXUVXDQWWR6HFWLRQRIWKH)LVKDQG*DPH&RGH
5:4%MXULVGLFWLRQSXUVXDQWWR6HFWLRQRIWKH&OHDQ:DWHU$FWDQG6HFWLRQRIWKH3RUWHU&RORJQH$FWDQG
ZHWODQGVDVGHȴQHGXQGHUWKH&DOLIRUQLD&RDVWDO$FW
8OWLPDWHDOLJQPHQWRI6KRSNHHSHU5RDGVKDOOEHGHVLJQHG VRWKDWLWZLOOQRWLPSDFWDGHOLQHDWHGZHWODQG
6RXUFH
&LW\RI/RQJ%HDFKDQG3ODFH:RUNV
Source: City of Long Beach, 2022; PlaceWorks, 2022.
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
1,350
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Figure 4 - Project Location within the Southeast Area Specifi c Plan
1. Introduction
County o f L os A nge el s County of Los Angeles County o f O range County of Orange Seal Beach eal Beach
Long Beach ong Beach
1 CALIFORNIA
1 CALIFORNIA
Project Boundary
Project Location
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
July 2023 Page 13
1.3 CEQA HISTORY
The City is the public agency which had the principal responsibility for carrying out and approving the SEASP, and as such was the “Lead Agency” under CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15367). In September 2017, the City certified the PEIR; amended the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP); repealed the Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan (PD-1), which was the prior specific plan for the area; amended the Municipal Code to establish the SEASP (SP-2); and amended the Land Use District Map in the southeastern portion of Council District 3.
The ordinances were submitted to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for certification as a Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) in January 2019, and the CCC held a hearing for the LCPA and adoption of the SEASP in October 2020. The CCC recommended certification of the LCPA with sixteen modifications which were adopted by the City in July 2021. The CCC subsequently certified the SEASP on September 8, 2021.
The PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of the buildout and growth anticipated with the implementation of SEASP (see Table 1, Southeast Area Specific Plan Land Use Summary). The City adopted the Reduced Intensity Alternative for the SEASP buildout. Implementation of the SEASP would result in a net increase of 2,547 dwelling units, 307,071 square feet of commercial/employment, and no hotel rooms. The proposed project would be one of the first projects implemented under the SEASP.
Table 1 Southeast Area Specific Plan Land Use Summary
Existing (2017)
Projection After
Buildout
Net Increase
(from PEIR)
Adopted SEASP Net
Increase
Dwelling Units 4,079 9,518 5,439 2,547
Population 6,486 15,134 8,648 --
Commercial/Employment (SF) 2,091,476 2,665,052 573,576 307,071 Employees 3,555 4,115 560 --
Hotel Rooms 375 425 50 0
Acres 1,3811 1,4722 0 0
Source: Long Beach 2017a & 2017b.
1. The Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan (PD-1) boundary does not include portions of the San Gabriel River and the Los Cerritos Channel totaling 94 acres and 6 acres resulting from a Los Angeles County boundary adjustment approved by LAFCO.
2. The SEASP area consists of a total of 1,481 acres: 1) 1,472 acres within the proposed Specific Plan, which includes the 94 acres of waterways and 6 acres along the southeast boundary; and 2) 9 acres in the conventional zoning area that were in the PD-1 boundary but removed from the SEASP.
All projects within the SEASP area would be required to implement applicable SEASP policies, development standards, and applicable mitigation measures established by its PEIR and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) (see Appendix A). This compliance checklist evaluates proposed project in light of applicable requirements, standards, and mitigation measures.
1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project applicant proposes to demolish the two existing office buildings and associated parking and landscape areas located at 6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, and construct a seven-level mixed‐use M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
development that would include one partially subterranean level, six stories above grade, and a roof deck. The proposed project would be approximately 645,045 gross square feet (or 429,835 square feet, not including parking). See Figure 5, Site Plan.
1.4.1 Proposed Land Use
1.4.1.1 RESIDENTIAL
The proposed project would consist of 390 dwelling units consisting of studios, one-bedrooms, two-bedrooms, and three-bedrooms. Seventeen dwelling units would be reserved as very low-income housing units. The residential units of the proposed project would span levels one through six. Total residential square footage would be approximately 331,365 square feet.
1.4.1.2 COMMERCIAL
Approximately 5,351 square feet of commercial space would be on level 1 (ground floor). The commercial component would be on the southwest corner of the proposed building near the intersection of Studebaker Road and Pacific Coast Highway.
1.4.1.3 OPEN SPACE AND AMENITY SPACE
The proposed project would include approximately 12,485 square feet of indoor amenity space. The amenity space would include a lobby/concierge (1,182 square feet), mail lounge (1,144 square feet), clubroom (3,496 square feet), leasing office (1,573 square feet), fitness space (3,090 square feet), and amenity space (2,000 square feet).
The proposed project would provide a total of approximately 67,138 square feet of open space, which includes 21,997 square feet of private open space, 20,634 square feet of common open space, and 24,507 square feet of public open space. Private open space includes balconies. Common open space (for residential use) would be provided in two courtyards (on the ground floor along Pacific Coast Highway and one along Studebaker Road) and the 10,498-square-foot pool deck on the roof. Public open space would be provided on the ground floor in a view corridor along the north side of the project site, two courtyards (one along Pacific Coast Highway and one along Studebaker Road), and a plaza.
Ground level open space would include bench seating, covered outdoor dining space, fire pit, recreation turf, game lawn, media wall, patio, outdoor games, outdoor barbeque counter, fountain, planters, seating areas, string lights, art sculpture, and dog run. Common open space on the roof level would include a pool/spa, pool fencing, showers, a bar, cabanas/umbrellas, various seating areas, day beds, fire pits, a BBQ counter, a feature wall, trees, and raised planters. The proposed project would be landscaped throughout and provide passive open spaces around the proposed building.
E
D
T
D
WETLAND LIMITS
W
WETLAND LIMIT
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
WETL
WETLAND AREA
WL
WL
WL
WL
WL
WL
WL
WL
AD
30 48
SIDE
APPROACH
+54" MAX. A.F.S.
30 48
SIDE
APPROACH
+54" MAX. A.F.S.
###2
000
8'-6" x 18'-0"
###2
000
8'-6" x 18'-0"
###2
000
8'-6" x 18'-0"
###
ELEC. VEHICLE
CHARGING
9'-0" x 18'-0
2 000
###
ELEC. VEHICLE
CHARGING
9'-0" x 18'-0
2 000
ED
AD
AD
AD
30 48
SIDE
APPROACH
+54" MAX. A.F.S.
30 48
SIDE
APPROACH
+54" MAX. A.F.S.
ED ED
<6.25%
RAMP UP
<6.25%
ED
OTIS GEN3
3500 LB / 350 FPM
5'-6" PIT
15'-1" OVERRUN
9'-9" CAB HEIGHT
100' MAX. TRAVEL
NO PIT LADDER RECESS REQ'D
OTIS GEN3
4500 LB / 350 FPM
5'-6" PIT
13'-7" OVERRUN
7'-9" CAB HEIGHT
150' MAX. TRAVEL
NO PIT LADDER RECESS REQ'D
AD
STEP
STEP
STANDPIPE
STANDPIPE
UP 23R
STANDPIPE
STANDPIPE
STANDPIPE
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
6P
4C16D-6PCS
6P
4C16D-6PCS
6P
4C16D-6PCS
6P
4C16D-6PCS
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
6P
4C16D-6PCS
6P
4C16D-6PCS
6P
4C16D-6PCS
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
20M+2P
4C16D-20
PULL SECTION MAIN
SECTION
DISTR.
SECTION
WIRE
WAY
DISTR.
SECTION
TI
MAIN
TI
METERING
CORNER
SECTION
GARAGE
MAIN
UTILITY
PULL
FIRE PUMP
HOUSE
LOADS
HOUSE
METER &
MAIN
CORNER
SECTION
10.416 FFE
SLOPE DOWN
(2% MAX)
REF
REF REF
JT
REF
REF REF REF
REF REF REF
REF REF
REF REF
REF
ELECTRICAL
ROOM
ELECTRICAL
ROOM
10.00 FFE
10.25 FFE
SLOPE DOWN
1.0% (2% MAX)
RUN = 25.00'
RISE = 0.25'
14.50 FFE
OTIS GEN3
3500 LB / 350 FPM
5'-6" PIT
15'-1" OVERRUN
9'-9" CAB HEIGHT
100' MAX. TRAVEL
NO PIT LADDER RECESS REQ'D
20 15 10 5
SERVES 34 UNITS
LEVELS 1 & 2
MSA-N1
25 30 34
20 15 10 5
SERVES 32 UNITS
LEVELS 1 & 2
MSA-E1
32 29 25
PULL SECTION MAIN SECTION DISTR. SECTION WIRE WAY DISTR. SECTION 20 15 10 5
SERVES 30 UNITS
LEVELS 1 & 2
MSA-W1
30 25
16 - BIKE
RACK
16 - BIKE
RACK
16 - BIKE
RACK
16 - BIKE
RACK
T
T
T
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
VIEW
CORRIDOR
7,886 SQ. FT.
COURTYARD
1 5,149 SQ. FT.
COURTYARD
2 3,701 SQ. FT.
RETAIL
5,351 SQ. FT.
CLUBROOM
3,496 SQ. FT.
LEASING
1,573 SQ. FT.
MAIL
1,144 SQ. FT. LOBBY CONCIERGE
1,182 SQ. FT.
FITNESS
3,090 SQ. FT.
COURTYARD
4 6,435 SQ. FT.
COURTYARD
3 3,042 SQ. FT.
AMENITY 1
2,000 SQ. FT.
26'-0"
77'-4"
66'-7"
77'-4"
62'-6"
175'-1"
102'-4"
190'-7"
272'-10"
117'-11"
72'-2"
234'-11"
83'-7"
52'-3" 82'-2" 64'-10" 159'-9"
436'-4"
423'-7"
5'-8" 86'-10" 72'-0" 136'-11" 44'-10"
7'-8"
2'-5"
2'-1"
1'-3"
4'-11"
11'-5"
10'-11"
32'-8"
6'-6"
13'-2"
5'-9"
4'-8"
26'-0"
24'-0"
24'-0"
18'-0"
8'-6" 8'-6" 8'-6"
18'-0"
9'-0"
9'-0"
18'-0" 24'-0" 18'-0"
24'-0" 15'-0" 8'-0"
24'-6"
10'-0"
SETBACK LINE
14'-6"
14'-6"
STEP BACK LINE
10'-0"
4'-6"
STUDEBAKER ROAD
PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY A3
A1
PASEO LANDSCAPE 6' BUFFER FROM FIRE LANE
LOADING
ELEC.
RM
ELEC.
RM
ELEC.
RM
GARAGE
ENTRY
FIRE ACCESS
PASSAGE
ENTRY
DRIVE
A5
A3
A3
A3
A3
A5
A5
A5A5
A3 A6
A3
A3
A3
A3
U1
B3
B2 B2
B2
B2 B2
B4
B4
B2 B2 B4
A6
U1
A5.1
U1
B2
U1
U1
A6
U1 U1
A5A6
C1
U1 B4
A6
B4B4
5'
5'-5"
5'
5'-9"
8'
6'
6'-9"
5'-6"
9'-5"
6'-3"
7'-6"
8'
5'
LIMIT OF WORK
10'-0"
10'-0"
SITE PLAN A1.2
NORTH
1"=30'-0"
0 15' 30' 60' 90'
100' WETLAND BUFFER
LEGEND
CORNER VISIBILITY TRIANGLE
10' UPPER LEVEL STEP-BACK
SETBACK LINE & PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT
Source: AO Architects, 2023.
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
75 Figure 5 - Site Plan
1. Introduction
100’ Wetland Buff er10’ Upper Floor SetbackSetback Line & Public Access EasementCorner Visibility Triangle Project Boundary
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
LEVEL 2
(25.41')
LEVEL 1
(12.33')
LEVEL 3
(35.60')
LEVEL 4
(45.68')
LEVEL 5
(55.77')
LEVEL 6
(65.85')
13'-1" 10'-2
1 4
" 10'-1" 10'-1" 10'-1" 11'-1" 3'-0"
12.38' TOC
AVG ELEV
± 67'-7" (85' MAX)
AVERAGE ROOF SURFACE
8.90' LOWEST
FIRE DEPT ACCESS
LEVEL 2
(25.41')
LEVEL 1
(12.33')
LEVEL 3
(35.60')
LEVEL 4
(45.68')
LEVEL 5
(55.77')
LEVEL 6
(65.85')
13'-1" 10'-2
1 4
" 10'-1" 10'-1" 10'-1" 11'-1" 3'-0" ± 73'-03 4" (75' MAX)
FF AMENITY DECK
23'-2"
RETAIL HEIGHT (FTF) 12.38' TOC AVG ELEV
± 67'-7" (85' MAX)
AVERAGE ROOF SURFACE
8.90' LOWEST
FIRE DEPT ACCESS
A2.6
SOUTH ELEVATION 2
NORTH ELEVATION 1 KEY MAP
NORTH
N.T.S.
STUDEBAKER RD
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
2 1 SEASP CHAPTER 8.2.14 BIRD-SAFE TREATMENT
- ULTRA-VIOLET GLASS (PROJECT PROPOSES SOLARBAN 90 (2) + CLEAR OR EQUAL WHICH REFLECTS 92% OF UV LIGHT)
- GLAZING WITH LESS THAN 30 PERCENT COEFFICIENT "REFLECTIVITY OUT" (SOLARBAN 90 (2) + CLEAR VISIBLE LIGHT REFLECTANCE OF 12%) - USE OF RECESSED BALCONIES TO CAST SHADOWS- USE OF PROJECTING BALCONIES TO CAST SHADOWS
TRANSMITTANCE REFERS TO LIGHT THAT
PASSES THROUGH. WHAT DOES NOT GET
TRANSMITTED (PASS THROUGH) GETS
REFLECTED BACK OUT. REFER TO IMAGE ON
LEFT. SOLARBAN 90 (2) + CLEAR TRANSMITS 8%
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
35 Figure 6a - Elevations - South and North
1. Introduction
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Source: AO Architects, 2023.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
LEVEL 2
(25.41')
LEVEL 1
(12.33')
LEVEL 3
(35.60')
LEVEL 4
(45.68')
LEVEL 5
(55.77')
LEVEL 6
(65.85')
13'-1" 10'-21
4" 10'-1" 10'-1" 10'-1" 11'-1" 3'-0"
12.38' TOC
AVG ELEV
8.90' LOWEST
FIRE DEPT ACCESS
± 67'-7" (85' MAX)
AVERAGE ROOF SURFACE
LEVEL 2
(25.41')
LEVEL 1
(12.33')
LEVEL 3
(35.60')
LEVEL 4
(45.68')
LEVEL 5
(55.77')
LEVEL 6
(65.85')
13'-1" 10'-21
4" 10'-1" 10'-1" 10'-1" 11'-1" 3'-0"
23'-2"
RETAIL HEIGHT (FTF) 12.38' TOC AVG ELEV
± 67'-7" (85' MAX)
AVERAGE ROOF SURFACE
8.90' LOWEST
FIRE DEPT ACCESS WEST ELEVATION
4 EAST ELEVATION
3 A2 7
KEY MAP
NORTH
N.T.S.
STUDEBAKER RD
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
4 3
1 2
1. PERFORATED METAL
SCREEN
2. BIRD CONTROL PROTECTIVE
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
35 Figure 6b - Elevations - West and East
1. Introduction
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Source: AO Architects, 2023.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
July 2023 Page 21
1.4.1.4 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
The proposed project would contain a modern design and contain one six-story building with a roof deck and one level of partial subterranean parking. The parking structure would be located on the east side of the building and would be hidden from view from Pacific Coast Highway and Studebaker Road. The proposed building would include varying building heights, including two stories (23-feet-2-inches) of retail at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Studebaker Road. The proposed project’s max height shall be six stories (73-feet1-inches above grade at the amenity deck). SEASP would allow for a residential development adjacent to Pacific Coast highway a maximum of five stories; however, with the incorporation of affordable housing, the proposed project would seek a waiver to allow a maximum allowable building height of 91 feet and eight and a half inches measured to the highest vertical component of the amenity deck (see Section 1.4.6, Project Approvals, below).
The proposed project would include a pedestrian-scale design with the ground-floor having a distinct façade treatment from the stories above. Additionally, the façade of the retail development would be mirrored across the development for a consistent architectural design.
The proposed building would use a variety of architectural materials such as a light sand finish stucco, metal cladding, vinyl windows, metal awning, aluminum storefront window, soffit panels wood finish, metal railing, wood lap siding (fiber cement) and glass railings with metal framing. Building façade and openings would be designed to meet the requirements of SEASP 8.3.14, Bird-Safe Treatments. See Figure 6a, Elevations – South and North, and Figure 6b, Elevations – West and East. The proposed project would be designed to meet United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification. The proposed project would include lighting throughout the project site for safety, wayfinding, and accent lighting.
1.4.2 Vehicle Access and Parking
The proposed project would provide a total of 576 parking stalls comprised of 456 residential stalls, 98 residential guest stalls, and 22 commercial stalls. The proposed project would provide the required amount of parking. Of the 576 parking stalls, 144 stalls would be electric vehicle charging station (EVCS) capable stalls (5 percent of these stalls – eight stalls – would have the charging equipment installed). The proposed project would provide a total of 196 bicycle parking stalls. The vehicle parking would be including in the partial subterranean level through the sixth level. Vehicle access would be provided via one ingress-egress driveway off Studebaker Road entering the first level. The view corridor along the northern portion of the project site would also serve as a dedicated emergency access only fire lane.
1.4.3 Right-of-Way Improvements
The proposed project includes the improvements to Pacific Coast Highway along the west side of the project site and to the terminus of Studebaker Road (public roadway) along the southern side of the project site (including a portion of the existing Pumpkin Patch site within the Studebaker Road public right of way, see Figure 3). On Pacific Coast Highway, the proposed project would construct a curb between the existing bicycle lane and the vehicle travel lane and construct a new bus turn out near the current bus stop. The proposed project would construct roadway improvements within the Studebaker Road existing public right-of-way to include a center median, sidewalk, and bicycle lane. Vehicular access would be provided from the Studebaker M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
Road right-of-way to the parcel with APN 7237-020-041. A round-about feature would be installed at the terminus of Studebaker Road. An ingress-egress driveway would extend north from the round-about to provide access to the existing parking lot to the northeast of the project site. The driveway would extend onto parcel APN 7237-020-041, east of the proposed building. Studebaker Roadway improvements would provide access to the existing office building on the parcel to the east of the project site and the existing parking lot to the northeast of the project site. A curb and gutter would be constructed along the sides of Studebaker Road and Shopkeeper Road that front the project site as well as a curb along the side of Pacific Coast Highway that fronts the project site.
The proposed project would be sited and designed to allow for the future completion of Shopkeeper Road connection at the rear of the property when this is undertaken in the future in conformance with the SEASP policies (not a part of the project).
Off
1.4.4 Stormwater Improvements and Utilities Connections The proposed project would connect to existing underground utilities that currently serve the project site. A Low Impact Development (LID) Feasibility Screening report was prepared for the proposed project (see Appendix F). The report determined that due to project site constraints, such as groundwater and geologic conditions, stormwater infiltration and capture and use would not be feasible for the proposed project. Further, biofiltration was also found to be infeasible because the size of the planter box that would be needed would occupy 8 percent of the site area and obstruct fire access paths and amenity areas. For these reasons, the proposed project would instead implement flow-based Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) measures (i.e., pretreatment filters) and pay the City off-site runoff mitigation fees at $3.00 per square foot of non-infiltrated or non-treated stormwater to the City of Long Beach’s Stormwater Pollution Abatement Fund.
1.4.5 Construction
The proposed project would be constructed in one phase, which would last approximately 40 months.
Construction activities would include the demolition of existing buildings (6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway), parking areas, and associated landscaping; site preparation; grading; utility trenching; building construction; asphalt/concrete paving; architectural coating; and finishings/landscaping.
1.4.6 Project Approvals
1.4.6.1 CITY OF LONG BEACH
Implementation of the proposed project would require the following discretionary and ministerial project approvals from Long Beach:
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
July 2023 Page 23
Discretionary Approvals
▪ Site Plan Review (Planning Commission): Design review process established to meet certain community goals which are, among others, to ensure that the highest quality of land planning and design are incorporated into development projects.
▪ Lot Line Adjustment: Subdivision action to adjust the boundary between two (2) or more adjacent lots where the land taken from one (1) lot is added to an adjacent lot, and where a greater number of lots than originally existed is not thereby created.
▪ Lot Merger: Subdivision action to consolidate two (2) or more contiguous recorded lots. ▪ Sign Program: Design review to ensure that all signs on a subject property are of complementary style and design and are compatible with the architecture and theme of the property. ▪ Local Coastal Development Permit: Coastal permit to ensure that all public and private development in the Long Beach Coastal Zone is developed consistent with the City’s certified local coastal program.
Additional Approvals
▪ Density Bonus, incentive, and waivers granted pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915), including but not limited to:
o 20 percent density bonus.
o Incentive, Building Massing, would allow the proposed project to include one building in lieu of multiple buildings encouraged by the SEASP.
o Waiver 1, Maximum Building Height, would allow increased building height to a maximum height of 91 feet and eight and a half inches to allow for the sixth floor and rooftop amenities. o Waiver 2, Building Story Requirements, would allow the proposed building to exceed the building height requirements along Pacific Coast Highway (limited to 5 stories) and Shopkeeper Road (limited to 3 stories).
o Waiver 3, Building Story Requirements along Shopkeeper Road Fronting Wetlands, would allow the project to include six stories adjacent to Shopkeeper Road fronting the wetlands. o Waiver 4, Building Story Requirements: Variety of Heights, would allow the project to include additional height variations.
▪ California Department of Transportation Encroachment Permit for roadway improvements within the Pacific Coast Highway public right-of-way.
▪ City of Long Beach Department of Public Works Right-of-Way Improvement Permit for roadway improvements within the City of Long Beach public right-of-way. ▪ Other ministerial actions as needed to allow for the construction and operation of the proposed project, including but not limited to grading permit.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
1.4.6.2 OTHER AGENCY ACTIONS REQUESTED
State and Regional Agencies
▪ Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES permit; construction stormwater runoff permits, Storm Drain MS4 Permit)
▪ South Coast Air Quality Management District – Rule 201: Permit to construct
1.5 SEASP BUILDOUT AND DENSITY
Projects must be consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which EIR was certified to qualify for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. Development intensity for the Mixed-Use Community Core (MU-CC) designation is established by Section 6.2I of the SEASP. Mixed-Use Community Core blocks are allowed a maximum of 2.0 FAR (except for overnight visitor-serving accommodations) across each MU-CC block. FAR is measured by dividing the gross floor area of all the buildings located in the MU-CC block by the total gross area of the lots or parcels of land that comprise each MU-CC block. The proposed project’s block is defined by the “entirety of the mixed-use area bounded by 2nd Street, Pacific Coast Highway, Studebaker Road, and Shopkeeper” (Long Beach 2017a). As shown in Table 2, MU-CC Block FAR, the Block FAR with the proposed project is 0.45.
Table 2 MU-CC Block FAR
Block Parcel APN
Square Footage of
Block
Existing Building
Square Footage to
Remain
Proposed Project
Gross Square Feet FAR
Entirety of the mixed-use
area bounded by 2
nd
Street, Pacific Coast
Highway, Studebaker
Road, and Shopkeeper
7237-020-0221
1,237,406 square
feet
127,651 square
feet
429,835 square
feet3
0.45 7237-020-0241
7237-020-0511
7237-020-9041
7237-020-050
7237-020-040
7237-020-0412
Source: Los Angeles County 2023
1 Not a part of the project site.
2 Partially onsite
3 Based on Long Beach Municipal Code Section 21.15.1090 (Floor area ratio).
As discussed in Section 1.3, the proposed project is one of the first projects being proposed within the SEASP and would be within the buildout anticipated for the SEASP area. Table 3, Southeast Area Specific Plan Remaining Capacity, shows the remaining buildout capacity available after the implementation of the proposed project.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
July 2023 Page 25
Table 3 Southeast Area Specific Plan Remaining Capacity Adopted SEASP
Net Increase1
Remaining
Capacity with
other SEASP
Projects3
Demolish/
Remove Proposed Project
Remaining
Balance
Dwelling Units 2,547 1,666 -- 390 1,276
Commercial/Employment
(SF) 307,071 442,703 61,493 5,351 498,845
Hotel Rooms 0 0 -- 0 0
Acres2 0 0 -- 0 0
Source: Long Beach 2017a & 2017b.
1 Population and employees change over time and are closely tied with square footage and dwelling units. Therefore, for tracking purposes of buildout capacity, population and employees are not included.
2 The SEASP area will remain the same, no change to acreage. 3 Other projects include 6500 and 6700 Pacific Coast Highway M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2023 Page 27
2. Environmental Checklist
2.1 PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Project Title: Marketplace Mixed-Use Project at 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Long Beach
Development Services Department
411 W. Ocean Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Long Beach, California 90802
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Maryanne Cronin, Planner
562-570-5683
4. Project Location:
The project site is located at 6615-6695 East Pacific Coast Highway in the City of Long Beach in Los Angeles County, which is surrounded by the cities of Los Angeles, Carson, Compton, Paramount, Bellflower, Lakewood, Hawaiian Gardens, Signal Hill, Seal Beach, Alamitos, and Cypress and unincorporated communities in Los Angeles and Orange Counties (see Figure 1, Regional Location). Pacific Coast Highway, which borders the project site to the west, provides primary regional and local access to the project site. Regional access to the project site is also provided by State Route (SR) 22, SR-19, Interstate (I) 405, and I-605. Local access is also provided by Studebaker Road to the south of the project site. The project site is located in the southeast side of the City and of the SEASP area, near the border with Orange County. The project site encompasses private property and public right-of-way (approximately 253,636 square feet or approximately 5.8 acres) and is comprised of two full parcels with assessor parcel numbers (APN) 7237-020-040 and -050, a portion of parcel with APN 7237-020-041, the sidewalk and bike lane along Pacific Coast Highway, and Studebaker Road rightof-way. The project site for the development of the mixed-use project is 3.7 acres in size.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
1000 Sansome Street, 1st Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
6. General Plan Designation: Land Use District (LUD) No. 7 (Mixed‐Uses) (based on LCP)
7. Zoning: Specific Plan 2, Mixed‐Use Community Core (SP‐2‐MUCC)
8. Description of Project:
The project applicant proposes to demolish the two existing office buildings and associated parking and landscape areas located at 6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway and construct a seven-level mixed‐use development that would include one partially subterranean level, six stories above grade, and a roof deck. The M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
2. Environmental Checklist
proposed project would be approximately 645,045 gross square feet (or 429,835 square feet, not including parking). The proposed project would include 390 dwelling units, 17 of which will be reserved as very lowincome housing units, and 5,351 square feet of ground-floor commercial. The proposed project would include a total of 12,485 of indoor amenity space and 67,138 square feet of open space. The proposed project also includes public right-of-way improvements to the terminus of Studebaker Road immediately south of the proposed mixed-use development, which would include a new center median, sidewalk, bicycle lane, and roundabout. Along Pacific Coast Highway, the proposed project would construct a curb between the existing bicycle lane and the vehicle travel lane and construct a new bus turn out near the current bus stop.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The project site is surrounded by commercial uses and open space. All surrounding properties of the project site are within the SEASP area. The commercial properties to the north and east (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway) of the project site are within the SEASP MU-CC designation and in LUD No. 7 of the 1989 General Plan Land Use Element. The Los Cerritos Wetlands to the northeast of the project site are designated as Coastal Habitat/Wetlands/Recreation (CHWR) in the SEASP and were previously in an area of deferred assignment/certification. The Pumpkin Patch site south of the project site, has a SEASP designation of Industrial (I) and in LUD No. 7 of the 1989 General Plan Land Use Element.
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participating agreement):
• Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES permit; construction stormwater runoff permits, Storm Drain MS4 Permit)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District – Rule 201: Permit to construct • California Department of Transportation Encroachment Permit for roadway improvements within the Pacific Coast Highway public right-of-way.
• City of Long Beach Department of Public Works Right-of-Way Improvement Permit for roadway improvements within the City of Long Beach public right-of-way.
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.94 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3I contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
A compliance checklist consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning, was prepared for the proposed project to show consistency with the SEASP and SEASP EIR. Tribal consultation consistent with AB52 and SB18 were performed during the SEASP and SEASP EIR. No further tribal consultation is required. The proposed project would implement identified M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
2. Environmental Checklist
July 2023 Page 29
mitigation measures related to archaeological resources, including Mitigation Measures CUL-3 through CUL-6. Mitigation Measure CUL-4 requires that the City notifies the three Native American tribal representatives that who requested Native American monitoring of ground-disturbing activities. For each project, the project applicant would retain one certified Native American monitor who would accompany the professional archaeological monitor during on-call monitoring.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
2. Environmental Checklist
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture / Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
2.3 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
7/10/23
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
2. Environmental Checklist
July 2023 Page 31
2.4 FORMAT AND EVALUATION OF IMPACTS
2.4.1 Format for this Environmental Compliance Checklist The SEASP Program EIR (PEIR) analyzed potential environmental impacts of the implementation of the SEASP in accordance with the Environmental Checklist Form included in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The PEIR included a “full scope” EIR. The PEIR evaluated a total of 17 environmental topics, including aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems. The PEIR analyzed the potential impacts of the buildout and growth anticipated with the implementation of SEASP (see Table 1, Southeast Area Specific Plan Land Use Summary). The buildout of the SEASP would generate a net increase of 2,547 dwelling units, 307,071 square feet of commercial/employment uses, and no hotel rooms. The cumulative impacts of past, present, and probable future development associated with the SEASP were evaluated in the PEIR.
This Compliance Checklist analyzes the proposed project in light of the approved project (the SEASP), the certified PEIR, and its mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). The analysis in this Environmental Compliance Checklist will include all environmental topics analyzed in the PEIR prepared for the PEIR along with the energy and wildfire topics which were added to the Environmental Checklist after the certification of the PEIR. Each environmental topic is structured with a PEIR Summary, a discussion of existing conditions, and an analysis for each threshold. Each threshold conclusions with a statement of the level of significance of the threshold. Included in the analysis is a determination if the mitigation measures identified in the PEIR are applicable to the proposed project, and whether there are any additional impacts not previously evaluated in the PEIR, which would therefore require the implementation of revised mitigation measures.
Components of certain mitigation measures identified in the PEIR are not applicable to this project, and therefore have been shown as stricken.
CEQA Section 21083.3 and Guidelines Section 15183, Project Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning, mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. As such, this Environmental Compliance Checklist answers the following questions consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183:
▪ Are there environmental effects peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located? ▪ Are there environmental effects that were not analyzed as significant effects in the SEASP PEIR? ▪ Are there potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the SEASP PEIR?
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
2. Environmental Checklist
▪ Are there previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the SEASP PEIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the SEASP PEIR?
2.4.1.1 SOURCES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The following sources are incorporated by reference into this compliance checklist. ▪ Long Beach General Plan
▪ Long Beach Municipal Code
▪ Southeast Area Specific Plan
▪ Southeast Area Specific Plan certified EIR and adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
2.4.2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063I(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
2. Environmental Checklist
July 2023 Page 33
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
July 2023 Page 34
3. Environmental Analysis
This section provides an evaluation of the impact categories and questions contained in the checklist and identifies mitigation measures, if applicable.
3.1 AESTHETICS
Issues
SEASP PEIR
Determination
Are there
environmental
effects peculiar to
the project or the
parcel on which
the project would
be located?
Are there
environmental
effects that were
not analyzed as
significant effects
in the SEASP
PEIR?
Are there
potentially
significant offsite impacts and
cumulative
impacts which
were not
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
Are there
previously
identified
significant effects
which, as a result
of substantial
new
information which
was not known at
the time the
SEASP PEIR was
certified, are
determined to
have a more
severe adverse
impact than
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant
Impact
no no no no
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less than
Significant
Impact
no no no no
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than
Significant
Impact
no no no no
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Less than
Significant
Impact
no no no no
SEASP PEIR SUMMARY
The PEIR analyzed views through the SEASP area from 2nd Street, Studebaker Road, and Pacific Coast Highway. Studebaker Road offers distant views of the San Gabriel Mountains and closer views of the Los M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 35
Cerritos Wetlands. Wetland restoration activities promoted by the SEASP and landscape buffers (for industrial uses) would reduce visual obstructions.
The PEIR determined that scenic views visible from the Pacific Coast Highway corridor are generally obstructed by commercial buildings, ornamental trees, signage, and other elements of the urban environment.
Views of Alamitos Bay are visible from Marina Drive south of Pacific Coast Highway, but these views are substantially obstructed by boats in the marina. The most generous views of the Los Cerritos Wetlands visible from the Pacific Coast Highway corridor are found where Pacific Coast Highway crosses the Los Cerritos Channel. Elsewhere, views of the wetlands are generally blocked by retail and office buildings in the Marketplace shopping center. Upon buildout of the SEASP, the Pacific Coast Highway corridor would experience the most change in land uses and building intensity, including the introduction of pedestrianoriented mixed uses, a modified street scene along Pacific Coast Highway, and buildings up to seven stories tall.
Because no view corridors currently exist along this segment of Pacific Coast Highway (between 2nd Street and the San Gabriel River), impacts of the SEASP’s implementation would be beneficial.
The PEIR determined that the majority of the SEASP area would experience little to no change in visible appearance upon buildout of the Specific Plan. Scenic views from major roadways traversing the SEASP area would either be unchanged or improved due to 1) future restoration activities and consolidation of oil extraction infrastructure as encouraged by the SEASP, 2) preservation of roadway alignments that offer distant views of the San Gabriel Mountains, and 3) the required introduction of new view corridors in the portion of the SEASP area that would experience the most new urban development. Upon implementation of the SEASP, adverse impacts to existing scenic views would be less than significant.
The PEIR determined that the SEASP would not adversely impact scenic resources along Pacific Coast Highway. Buildout of the SEASP would generally result in new or intensified urban uses in areas that already feature urban uses that obstruct—or partially obstruct—scenic views from Pacific Coast Highway. Urban uses would not be allowed in areas that currently feature expansive horizontal planes of vision offering views of scenic resources from Pacific Coast Highway, except for the “Pumpkin Patch” site (across Pacific Coast Highway from the project site). However, eastward views of the Los Cerritos Wetlands and San Gabriel Mountains from the “Pumpkin Patch” site are already obstructed by commercial buildings and trees in the foreground and the Haynes Generating Station. Because Pacific Coast Highway is not an officially designed scenic highway in the SEASP area, and because buildout of the SEASP would concentrate new development and redevelopment in areas that already feature urban uses, adverse impacts to scenic views visible from a state scenic highway would be minimal. Furthermore, development standards and design guidelines in the SEASP include provisions aimed at protecting existing viewsheds and promoting the creation of new “water and wetlands” view corridors along PCH. Impacts related to state scenic highways would be less than significant.
The buildout of the SEASP would alter and intensify development in the SEASP area, but would not adversely impact the existing visual appearance of the SEASP area. The proposed MU-CC designation along the Pacific Coast Highway (where the project site is located) would affect the existing commercial corridor that includes the Marina Pacific Mall, Marketplace, Seaport Marina Hotel, and Marina Shores shopping center. This area is envisioned as the primary activity center in the SEASP area and provides for a mix of uses including residential, regional retail, hotel, and office uses. The focus of this designation is on creating a pedestrian scale environment, M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
including increased connectivity, gathering spaces, and linkages to the marina and wetlands. Because the MU-CC and the Mixed-Use Marina designations would allow the greatest intensification of land uses—including buildings up to seven stories in some locations—and the greatest flexibility for future development, the parcels along Pacific Coast Highway would be expected to see the greatest change in physical appearance and community character over time as parcels are redeveloped. However, the proposed SEASP contains numerous development standards and design guidelines designed to maintain a consistent and aesthetically pleasing community character along the Pacific Coast Highway corridor. The guidelines have been designed to preserve the SEASP area’s unique identity. In particular, the design standards and guidelines focus on creating view corridors from Pacific Coast Highway to the area’s waterways, creating streetscapes that offer visual interest, and ensuring that buildings “step back” from scenic amenities and community edges. Compliance with these standards and guidelines would ensure that any change in visual appearance along the Pacific Coast Highway corridor would reflect the existing community character and maritime atmosphere of the SEASP area.
Therefore, the SEASP determined that aesthetic impacts along the Pacific Coast Highway corridor would be less than significant.
The SEASP area is highly urbanized and built out, and there are many existing sources of nighttime illumination. The buildout of the SEASP would alter and intensify land uses and their related lighting sources in the area by introducing new buildings (with both interior and exterior lighting), security, signage, and parking lights. In addition to necessary lighting for safety and security, the SEASP would also introduce aesthetic lighting, such as illumination of areas within the neighborhood commercial areas (e.g., Bixby Plaza and Marina Plaza) and the mixed-use core area (e.g., Marina Pacific Mall, Seaport Marina Hotel, Marketplace, and Marina Shores) for architectural and façade detailing. Additional sources of glare could also be introduced through the project area in the form of large expanses of glazing (i.e., glass windows) and building materials (e.g., reflective metal treatments). In order to ensure that new development in the SEASP area does not generate excessive light and glare, the SEASP includes design guidelines aimed at reducing the impacts of light and glare on adjacent land uses. In addition, future development projects would be required to adhere to the lighting standards outlined in the Long Beach Municipal Code (LBMC). Overall, lighting and glare impacts associated with buildout of the SEASP would not substantially increase nighttime light and glare in the SEASP area or its surroundings. Compliance with components of the SEASP and the LBMC would ensure that development in the SEASP area would not produce a substantial increase in light or glare. Light and glare impacts would be less than significant.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site is developed with a two two-story office building, the Studebaker Road right-of-way, and the eastern portion of the Pacific Coast Highway along the project site. It is also developed with surface parking and limited landscaping throughout in an urbanized environment and is surrounded by urban uses (see Section
1.2, Environmental Setting, above). Because of the urban context and current development on-site, sources of light and glare already exist on the project site (i.e., light posts in the parking lots on-site, security lighting around the building, accent lighting, light emanating for windows, and vehicle headlights from vehicles in the parking lots) and surrounding uses (e.g., street lights and headlights along Pacific Coast Highway, Studebaker Road, and Marina Drive; vehicle headlights along roadways and in parking lots; light posts in parking lots on surrounding properties; security and accent lighting on surrounding properties; and light emanating from windows). Existing M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 37
glare sources include sunlight and light reflecting off of light-colored building materials, windows, and vehicles on-site; surrounding properties; and along public rights-of-way.
Although the adjacent “Pumpkin Patch Site” is currently a vacant site and does not regularly emit light and glare, it is used occasionally for events and holidays where light posts, security lighting, and event lighting are used. The Pumpkin Patch site is also located in a highly urbanized area and surrounded by existing lighting and glare sources.
The SEASP identifies the Los Cerritos Wetlands, to the northeast of the project site, as a view opportunity area. According to the SEASP, projects are required to create public views to these areas through project design, building orientation, roadway configuration and other design techniques. The PEIR identifies the Los Cerritos Wetlands as a visual feature.
Pacific Coast Highway, adjacent to the project site, is listed as an eligible scenic route. The eligible portion extends from the Traffic Circle (Route 19) on its northwestern end to San Juan Capistrano where Pacific Coast Highway intersects with Interstate 5. The closest officially designated scenic highway is State Highway 91, approximately 17.5 miles northeast of the project site (Caltrans 2023).
The PEIR identifies six gateways into the SEASP area. The south gateway is Pacific Coast Highway on the south side of the SEASP area where it intersects with San Gabriel River, adjacent to the project site.
The SEASP establishes development standards for the MU-CC designation in Section 6.2 and Design Standards and Guidelines in Chapter 8.
DISCUSSION
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The project site is to the southwest of the Los Cerritos Wetlands, an identified view opportunity/visual feature.
However, public views of the Los Cerritos wetlands through the project site are already obstructed by existing commercial buildings, landscaping, and the commercial building at 6621 Pacific Coast Highway. Since the project site is currently developed, limited scenic views of the Los Cerritos Wetlands are currently visible looking across the project site from Pacific Coast Highway. These limited views of the Los Cerritos Wetlands can be seen looking across the northern portion of the project site across existing surface parking lots. However, this view is hindered by existing landscaping and development. The proposed project would retain a view corridor, consistent with the SEASP, along the emergency-only access lane on the northern portion of the project site, where the existing view occurs. Therefore, the proposed project would not obstruct existing views of the Los Cerritos Wetlands.
The right-of-way improvements would include a portion of the Pumpkin Patch site that is within the public right-of-way. The proposed project would not affect views of or from the parcel in which the Pumpkin Patch site is located. Existing trees block views of the Los Cerritos Wetlands from Studebaker Road and the portion of the Pumpkin Patch site within the public right of way. Therefore, the proposed project would not affect views across the Pumpkin Patch site.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
The project site is on the eastside of Pacific Coast Highway, and therefore, development of the proposed project would not hinder views of the San Gabriel River along Pacific Coast Highway (which is located to the south of the project site) nor views of Alamitos Bay from Marina Drive (which are located to the west of the project site).
Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Pacific Coast Highway, adjacent to the project site, is listed as an eligible scenic route. No officially designated state scenic highways are near the project site. The project site is fully developed with office buildings, surface parking, public rights of way, and ornamental landscaping. As discussed under threshold (a) above, the proposed project would not hinder nor obstruct scenic views from the Pacific Coast Highway as buildout of the SEASP is expected to generally result in new or intensified urban uses in areas that already feature urban uses that obstruct—or partially obstruct—scenic views from the Pacific Coast Highway. Development of the proposed project would not damage nor remove significant trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings since none exist onsite (also see Section 3.5, Cultural Resources). The proposed project is on a site with a SEASP designation of MU-CC and is consistent with the MU-CC designation. Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to comply with the development standards and design guidelines in the SEASP, including provisions aimed at protecting existing viewsheds. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR.
The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? The SEASP area and the project site are in an urbanized area. The proposed project is on a site that is designated MU-CC with a zoning designation of Specific Plan 2, Mixed‐Use Community Core (which refers to the SEASP). As discussed under “SEASP PEIR Summary” above, the MU-CC designation is envisioned as the primary activity center in the SEASP area and provides for a mix of uses including residential, regional retail, hotel, and office uses. The focus of this designation is on creating a pedestrian scale environment, including increased connectivity, gathering spaces, and linkages to the marina and wetlands. The proposed project would be consistent with the MU-CC designation and its intent by providing a mixed-use development that includes M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 39
residential and commercial uses, outdoor public spaces, and encourages pedestrian activity along Pacific Coast Highway and Studebaker Road.
The SEASP outlines development standards and design standards for future development within its boundaries, which provides standards for height, setbacks, uses, parking, outdoor space, and building design and form, among others. The proposed project would be required to comply with these standards. As discussed in Section
6.7, General Development Standards, of the SEASP, projects in the MU-CC areas can exceed the maximum building height up to seven stories in certain circumstances. The proposed project would provide a maximum of six stories, which would be allowed pursuant to the State Density Bonus (Government Code Section 65915) and is within the maximum height contemplated by the SEASP. See Section 1.4.6, Project Approvals.
The proposed project would reserve 5 percent of its dwelling units (17 dwelling units) as very low-income affordable units pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law. Under the State Density Bonus Law, the proposed project would be allowed a density bonus, incentives, and waivers as ministerial actions (which are not subject to CEQA). The proposed project is allowed a 20 percent increase in density and waivers discussed in Section
1.4.6, Project Approvals. These allowances supersede the development standards outlined in the SEASP. While the proposed project would exceed the SEASP’s standards for density, height, massing, and building story requirements, the proposed project is ministerially allowed pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law. Further, the proposed project would comply with other applicable standards in the SEASP.
Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
The proposed project would develop a six-story mixed-use building. Compared to the existing office buildings onsite, the proposed development would be a larger and more intense use than the existing office buildings.
Additionally, because the proposed project would include a residential component, persons are expected to be on-site 24 hours a day, whereas an office building would mostly have persons on-site during working hours.
Therefore, compared to the existing use on-site and consistent with the PEIR, the proposed project would generate more light and glare (refer to “SEASP PEIR Summary” above).
As shown in Figure 7, Photometric Plan, light generally decreases outwards from the proposed building. Higher light levels are associated with being near a light source, generally along the proposed building and common open spaces interior to the project site. Light levels along the border of the proposed building range between
14.9 foot-candles near light sources to 0.0 foot-candle. The proposed round-about on Studebaker Road is the portion of the proposed project closest to the Los Cerritos Wetlands. As shown in Figure 7, light levels along Studebaker Road would be 0.0 foot-candles.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
The proposed project would be required to comply with the SEASP design guidelines aimed at reducing the impacts of light and glare. For example, Section 8.3.9 (Site Lighting), Section 8.3.10 (Building Lighting), and Section 8.3.14 (Bird-Safe Treatments), implement lighting and façade treatment requirements for development projects within the SEASP and adjacent to wildlife areas. Further, the proposed project would be required to comply with standards outlined in the LBMC, such as Sections 21.41.259 (Parking Areas, Lighting), 21.44.855 (Light and Glare Intrusion Prevention), and 21.44.600 (Prohibited Signs). Consistent with the SEASP, the proposed project would not substantially increase nighttime light and glare in the SEASP area or its surroundings. Light and glare impacts would be less than significant. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
Calculation Summary
Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/MinRoof Deck Illuminance Fc 2.86 31.2 0.0 N.A. N.A.Site Illuminance Fc 0.60 14.9 0.0 N.A. N.A.
STUDEBAKER ROAD
P
ACIFIC COA S
T HIGH W
AY
RETAIL
FIRE ACCESS
IN / LOADING
MOVEFITNESS
MAIL
BREEZEWAY
CO-WORK
CLUBROOM
ROOM ELECT.
ROOM
ELECT.
ETLAND BOUNDARY 00' W 5
24 P
ACIFIC COA S
T HIGH W
AY
P
ACIFIC COA S
T HIGH W
AY
STUDEBAKER ROAD
LEASING
LOBBY
EVC S
FUTURE VAN
RES
IDENT
FUTURE
RES
IDENT
FUTURE
RES
IDENT
FUTURE
RES
IDENT
2424
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.9 2.0 2.0 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 2.8 2.9 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.5 3.6 1.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.5
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 3.9 4.0 1.7 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 10.8 0.80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 4.0 4.1 1.6 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 6.5 13.6 4.1 0.5
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.9 4.0 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 7.7 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 3.6 0.5 0.30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.6 3.6 3.7 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 5.6 10.0 1.2 3.6 10.6 1.4 3.7 11.8 3.1 0.5
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.2 3.2 3.3 1.2 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.5 0.7 0.6 0.5 1.2 1.2 13.4 0.80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.0 2.5 2.6 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.7 1.9 0.5 0.2 14.3 1.7 0.6 0.7 3.2 0.3 1.2 0.4
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 1.7 1.7 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.1 4.0 12.8 3.2 4.8 11.0 1.4 0.4 0.3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 4.5 0.50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.70.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 1.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.4 1.5 2.9 9.6 12.1 7.8 3.2 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.2 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.5 2.1 1.7 0.9 2.4 2.3 1.5 0.8 1.6 14.9 1.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.4 0.8 0.0 1.5 2.6 1.8 2.4 1.2 1.5 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.7 1.9 0.9 1.0 1.6 0.7 1.1 1.4 1.0 1.9 0.8 2.2 0.50.0 0.1 0.8 9.5 7.0 14.6 5.6 10.5 7.4 9.5 1.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.20.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.0 1.2 1.2 3.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.3 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 2.8 2.2 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 1.0 8.2 3.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.8 1.5 1.9 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.10.0 0.1 0.8 3.3 3.0 2.0 3.8 11.3 5.3 1.2 0.9 0.10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 4.5 1.6 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.2 2.0 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 1.8 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.9 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 4.1 4.0 2.5 1.3 0.7 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.4 1.9 5.2 10.8 8.5 8.6 10.8 7.5 2.9 0.7 0.4 1.4 4.3 9.7 10.1 6.2 5.9 10.7 9.3 4.1 1.0 0.5 1.6 4.6 10.4 9.7 4.3 1.0 0.20.0 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.8 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.7 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.5 1.7 1.4 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.6 1.4 1.3 1.1 0.7 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.019.0 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 1.70.1 14.4 0.1 0.8 8.4 0.0 0.0 7.9 2.4 2.2 3.50.1 15.0 0.1 0.9 8.4 0.0 0.0 8.2 11.7 10.0 10.90.0 14.5 0.1 0.8 8.1 0.0 0.0 8.0 15.2 12.2 14.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 31.20.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Source: Lighting Design Alliance, 2023.
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
100
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Figure 7 - Photometric Plan
3.1. Aesthetics
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 4.2 0.6
0.0 1.2 0.50.0 10.8 0.8
4.1 0.5
0.5 0.33.1 0.513.4 0.81.2 0.40.4 0.3 0
Scale (Feet)
30 STUDEBAKER ROAD
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
This page intentionally left blank.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 43
3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Issues
SEASP PEIR
Determination
Are there
environmental
effects peculiar to
the project or the
parcel on which
the project would
be located?
Are there
environmental
effects that were
not analyzed as
significant effects
in the SEASP
PEIR?
Are there
potentially
significant offsite impacts and
cumulative
impacts which
were not
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
Are there
previously
identified
significant effects
which, as a result
of substantial
new
information which
was not known at
the time the
SEASP PEIR was
certified, are
determined to
have a more
severe adverse
impact than
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact no no no no
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact no no no no
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code Section 51104(g))?
No Impact no no no no
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact no no no no
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact no no no no
SEASP PEIR SUMMARY
The certified PEIR determined that the SEASP area is not designated Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance, and no land in Long Beach is subject to a Williamson Act contract. The City of Long Beach does not have any land zoned as forest land, timberland, nor Timberland Production. The certified EIR determined that the implementation of the SEASP would not convert mapped M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
farmland to nonagricultural use, and no impact would occur to farmland nor agricultural uses. Buildout of the SEASP would have no impact on forestland.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site is entirely developed with two office buildings and surface parking lot. The project site does not contain Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance; Williamson Act contract; nor forest land (DOC 2023a, 2023b; Long Beach 2017b).
DISCUSSION
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
As discussed under “SEASP PEIR Summary” above, the SEASP area, including the project site, does not contain farmland (including Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance), forest land, nor timberland. Additionally, there are no Williamson Act contracts within the SEASP area. The proposed project would not convert farmland, forest land, nor timberland to other nonagricultural uses. The proposed project would not conflict with agricultural nor forestry/timberland zones nor Williamson Act contracts, since none exist on-site nor within the SEASP area.
Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 45
3.3 AIR QUALITY
Issues
SEASP PEIR
Determination
Are there
environmental
effects peculiar to
the project or the
parcel on which
the project would
be located?
Are there
environmental
effects that were
not analyzed as
significant effects
in the SEASP
PEIR?
Are there
potentially
significant offsite impacts and
cumulative
impacts which
were not
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
Are there
previously
identified
significant effects
which, as a result
of substantial
new
information which
was not known at
the time the
SEASP PEIR was
certified, are
determined to
have a more
severe adverse
impact than
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Significant and
Unavoidable
no no no no
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Significant and
Unavoidable
no no no no
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Significant and
Unavoidable
no no no no
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Significant and
Unavoidable
no no no no
SEASP PEIR SUMMARY
The certified PEIR determined that the approved project would result in a potentially significant impact associated with conflict with or obstruction of an air quality plan, result in a cumulative considerable net increase of construction-related and operation-related criteria pollutants, and expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. To address these potential air quality impacts, the certified PEIR required implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-6 and Project Design Features (PDFs) PDF-1 through PDF-9. However, even with PDFs and the incorporation of these mitigation measures, these impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
The certified PEIR determined that the new nonresidential land uses associated with the SEASP would not create significant objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people. Existing and new industrial uses would be required to follow South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD) Rule 402, Nuisance, which would aid to prevent nuisances on sensitive land uses. Therefore, impacts related to objectionable odors would be less than significant.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing two-story office buildings with surface parking lot generates criteria air pollutants from transportation sources, energy generation and delivery (natural gas and purchased energy), and area sources such as landscaping equipment and architectural coatings. As mentioned in Table 12, current land uses generate approximately 615 average daily trips (Fehr & Peers 2023), and therefore generate mobile emissions associated with those existing trips. The nearest off-site sensitive receptors to the project site are the multi-family residential apartments and single-family homes to the south and the single-family homes to the west in the Naples neighborhood.
The PEIR was prepared prior to the adoption of the South Coast AQMD 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The assessment of proposed project impacts is updated to address the 2022 AQMP and evaluates the proposed project against previously disclosed impacts in the PEIR.
SEASP Project Design Features
The PEIR includes the following PDFs that apply to the proposed project, in addition to the SEASP as a whole.
Other PDFs (see Chapter 5.4 of the PEIR) apply to the SEASP area as whole. ▪ PDF-3: Reduced Parking Requirements. Projects in SEASP are eligible for a parking reduction by incorporating Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, pending Site Plan Review approval.
TDM strategies applicable to reduced parking requirements, subject to the discretion of the City’s Development Services Department Director include, but are not limited to:
⚫ Car sharing
⚫ Carpool/vanpool
⚫ Unbundled parking (parking spaces are rented or sold separately, rather than automatically included with the rent or purchase price of a residential or commercial unit) ⚫ Joint use (shared parking)
⚫ Transit, bicycle, and pedestrian system improvements
• Trip reduction incentives to employees, such as free transit passes A “park once” policy shall be promoted for SEASP. Rather than driving from one use to another, visitors are highly encouraged to park once and walk to one or more destinations within the Project area. Similarly, residents and employees are encouraged to walk from residences or workplaces to SEASP destinations.
All parking reduction requirements shall be approved at the discretion of the Development Services Department Director, which will determine the appropriate level of parking demand reduction generated by these strategies on a project-specific basis.
▪ PDF-5: Bicycle Network. Figure 6-2 in the Specific Plan identifies proposed bicycle connections. Bicycle circulation is provided on streets with designated bike lanes, separated bikeways (cycle tracks), and offstreet pathways. These facilities are classified in four bicycle facility classifications:
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 47
• Class I Bikeway (Multiuse Path). Provides a separated corridor that is not served by streets and highways and is away from the influence of parallel streets. Class I bikeways are for nonvehicle use only with opportunities for direct access and recreational benefits, right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, and minimized cross-flow conflicts. SEASP includes a new Class I facility on the north side of the Los Cerritos Channel that would connect Pacific Coast Highway to Loynes Drive if it does not impact sensitive wetlands in the area. A connection is also proposed that would link this route to the existing San Gabriel Bike Trail. • Class II Bikeway (Bike Lanes). Provides a delineated right-of-way assigned to bicyclists to enable more predictable movements, accommodating bicyclists through on-street corridors. New Class II bikeways are proposed along the Shopkeeper Road extension to Pacific Coast Highway, Studebaker Road, and Marina Drive.
• Class III Bikeway (Bike Route). A shared facility (by bikes and vehicles) that provides either continuity with other bicycle facilities or designates preferred routes through high-demand on-street corridors. The existing Class III facility along 2nd Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Studebaker Road is envisioned to be improved as a Class II facility through implementation of this Specific Plan. • Class IV Separated Bikeways (Cycle Track). Provides delineated right-of-way assigned to bicyclists with physical separation from vehicles. This separation can include parked vehicles, bollards, curbs, or any other physical device that provides separation. The most significant change to the bike and roadway network proposed for the SEASP area is the inclusion of two cycle tracks—one along Pacific Coast Highway and the other along Studebaker Road.
▪ PDF-7: Building Placement and Orientation/Heat Gain. SEASP encourages buildings that are oriented for energy efficiency to capture day lighting, minimize heat gain, and take advantage of prevailing breezes for natural ventilation. The SEASP encourages open spaces that are appropriately landscaped and provide adequate shade devices or shade trees to reduce heat island effects. Shade devices include, but are not limited to, umbrellas, awnings, trellises, and canopies that are integrated into the building or over open spaces. Greenroofs, or eco-roofs, are permitted in the Specific Plan area to reduce stormwater runoff, lower energy consumption, and provide spaces for community gardens. SEASP also encourages parking lots that provide sufficient tree coverage to mitigate the heat island effect. Parking structures should also be shaded and/or include photovoltaic arrays on the top deck to reduce heat island effect. ▪ PDF-8: Energy Efficient Lighting. SEASP requires use of low-contrast lighting, low-voltage fixtures, and energy-efficient bulbs, such as compact fluorescent and light emitting diode (LED) bulbs for all outdoor lighting. Additionally, SEASP encourages the use of solar-powered light fixtures. For architectural lighting, use of automatic timers is encouraged to conserve energy at night. Furthermore, the SEASP includes birdsafe measures that would result in energy co-benefits, including requirements for automated on/off systems and motion detectors for interior lighting. The SEASP also encourages building owners to participate in “Lights Out for Birds” programs or similar initiatives by turning off lighting at night.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
▪ PDF-9: Drought-Tolerant Landscaping. Landscaping shall be drought tolerant and feature native wetland plants to create a more seamless transition between the natural wetlands and development. Landscaping for projects (including right-of-way medians) within SEASP shall be consistent with the provisions of Chapter 21.42, Landscape Standards, in the Zoning Code. Landscaping shall be consistent with Title 21 Standards as well. For Mixed-Use Community Core and Mixed-Use Marina, the provisions of Chapter
21.42.040, Landscaping Standards, for R-3, R-4, and Nonresidential Districts shall apply.
DISCUSSION
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The first consistency criterion requires an analysis of whether a project creates or exacerbates an existing air quality violation. As discussed under Air Quality threshold (b) below, the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in magnitude of air quality impacts for construction or operation of the proposed project. Therefore, regional impacts related to air quality violations and AQMP consistency would be less than significant, and the proposed project would not result in new or exacerbated impacts than were disclosed in the PEIR.
The second consistency criterion requires that the project not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP and not interfere with control strategies to attain the ambient air quality standards (AAQS). A project is consistent with the AQMP if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment projections developed by SCAG. These demographic trends are incorporated into SCAG’s 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS or Connect SoCal) to determine priority transportation projects and vehicle miles traveled in the SCAG region (SCAG 2020). Because the AQMP strategy is based on projections from local general plans, projects that are consistent with the local general plan are considered consistent with the air-quality-related regional plan.
The proposed project would replace the two-story office buildings with a new mixed-use building (residential and commercial) in the SEASP area. As discussed below in Section 3.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project is consistent with SEASP’s buildout projections for residential units and commercial square footage. The proposed project would also be consistent with the existing land use designation of Mixed-Use Community Core (MU-CC), and the commercial component would be local serving uses that would not generate substantial regional traffic. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce direct nor indirect substantial unplanned population growth in the City beyond what was analyzed by the PEIR.
Operation of the proposed project would not introduce new employment that would disproportionately contribute to growth accounted for in the 2022 AQMP emissions inventory.
Operation of the proposed project would not interfere with or obstruct implementation of the 2022 AQMP and would not contribute to delaying timely attainment of the air quality standards. Consistent with PEIR, the proposed project would implement applicable PDFs in the PEIR and Mitigation Measures AQ1 through AQ-6. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 49
severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures from the adopted MMRP are applicable to the proposed project. Refer to Appendix A for the full list of mitigation measures associated with the certified PEIR. Any minor modifications and/or project-specific clarifications to the mitigation measures from the certified PEIR are shown are shown with strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text.
AQ-1 Applicants for new development projects within the Southeast Area Specific Plan shall require the construction contractor to use equipment that meets the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 emissions standards for off-road diesel-powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Long Beach that such equipment is not available. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 4 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the California Air Resources Board’s regulations.
Prior to construction, the project engineer shall ensure that all demolition and grading plans clearly show the requirement for EPA Tier 4 or higher emissions standards for construction equipment over 50 horsepower. During construction, the construction contractor shall maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the construction site for verification by the City of Long Beach. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, and numbers of construction equipment onsite. Equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. Construction contractors shall also ensure that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with California Air Resources Board’s Rule 2449.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 is applicable to the proposed project.
AQ-2 Applicants for new development projects within the Southeast Area Specific Plan shall require the construction contractor to prepare a dust control plan and implement the following measures during ground-disturbing activities—in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403—to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. The City of Long Beach shall verify that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. ▪ Following all grading activities, the construction contractor shall reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering.
▪ During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall sweep streets with SCAQMD Rule 1186–compliant, PM10-efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
▪ During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and shall tarp materials with a fabric cover or other cover that achieves the same amount of protection. ▪ During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site and a minimum of three times per day.
▪ During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall limit onsite vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour. ▪ Heavy construction vehicles trips shall be limited to off-peak hours.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure AQ-2 is applicable to the proposed project.
AQ-3 Applicants for new development projects within the Southeast Area Specific Plan shall require the construction contractor to use coatings and solvents with a volatile organic compound (VOC) content lower than required under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113 (i.e., super compliant paints). The construction contractor shall also use precoated/natural-colored building materials, where feasible. Use of low-VOC paints and spray method shall be included as a note on architectural building plans and verified by the City of Long Beach during construction.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure AQ-3 is applicable to the proposed project.
AQ-4 Prior to issuance of a building permit for new development projects within the Southeast Area Specific Plan, the property owner/developer shall show on the building plans that all major appliances (dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers) to be provided/installed are Energy Star appliances and electricity service initially enrolled for the development be sourced from 100 percent renewable sources, such as Southern California Edison’s Green Rate. Installation of Energy Star appliances and enrollment in an applicable electricity service shall be verified by the City of Long Beach prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
In addition, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the property owner/developer shall demonstrate to the City that tenant and landscaping contracts prohibit the use of gasoline-powered equipment, including lawn and garden equipment and outdoor power equipment. As part of the tenant contracts, the property owner/developer shall provide educational materials regarding the South Coast AQMD Electric Lawn and Garden Equipment Incentive and Exchange Program, Commercial Lawn & Garden Battery BuyDown Rebate Program, and Residential Lawn Mower Rebate Program as well as the new requirement of AB 1346.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure AQ-4 is applicable to the proposed project. This mitigation measure is also incorporated into the PEIR Chapter 5.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and has been updated to incorporate the City’s recently adopted Climate Action Plan (LB CAP) and be consistent with the City’s LB CAP GHG M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 51
Reduction Action Consistency Checklist (see Table 8, in Section 3.8 below). Refer to Section 3.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, below for further discussion.
AQ-5 Prior to issuance of building permits for residential development projects within the Southeast Area Specific Plan, the property owner/developer shall indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s). Proper installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Long Beach prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
▪ For multifamily dwellings, electric vehicle charging shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code and the Long Beach Municipal Code.
▪ Bicycle parking shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.9 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure AQ-5 is applicable to the proposed project.
AQ-6 Prior to issuance of building permits for nonresidential development projects within the Southeast Area Specific Plan, the property owner/developer shall indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s).
Proper installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Long Beach prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
▪ For buildings with more than ten tenant-occupants, changing/shower facilities shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.4.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code.
▪ Preferential parking for low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.5.1 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code.
▪ Facilities shall be installed to support future electric vehicle charging and electric vehicle infrastructure to comply with Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code and the Long Beach Municipal Code.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure AQ-6 has been updated to reflect the 2022 CALGreen Code. Mitigation Measure AQ-6 is applicable to the proposed project.
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? The Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB is presently designated nonattainment for both the federal or state ambient air quality standards for lead (Pb), ozone (O3) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The South Coast AQMD published guidance addressing the evaluation of potential cumulative impacts for CEQA projects. The South Coast AQMD asserts that if construction or operation of a project would produce M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
maximum daily emissions exceeding the applicable project-specific thresholds, those emissions would also be considered cumulatively significant and may require mitigation. For this reason, the South Coast AQMD applies the same project-level thresholds to cumulative assessments as a screening approach. Conversely, if construction and operation of a project would not generate emissions of sufficient quantity to exceed any of the applicable mass daily thresholds at either the regional or localized level, then that project and its associated emissions would be considered less than significant in the cumulative context.
Construction
Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources, such as on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Construction of the proposed project would generate criteria air pollutants associated with construction equipment exhaust and fugitive dust from demolition and debris haul, grading and soil haul, utilities trenching, building construction, architectural coating, pavement of asphalt and non-asphalt surfaces, finishing and landscaping, and roadway improvement.
Construction associated with the mixed-use development is anticipated to start in mid-2024 and finish in by end of 2027. Roadway widening along Studebaker Road would occur concurrently with construction of the mixed-use development and would involve grubbing and land clearing; grading and excavation; drainage, utilities, and subgrade, and paving. Improvements on Studebaker Road assumed construction activities over
1.71 acres and a construction period from Summer 2026 to Winter 2027, concurrent with the paving phase associated with the mixed-use development.
Air pollutant emissions from construction activities on-site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Table 4, Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions, shows an estimate of maximum daily construction emissions for the proposed project and compares those emissions to the construction emissions identified in the PEIR. The table shows the highest daily emissions during construction of the proposed project would not exceed any applicable regional mass daily thresholds established by the South Coast AQMD.
Therefore, project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.
Table 4 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions
Construction Phase
Pollutants
(lb/day)1, 2
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Year 2023
Utility Relocation Trenching <1 3 4 <1 <1 <1
Building Demolition 1 16 21 <1 2 1
Building Demolition and Asphalt Demolition 2 27 41 <1 3 1 Building Demolition, Building Debris Onsite Processing/Recycling, and Asphalt Debris Onsite Processing/Recycling
69 17 118 <1 6 2
Year 2024
Building Demolition, Building Debris Onsite Processing/Recycling, and Asphalt Debris Onsite Processing/Recycling
1 47 42 <1 13 5
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 53
Table 4 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions
Construction Phase
Pollutants
(lb/day)1, 2
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation 2 96 50 <1 21 7
Rough Grading 1 18 22 <1 5 2
Fine Grading 2 13 39 <1 5 1
Building Construction 1 47 42 <1 13 5
Year 2025
Building Construction 2 12 37 <1 5 1
Building Construction, Utility Trenching, and Architectural Coating 5 16 46 <1 5 1 Year 2026
Building Construction, Utility Trenching, and Architectural Coating 5 21 53 <1 6 2 Building Construction and Architectural Coating 4 13 40 <1 5 1 Building Construction, Architectural Coating, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and Finishing/Landscaping, Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing3 5 24 59 <1 6 2
Building Construction, Architectural Coating, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and Finishing/Landscaping, and Linear, Grading & Excavation3 6 48 102 <1 9 2
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, Linear, Grading & Excavation3
4 20 44 <1 5 1
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, Linear, Drainage, Utilities, & Sub-Grade3 3 28 58 <1 6 2
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, Linear & Paving3
3 27 62 <1 5 1
Year 2027
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, Linear & Paving3
3 28 57 <1 5 1
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping
2 20 44 <1 5 1
Building Construction 2 12 31 <1 4 1
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
Maximum Daily Emissions 69 96 118 <1 21 7
SEASP PEIR Construction Emissions 84 261 221 <1 34 19
Proposed Project vs SEASP PEIR (15) (165) (103) (0) (13) (12) South Coast AQMD Regional Construction Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Significant? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.12 Highest winter or summer emissions are reported. See Appendix B. 1 Based on the preliminary construction information provided by the Applicant. Where specific information regarding proposed project-related construction activities was not available, construction assumptions were based on CalEEMod defaults, which are based on construction surveys conducted by South Coast AQMD of construction equipment.
2 Includes implementation Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3 which include fugitive dust control measures required by South Coast AQMD under Rule 403, including watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 25 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, replacing ground cover quickly, and street sweeping with Rule 1186–compliant sweepers. Includes implementation of use of coatings and solvents with a VOC content lower than required under South Coast AQMD Rule 1113 (i.e., super compliant paints). In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requires use of Tier 4 construction equipment for equipment for equipment 50 horsepower and higher.
3 Linear phases associated with the roadway construction project.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
Operations
Upon buildout, the proposed project would generate operational emissions from on-road mobile sources, area sources (e.g., landscaping equipment, architectural coating), and energy use (i.e., natural gas used for heating and cooking). However, the proposed project’s nature and size would not result in a larger increase in longterm, operational criteria air pollutants compared to the scale of development associated with the SEASP buildout.
Implementation of the proposed project would be consistent with the local land use designation of MU-CC and provide neighborhood-serving retail uses that would reduce trip lengths relative to other parts of the region.
Thus, long-term operation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact related to cumulatively considerable emissions of nonattainment pollutants. In addition, applicable PDFs would further reduce emissions generated during project operation by requiring various transportation demand measures, active transportation infrastructure, intersection signalization, and energy efficiency design in building design and orientation. Moreover, PEIR Mitigation Measures AQ-4 through AQ-6 would further reduce the generation of operational emissions generated by the proposed project by requiring electric landscaping equipment, energy-efficient appliances, electricity sourced from renewable generation sources, and installation of CALGreen Tier 2 EV charging standards. Therefore, the operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.
Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
Mitigation Measures
Refer to Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-6.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Construction-Phase
Localized Significance Thresholds
This impact analysis describes localized impacts from short-term construction activities. The proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations during construction activities if it would cause or contribute significantly to elevated levels. Unlike the mass of emissions shown in the regional emissions analysis in Table 4, which are described in pounds per day, localized concentrations refer to an amount of pollutant in a volume of air (ppm or µg/m3) and can be correlated to potential health effects.
Screening-level localized significance thresholds (LST) (pounds per day) are the amount of project-related mass emissions at which localized concentrations (ppm or µg/m3) could exceed the AAQS for criteria air pollutants for which the SoCAB is designated nonattainment. They are based on the acreage disturbed and distance to the M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 55
nearest sensitive receptor. Screening-level LSTs are based on the proposed project site size and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. Thresholds are based on the California AAQS, which are the most stringent, established to provide a margin of safety in the protection of public health and welfare. They are designed to protect sensitive receptors most susceptible to further respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. The nearest off-site sensitive receptors are the multifamily residential apartments (Eaves Seal Beach apartments) and single-family homes to the south in Seal Beach and the single-family homes to the west in the Naples neighborhood.
As shown in Table 5, Maximum Daily On-Site Localized Construction Emissions, maximum daily localized emissions of criteria pollutants and ozone precursors from sources on the project site would not exceed any applicable LST values for the SRA 4. It should be noted that the emissions expressed in Table 5 incorporate PEIR Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3.
Table 5 Maximum Daily On-Site Localized Construction Emissions Pollutants (lbs./day)1,2
NOX CO PM103 PM2.53
South Coast AQMD 0.50-Acre LST 57 585 108.68 58.94
Utility Relocation Trenching 3 4 0.06 0.06
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 1.00-Acre LST 57 585 108.68 58.94
Building Demolition 11 18 0.79 0.27
Building Demolition, Building Debris Onsite
Processing/Recycling, and Asphalt Debris Onsite
Processing/Recycling
13 115 5.06 1.60
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 1.31-Acre LST 65 665 111.50 60.80
Building Construction 9 15 0.12 0.11
Building Construction and Architectural Coating 10 16 0.13 0.12 Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 1.81-Acre LST 77 794 116.00 63.78
Building Construction, Utility Trenching, and
Architectural Coating
13 20 0.19 0.18
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 2.00-Acre LST 82 842 117.68 64.90
Building Demolition and Asphalt Demolition 22 37 1.27 0.48 Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 2.31-Acre LST 86 914 120.08 66.35
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping
15 26 0.20 0.18
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 2.50-Acre LST 89 957 121.51 67.22
Rough Grading 10 18 2.67 1.04
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
Table 5 Maximum Daily On-Site Localized Construction Emissions Pollutants (lbs./day)1,2
NOX CO PM103 PM2.53
Fine Grading 10 18 2.65 1.04
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 2.81-Acre LST 93 1,028 123.91 68.67
Building Construction, Architectural Coating,
Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and Finishing/Landscaping,
Linear, Grubbing & Land Clearing
21 32 0.55 0.29
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 3.50-Acre LST 103 1,186 129.17 71.86
Site Preparation 15 28 10.00 4.75
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 3.81-Acre LST 107 1,258 131.57 73.31
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, Linear & Paving
23 38 0.30 0.27
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 4.31-Acre LST 114 1,372 135.40 75.63
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, Linear, Drainage, Utilities, &
Sub-Grade
31 51 1.24 0.44
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 5.00-Acre LST 123 1,530 140.67 78.82
Building Construction, Architectural Coating,
Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and Finishing/Landscaping,
and Linear, Grading & Excavation
44 73 2.51 0.69
Building Construction, Asphalt/Concrete Paving, and
Finishing/Landscaping, and Linear, Grading &
Excavation
43 72 2.49 0.67
Exceeds LST? No No No No
Sources: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.12, and South Coast AQMD 2008 and 2011. Highest winter or summer emissions are reported. Linear phases associated with the roadway construction project.
1 Assumes 1 acre of disturbance per day and 25 meters to closest sensitive receptor for a conservative assessment of localized impacts. 2 Based on information provided or verified by the District. Where specific information regarding project-related construction activities or processes was not available, construction assumptions were based on CalEEMod defaults, which are based on construction surveys conducted by the South Coast AQMD. 3 Includes implementation Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3 which include fugitive dust control measures required by South Coast AQMD under Rule 403, including watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 25 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, replacing ground cover quickly, and street sweeping with Rule 1186–compliant sweepers. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requires use of Tier 4 construction equipment for equipment for equipment 50 horsepower and higher.
As shown in Table 5, daily construction emissions would not exceed any applicable localized daily thresholds established by the South Coast AQMD, and with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, Tier-4 equipment would be required for off-road diesel-powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower. Therefore, maximum daily localized emissions of criteria pollutants and ozone precursors from sources located on the project site would not exceed any applicable LST values and a construction HRA would not be required. Emissions from construction activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 57
criteria pollutant concentrations. Further, the proposed project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 from the PEIR.
Operation
Operational Phase LSTs
Implementation of the proposed project would replace two-story office buildings with a new mixed-use building (retail and commercial). The proposed land uses for the proposed project are consistent with those analyzed in the PEIR and would not be associated with generating a high or substantial number of trucks trips.
There would be no substantial source of criteria pollutant or air toxic emissions associated with operation of the proposed project that could potentially expose nearby sensitive receptors to long-term pollutant concentrations. Therefore, long-term operation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of carbon monoxide (CO) called hotspots.
These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to the AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hot spots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. The SoCAB has been designated in attainment of both the National and California AAQS for CO. Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited—to generate a significant CO impact (BAAQMD 2023). The proposed project compared to existing conditions would generate net incremental 53 PM peak-hour trips (Fehr & Peers 2023). Peak-hour trips would therefore be substantially below the peak-hour vehicle trips needed to generate a significant CO impact. In addition, the proposed project is within the buildout of the PEIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not have the potential to substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections in the vicinity of the project site.
As discussed under this threshold, construction and operation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
A significant impact would occur if construction or operation of the proposed project would result in the creation of nuisance odors that would be noxious to a substantial number of people, or visible dust plumes.
The proposed project would comprise similar uses to those analyzed in the PEIR. Potential sources that may M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
produce objectionable odors during construction activities include equipment exhaust, application of asphalt and architectural coatings, and other interior and exterior finishes. However, these odors would be temporary and confined to the immediate area of the construction activities. All construction activities would be conducted in accordance with the best management practices in South Coast AQMD Rule 402, which would minimize and provide a control for odors. Therefore, the construction of the proposed project would not result in odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people and would not result in new or exacerbated effects compared to the PEIR.
The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatment plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. The proposed project does not include any of these uses, but on-site trash receptacles would have the potential to create adverse odors. The mixed-use building would properly maintain odors associated with trash in compliance with the Long Beach Municipal Code, and there would be no operational activities that would be expected to produce dust plumes that could pose violations of South Coast AQMD Rule 402. Therefore, the operation of the proposed project would not result in odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. There is no new substantial information that would cause the significant and unavoidable air quality impacts identified in the SEASP PEIR more severe due to the development of the project. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AQ-7 is not applicable to the proposed project, since the project is not a new industrial use. Refer to Appendix A for a full list of mitigation measures from the PEIR.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 59
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Issues
SEASP PEIR
Determination
Are there
environmental
effects peculiar to
the project or the
parcel on which
the project would
be located?
Are there
environmental
effects that were
not analyzed as
significant effects
in the SEASP
PEIR?
Are there
potentially
significant offsite impacts and
cumulative
impacts which
were not
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
Are there
previously
identified
significant effects
which, as a result
of substantial
new
information which
was not known at
the time the
SEASP PEIR was
certified, are
determined to
have a more
severe adverse
impact than
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
no no no no
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
no no no no
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
no no no no
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
no no no no
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact no no no no
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact no no no no
SEASP PEIR SUMMARY
The southern portion of the SEASP area (south of Colorado Street and Loynes Drive) is in the coastal zone.
Approximately 62 percent (920 acres) of the SEASP area has a vegetation and land cover designation of “developed.” Approximately 11.9 percent (175 acres) and 11.4 percent (168 acres) of the SEASP have M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
vegetation and land cover designations of “undeveloped, wetland” and “open water,” respectively. The remaining designations include park land (82 acres); undeveloped, upland (75 acres); and mineral extraction (55 acres). The SEASP area contains habitat for 21 special status plant species, 4 of which are federal and/or state-listed as endangered, threatened, or candidate species, and 26 special status wildlife, 11 of which are federal and/or state-listed as endangered, threatened, or candidate species. Additionally, several other plant and animal species have been observed through field survey of the SEASP area.
Implementation of the SEASP could directly impact sensitive species and natural communities from the removal of native vegetation that supports sensitive species. Implementation of the SEASP could indirectly impact sensitive species and natural communities with noise, lighting, human activities, urban/wetland interface, stormwater runoff, and bird strikes. Buildout of the SEASP could impact jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands directly—from private development, trails, or other recreational uses in the Los Cerritos Wetlands Complex (LCWC) and jurisdictional waters within the proposed Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation—and indirectly from noise, runoff, and human intrusion. The policies, development standards, and design standards and guidelines of the SEASP, regulatory compliance, and mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Riparian habitats found within the SEASP area include the San Gabriel River and, to lesser extent, the Los Cerritos Channel and Haynes Cooling Channel. These waterways are channelized within the SEASP area and are not part of any allowed development. Therefore, there will be no direct impacts to these riparian features.
Recognized wildlife corridors have not been designated in the SEASP area. The San Gabriel River will not be directly impacted by implementation of the SEASP. The LCWC is likely part of a migration path for urban wildlife, providing food and resting sources; some species seek breeding grounds within the SEASP area. The preservation of wetlands and limited uses allowed in the proposed Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation land use designation would result in avoidance of impacts to wildlife using this area as a corridor. There is a potential for existing ornamental trees to be removed during development or redevelopment in the urbanized areas.
Compliance with Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) would ensure that trees and nests would not be removed during the breeding season. Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan could affect wildlife movement but adopted mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
The SEASP area is not in a habitat conservation plan, a natural community conservation plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts with respect to a habitat conservation plan would occur.
City-maintained trees in Long Beach are protected under LBMC Chapter 14.28 (Trees and Shrubs), which regulates the planting, maintenance, and removal of trees in the city. Projects developed under the SEASP may involve the removal of existing ornamental trees, including street trees. However, projects would be required to comply with provisions of the LBMC and the SEASP. Therefore, implementation of the SEASP would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting trees, and no impact would occur.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 61
PEIR Project Design Features
The PEIR include the following PDFs that apply to the proposed project, in addition to the SEASP as a whole.
Other PDFs (see Chapter 5.4 of the PEIR) apply to the SEASP area as whole and are not applicable to the proposed project.
▪ PDF-BIO-1: Wetland Delineations2
▪ PDF-BIO-3: Wetland Buffers3
▪ PDF-BIO-4: New landscape plantings shall utilize non-invasive species (prohibited species published by the California Invasive Plant Council) and reflect native plants typically associated with wetlands into development around wetlands.
▪ PDR-BIO-5: Wetlands Edge at Shopkeeper Road. Landscaping within 500 feet of natural areas along this edge shall consist of California Native species or varieties that will not invade habitat or hybridize with existing native vegetation to create a more seamless transition between the natural wetlands and development (per CALGreen and Cal-IPC standards).
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The analysis in Section 3.4, Biological Resources, is based in part on the following technical report:
▪ Biological Technical Report, Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA), June 28, 2023. (A complete copy of this report is included in Appendix C).
The project site contains two office buildings, surface parking, public rights-of-way, and some landscaping throughout the project site. The project site is located in the coastal zone. The LCWC and the SEASP Wetland Complex Boundary are to the east of the project site. The vegetation and land cover at the project site are shown as “developed.” No wetlands exist on the project site (USFWS 2023; GLA 2023).
During vegetation mapping of the project site, five vegetation/land use types were identified on the project site: Avena spp. – Bromus spp. seminatural alliance/Mesembryanthemum spp. – Carpobrotus spp. semi-natural alliance, developed, disturbed, eucalyptus, and ornamental. Table 6, Summary of Vegetation/Land Use Types for the Project Site, provides a summary of vegetation types/land uses and the corresponding acreage.
The vegetation at the project site is primarily developed and disturbed with ornamental landscaping (e.g. nonnative trees, shrubs, and turf) and non-native weedy species (97.2 percent). Common ornamental species identified on the project site include London plane trees (Platanus x hispanica), Indian hawthorne (Rhaphiolepis indica), English ivy (Hedera helix), pittosporum (Pittosporum sp.), rusty fig (Ficus rubiginosa), Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), and Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis). No native vegetation communities occur within the project site (GLA 2023).
2 Wetland delineations are discussed in policies 5.2 and 5.3. 3 Wetland buffers are discussed in policy 5.20 and referenced throughout Chapter 5 of the SEASP.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
Table 6 Summary of Vegetation/Land Use Types for the Project Site On-Site Vegetation/Land Use Types Area (Acres)
Avena spp. – Bromus spp. seminatural alliance/Mesembryanthemum spp. – Carpobrotus spp. semi-natural alliance
0.14 Developed 4.57
Disturbed 0.59
Eucalyptus 0.02
Ornamental 0.43
Total 5.75
Source: GLA 2023.
GLA reviewed the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), which identified southern coastal salt marsh as occurring within the United States Geological Service (USGS) Los Alamitos quadrangle. The project site does not contain southern coastal salt marsh nor any special-status habitats. Additionally, the project site does not contain any vegetation communities that would be considered an environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA). The project site does not contain any blue-line streams, jurisdictional waters, or wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act or the California Coastal Act (GLA 2023).
The nearest potential wetlands are associated with a property owned by the City of Long Beach, at least 194 feet north of the project site, and the northeast edge of the Pumpkin Patch site approximately 221 feet east of the project site.
No special-status animals were detected at the project site, and none are expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat. The project site contains trees, shrubs, and ground cover that provide suitable habitat for common species of nesting migratory birds. Additionally, the eucalyptus trees at the eastern end of the 100- foot buffer may provide roosting sites for more common urban-adapted species such as the red-tailed hawk, but there are no suitable breeding or foraging habitats for special-status raptors in the project site (GLA 2023).
See Figure 8, Vegetation Map.
SEASP Policies
The SEASP includes a number of policies related to biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project (see Table 11, in Section 3.11, Land Use and Planning).
Pacific Coast Highway
North Studebaker Road
Source: Glenn Lukos Associates, 2023.
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
100
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T AT 6 6 1 5 E . PA C I F I C C O A S T H I G H WAY
CITY OF LONG BEACH
Figure 8 - Existing Vegetation Map
3.4. Biological Resources
Project Site100' Buffer into Undeveloped AreasAvena spp. – Bromus spp. seminatural alliance/Mesembryanthemum spp. – Carpobrotus spp. semi-natural allianceEucalyptusOrnamentalDisturbedDeveloped M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
This page intentionally left blank.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 65
DISCUSSION
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? As part of the Biological Technical Report, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants were reviewed, vegetation communities and land cover types within the project site were mapped according to the List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (or California Natural Community List), and a site survey was conducted. The literature search generated a list of 39 special-status plant species and 65 special-status animal species that have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the project site and determined that none of the species have the potential to occur on-site due to lack of suitable habitat. The project site does not contain any special-status vegetation types nor vegetation communities that would be considered an ESHA. The project site and a 100-feet buffer around the project site do not contain USFWS-designated critical habitat. The proposed project would not directly modify habitat. No special-status animals were detected at the project site, and none are expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat (GLA, 2023).
The City of Long Beach Property Site (Marketplace Marsh) is 194 feet northeast of the project site, and the Los Cerritos Wetlands complex is located to the northeast beyond the Marketplace Marsh; both wetland areas are separated from the project site by existing development (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway). Accordingly, there is no potential for temporary or permanent indirect impacts to adjacent native open space. Nevertheless, the project would incorporate design features to prevent indirect impacts, including ensuring that stormwater flows and other runoff will not discharge into the Marketplace Marsh and Los Cerritos Wetlands (see Section 1.4.4, Stormwater Improvements and Utilities), and installing exterior lighting that is directed downward and away from the Marketplace Marsh and Los Cerritos Wetlands (see Figure 7, Photometric Plan). Additionally, the landscaping plant palette will not include any invasive species. Finally, the Marketplace Marsh and Los Cerritos Wetlands would remain fenced as in their current condition to prevent public access. Construction activities would comply with all applicable regulations and requirements for dust control, air quality, pollutants, and noise to further reduce potential indirect impacts to special status species.
The proposed project would be required to implement applicable mitigation measures from the certified PEIR (see below). Consistent with BIO-3, the proposed project would prepare a construction management plan; a monitoring biologist would be required on-site during any grading activities; and a project-specific contractor training program would be developed and implemented to train construction contractors of sensitive biological resources. The proposed project would be required to implement the noise measures in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 (in addition to the mitigation measures in Section 3.13, Noise) to reduce noise during construction.
Mitigation Measure BIO-6 would not apply to the proposed project since the proposed project does not include any trails or an access plan adjacent to jurisdictional waters. Consistent with Mitigation Measure BIO-7, prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant and/or subsequent builder shall prepare an urbanopen space interface brochure to educate residents on the responsibilities associated with living near sensitive biological habitat.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
Consistent with Mitigation Measure BIO-5, a photometric plan was prepared for the proposed project (see Figure 7). As shown in Figure 7, the proposed project would generate between 0.0 and 0.1 foot candles of light at the proposed roundabout on Studebaker Road (i.e., the portion of the nearest to the Los Cerritos Wetlands without being obstructed by a building). Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Mitigation Measure BIO-5.
Consistent with the PEIR, with implementation of applicable mitigation measures, the proposed project would not create a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent environmental review is required.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures from the adopted MMRP are applicable to the proposed project. Refer to Appendix A for the full list of mitigation measures associated with the certified PEIR. Any minor modifications and/or project-specific clarifications to the mitigation measures from the certified PEIR are shown are shown with strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text.
BIO-1 Concurrent with submittal of site development plans for development on or adjacent to undeveloped land and all land within the Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation land use, the project applicant shall submit a biological resources report conducted by a qualified biologist.
The biological resources report shall include: analysis of available literature and databases (CNDDB); historical sensitive biological resources; review of current land use and land ownership within the project vicinity; on-site survey and mapping that delineates vegetation communities present within the development area; identification of jurisdictional waters and special status habitat, wildlife, and plant species. Focused surveys for sensitive, threatened, endangered species, will also be prepared, as required. The project applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed development and project design avoids impacts to special status species and habitats, in consultation with CDFW and USFWS. If complete avoidance is not possible, the project applicant shall obtain necessary permits from CDFW and USFWS. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall submit plans, required permits, and mitigation plans (if needed) to the Long Beach Development Services Department for review and approval.
Applicability: The proposed project site is not undeveloped and is not within or adjacent to land designated as Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation. However, an undeveloped parcel (the Pumpkin Patch site) is adjacent to the southern project site boundary. This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project. The Biological Technical Report prepared for the proposed project to comply with the requirements of BIO-1 is included in Appendix C.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 67
BIO-2 Concurrent with submittal of site development plans for development on or adjacent to undeveloped land and all land within the Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation land use, the project applicant shall submit a jurisdictional delineation prepared by a qualified biologist or letters stating that no such jurisdictional features exist. The jurisdictional delineation shall be prepared pursuant to the requirements of (1) US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, (2) CDFW jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code, (3) RWQCB jurisdiction pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and Section 13260 of the Porter-Cologne Act, and (4) wetlands as defined under the California Coastal Act. The project shall be designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. If wetland avoidance is not possible, the applicant shall ensure no net loss of wetlands either by creation of applicantsponsored wetlands or purchase of mitigation bank credits in consultation with applicable Federal- and State- agencies (Corps, CDFW, RWQB, and/or Coastal Commission). Any mitigation, replacement, and/or restoration of habitat shall occur in the LCWC or in an approved coastal mitigation bank that covers this area. If the applicant can demonstrate that there are no logistically viable opportunities for mitigation within the LCWC, the applicant may propose mitigation elsewhere, which must be approved by the City and the resource agencies. The mitigation plan prepared in consultation with the applicable agencies shall include: responsibilities and of persons to supervise and implement the plan, site selection, restoration and creation of habitat; site preparation and planting implementation, schedule, maintenance guidelines, monitoring plan (5 year minimum), and long-term preservation. Prior to the issuance of grading permits covering jurisdictional areas, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the Long Beach Development Services Department that (1) all necessary permits or authorizations have been obtained from the Corps (pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act), CDFW (pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code, and RWQCB (pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act), the Coastal Commission, or that no such permits are required; and (2) the detailed mitigation and restoration plan shall be approved by the Development Services Department.
Applicability: The proposed project is not undeveloped, and the project site is not within or adjacent to land designated as Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation. However, an undeveloped parcel (the Pumpkin Patch site) is adjacent to the southern boundary of the project site. This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project. Jurisdictional Delineations are discussed in the Biological Technical Report prepared for the proposed project to comply with the requirements of BIO-2, and is included in Appendix C. A minor typographical edit was made to this mitigation measure to clarify an Agency acronym.
BIO-3 If sensitive biological resources are identified within or adjacent to the proposed development area, the project applicant shall submit evidence to the Long Beach Development Services Department that a qualified biologist has been retained to prepare a construction management plan. The construction limits shall be clearly flagged and/or fenced. No construction access, parking, storage of equipment, or waste dirt or rubble will be permitted within such marked M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
areas. A monitoring biologist shall be onsite during any grading activities. The qualified biologist shall also develop and implement a project specific contractor training program to educate project contractors on the sensitive biological resources within and adjacent to the proposed development project area and oversee measures to avoid and/or minimize impacts to these species.
Applicability: The proposed project site is approximately 194 feet from the Los Cerritos Wetlands at its closest point. This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project.
BIO-4 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for any development, the project applicant shall include noise reduction measures to reduce noise impacts to wildlife. A note shall be provided on development plans indicating that throughout grading, demolition, and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction-related noise:
▪ During all excavation and grading on-site, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards.
▪ The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors (wildlife) nearest the project site. ▪ The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors (wildlife) during all project construction.
▪ No construction shall occur within 500 feet of nesting raptors or threatened or endangered species and 100 feet of all other nesting birds protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Applicability: This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project.
BIO-5 Prior to approval of any development adjacent to jurisdictional waters or habitat for special status species and all land within the Coastal Habitat, Wetlands & Recreation land use, the project applicant shall submit a photometric plan demonstrating that the project will be designed and shielded so that the nighttime lighting shall be no greater than 0.10 foot-candle at the edge of the habitat. This would ensure that spill light does not result in exposure of artificial light at levels exceeding the intensity of moonlight (approximately 0.5 foot-candle).
Applicability: The project site does not contain habitat for special status species. The nearest potential wetlands are approximately 194 feet northeast of the project site but are not adjacent to the project site. A photometric plan was prepared for the proposed project to comply with the requirements of BIO-5. See Figure 7.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 69
BIO-7 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant and/or subsequent builder shall prepare an urban-open space interface brochure to be approved by the Long Beach Development Services Department to educate residents on the responsibilities associated with living near sensitive biological habitat. The brochure shall address relevant issues, including the role of natural predators in the wildlands and how to minimize impacts of human and domestic pets on native communities and their inhabitants. The approved brochure, along with attachments, shall be included as part of the rental/lease agreements and as part of the sales literature for future developments.
Applicability: This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
The project site lacks suitable habitat to support special-status species. The project site does not contain any special-status vegetation types nor vegetation communities that would be considered an ESHA. The project site and a 100-feet buffer around the project site do not contain USFWS-designated critical habitat (GLA 2023).
The project site and the 100-foot buffer do not contain any blue-line streams, jurisdictional waters, or wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act or the California Coastal Act. A few areas of the project site and 100-foot buffer exhibited ponding during the biological reconnaissance site visit on March 16, 2023, but these areas do not constitute jurisdictional wetlands. The vegetation consists of a mix of native and non-native species with wetland indicator statuses ranging from obligate (OBL) to upland (UPL), but this area does not constitute a wetland as it occurs in an unmaintained section of a landscape planter and is not a naturally occurring feature.
A few localized areas of very shallow ponding were observed within the 100-foot buffer in the Pumpkin Patch, but these areas do not constitute wetlands, as the soils are compacted due to ongoing disturbance and tend to exhibit shallow ponding after any significant rainfall. The nearest potential wetlands are associated with the City of Long Beach Property Site (Marketplace Marsh) at least 194 feet north of the project site, and the northeast edge of the Pumpkin Patch site approximately is 221 feet east of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands.
Further, as discussed in Table 6, above, the proposed project does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. With implementation of applicable mitigation measures, and as discussed under threshold (a), the proposed project would not have indirect impacts to riparian habitat, wetlands, nor sensitive natural communities. As such, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat, other sensitive natural community, or wetland.
Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would be consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent environmental review is required.
Mitigation Measures
Refer to Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-5, and BIO-7. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The project site consists of an existing commercial development, portions of public rights of way, and the disturbed edge of the adjacent Pumpkin Patch site. Although there may be local wildlife movement through the Pumpkin Patch, impacts of the proposed project would be limited to the edge of the Pumpkin Patch within Studebaker Road and therefore would not interfere substantially with wildlife movement. The project site does not contain a native wildlife nursery site.
The project site contains eucalyptus trees that may provide roosting sites for common urban-adapted species such as the red-tailed hawk but are not expected to nest within the project site because onsite observations found no nesting raptors in the project site due to a general lack of suitable habitat (GLA 2023). However, the project site currently contains mostly nonnative trees, shrubs, and ground cover that have the potential to support nesting birds that are protected while nesting pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Sections 3505, 3503.5, and 3800 of the California Department of Fish and Game Code. The proposed project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure BIO-8 from the certified PEIR. With implementation of BIO-8, the proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Further, the proposed project would be landscaped with variety of plants species, including multiple tree varieties on the ground floor and on the pool deck; the new trees could serve as new nesting opportunities for birds.
Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would be consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent environmental review is required.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures from the adopted MMRP are applicable to the proposed project. Refer to Appendix A for the full list of mitigation measures associated with the certified PEIR. Any minor modifications and/or project-specific clarifications to the mitigation measures from the certified PEIR are shown are shown with strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 71
BIO-8 If construction is proposed between January 15 to September 1st, January through September, a qualified biologist must conduct a nesting bird survey(s) at least 30 days prior to commencement of construction with a follow-up survey no more than three days prior to initiation of construction activities to document the presence or absence of nesting birds in or adjacent to the project site. The preconstruction survey(s) will focus on identifying any raptors and owls, any species listed pursuant to the federal or California Endangered Species Act, California bird species of special concern, or a wading bird (herons or egrets), and/or passerines nests that may be directly or indirectly affected by construction activities. Any nest permanently vacated for the season would not warrant protection pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If active nests are documented, the following measures are required:
▪ Species-specific measures shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. At a minimum, grading in the vicinity of a nest shall be postponed until the young birds have fledged. A minimum exclusion buffer of 100 feet shall be maintained during construction, depending on the species and location.
The perimeter of the nest setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with stakes and flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel and activities are restricted from the area.
▪ Vegetation clearing shall be conducted outside of the nesting season. If avoidance of the nesting season is not feasible, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within three days prior to any disturbance of the site, including vegetation clearing, demolition activities, and grading. If active nests are identified, the biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nests, and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied and the juvenile birds can survive independently from the nests. ▪ For active nest of any species listed pursuant to the federal or California Endangered Species Act, California bird species of special concern, wading bird (herons or egrets), or owls or raptors, construction activities within 300 feet (500 feet from any owl or raptor nests) shall not exceed noise levels of 65 dB peak until the nest(s) is naturally vacated and juveniles have fledged and there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. The 65 dB peak noise levels may only be increased if a noise study demonstrates the ambient noise level is above 65 dB at the subject site, and shall not be allowed to exceed the ambient level.
▪ A survey report by a qualified biologist verifying that no active nests are present, or that the young have fledged, shall be submitted to the Long Beach Development Services Department prior to initiation of grading in the nest-setback zone. The qualified biologist shall serve as a biological monitor during those periods when construction activities occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. ▪ A final report of the findings, prepared by a qualified biologist, shall be submitted to the Long Beach Development Services Department prior to construction-related activities that have the potential to disturb any active nests during the nesting season.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
Applicability: This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project and minor clarifications/additions based on the biological technical report prepared for the proposed project, have been provided, consistent with SEASP Policy 5.30. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? As with the PEIR, the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, including the policies set forth in SEASP (see Table 11. The proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, including the policies set forth in SEASP, as no jurisdictional waters, wetlands, ESHA, or sensitive coastal habitat areas are located within 100 feet of the project site. The proposed project would also not conflict with the City’s Tree Maintenance Policy (LBMC Section 14.28). The project would not result in a conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan since the project site is not within an area covered by a HTP nor NCCP (GLA 2023).
Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would be consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent environmental review is required.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 73
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Issues
SEASP PEIR
Determination
Are there
environmental
effects peculiar to
the project or the
parcel on which
the project would
be located?
Are there
environmental
effects that were
not analyzed as
significant effects
in the SEASP
PEIR?
Are there
potentially
significant offsite impacts and
cumulative
impacts which
were not
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
Are there
previously
identified
significant effects
which, as a result
of substantial
new
information which
was not known at
the time the
SEASP PEIR was
certified, are
determined to
have a more
severe adverse
impact than
discussed in the
SEASP PEIR?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Significant and
Unavoidable
no no no no
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
no no no no
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
no no no no
SEASP PEIR SUMMARY
Chapter 5.5, Cultural Resources, of the certified PEIR addressed the impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources (TCR) associated with buildout of the SEASP. The PEIR identified one historic resource adjacent to the southwest boundary of the SEASP area: the Long Beach Marine Stadium, a California-listed Point of Historic Interest and Historical Landmark that was considered likely eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Additionally, the Bixby Ranch Field Office may be locally significant, although this is not expressed specifically on the site record.
New development and redevelopment have the potential to occur throughout the SEASP area with proposed land use changes, and intensification is identified predominantly in the proposed Mixed-Use Community Core and Mixed-Use Marina areas. These areas are developed, and there are no known historical resources in these areas. If future development would impact buildings 45 years or older, a formal historical resources evaluation would be required at that time. The intensification in the Mixed-Use Community Core is not expected to impact Marine Stadium because these areas are separated by existing development, Marina Drive, and parking areas.
Although the scale and character of the area may change, new development is required to be consistent with the development standards and design guidelines in the SEASP. Special attention is required for edge effects M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
and views. The PEIR incorporated Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 to reduce potential impacts to historic resources; however, impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable.
The PEIR identified six archaeological resources within its boundaries. Development consistent with the SEASP could impact known archaeological sites and unknown archeological resources. Development or redevelopment in accordance with the SEASP may uncover tribal cultural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3 through CUL-5 would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
One tribal representative indicated that there is the potential for human burials within the SEASP area.
Therefore, ground disturbance by projects developed pursuant to the SEASP could encounter human remains.
Implementation of the proposed SEASP could disturb human remains, include those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-6 would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This analysis in this section is based on the following technical study:
▪ Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Used Project, City of Long Beach, Los Angeles County, California (“Historic Evaluation”), Cogstone Resource Management (Cogstone), June 2023. (Appendix D)
A Historic Evaluation was completed in compliance with the Southeast Area Specific Plan (SEASP) Mitigation Measure CUL-1 (Cogstone 2023) which states that “Future development or redevelopment projects on or near buildings or structures 45 years of age or older shall require an intensive-level historical evaluation.” In total, three buildings were evaluated as part of the Historic Evaluation. This includes two office buildings within the Long Beach Marketplace Office Park; 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979) located within the project site and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980) located adjacent to the project site. The third building evaluated for Historic Evaluation was a vacant El Torito restaurant (built 1977/1978) located adjacent to the project site at 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway. The buildings adjacent to the project site (the El Torito restaurant at 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway and the office building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway) were documented and evaluated for potential historic significant in compliance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1. While 6605 E.
Pacific Coast Highway meets the minimum threshold of being 45 years old, the building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (43 years old) does not meet this threshold. To be conservative and to maintain compliance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1, the building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway was included in the Historic Evaluation in the event that this building meets the 45-year age threshold before the proposed project is complete. Since the office building at 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway (within the project site) was built in 1983 and is 40 years old, it was not included in the Historic Evaluation since the proposed project is anticipated to be complete before the building reaches the 45-year age threshold.
The SEASP states that the entire SEASP area is sensitive for archeological and tribal resources. The SEASP incorporates policies and the following conditions of approval for new development (see page 104 of the SEASP):
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 75
1. LUP Policy: Where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall be required (Coastal Act Section 30244).
2. New Development shall implement the mitigation measures below as conditions of project approval:
a. Any development project that involves disturbance of soils, including native soils that may have been previously disturbed and/ or compacted, shall be required to prepare an Archaeological Monitoring and Mitigation Plan for the protection of archaeological/ paleontological resources during project grading and construction activities, prepared by a qualified professional, which shall incorporate the following measures and procedures:
i. During all digging, ground disturbance, and subsurface activity on the site, archaeological monitor(s) qualified by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) standards and Native American Most Likely Descendants (MLDs) from each tribe when State Law mandates identification of MLDs, shall be present on the site.
ii. Also present during all digging, ground disturbance, and subsurface activity on the site shall be a minimum of one (1) Native American monitor for every location of ground disturbance; on shared ancestral territories, a minimum of one (1) individual monitor representing each Tribe is required. Monitors must be selected according to the Native American Heritage Commission’s contact list. On shared ancestral lands, Native American monitors from different tribes shall be present at the same time and monitoring the same location. More than 1 set of monitors on the site may be necessary during times with multiple grading and soil disturbance locations. Tribal representatives selected for the monitoring shall be rotated equally and fairly among all tribal groups affected, such that every tribal group has an equal opportunity to monitor on the site.
During all digging, ground disturbance, and subsurface activity on the site, any Native American representatives from Tribes on the NAHC list are welcome to be present on the site and monitor, even if they are not the assigned set of monitors within the rotation for that day. iii. If any tribal cultural deposits are discovered, including but not limited to skeletal remains and grave-related artifacts, traditional cultural sites, religious or spiritual sites, or other artifacts, all development and ground disturbance shall cease until a treatment method is determined. On shared ancestral lands, each affected tribe must have input on the treatment method. iv. In-situ preservation and avoidance of cultural deposits shall be considered the preferred mitigation option. For in-situ preservation and or re-burial, the boundaries of the resource shall be determined and a setback shall be established between the boundary of cultural deposits and any proposed development; the setback shall be no less than 20 feet and may be larger if necessary to protect the cultural deposits.
v. If human remains are encountered, compliance with applicable State and Federal laws shall be required. Where appropriate and consistent with State and Federal laws, the treatment of remains shall be decided upon consultation with the MLDs and/or Native American monitors.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
vi. Representatives of Native American groups with documented ancestral ties to the area, as determined by the NAHC, shall also be invited to review and comment on the Archaeological Monitoring and Mitigation Plan.
b. Prior to issuance of any coastal development permits, new development projects located within areas designated Coastal Habitat/ Wetlands/Recreation or on other vacant lots shall prepare an Archaeological Research Plan (ARP) that:
i. Includes a detailed plan for archeological research and testing to characterize the potential for archeological resources on the site and to identify and accurately delineate (to the maximum extent practicable and in accordance with current professional archeological practices) any resources that may be discovered during the investigations.
ii. Addresses the larger cultural and tribal setting of the project area and describe how the project sites fit into this setting. The ARP shall address potential connections between the project site(s) and the broader network of prehistoric villages and resources of tribal people in the Long Beach area. The ARP shall address the value of living resources and the cultural significance for the surrounding sites to tribal communities.
iii. Addresses the likelihood of archeological resources (including burials) being present and what impacts the project may have on unknown archeological resources under the artificial fill.
Additional site testing may also include excavation of test pits and other soil testing methodologies if recommended by the peer review committee.
iv. If, during archeological testing, any cultural deposits, including but not limited to skeletal remains and grave-related artifacts, traditional cultural, religious or spiritual sites, midden and lithic material or artifacts, are discovered, they shall not be exposed and the testing shall be immediately halted in this location. Additional testing shall be conducted further from the center of the discovery until sterile conditions are encountered.
v. The ARP shall not authorize the excavation of any cultural deposits nor data recovery nor prejudice the ability to comply with applicable State and Federal laws if human remains are encountered. A coastal development permit is required for the ARP to be carried out, prior to any site grading or construction or other development or disturbance to the site. vi. If resources are discovered, significance testing of these resources may be conducted in accordance with best management practices, if the affected Native American tribes agree to significance testing. The ARP shall be revised as appropriate. The range of investigation and mitigation measures considered shall not be constrained by the approved development. Mitigation measures considered shall range from in-situ preservation to recovery and/or relocation. A good faith effort shall be made to avoid impacts to cultural resources through methods such as, but not limited to, project redesign, capping, and creating an open space area around the cultural resource areas.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 77
vii. The ARP shall be reviewed by an archaeological peer review committee convened in accordance with current professional practice. Representatives of Native American groups with documented ancestral ties to the area, as determined by the NAHC, shall also be invited to review and comment on the ARP.
c. If more specific requirements for a project exist pursuant to an approved coastal development permit, then the conditions of that permit shall supersede the provisions of this section.
DISCUSSION
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Two office buildings within the Long Beach Marketplace Office Park, 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979) located within the project site and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980) located adjacent to the project site, are recommended not eligible for listing at the local, state, or national level due to a lack of historical significance; the fact that the buildings are not associated with events or individuals significant to history, and do not embody an exemplary representation of a distinctive type, period, or method of construction (Cogstone 2023). The vacant El Torito restaurant (6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway) located adjacent to the project site is also recommended not eligible for listing at the local, state, or national level for the same reasons (Cogstone 2023).
The project site is approximately 1.6 miles southeast from the Long Beach Marine Stadium and 0.4 mile south of the Bixby Ranch Field Office at 6433 2nd Street, both of which are historical resources. Consistent with the PEIR, development on sites designated “Mixed-Use Community Core,” such as the project site, are not expected to impact Marine Stadium because these areas are separated by existing development, Marina Drive, and parking areas. Given the distance to the Bixby Ranch Field Office, no direct or indirect impacts would occur. The proposed project would be required to comply with the policies, development standards, and design guidelines in the SEASP. Compliance with the SEASP would ensure that the proposed project would not significantly impact views of historic resources. Given the project site’s distance from Long Beach Marine Stadium and Bixby Ranch Field Office and given that no buildings on-site or adjacent to the project site are eligible for listing, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to historic resources.
Therefore, development of the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures from the adopted MMRP are applicable to the proposed project. Refer to Appendix A for the full list of mitigation measures associated with the certified PEIR.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
CUL-1 Future development or redevelopment projects on or near buildings or structures 45 years of age or older shall require an intensive-level historical evaluation. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant/developer shall prepare the evaluation in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local guidelines for evaluating historical resources. If, based on the evaluation of the property, it is determined that the proposed development or redevelopment project will have a substantial adverse effect on a historical resource (i.e., it would reduce its integrity to the point that it would no longer be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or in the list of Long Beach Landmarks), then the provisions of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 shall be implemented by the property owner or project applicant/developer to eliminate or reduce the project’s impact on historical resources.
Applicability: This mitigation measure applies to the proposed project. A Historic Evaluation was prepared for the proposed project consistent with the requirements of mitigation measure CUL-1 and is included in Appendix D.
CUL-2 If, based on the intensive-level historical evaluation required under Mitigation Measure CUL1, it is determined that the proposed development or redevelopment project will have a substantial adverse effect on a historical resource, the City of Long Beach shall require the property owner or project applicant/developer to implement the following measures:
A. Rehabilitation According to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
1. If the proposed project includes renovation, alteration, or an addition to a historical resource (not including total demolition), then the property owner or project applicant/developer shall first seek to design all proposed renovation, alterations, or additions to the historical resource in a manner that is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards), found at:
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/rehabilitation/rehab/stand.htm. a. Plans for rehabilitation shall be created under the supervision of a professional meeting the Department of Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in Architectural History or Historic Architecture and be designed by a licensed architect with demonstrated historic preservation experience. b. Plans shall be reviewed in the schematic design phase prior to any construction work, as well as in the 60 and 90 percent construction documents phases, for compliance with the Standards by a historic preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards with demonstrated experience with the Standards compliance reviews. c. The qualified historic preservation professional reviewing the plans shall create a technical memo at each phase and submit the memo to the City of Long Beach Development Services Department for concurrence.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 79
d. At the discretion of the City, a detailed character-defining features analysis and/or historical resource treatment plan may need to be prepared for select historical resources by a historic preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards if the nature of the project or the significance of the property warrants such detailed analysis.
e. A qualified historic preservation professional shall monitor construction activities at key milestones to ensure that the work to be conducted complies with the Standards. The milestones shall be agreed upon in advance by the City and property owner or project applicant/developer.
f. City staff and the qualified historic preservation professional shall review the finished rehabilitation/renovation in person upon completion. g. In the event that any historical resource(s) are leased to third-party tenants and tenant improvements will be made, all of the terms of this stipulation shall be disclosed in the lease agreements, agreed upon in writing, and mutually enforced by the property owner or project applicant/developer and the City.
The tenants shall not be permitted to conduct work that does not comply with the Standards.
B. Rehabilitation According to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
1. If the proposed project includes total demolition of a historical resource, the property owner or project applicant/developer shall first consider an alternative that retains the historical resource and incorporates it into the overall project development as an adaptive re-use of the building.
2. If the project site permits, the historical resource should be relocated to another location on the site, and the resource should be reincorporated into the overall project.
3. If the City determines that retention/onsite relocation of the historical resource is not feasible through a credible feasibility study, the City shall elect to allow the property owner or project applicant/developer to move forward with the development/redevelopment project; however, all other requirements outlined in this mitigation measure shall apply.
C. Third Party Sale
1. If the City determines that retention or onsite relocation of the historical resource is not feasible, then the property owner or project applicant/developer shall offer any historical resources scheduled for demolition to the public for sale and offsite relocation by a third party:
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
a. The historic resource(s) shall be advertised by the property owner or project applicant/developer at a minimum in the following locations: project applicant’s/developer’s website (if applicable); City of Long Beach website; Los Angeles Times website and print editions; Long Beach Press Telegram. b. The bidding period shall remain open for 60 days after the date of advertisement to allow adequate response time from interested parties. c. Qualified parties shall meet the following minimum qualifications to be considered a realistic buyer: possess adequate financial resources to relocate and rehabilitate the historical resource(s); possess an available location for the historical resource(s); and provide for a new use for the historical resource(s). d. The City shall approve the qualified buyer. If no such buyer comes forward within the allotted time frame, the City shall elect to issue a demolition permit for the historical resource. However, all other requirements outlined in this mitigation measure shall apply.
D. Recordation
1. The property owner or project applicant/developer shall create HABS-like Level II documentation prepared in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering Documentation. Information on the Standards and Guidelines is available at the following links:
http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/arch_stnds_6.htm.
http://www.nps.gov/history/hdp/standards/index.htm.
a. Photographs with large-format black-and-white negatives (4 inches by 5 inches or larger) of the property as a whole shall be provided; photocopies with large format negatives of select existing drawings, site plans, or historic views where available. A minimum of 12 views showing context and relationship of historical resources to each other shall be provided; aerial views showing the whole property shall also be provided.
b. Written historical descriptive data, index to photographs, and photo key plan shall be provided.
c. The above items shall be created by a historic preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards with demonstrated experience in creating HABS Level II documentation. d. The above items shall be created prior to any demolition or relocation work. e. The above items shall be distributed to the following repositories for use by future researchers and educators. Before submitting any documents, each of the following repositories shall be contacted to ensure that they are willing and M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 81
able to accept the items: City of Long Beach Public Library; Long Beach Historical Society; Los Angeles Public Library; South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton; and City of Long Beach Development Services Department (building files).
E. Salvage and Reuse
1. If offsite relocation of the historical resource by a third party is not accomplished, the property owner or project applicant/developer shall create a salvage and reuse plan identifying elements and materials of the resource that can be saved prior to any demolition work.
a. The salvage and reuse plan shall be included in bid documents prepared for the site and shall be created by a historic preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards with demonstrated experience in creating salvage and reuse plans. b. Elements and materials that may be salvageable include windows; doors; roof tiles; decorative elements; bricks, foundation materials, and/or paving materials; framing members; furniture; lighting; and flooring materials, such as tiles and hardwood.
2. The property owner or project applicant/developer shall identify individuals, organizations, or businesses interested in receiving the salvaged items; these may include Habitat for Humanity Restore; other affordable housing organizations; or salvage yards. The following steps shall be taken by the property owner or project applicant/developer:
a. Identification of the individuals, organizations, or businesses interested in receiving the salvaged items shall be completed in consultation with the City. b. Identification of the individuals, organizations, or businesses interested in receiving the salvaged items shall be accomplished by contacting potentially interested parties directly first.
c. Items to be salvaged shall be advertised in the following locations for a period of 60 days if none of the contacted parties are able to receive the items: Los Angeles Times and Long Beach Press Telegram.
3. The property owner or project applicant/developer shall remove salvageable items in the gentlest, least destructive manner possible. Historic materials and features shall be protected by storing salvaged items in indoor, climate- and weather-controlled conditions until recipients can retrieve them. The removal of salvageable items shall be performed by a licensed contractor with demonstrated experience with implementing salvage and reuse plans.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
F. Other Optional Interpretive, Commemorative, or Educational Measures The City may also elect to require additional (optional) mitigation measures crafted in response to a specific historical resource’s property type or significance, association with a specific historic person, or overall value to the community, as practical, so long as the measure is commensurate with the significance of the property and the level of impact to that resource.
Such measures may include educational or interpretive programming; signage; incorporation of historical features into new developments or public art; contribution to a mitigation fund for future historic preservation efforts; written histories or contexts important to the public’s understanding of the lost resource (presuming no other extant resource can interpret such significance); etc. The need for these additional measures shall be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis and incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. Some measures may be made available to the public through museum displays, written reports at research repositories, on- or offsite signage, or existing online multimedia sites.
Applicability: This mitigation measure could apply to the proposed project. The Historic Evaluation (Appendix D) was prepared for the proposed project consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 (above). The Historic Evaluation found that there are no historic resources existing onsite or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, Mitigation Measure CUL-2 is not needed. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
The project site is currently developed with existing office buildings, surface parking, public rights of way, and landscaping. Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed project would discover unknown archaeological and tribal cultural resources. Nevertheless, and consistent with the certified PEIR, development of the proposed project could unearth unknown archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources. The proposed project would be required to incorporate the conditions of approval (see “Existing Conditions” for this topic) that would require the preparation and implementation of an Archaeological Monitoring and Mitigation Plan during grading and construction activities. The Archaeological Monitoring and Mitigation Plan would outline procedures for monitoring during grading and construction activities and steps to take in the event that archaeological or tribal cultural resources are encountered during grading and construction activities.
Additionally, the proposed project would be required to implement applicable mitigation measures from the PEIR (below). Mitigation Measure CUL-5 is not applicable to the proposed project since the project site is developed and the portion of the project site that encompasses the Pumpkin Patch site is within the public right-of-way and has also been developed. Development of the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the PEIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the PEIR and would remain consistent with the PEIR. Effects peculiar to the proposed project or the project site do not exist. No new information would result in more severe impacts. Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met. No subsequent review is required.
M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis
July 2023 Page 83
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures from the adopted MMRP are applicable to the proposed project. Refer to Appendix A for the full list of mitigation measures associated with the certified PEIR.
CUL-3 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, and for any subsequent permit involving excavation to increased depth, the project applicant for each development or redevelopment project considered for approval pursuant to the Southeast Area Specific Plan shall provide letters to the City of Long Beach from a qualified archaeologist and paleontologist (for excavations five feet below ground surface and deeper) who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. The letters shall state that the project applicant has retained these individuals, and that the archaeological consultant will be present during all grading in previously undisturbed areas and other significant ground-disturbing activities and that the paleontological consultant will be present during all grading that occurs below 5 feet from the ground surface. In the event archeological or paleontological resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, the professional archeological or paleontological monitor shall have the authority to halt any activities adversely impacting potentially significant cultural resources until they can be formally evaluated. Suspension of ground disturbances in the vicinity of the discoveries shall not be lifted until the archaeological and/or paleontological monitor, in coordination with the construction contractor, has evaluated discoveries to assess whether they are significant cultural resources, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If significance criteria are met, then the project shall be required to perform data recovery, professional identification, radiocarbon dates as applicable, and other special studies. The resources shall be offered for curation or preservation to a repository with a retrievable collection system and an educational and research interest in the materials, such as the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History or California State University, Fullerton, or other local museum or repository. If no museum or repository is willing to accept the resource, the resource shall be considered the property of the City and may be stored, disposed of, transferred, exchanged, or otherwise handled by the City at its discretion.
Applicability: Mitigation Measure CUL-3 is applicable to the proposed project.
CUL-4 At least 30 days prior to ground disturbance by each project development or redevelopment in conformance with the Specific Plan, the City of Long Beach would notify the three Native American tribal representatives who requested Native American monitoring of ground disturbing activities (Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians Kizh Nation, Gabrieleño/Tongva Band of Mission Indians, and Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation). For each project, the project applicant would retain one certified Native American monitor who would accompany the professional archaeological monitor during on-call monitoring. The Native American monitor would have the same authority to halt activities that could adversely impact archaeological or tribal cultural resources that the professional archaeological monitor would. The Native American monitor would recommend measures to avoid, preserve, and/or M A R K E T P L A C E M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T A T 6 6 1 5 E . P A C I F I C C O A S T H I G H W A Y
C I T Y O F L O N G B E A C H
3. Environmental Analysis