Los Alamitos City Council
April 11, 2022

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
Council Chamber
3191 Katella Ave., Los Alamitos, CA 90720

CITY COUNCIL REVISED AGENDA

ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
Monday, April 11, 2022 – 5:30 p.m.

SAFETY ALERT – NOTICE REGARDING COVID-19
If you wish to attend the City Council meeting in person, the Council Chamber located at 3191 Katella Ave., Los Alamitos, California 90720, will have seating for this meeting and the public shall have the right to observe and offer public comment at this location. The City of Los Alamitos continues to follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and these provisions are subject change with short notice.

While you may attend this meeting in person, given the health risks associated with COVID-19, please be advised that you may submit comments on any agenda item or on any item not on the agenda by email to [email protected] with the subject line “PUBLIC COMMENT”. Comments received by 3:00 p.m. will be compiled, provided to the City Council, and made available to the public before the start of the meeting.

Staff will not read email comments at the meeting but the official record will include all email comments received until the close of the meeting. You may also view the meeting live on local cable channel 3.

Please consider carefully before attending this meeting in person and do not attend this meeting in person if you have had direct contact with someone who has tested positive for Coronavirus (COVID-19), or you are experiencing symptoms such as coughing, sneezing, fever, difficulty breathing or other flu-like symptoms.

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC – This Agenda contains a brief general description of each item to be considered.

Except as provided by law, action or discussion shall not be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda.

Supporting documents, including staff reports, are available for review at City Hall in the City Clerk’s Office or on the City’s website at www.cityoflosalamitos.org once the agenda has been publicly posted.

Each matter on the agenda, no matter how described, shall be deemed to include any appropriate motion, whether to adopt a minute motion, resolution, payment of any bill, approval of any matter or action, or any other action. Items listed as “for information” or “for discussion” may also be the subject of an “action” taken by the City Council at the same meeting.

Any written materials relating to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection online at www.cityoflosalamitos.org.

Persons wishing to address the City Council on any item on the City Council Agenda should complete a blue “Request to Speak” card and will be called upon at the time the agenda item is called or during the City Council's consideration of the item and may address the City Council for up to three minutes.

It is the intention of the City of Los Alamitos to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee, or a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (562) 431-3538, extension 220, 48 hours prior to the meeting so that reasonable arrangements may be made.

REVISED - City Council Adjourned Regular Agenda
April 11, 2022

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL
Mayor Hasselbrink
Mayor Pro Tem Doby
Council Member Bates
Council Member Chirco
Council Member Nefulda

3. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Findings Required by AB 361 for the Continued Use of Teleconferencing for Meetings (City Attorney)
For the City Council to continue to have the option to meet via teleconference during the pandemic, AB 361 requires the City Council make specific findings at least every thirty (30) days.

Recommendation: Make the following findings by a majority vote of the City Council:

1. A state of emergency has been proclaimed by California’s Governor due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and continues to be in effect; and,

2. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and,

3. State and local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing to slow the spread of COVID-19.

B. Ordinance No. 2022-01 – Adoption of District Maps for the City of Los Alamitos By-District Elections (City Clerk)
Pursuant to Elections Code section 21601, cities with by-district election systems are required to redraw their district boundary maps following each decennial federal census to ensure compliance with the California and federal Voting Rights Acts. The process to complete the redistricting requires a minimum of four public hearings and dedicated public outreach to ensure minority populations and communities of interest are aware of the redistricting effort and are provided with options to participate. Tonight’s item will adopt the final district map.

Recommendation: Adopt Ordinance No. 2022-01, entitled, “An

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING DISTRICT MAPS FOR THE CITY OF LOS
ALAMITOS BY-DISTRICT ELECTIONS.”
REVISED - City Council Adjourned Regular Agenda
April 11, 2022

C. Oppose State Ballot Measure Restricting Voters’ Input and Local Taxing Authority (City Clerk)
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act limits voters’ authority, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold violators of state and local laws accountable. The League of California Cities is requesting cities adopt a resolution to demonstrate how harmful this measure would be to the community and the people of California.

Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-13, entitled, “A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS

ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION
AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT (AG# 21-0042A1)
INITIATIVE”.

4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Consideration of the Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU) Zone Strategic Plan (Development Services)
The City is undergoing a strategic plan for the Town Center zoning area that will establish a scenario to increase economic development, attract businesses, provide property owners an easier path for projects, and help address the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers that have been assessed by the State. Council will consider the Resolution to adopt the Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU) Zone Strategic Plan, the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Recommendation:

1. Open the Public Hearing; and,

2. Take testimony; and,

3. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2022-12, entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE City Council OF THE CITY OF LOS
ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, Adopting the TOWN CENTER MIXED
USE (TCMU) ZONE STRATEGIC PLAN, DATED February 23, 2022,

TO INCLUDE ITS GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

REPORT (EIR) ADDENDUM, AND MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM, BOTH DATED DECEMBER 2021
(CITYWIDE) (CITY INITIATED).”
REVISED - City Council Adjourned Regular Agenda
April 11, 2022

5. CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
City Negotiator: Shelley Hasselbrink, Mayor
Employee/Organization: Chet Simmons, City Manager
Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6
B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Title: City Manager
Authority: Government Code Section 54957

6. ADJOURNMENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing Agenda was posted at the Los Alamitos City Hall, 3191 Katella Ave. and online at www.cityoflosalamitos.org not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
Dated: March 7, 2022
1654466.1
City of Los Alamitos

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 11, 2022 ITEM NUMBER: 3A
To: Mayor Shelley Hasselbrink & Members of the City Council From: Michael S. Daudt, City Attorney
Subject: Findings Required by AB 361 for the Continued Use of Teleconferencing for Meetings

SUMMARY
For the City Council to continue to have the option to meet via teleconference during the pandemic, AB 361 requires the City Council make specific findings at least every thirty (30) days.

RECOMMENDATION
Make the following findings by a majority vote of the City Council:

1. A state of emergency has been proclaimed by California’s Governor due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and continues to be in effect; and,

2. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and,

3. State and local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing to slow the spread of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSION
Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361) was signed into law by the Governor on September 16, 2021.

A portion of AB 361 enacted amendments to California Government Code section 54953 regarding teleconference meetings. Those amendments authorize local agencies, like the City, to continue to conduct meetings by teleconference1 during a Governor-proclaimed state of emergency2 provided that certain findings are made by the legislative body, and provided that certain procedural requirements are met regarding public access to the meetings.
1 A “teleconference” occurs for purposes of AB 361 whenever one or more members of the City Council connect to a City Council meeting via electronic means. Thus, even if four members of the City Council meet in person, if the fifth joins the meeting via Zoom, the meeting will be a teleconference meeting that must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of AB 361. 2 For purposes of AB 361 “…’state of emergency’ means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act…” Cal. Gov’t Code Sec. 54953(e)(4). Section 8265 of CESA in turn refers to a state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor AB 361 Teleconference Findings
April 11, 2022

1654466.1
A new requirement in AB 361 requires specific findings be reaffirmed at least every thirty (30) days in order for the City Council to continue to have the option for one (1) or more of its members to use teleconferencing.

The Required Findings
The teleconference provisions in AB 361 may only be utilized as long as a Governorproclaimed state of emergency remains active, or while state or local officials have recommended measures to promote social distancing. When either of those is the case (both are true at this time), then in order to continue to teleconference using the new provisions of AB 361, the City Council must make the following findings by majority vote every 30 days:
(A) The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and
(B) Either of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person; or
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing3.

To comply with that requirement, the recommended action would have the City Council find each of the following:

1. A state of emergency has been proclaimed by California’s Governor due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and continues to be in effect; and,

2. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and,

3. State and local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing to slow the spread of COVID-19.

The “Every 30 Days Thereafter” Requirement
As noted above, AB 361 findings must be made “no later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to [AB 361], and every 30 days thereafter…” In order to preserve the option for the City Council or individual members of the City Council to participate in meetings during the pandemic via teleconference in the future, the City Council will have to adopt the required findings at least every 30 days.

Potential Consequence of Not Making the Findings Every 30 Days AB 361 does not expressly state what happens if a legislative body fails to make the required findings “every 30 days.” However, it expressly requires the timely re-approval of the findings “in order to continue to teleconference” in the manner that AB 361 authorizes.
3 Cal Gov’t Code Sec. 54953(e)(3)
AB 361 Teleconference Findings
April 11, 2022

1654466.1
As a result, if the City Council does not adopt the required findings every 30 days, then the City Council could be precluded from continuing to teleconference thereafter, perhaps even if the City Council was willing to adopt the findings at a later date. For this reason, the City Attorney recommends that the City Council adopt the required findings at this time and at least every 30 days thereafter, unless the City Council decides as a permanent matter that it will no longer permit teleconferencing at all (e.g., regardless of whether the state of emergency worsens).

Procedural Requirements for The Conduct of Teleconference Meetings AB 361 contains several new requirements for the conduct of teleconference meetings with which the City has prepared to comply. Specifically, each meeting must:

1. Allow members of the public to attend and comment at the meeting via call-in option or internet-based service option; and,

2. Protect the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body; and,

3. In the event of disruption which prevents broadcasting the meeting or which prevents members of the public from offering public comments via the call-in or internet-based option, the City Council must take no further action until the disrupted public access is restored; and,

4. The City may not require public comments to be submitted in advance, and must offer the opportunity for the public to offer comments “in real time” during the meeting; and,

5. The public must be allowed “a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow members of the public to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to register [to log into the teleconference], or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

Submitted by: Michael S. Daudt, City Attorney
Approved by: Chet Simmons, City Manager
City of Los Alamitos

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 11, 2022 ITEM NUMBER: 3B
To: Mayor Shelley Hasselbrink & Members of the City Council Presented By: Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
Subject: Ordinance No. 2022-01 – Adoption of District Maps for the City of Los Alamitos By-District Elections

SUMMARY
Pursuant to Elections Code section 21601, cities with by-district election systems are required to redraw their district boundary maps following each decennial federal census to ensure compliance with the California and federal Voting Rights Acts. The process to complete the redistricting requires a minimum of four public hearings and dedicated public outreach to ensure minority populations and communities of interest are aware of the redistricting effort and are provided with options to participate. Tonight’s item will adopt the final district map.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Ordinance No. 2022-01, entitled, “An ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING DISTRICT MAPS FOR THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS BY-DISTRICT ELECTIONS.”

BACKGROUND
On May 11, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-08 declaring its intent to initiate proceedings to transition the City from at-large to district-based Council Member elections pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010 and Government Code Section 34886. The City Council subsequently held five public hearings to solicit feedback and review City Council district maps submitted by the public. On July 16, 2018, the City Council introduced and on July 30, 2018, adopted Ordinance 2018-05, selecting a preferred map and election sequence for the newly created City Council District boundaries (“Districting Ordinance”).

Following the early resignation of a Council Member Warren Kusumoto, Ordinance No. 2020-02 was adopted to amend the Districting Ordinance to provide for the election of ORD 2022-01 – Adoption of District Boundaries Map
April 11, 2022

three Councilmembers by district in 2020, with two Councilmembers elected by district in 2022.

After the transition to the district-based election system, the City was geographically divided into five separate districts, each represented by one Council Member who was chosen by the electors residing in that particular district.

On May 17, 2021, the City Council approved an agreement with National Demographics Corporation, Inc. for Professional Demographer Services to assist in facilitating City Council District Map revisions.

The districts must now be redrawn using the 2020 census data and in compliance with the Fair Maps Act (the “Act”), which was adopted by the California legislature as AB 849 and took effect January 1, 2020. The deadline for cities with November elections to adopt the final District Map is April 17, 2022 (205 days before the election). If this deadline is passed, the County Superior Court will adopt the district boundaries for the City.

Under the Act, the Council shall draw and adopt boundaries using the following criteria in the listed order of priority (Elections Code 21601(c) for general law cities / 21621(c) for charter cities):
• Comply with the federal requirements of equal population and the Voting Rights Act
• Geographically contiguous
• Undivided neighborhoods and “communities of interest” (socio-economic geographic areas that should be kept together)
• Easily identifiable boundaries
• Compact (do not bypass one group of people to get to a more distant group of people)
• Shall not favor or discriminate against a political party Once the prioritized criteria are met, other traditional districting principles can be considered, such as:
• Minimize the number of voters delayed from voting in 2022 to 2024 • Respect voters’ choices / continuity in office
• Future population growth
The City must ensure compliance with the following state and federally-mandated criteria:
• Each district shall contain a nearly equal population. • Each district shall be drawn in a manner that complies with the Federal Voting Rights Act.
• Each district shall not be drawn with race as the predominate factor in violation of the principles established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), and its progeny.

ORD 2022-01 – Adoption of District Boundaries Map
April 11, 2022

After meeting those requirements, the idea of districts is to achieve goals including respect for communities of interest. A community of interest is a neighborhood or group that would benefit from being in the same district because of shared interests, views, or characteristics. Possible community features include, but are not limited to:

A. School attendance areas;
B. Natural dividing lines such as major roads, hills, or highways; C. Areas around parks and other neighborhood landmarks; D. Common issues, neighborhood activities, or legislative/election concerns; and E. Shared demographic characteristics, such as:
a. Similar levels of income, education, or linguistic insolation b. Languages spoken at home
c. Single-family and multi-family housing unit areas
Public Hearings
By law, the City must hold at least four public hearings that enable community members to provide input on the drawing of district maps:
• At least one hearing must occur before the city or county draws draft maps • At least two hearings must happen after the drawing of draft maps • The fourth hearing can happen either before or after the drawing of draft maps • City or county staff or consultants may hold a public workshop instead of one of the required public redistricting hearings
To increase the accessibility of these hearings, cities and counties must take the following steps:
• At least one hearing must occur on a Saturday, Sunday, or after 6 p.m. on a weekday
• If a redistricting hearing is consolidated with another local government meeting, the redistricting hearing portion must begin at a pre-designated time • Local public redistricting hearings should be made accessible to people with disabilities
Notices of the Public Hearings were published in English, Spanish, Korean, and Vietnamese in the local newspaper, posted on the City website, and City Hall posting boards. Videos of the public hearings were posted on the redistricting webpage.

Public Hearing 1 – Tuesday, January 18, 2022 – 5:30 p.m.

This was the first meeting held virtually before the City Council. Dr. Levitt provided the presentation on the redistricting process and this was the first opportunity for the public to provide input. There were no members of the public that wished to participate present and no written public comments were received. Council raised concerns regarding the ability to account for future population growth. A list of known planned and approved ORD 2022-01 – Adoption of District Boundaries Map
April 11, 2022

developments was provided to NDC for consideration. Concerns regarding the amount of available single-housing units in District 1 were also stated.

Public Hearing 2 – Monday, February 7, 2022 – 5:30 p.m.

This was the second Public Hearing held before the City Council. Dr. Levitt provided the presentation on the redistricting process, and permissible criteria to be considered to evaluate district boundaries. There were no members of the public that wished to participate present and no written public comments were received.

Public Hearing 3 – Monday, February 28, 2022 – 6:30 p.m.

This was the third public hearing held before the City Council. Dr. Levitt provided the presentation on the redistricting process and permissible criteria to be considered to evaluate district boundaries. Dr. Levitt reviewed the four maps for consideration, one draft map submitted by the public and three draft maps prepared by NDC.

Frank Marquese stated support for the work the City was doing and Maggie Marquese received clarification regarding Public Map 1 and NDC Map 1. She stated it would be challenging to split up the Apartment Row neighborhood. Shane Smith identified himself as the individual who submitted the public map. He expressed concern the socioeconomic data was not available on the public map drawing tool and supported participating in the process.

Council discussed the inclusion of Lily and Marna in District one, requested across the street neighbors be in the same district if population balance would allow for it, concern for the lack of single family homes in District 1, ensured new developments were taken into consideration, and stated a preference for not moving residents to a district that would prolong their ability to vote.

Public Hearing 4 – Monday, March 7, 2022 – 6:00 p.m.

This was the fourth public hearing held before the City Council. Dr. Levitt reviewed and discussed the draft maps of proposed districts that had been submitted by members of the community and by the City’s consultant National Demographics Corporation (NDC).

City Council, Staff, and members of the public discussed the following:
• Strong desire to stay close to original map in order to avoid confusion for residents.
• Try to avoid shifting residents into new districts that may delay their ability to vote in an upcoming election.
• To the extent possible, ensure that neighborhoods stay together. • Attempt to allow residents on the same block or across the street from each other to remain within the same district (where possible).
• Try to create symmetrical shaped districts boundaries that follow straight lines (where possible) that are easy for residents to identify. • Ensure district boundaries include different housing types (single family homes, Townhomes, Condo, Apartments).

ORD 2022-01 – Adoption of District Boundaries Map
April 11, 2022

The City Council directed Dr. Levitt to revise Map 2 based on the comments received and continued the Public Hearing to March 21, 2022, at 7:00 p.m.

Public Hearing 4 Continued – Monday, March 21, 2022 – 7:00 p.m.

This was the continuation of public hearing four held before the City Council. Dr. Levitt reviewed and discussed the draft maps of proposed districts had been submitted by members of the community and by the City’s consultant National Demographics Corporation (NDC).

Maggie Marquese, resident, stated she had reviewed the draft maps to ensure there was a balance of homeowners and renters in all the districts. She thanked Dr. Levitt for hearing the feedback of the community and thanked the Council for including the community in the process.

Mr. Joe E, resident, spoke positively of NDC and thanked Staff for its timely response to his households feedback. He appreciated Council taking time to review additional maps and believed they would make the best decision for the City. He stated support for NDC Map 5.

City Council and Staff discussed the following:
• Support for NDC Map 5
• Walkable districts that all had a variety of residential, renters, and industrial • District 4 and 5 are close to previous district lines so voters would not be disenfranchised
• Support for District 3 maintaining family and commercial areas in NDC Map 5 • Community can reach out to any Council Member for support, not just their District representative
The City Council unanimously selected NDC Map 5 as the preferred District Boundary Map and introduced Ordinance No. 2022-01 and entitled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING DISTRICT MAPS FOR THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS BY-DISTRICT ELECTIONS .” The meeting was adjourned to Monday, April 11, 2022 for final adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-01.

Channels of Outreach
The City of Los Alamitos leveraged a full array of outreach platforms to connect with the public. These included:
• The creation of the redistricting page on the City’s website, https://calosalamitos.civicplus.com/445/2022-Redistricting. The webpage contains all notices, flyers, Staff reports, presentations, and meeting recordings. Per the Elections Code the website must be maintained for ten years.

ORD 2022-01 – Adoption of District Boundaries Map
April 11, 2022

• Social Media posts spread across Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor.com. o 1/10/22 – Introduction of the process and notice of first Public Hearing o 1/18/22 – Reminder to join the first Public Hearing
o 1/27/22 – Requesting input for maps and notice of second Public Hearing o 2/7/22 – Notice of Public Hearing available on the City’s website o 2/14/22 – Notice Redistricting Map Tools available Online and third Public Hearing
o 2/21/22 – Notice of Map Drafts available online and third Public Hearing o 3/3/22 – Notice of Final Map selection and fourth Public Hearing o 3/7/22 – Reminder of fourth Public Hearing
o 3/10/22 – Notice of Public Hearing 4 continuation to March 21, 2022 o 3/15/22 – Notice of Map Drafts available online and continuation of fourth Public Hearing
• Pubic Hearing Notices in English, Spanish, Korean, and Vietnamese were published in the News Enterprise on January 12 and February 2, 2022. Including the Notice for Public Hearing 4 Continuation published on March 16, 2022. • Email outreach to 10,105 subscribers via the City’s Weekly Newsletter to drive awareness of the redistricting effort and opportunities to participate in Public Hearings
• Four Public Hearings, which included one (1) virtual meeting, to discuss the redistricting process and gather public input on neighborhoods and communities of interest
Redistricting Website
The redistricting webpage, http://cityoflosalamitos.org/445/2022-Redistricting, was created to provide extensive resources to the public where they could learn about the redistricting process, access all the materials and meeting information, and draw maps based upon their understanding of communities of interest and submit them for consideration.

Draft Maps
Maps must be population-balanced to be considered for potential adoption. Resident submitted maps and draft maps were posted on the City’s website on March 3, 2022.

Notice advising draft maps were available was posted on the City’s Facebook and Nextdoor.com page.

The public submitted one map. NDC originally created three district sequencing scenarios for consideration by the City Council. Based off Council comments NDC prepared a fourth map from February 28, 2022, and a fifth map from March 7, 2022 for consideration.

ORD 2022-01 – Adoption of District Boundaries Map
April 11, 2022

Dr. Levitt examined the request to have across the street neighbors in the same district.

Due to the dense population in the Apartment Row neighborhood, it was not feasible to do so. Dr. Levitt of NDC will lead a review of the maps and answer questions.

DISCUSSION
At its March 21, 2022 meeting, the City Council unanimously selected NDC Map 5 as the preferred District Boundary Map and introduced Ordinance No. 2022-01. The meeting was adjourned to Monday, April 11, 2022 for final adoption of Ordinance No. 2022-01.

The deadline to adopt a new map is April 17, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT
No additional allocations are being requested at this time. Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the Election Expense Account, 10.511.5233,
Submitted by: Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
Approved by: Chet Simmons, City Manager

Attachment: 1. Ordinance No 2022-01

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-01

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
DISTRICT MAPS FOR THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS BYDISTRICT ELECTIONS WHEREAS, on July 30, 2018, the City Council of the City of Los Alamitos adopted Ordinance No. 2018-05 establishing a district-based election system for City Councilmembers and selecting a voting district map for five (5) Council Districts; and, WHEREAS, Elections Code § 21601 requires that following each decennial federal census, and using that census as a basis, the City Council shall, by ordinance or resolution, adjust the boundaries of any or all of the Council Districts so that the districts shall be as nearly equal in population as may be and shall comply with the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the state and federal Voting Rights Acts; and,
WHEREAS, Public Hearings were held on January 18, 2022, and February 7, 2022, to receive public input regarding the composition of the City’s Council Districts before any updated draft voting district maps were drawn; and,
WHEREAS, Public Hearings were then held on February 28, 2022, and March 7, 2022, where the public was invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft voting district maps; and,
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2022, the City Council held a final public hearing on the proposal to adjust Council District boundaries, reviewed additional public input, formally selected the voting district map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein, and as set forth in this Ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, this Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Elections Code §§ 21600 - 21609 to provide for election of members of the City Council of the City of Los Alamitos by-district in five (5) single-member districts to implement the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Elections Code§ 14025, et seq.) and protect the guarantees of the California Constitution.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2. The voting district map attached hereto as Exhibit A shall be and is hereby adopted and determined to constitute the five (5) Council Districts in the City of Los Alamitos, California.

CC ORD 2022-01

SECTION 3. The City Clerk is authorized to make technical adjustments to the Council District boundaries that do not substantively affect the populations in the districts, the eligibility of candidates, or the residence of elected officials within any district. The City Clerk must consult with the City Manager and City Attorney concerning any technical adjustments deemed necessary and advise the City Council of any such adjustments required in the implementation of the districts.

SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause a summary thereof to be published within fifteen (15) days of the adoption and shall post a Certified copy of this Ordinance, including the vote for and against the same, in the Office of the City Clerk, in accordance with Government Code Section 36933.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of March, 2022.

Shelley Hasselbrink, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
Michael S. Daudt, City Attorney
CC ORD 2022-01

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS )
I, Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Los Alamitos, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2022-01 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 21st day of March, 2022 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at an adjourned regular meeting of the City Council on 11th day of April, 2022, by the following roll-call vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
_______________________________
Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk

CC ORD 2022-01

Exhibit A
Council District Map
3 1
4 2
5 Little Cottonwood Park
Arbor Park
Laurel Park
South Highlands Park
605
605
Tripoli Ave
Shiloh Way
Doolittle Ave
Los Alamitos B vl d
Pso Bonita
Saratoga Ave
Constitution Ave
Howard Ave
Green Ave
Katella Ave Katella Ave
Noel St
Orangewood Ave
Valley Forge Ave
Cherry St
Reagan St
P ni e St
Bunker Hill Dr
Kearsarge Ave
Humbolt St
Portal Dr
Ball Rd
Cerritos Ave
Los Vaqueros Cir
Ticonderoga D
S
r
aratoga Dr
Langley Dr
M di way D
E
r
ssex Dr
Enterprise Dr
Thor Ave
Serpentine Dr
Seal Beach Blvd
Sausalito St
Farquhar Ave
Liberty Ave
Bloomfield Ave
Toland Ave
Wasp Ct
Chestnut St
Walnut St
Los Alamitos Blvd
Fenley Dr
Lexington Dr
Lampson Ave
Kyle St
Antietam Ave
Yorktown Ave
Winners Cir
Orangewood Ave
Catalina St Oak St
Cll Lee
Barbi Ln
Kay ol r St
Via el Mercado
Myra Ave
Olympic Dr
Forrestal Ct
Florista St
Harrisburg Rd
la Colmena Way
Lake Champlain Ct
Vis de Ora
el Dorado Way
del Norte Way
Farnham Ave
Bradbury Rd
Rossmoor Way
Satellite Dr
Kings St
Lassen St
Map el St
Bloomfield Ave
America Dr
Minuteman Cir
Apollo Cir
Interior Cir Carlsbad Cir
Wallingsford Rd
Ranger Dr
Tarawa Dr
Bryant Ct
Marion Ave
Santa Elise St
Colgate Dr
Santa Clara St
Larwin Ave
City of Los AlamitosRedistricting 2022
NDC Map 5
Map layers
NDC Map 5
Streets
Landmark Area
Water Area
Current Districts ©2021 CALIPER
NDC Map 5
District 1
Total Pop 2,325
Deviation from ideal -34
% Deviation -1.44%
% Hisp 30.7%
% NH White 38%
% NH Black 5%
% Asian-American 22%
Total 1,604
% Hisp 33%
% NH White 41%
% NH Black 12%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 12%
Total 1,328
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 26%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 51%
% NH Black 12%
Total 1,107
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 52%
% NH Black 12%
Total 719
% Latino est. 23%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 54%
% NH Black est. 13%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 2,251
age0-19 24%
age20-60 54%
age60plus 22%
immigrants 18%
naturalized 76%
english 71%
spanish 18%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 2%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 6%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 11%
Child in Household child-under18 38%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 66%
income 0-25k 11%
income 25-50k 24%
income 50-75k 16%
income 75-200k 41%
income 200k-plus 8%
single family 61%
multi-family 39%
rented 63%
owned 37%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data.
2 2,323
-36
-1.53%
19%
47%
3%
27%
1,683
12%
51%
6%
29%
1,397
13%
12%
12%
2%
67%
6%
1,211
13%
12%
12%
2%
67%
6%
931
10%
9%
9%
2%
73%
6%
2,234
22%
56%
22%
19%
69%
70%
8%
18%
4%
7%
32%
34%
19%
33%
64%
12%
13%
16%
40%
19%
60%
40%
57%
43%
3 2,375
16 0.68%
29%
44%
3%
20%
1,544
21%
58%
9%
13%
1,334
22%
20%
8%
2%
61%
8%
1,107
22%
20%
7%
2%
63%
8%
821
19%
18%
6%
2%
66%
8%
2,234
27%
52%
21%
17%
65%
79%
9%
10%
1%
6%
37%
29%
17%
36%
64%
12%
17%
15%
45%
11%
41%
59%
69%
31%
4 2,490
131

5.55%
29%
47%
3%
16%
1,778
31%
53%
3%
10%
1,590
20%
19%
5%
1%
71%
3%
1,373
18%
17%
5%
1%
73%
3%
924
16%
15%
5%
2%
75%
3%
2,438
24%
54%
21%
13%
68%
79%
12%
5%
4%
4%
38%
29%
12%
39%
65%
12%
20%
14%
40%
14%
65%
35%
53%
47%
5 2,281
-78
-3.31%
21%
55%
2%
16%
1,747
14%
70%
6%
9%
1,563
13%
12%
7%
1%
74%
5%
1,412
13%
12%
7%
1%
75%
5%
1,038
10%
10%
5%
1%
79%
5%
2,328
24%
52%
24%
11%
69%
86%
3%
9%
2%
4%
39%
32%
18%
37%
62%
9%
11%
11%
46%
22%
71%
29%
42%
58%
Total
11,794
209

8.86%
26%
46%
4%
20%
8,356
22%
55%
7%
15%
7,212
19%
18%
8%
2%
65%
7%
6,210
18%
17%
8%
2%
67%
7%
4,433
15%
14%
6%
1%
70%
6%
11,484
24%
54%
22%
16%
69%
77%
10%
10%
3%
5%
37%
31%
15%
37%
64%
11%
17%
14%
43%
15%
60%
40%
57%
43%
03/13/2022 21:50 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
City of Los Alamitos

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 11, 2022 ITEM NUMBER: 3C
To: Mayor Shelley Hasselbrink & Members of the City Council Presented By: Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
Subject: Oppose State Ballot Measure Restricting Voters’ Input and Local Taxing Authority

SUMMARY
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act limits voters’ authority, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold violators of state and local laws accountable. The League of California Cities is requesting cities adopt a resolution to demonstrate how harmful this measure would be to the community and the people of California.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 2022-13, entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT (AG# 21-0042A1) INITIATIVE”.

BACKGROUND
In 2018, the Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act or (AG# 17-0050 Amdt. #1), was being circulated to qualify for the November 2018 ballot. This initiative would have drastically limited local revenue authority. Through the successful work and advocacy of the League of California Cities and its coalition, the measure’s proponents withdrew the initiative from the ballot in June 2018.

On January 4, 2022, the California Business Roundtable filed the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act or AG# 21-0042A1. This measure is far more detrimental to cities than the measure filed in 2018, because it would decimate vital local and state services to the benefit of wealthy corporations.

DISCUSSION
Oppose Taxpayer Protection and Govt. Accountability Act April 11, 2022

The League of California Cities, along with a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses, strongly oppose this initiative.

TAG# 21-0042A1 will limit voter authority and accountability; restrict local fee authority to provide local services; restrict authority of state and local governments to issue fines and penalties for violations of law; and, restrict local tax authority to provide local services. A detailed legal analysis from the League of California Cities is attached.

Fiscal Impact
None.

Submitted by: Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
Approved by: Chet Simmons, City Manager
Attachment: 1. Resolution No. 2002-13

2. League of California Cities (LOCC) Legal Analysis

3. LOCC Measure Opposition Fact Sheet

4. California City Finance Fiscal Analysis
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS

ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE TAXPAYER
PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT (AG#
21-0042A1) INITIATIVE
WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot; and, WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot; and, WHEREAS, the measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources; and,
WHEREAS, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and infrastructure, and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent; and, WHEREAS, the measure makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and, WHEREAS, the measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to state and local services at risk, and could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more; and, WHEREAS, the measure would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, and utilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Los Alamitos, California, finds that the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2. The City of Los Alamitos will join the NO on Initiative 21-0042A1 coalition, a growing coalition of public safety, labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the state.

Attachment 1
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is directed to email a copy of this adopted resolution to the League of California Cities at [email protected].

SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of February, 2022. _______________________________
Shelly Hasselbrink, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Michael S. Daudt, City Attorney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS )
I, Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Los Alamitos, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 28th day of February, 2022, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________________________
Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk

The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-0042A1
January 21, 2022
Summary: The measure limits the voters’ input, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold state and local law violators accountable.

Limiting Voter Authority and Accountability
• Limits voter input. Prohibits local voters from providing direction on how local tax dollars should be spent by prohibiting local advisory measures. • Invalidates Upland decision that allows majority of local voters to pass special taxes. Taxes proposed by the Initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. All measures passed between January 2022 and November 2022 would be invalidated unless reenacted within 12 months.

Restricting Local Fee Authority to Provide Local Services • Franchise fees. Sets new standard for fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property. The standard may significantly restrict the amount oil companies, utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations pay for the use of local public property. Rental and sale of local government property must be “reasonable” which must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.”
• Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence.

Restricting Authority of State and Local Governments to Issue Fines and Penalties for Violations of Law.
• Requires voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties.

Attachment 2
Restricting Local Tax Authority to Provide Local Services • Expanding existing taxes (e.g., UUT, use tax, TOT) to new territory (e.g., annexation) or expanding the base (e.g., new utility service) requires voter approval.
• City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. • New taxes can be imposed only for a specific time period. • Taxes adopted after January 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted.
• All state taxes require majority voter approval.
• Prohibits any surcharge on property tax rate and allocation of property tax to state.

Other Changes
• No fee or charge or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.

Stop the Corporate Loopholes Scheme
Deceptive Proposition Allows Major Corporations to Avoid Paying their Fair Share and Evade Enforcement when they Violate Environmental, Health & Safety Laws An association representing California’s wealthiest corporations — including oil, insurance, banks and drug companies — is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot. Their measure would create major new loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities; while also allowing corporations to evade enforcement when they violate environmental, health, safety and other state and local laws. Here’s why a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses oppose the Corporate Loophole Scheme:

Gives Wealthy Corporations a Major Loophole to Avoid Paying their Fair Share - Forcing Local Residents and Taxpayers to Pay More • The measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources – shifting the burden and making individual taxpayers pay more.

Allows Corporations to Dodge Enforcement When They Violate Environmental, Health, Public Safety and Other Laws
• The deceptive scheme creates new loopholes that makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.

Jeopardizes Vital Local and State Services
• This far-reaching measure puts at risk billions of dollars currently dedicated to critical state and local services.
• It could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services and more. • It would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, utilities and more.

Opens the Door for Frivolous Lawsuits, Bureaucracy and Red Tape that Will Cost Taxpayers and Hurt Our Communities
• The measure will encourage frivolous lawsuits, bureaucracy and red tape that will cost local taxpayers millions — while significantly delaying and stopping investments in infrastructure and vital services.

Attachment 3
Undermines Voter Rights, Transparency, and Accountability • This misleading measure changes our constitution to make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and local infrastructure.
• It also includes a hidden provision that would retroactively cancel measures that were passed by local voters — effectively undermining the rights of voters to decide for themselves what their communities need.
• It would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures, where voters provide direction to politicians on how they want their local tax dollars spent.

CaliforniaCityFinance.Com
Fiscal and Program Effects of
Initiative 21-0042A1 on Local Governments
If Initiative 21-0042A1 is placed on the ballot and passed by voters, it will result in:
 Billions of local government fee and charge revenues placed at heightened legal peril. Related public service reductions across virtually every aspect of city, county, special district, and school services especially for transportation, and public facility use.  Hundreds of millions of dollars of annual revenues from dozens of tax and bond measures approved by voters between January 1, 2022 and November 9, 2022 subject to additional voter approval if not in compliance with the initiative.
 Indeterminable legal and administrative burdens and costs on local government from new and more empowered legal challenges, and bureaucratic cost tracking requirements.  The delay and deterrence of municipal annexations and associated impacts on housing and commercial development.
 Service and infrastructure impacts including in fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, drinking water, sewer sanitation, parks, libraries, public schools, affordable housing, homelessness prevention and mental health services.

1. Local Government Taxes and Services Threatened
With regard to taxes, Initiative 21-0042A1:
 Prohibits advisory, non-binding measures as to use of tax proceeds on the same ballot. o Voters may be less informed and more likely to vote against measures.  Eliminates the ability of special tax measures proposed by citizen initiative to be enacted by majority voter approval (Upland).
o Because the case law regarding citizen initiative special taxes approved by majority vote (Upland) is so recent, it is unknown how common these sorts of measures might be in the future. This initiative would prohibit such measures after the effective date of the initiative. Any such measures adopted after January 1, 2022 through November 8, 2022 would be void after November 9, 2023.
 Requires that tax measures include a specific duration of time that the tax will be imposed. This seems to require that all tax increases or extensions contain a sunset (end date). o This would require additional tax measures to extend previously approved taxes at additional cost to taxpayers.
 Requires that a tax or bond measure adopted after January 1, 2022 and before the effective date of the initiative (November 9, 2022) that was not adopted in accordance with the measure be readopted in compliance with the measure or will be void twelve months after the effective date of the initiative (November 9, 2023).
o If past election patterns are an indication, dozens of tax and bond measures approving hundreds of millions of annual revenues may not be in compliance and would be subject to reenactment.

Most will be taxes without a specific end date. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, measures not in compliance would need to be placed on a special election ballot for approval before November 9, 2023 or the tax will be void after that date. General tax measures would require declaration of emergency and unanimous vote of the governing board.
2217 Isle Royale Lane • Davis, CA • 95616-6616
Phone: 530.758.3952 • Fax: 530.758.3952
Rev. January 7, 2022
Attachment 4
– 2 – rev January 7, 2022
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
 Requires voter approval to expand an existing tax to new territory (annexations). This would require additional tax measures and would deter annexations and land development in cities. o If a tax is "extended" to an annexed area without a vote after January 1, 2022, it will be void 12 months later until brought into compliance. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, such extensions for general taxes would, under current law, each require unanimous vote of the agency board to be placed on a special election ballot or would be void after November 9, 2023.

1.a. Number of Measures and Value of Local Taxes at Risk1 In 2020, voters in California approved 293 local tax and bond measures for cities, counties, special districts and schools (95 in March and 198 in November). The approved measures enacted $3.85 billion in new annual taxes including $1.3 billion for cities, $302 million for counties, $208 million for special districts (fire, wastewater, open space and transit districts), and $2.037 billion for schools (including for school bonds).

Most tax measures go to the ballot during a presidential or gubernatorial primary or general election in an even year. However, some tax measures are decided at other times. During 2019, there were 45 approved tax and bond measures (24 city, 14 special district, 7 school) adopting $154.0 million in new annual taxes ($124.0 million city, $10.5 million special district and $19.2 million school).

Most tax and bond measures comply with the new rules in Initiative 21-0042Amdt#1 except:
 Dozens of taxes would require end dates. This would require additional measures in future years to extend the taxes further. Very few extensions of existing local taxes fail.  Majority vote general tax measures could not be accompanied on the same ballot with an advisory, non-binding measure as to use of tax proceeds.  Special taxes placed on the ballot via citizen initiative would require two-thirds voter approval.

Bond measures have fixed terms. Historically, about 20 percent of other tax measures have included specific durations (i.e. sunsets). Advisory measures as to use of revenues are uncommon. I do not expect the provisions of 21-0042A1 to have any substantial effect on passage rates. However, some 2022 approved measures would likely have to put back on the ballot.

Based on history, a reasonable estimate of the annualized tax revenues estimated to be approved by 1 Source: Compilation and summary of data from County elections offices. – 3 – rev January 7, 2022
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
voters in 2022 and placed at risk by this initiative is at least $1.5 billion, including $1.0 billion from cities and $500 million from counties and special districts. 2 1.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Tax Provisions In addition to service delays and disruption due to new tax revenues placed at greater legal risk, there will be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The deterrence of taxes for annexations will delay and deter municipal annexations.

2. “Exempt Charges” (fees and charges that are not taxes) and Services Threatened With regard to fees and charges adopted after January 1, 2022, Initiative 21-0042A1:
 Subjects new fees and charges for a product or service to a new "actual cost” test defined as “(i) the minimum amount necessary to reimburse the government for the cost of providing the service to the payor, and (ii) where the amount charged is not used by the government for any purpose other than reimbursing that cost. In addition, subjects these same charges to a new, undefined, “reasonable” standard.
 Subjects fees and charges for entrance to local government property; and rental and sale of local government property to a new, undefined, “reasonable” test.  Subjects a challenged fee or charge to new, higher burdens of proof if legally challenged.  Prohibits a levy, charge or exaction regulating or related to vehicle miles traveled, imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.

2.a. Value on New Local Government Fees and Charges at Risk3 Virtually every city, county, and special district must regularly (e.g., annually) adopt increases to fee rates and charges and revise rate schedules to accommodate new users and activities. Most of these would be subject to new standards and limitations under threat of legal challenge. Based on the current volume of fees and charges imposed by local agencies and increases in those fees simply to accommodate inflation, the amount of local government fee and charge revenue placed at risk is about $1 billion per year including those adopted since January 1, 2022. Of this $1 billion, about $570 million is for special districts, $450 million is cities, and $260 million is counties.4
Major examples of affected fees and charges are:

1. Nuisance abatement charges - such as for weed, rubbish and general nuisance abatement to fund community safety, code enforcement, and neighborhood cleanup programs.

2. Commercial franchise fees.

3. Emergency response fees - such as in connection with DUI.

4. Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport charges.

5. Document processing and duplication fees.

6. Transit fees, tolls, parking fees, public airport and harbor use fees.

7. Facility use charges, fees for parks and recreation services, garbage disposal tipping fees.

In addition to fees and charges, the measure puts fines and penalties assessed for the violation of state and 2 This does not include citizen initiative special tax approved by majority but not two-thirds. Because this approach is new, the number of these measures and amount of revenue involved cannot be estimated. 3 Source: California State Controller Annual Reports of Financial Transactions concerning cities, counties and special districts, summarized with an assumed growth due to fee rate increases (not population) of 2 percent annually. 4 School fees are also affected but the amount is negligible by comparison. – 4 – rev January 7, 2022
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
local law at risk, making them taxes subject to voter approval under certain circumstances.

2.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Fee/Charge Provisions In addition to service delays and disruptions due to fee and charge revenues placed at greater legal risk, there would be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The risk to fees and charges will make infrastructure financing more difficult and will deter new residential and commercial development. ***********
mc
City of Los Alamitos

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 11, 2022 ITEM NUMBER: 4A
To: Mayor Shelley Hasselbrink & Members of the City Council Presented By: Ron Noda, Development Services Director
Subject: Consideration of the Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU) Zone Strategic Plan

SUMMARY
The City is undergoing a strategic plan for the Town Center zoning area that will establish a scenario to increase economic development, attract businesses, provide property owners an easier path for projects, and help address the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers that have been assested by the State.

Council will consider the Resolution to adopt the Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU) Zone Strategic Plan, the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Open the Public Hearing; and,

2. Take testimony; and,

3. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2022-12, entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING

THE TOWN CENTER MIXED USE (TCMU) ZONE STRATEGIC PLAN, DATED FEBRUARY 23, 2022, TO INCLUDE ITS GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT (EIR) ADDENDUM, AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, BOTH DATED DECEMBER 2021 (CITYWIDE) (CITY INITIATED).”

BACKGROUND
Over the course of the past year, the TCMU development team had the goal of creating a Strategic Plan design to satisfy the City’s priorities which include encouraging property owners to invest in their property, align the City’s effort to designate potential residential units to meet the RHNA numbers mandated by the State of California, and to bolster a diverse and resilient tax base by attracting new businesses.

TCMU Strategic Plan
April 11, 2022

At its February 23, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2022- 09, recommending City Council approval of the draft TCMU Strategic Plan. Approval of the resolution and the TCMU Strategic Plan will encourage development of a walkable and vibrant Town Center.

DISCUSSION
A map of the Town Center Mixed Use Zone is shown below:

Stakeholder input was vital even with the public health restraints in place during the planning process. Staff accomplished a variety of outreach including virtual surveys, interviews, meeting, and presentations to solicit feedback. Stakeholder input included:
• Online survey for property owners
• Online survey for Planning Commissioners
• One-on-one meetings with members of City Council (February 8-9, 2021) • Virtual stakeholder meeting (March 11, 2021)
• Planning Commission study session (April 28, 2021)
• Virtual stakeholder meeting (June 24, 2021)
TCMU Strategic Plan
April 11, 2022

• Planning Commission study session (August 25, 2021)
• Presentation at Planning Commission meeting (December 8, 2021) • Presentation at Planning Commission meeting (February 23, 2022) Stakeholders in the Town Center Mixed Use Zone gave Staff clear and unanimous feedback. The TCMU team developed the following vision and goals that have emerged as the guiding principles for the Town Center Strategic Plan. • Integrate the Town Center with schools, community destination, and employment centers.
• Invest in bike and pedestrian safety and infrastructure. • Promote a sense of community and high-quality gathering spaces. • Incorporate mixed-use development with some office and residential to support local businesses.
• Create a destination with amenities for young people, families, and seniors. • Position the Town Center as an engine for a sustainable and profitable City. • Reinforce and maximize connections with Los Alamitos Medical Center. • Provide appropriate parking facilities and management.

Following the vision and goals that were set throughout the planning and design process, common elements emerged that support the overarching vision of the Strategic Plan. The following list presents items related to implementation of the recommended strategies.

1. Mark the Town Center – Create a sense of arrival and define a sense of place.

This is usually done with trees and it is recommended to mark the intersection of Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue. The trees will quickly establish a strong place making feature.

2. Reimagine Pine Street – Reconfigure Pine Street to create a “Main Street” with additional parking and to serve a place making function. Creating a walkable and vibrant mix-use district, near Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue, will be conducive to pedestrian-oriented restaurants and outdoor café environment.

3. Build a mix-use core – Encourage a mix of housing, retail, restaurants, and office focused on Pine Street to support a vibrant district at all times of day. If executed in a coordinated effort, residents and visitors can patronize multiple businesses and engage in a range of activities.

4. Create a place to gather – Enhance the public realm with a network of public gathering spaces. An essential component of a socially and economically vibrant Town Center is high quality and inviting public spaces that supports a range of activities that will benefit all Los Alamitos residents including families with children.

TCMU Strategic Plan
April 11, 2022

5. Consider parking choices – Provide parking through a range of efficient strategies that support local businesses and public life. This is a significant issue in Los Alamitos and implementing creative strategies and some flexibility on the parts of both the City and developers to deliver an appropriate amount of parking to support existing and new businesses.

6. Promote housing – Housing is an essential component and is a key City priority in the development of the strategic plan. A range of housing types with different densities are recommended to balance the need to fulfill the State mandated RHNA numbers and to keep Los Alamitos true to its small town charm.

7. Connect to neighborhoods – Design key corridors as multi-modal bike and pedestrian thoroughfares will reinforce the plan area as the heart of Los Alamitos.

The TCMU Strategic Plan also includes recommended implementation actions and timelines. Examples of recommended actions include amendment of the General Plan and Municipal Code, and adoption of an inclusionary Housing Ordinance. These actions will be brought back to Council for consideration.

FISCAL IMPACT
No additional allocations are being requested at this time.

Submitted by: Ron Noda, Development Services Director
Approved by: Chet Simmons, City Manager
Attachment: 1. City Council Resolution 2022-12 – TCMU Zone Strategic Plan

2. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Amendment

3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

4. Planning Commission Resolution 2021-09
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-12

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS

ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE TOWN CENTER MIXED
USE (TCMU) ZONE STRATEGIC PLAN, DATED FEBRUARY 23, 2022,

TO INCLUDE ITS GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

REPORT (EIR) ADDENDUM, AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM, BOTH DATED DECEMBER 2021 (CITYWIDE)
(CITY INITIATED)
WHEREAS, the City of Los Alamitos has resolved to create a Los Alamitos Town Center Mixed Use Zone (TCMU) Strategic Plan will assist the Council in its deliberations regarding strategically investing in programs and projects aimed at providing a framework to revitalize, reimagine, and strengthen the heart of Los Alamitos; and, WHEREAS, the City of Los Alamitos was awarded a Senate Bill 2 (SB2) planning grant in 2020, referred to as the “Building Homes and Jobs Act,” which funding is dedicated to promoting and facilitating affordable housing development; and, WHEREAS, the City of Los Alamitos desires to attract the scale and type of development to this zone that is desired by the City and its residents; and, WHEREAS, with the monetary assistance awarded by the SB2 grant program, the City developed the Los Alamitos Town Center Mixed Use Zone (TCMU) Strategic Plan, to include its Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum, with the goal of attracting project proposals that can expect a clear pathway towards project entitlement that will be welcomed by the City; and,
WHEREAS, the adoption of such a plan will also allow the City to pursue funding related to the implementation of TCMU Strategic Plan projects; and, WHEREAS, on February 23, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2022-09 recommending City Council approval of the TCMU Strategic Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council considered said document on April 11, 2022.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Los Alamitos, California, finds that the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2. The City Council adopts Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU) Zone Strategic Plan, Dated February 23, 2022, attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Attachment 1
RESO 2022-12

SECTION 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to apply for and submit applications for grant programs to support the implementation of this Strategic Plan.

SECTION 4. The City Manager is encouraged to add the projects identified in the document to the City’s list of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP).

SECTION 5. The City Manager is authorized to execute those City of Los Alamitos grant applications, submit grant support documents, and any amendments thereto, on behalf of the City of Los Alamitos as required by a requesting department for receipt of those grant in support of this Strategic Plan.

SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Los Alamitos approves the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the Town Center Mixed Use Zone Strategic Plan, both dated December 2021.

SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 11th day of April, 2022. _____________________________
Shelley Hasselbrink, Mayor
ATTEST:

Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Michael S. Daudt, City Attorney
RESO 2022-12

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS )
I, Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk, of the City of Los Alamitos, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 21st day of March, 2022, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
_______________________________
Windmera Quintanar, MMC, City Clerk

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER

STRATEGIC PLAN
CC HEARING DRAFT 3.21.2022
City Council
Shelley Hasselbrink, Mayor
Tanya Doby, Mayor Pro Tem
Ron Bates, Council Member
Mark A. Chirco, Council Member
Jordan Nefulda, Council Member
Planning Commission
Art DeBolt, Chair
Gary Loe, Vice-Chair
Larry Andrade
Mary Anne Cuilty
Wendy Grose
John Riley
Victor R. Sofelkanik
City Staff
Chet Simmons, City Manager
Ron Noda, Acting Deputy City Manager
Tom Oliver, Associate Planner
Prepared by
Funded by SB2
City of
Los Alamitos
3191 Katella Ave
Los Alamitos, CA
90720
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS
ALAMITOS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE “TOWN CENTER MIXED
USE (TCMU) ZONE STRATEGIC PLAN,” DATED FEBRUARY 23, 2022, TO

INCLUDE ITS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) ADDENDUM,

AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, BOTH
DATED DECEMBER 2021 (CITYWIDE) (CITY INITIATED)
WHEREAS, the City of Los Alamitos has resolved to create a Los Alamitos Town Center Mixed Use Zone (TCMU) Strategic Plan will assist the Council in its deliberations regarding strategically investing in programs and projects aimed at providing a framework to revitalize, reimagine, and strengthen the heart of Los Alamitos; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Los Alamitos was awarded a Senate Bill 2 (SB2) planning grant in 2020, referred to as the “Building Homes and Jobs Act,” which funding is dedicated to promoting and facilitating affordable housing development;” and,,
WHEREAS, the City of Los Alamitos desires to attract the scale and type of development to this zone that is desired by the City and its residents; and,, WHEREAS, with the monetary assistance awarded by this program, the City developed its a Los Alamitos Town Center Mixed Use Zone (TCMU) Strategic Plan, to include its Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum, with the goal of attracting project proposals that can expect a clear pathway towards project entitlement that will be welcomed by the City; and, WHEREAS, the adoption of such a plan will also allow the City to pursue funding related to the implementation of Town Center Mixed Use Zone Strategic Plan projects; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said documents at a publically noticed meeting on December 8, 2021, which was continued to a future date; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said documents at a publically noticed meeting on February 23, 2022; and,.

WHEREAS, the City Council considered said document on _____ __, 2022.

RESOLUTION | 3

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS
ALAMITOS RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to apply for and submit applications for grant programs to support the implementation of this Strategic Plan, which is attached to this resolution as exhibit A.

SECTION 2. The City Manager is encouraged to add the projects identified in the document to the City’s list of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP).

SECTION 3. The City Manager is authorized to execute those City of Los Alamitos grant applications, submit grant support documents, and any amendments thereto, on behalf of the City of Los Alamitos as required by a requesting department for receipt of those grant in support of this Strategic Plan.

SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Los Alamitos approves the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the Town Center Mixed Use Zone Strategic Plan, both dated December 2021.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this __th day of ____, 2022.

Resolution No. 2022-XX
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Shelley Hasselbrink, Mayor
4 | TABLE OF CONTENTS CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Intro | Introduction and Executive Summary 06
Chapter 1 | Context and Existing Condition 08
Regional Context 09
City Context 10
Key Assets 11
Plan Area: TCMU Zoning 12
Existing Land Use 13
Urban Form and Character 14
Chapter 2 | Process and Public Engagement 16
Stakeholder Input Summary 17
Key Challenges 18
Scenario-Based Design Approach 19
Shared Vision and Goals 20
Understanding City Priorities 21
Chapter 3 | Strategic Framework 22
Adaptive Market-Based Approach 23
Development Framework 24
Clear Vision for a Vibrant Town Center 25
TABLE OF CONTENTS | 5
Table of Contents
Chapter 4 | Recommended Strategies 26
Mark the Town Center 28
Reimagine Pine Street 32
Build a Mixed-Use Core 36
Create Places to Gather 40
Consider Parking Choices 42
Promote Housing 44
Connect to Neighborhoods 48
Chapter 5 | Implementation 50
Recommended Implementation
Actions and Timeline 51
Regulatory Amendments 52
First Projects 53
Chapter 6 | Appendix 54
Existing Conditions - Site Inventory 56
Development Scenario A 70
Development Scenario B 72
Pine Street Design Scenarios 74
Recommended Municipal Code Amendments 78
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Introduction and Executive Summary
The Los Alamitos Town Center Strategic Plan provides a framework to revitalize, reimagine, and strengthen the heart of Los Alamitos. The Strategic Plan aims to establish a pedestrian-oriented Town Center at the intersection of Katella and Los Alamitos Boulevards, in the physical center of the City. A market-based, urban design plan and strategy, it clearly illustrates to private real estate interests the potential of properties in this area with the goal to attract the scale and type of development desired by the City.

The Plan leverages the City’s existing practice of hosting community events on Pine Street to imagine this one-block corridor as the spine for a dynamic center for various commercial, community and residential uses. It proposes a streetscape project on Pine Street to create an attractive environment for outdoor dining, shopping, on-street parking as well as city-wide festivals and events requiring the closure of the street to vehicles. Adjacent to Pine Street, the Plan anticipates a variety of mixed-use development with an emphasis on food uses and outdoor dining options located in multiple courtyards and pedestrian paseos, with connection to the historic St.

Isidore building. Within these core blocks are optimum sites for a new hotel, stand-alone commercial uses, and a parking structure that can be shared by multiple sites and uses in the Town Center.

To encourage pedestrian connections from this Pine Street district to other sites in the Town Center area as well as the Medical Center and adjoining neighborhoods, the Plan proposes wide, tree-lined sidewalks on Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue, as well as other adjacent streets.

The Plan anticipates additional mixed-use development along these streets, and throughout the Town Center promotes new residential and housing options.

For more than a decade, the City of Los Alamitos has encouraged the development of a walkable and vibrant Town Center. The underlying vision for the Los Alamitos Town Center Strategic Plan began as the City evaluated a new 6 | INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 future for its Town Center over 10 years ago through the Katella + Los Alamitos Commercial Corridors Plan (2010), followed by a more comprehensive assessment in the General Plan Update (2015). In 2015 the City also updated the zoning code to allow mixed-use, with physical streetscape improvements shortly following. Although the General Plan and mixed-use zoning code set the policies and standards for a mixed-use Town Center, a concept of its physical form had not been articulated. This Strategic Plan builds upon these previous planning efforts to illustrate the possibility of the Los Alamitos Town Center, implemented through a series of placemaking urban design strategies.

This Plan is informed by engagement with stakeholders, property owners, councilmembers, commissioners, and nonprofit leaders. Representing their consensus vision for the Town Center, the Plan provides clear expectations to property owners and developers who wish to invest in Los Alamitos. Proposals consistent with this Strategic Plan can expect a clear pathway towards project entitlement and will be welcomed partners with the City.

Nonetheless, the Strategic Plan is not a rigid document, but recognizes it will be implemented by multiple and incremental projects as individual investors participate in within the overall Town Center vision. As such, the Strategic Plan is presented as a dynamic “kit of parts.” For private development, this flexible development strategy includes 3- to 4-story mixed-use development up to 60 units/acre, commercial uses such as hotels, shopping and dining, residential townhomes and live/work units as components of mixed-use development, and shared parking structures. For the public sector, this strategy comprises of various streetscape improvements and a number of adjustments to the zoning standards within the Town Center. The Plan also identifies a number of potential public-private partnerships that can advance the Town Center vision.

The Los Alamitos Town Center Strategic Plan is funded through the State of California’s SB2 grant program to help cities identify opportunities for housing to meet their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation, and to develop planning strategies to streamline residential development in those areas.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | 7 1 CONTEXT AND

EXISTING CONDITIONS
8 | CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
This chapter provides an overview of key
considerations related to the context and
existing conditions for the Los Alamitos Town
Center Strategic Plan. A complete existing
conditions report is included in the Appendix.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS | 9
Regional Context
Los Alamitos is located in northwest Orange
County and is well connected to the region
by the 605 and 405 highways. Katella Avenue
and Los Alamitos Avenue are major arterials
that intersect at the future Town Center.

The City is well positioned in proximity
to regional destinations and commercial
centers.

Rather than competing for commercial
tenants that may already have a footprint
in the area, the Town Center Strategic Plan
has the opportunity to define strategies to
attract dynamic mixed-use development with
housing, experiential retail, medical office,
and other commercial and office uses that
are more resilient than traditional retail to
current and future market shifts.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
10 | CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
City Context
The City of Los Alamitos has a diverse mix of
uses, top-tier schools, and large employment
centers. These assets, as well as the City’s
locational advantage and high accessibility to
key destinations in Long Beach and Anaheim,
provide fertile ground for development
interest and investment.

While the City has attracted recent residential
and hotel development, the commercial core
of the City has not received such attention.

To ensure that Los Alamitos can continue to
compete within the region and to enhance
the quality of life for residents, development
interest should be guided to produce
additional assets for the City such as high
quality public space, community destinations,
and economic activity centered around a
walkable Town Center with high accessibility
to other assets within Los Alamitos.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Key Assets
High Performing Schools. Los Alamitos is
particularly attractive to families because of
its high performing schools.

St. Isidore Historical Plaza. This historical
asset is located with the Town Center MixedUse Plan Area.

Recent Development Activity. Recent
residential and hotel development within the
City demonstrate market demand for these
product types.

Robust Employment Centers. Major
employment centers like the Los Alamitos
Medical Center and Ganahl Lumber, in
additional to other local businesses, provide a
diverse and stable job base.

Los Alamitos High School St. Isidore Historical Plaza
Fairfield Inn & Suites, built 2020 Los Alamitos Medical Center CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS | 11 12 | CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
Plan Area :

Town Center
Mixed-Use Zoning
The Plan Area is defined by the Town Center
Mixed-Use (TCMU) zoning designation
established in the 2015 General Plan update.

The Town Center Mixed-Use (TCMU) zone
is established to provide opportunities
for commercial and residential mixed-use
development that takes advantage of easy
access to transit and proximity to commerce
while encouraging pedestrian activity. A
wide range of integrated commercial and
residential uses are appropriate. The Town
Center Mixed-Use zone requires the inclusion
of a ground-floor, street-frontage commercial
component for all projects. Exclusive
residential structures are not allowed. This
zone implements the General Plan Mixed-Use
land use designation. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)
Current development standards for the
TCMU zone are summarized below:

Max Density: 30 Units/acre
Max FAR: 2.0
Max Height: 60 feet
TCMU : Town Center Mixed-Use
R-1 : Single-Family Residential
R-3 : Multiple-Family Residential
LWOZ: Live/Work Overlay Zone
C-G : General Commercial
C-O : Commercial - Professional Office
MCSP : Medical Center Specific Plan
MOZ : Medical Overlay Zone
C-F : Community Facilities
Suburban Residential (Rossmoor)
N
0’ 250’ 500’
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS | 13
Existing Land Use
Commercial, retail, and office facilities are
the dominant land uses within the plan area.

Community and public facilities are also
present with a notable concentration in the
northeastern most block, bound by Pine
Street and Reagan Street. Adjacent land use
is predominantly residential with the key
exception of the Los Alamitos Medical Center
and associated medical offices to the east of
the Plan Area and north of Katella Avenue.

Notably, there are very few parcels with
residential land use within the plan area, a
key objective for the Town Center Mixed-Use
zone.

Single Family Residential
Multifamily Residential
Commercial / Retail
Office
Community / Public (incl. public parking)
Park / Open Space
Industrial
Vacant
N
0’ 250’ 500’
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

VONS CHASE BANK

MEDICAL CENTER
ST. ISIDORE HISTORICAL PLAZA
MADERA’S
CVS

US BANK

GANAHL LUMBER
CIF

SHOE CITY

LOS ALAMITOS PLAZA

FLAME BROILER CITY HALL
ORIGINAL FISH CO.

Urban Form and
Character
The Los Alamitos Town Center Strategic Plan
focuses on the 54 parcels with a total land
area of 19.6 acres near the intersection of
Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard.

The Plan Area consists of three full blocks to
the north of the intersection and also includes
parcels along Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos
Boulevard to the south of the intersection.

The parcels to the southwest of the
intersection are outside of Los Alamitos City
limits in the unincorporated community of
Rossmoor and are not included in the Plan
Area.

Blocks to the north of the intersection are
oriented north-south are similarly sized at
approximately 575 feet by 330 feet. Two of
the three blocks are bisected by north-south
access alleys.

Blocks to the south of the intersection are
oriented east-west and are also similarly sized
at approximately 380 feet by 720 feet. These
blocks include a north-south access alley that
runs parallel to Los Alamitos Boulevard and
additional east-west alleys that bisect the
remainder of the blocks.
14 | CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 CONTEXT AND EXISTING CONDITIONS | 15
Most structures within the plan area are built
prior to the year 2000.

Commercial buildings in the plan area are auto
oriented and building frontages often do not
directly engage the street.

There are existing through block alleys that
provide flexibility in the orientation of parking
access for current and new development.

Two and three story medical offices are a
prominent and stable land use within the Plan
Area.

There are some, though very few, residences
within the plan area.

The main intersection at Los Alamitos
Boulevard and Katella Avenue experiences
high volume traffic.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
2 PROCESS AND PUBLIC

ENGAGEMENT
16 | PROCESS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Engaging stakeholders and local experts
throughout this planning process was essential
in developing a shared understanding of the
vision, goals, challenges, and opportunities for
the Town Center.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

SURVEYS

SHARED VISION AND GOALS

MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF KEY CHALLENGES

ARTICULATED CITY PRIORITIES
PHONE

INTERVIEWS

VIRTUAL

ROUNDTABLE
STUDY

SESSION

VIRTUAL

COMMUNITY

MEETING

PLANNING

COMMISSION

PRESENTATIONS
PROCESS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT | 17
Stakeholder Input
Summary
Given the public health restraints in place during the
planning process, the planning team conducted a range
of virtual surveys, interviews, meetings, and presentations to solicit feedback. Stakeholder engagement activities
included:

Online Survey for Property Owners
Online Survey for Planning Commissioners
One-on-Ones with City Council (February 8-9, 2021)
Virtual Stakeholder Meeting (March 11, 2021)
Planning Commission Study Session (April 28, 2021)
Virtual Stakeholder Meeting (June 24, 2021)
Planning Commission Study Session (August 25, 2021)
Planning Commission Meeting (December 8, 2021)
City Council Presentation (February 2022)
While each engagement activity provided novel insights
that helped refine the vision and implementation
strategies for the Town Center Strategic Plan, there was a clear unanimity in a shared vision and understanding
of the key challenges in acheiving that vision, which was echoed throughout most conversations with stakeholders.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Key Challenges
Understanding key challenges for the Los Alamitos Town
Center is a critical aspect of developing strategies to encourage development in line with City priorities. The following challenges were identified through an existing conditions analysis and with input from stakeholders, City staff, councilmembers, and commissioners.

Vacancies and Retail Viability Failing retail and high
vacancy rates; retail my not be viable (especially post COVID).

Development Intensity Maintaining urban character
while promoting economically feasible development.

High Volume Traffic Difficulty creating a destination and walkable district at the intersection of two major roadways.

Increased traffic and parking are also of concern.

Parcelization and Build Out Most parcels in the area are built out. A catalytic development will require coordination among several property owners.

Regional Competition Los Alamitos may lack competitive
advantage over other cities with desirable destinations.

Limited City Resources Challenges to create conditions
where the private sector can execute development in
alignment with City priorities.

Uncertain future of retail and high
vacancies.

Parcels are built out with
auto-oriented retail.

Large intersection with high volume
traffic is an obstacle to walkability.

Los Alamitos faces tough competition
from attractive and walkable
destinations in Long Beach, Anaheim,
Stanton, Seal Beach and other nearby
locales.
18 | PROCESS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 Scenario-Based
Design Approach
Overcoming these challenges and capitalizing
on existing assets required an investigation
of several design strategies. Throughout the
engagement process, the planning team
produced a series of design scenarios for
discussion.

The scenarios were refined from meeting to
meeting and incorporated: feedback from
previous engagement activities, examples
from precedent projects throughout Southern
California, and parcel-based analysis of
opportunity sites within the plan area.

The key takeaways from the discussions
around these scenarios are presented
in the remainder of this chapter and the
recommended strategies which emerged as
a refinement of this process are presented in
the following chapters.

A series of alternative design scenarios helped guide discussions with stakeholders.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 PROCESS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT | 19 20 | PROCESS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Shared Vision and Goals
The following items represent the Vision and Goals that have emerges as the guiding principles for the Los Alamitos Town Center Strategic Plan.

Create
a destination with amenities for
young people, families, and seniors.

Position
the Town Center as an engine for
a sustainable and profitable City.

Reinforce
and maximize connections with Los Alamitos Medical Center.

Provide
appropriate parking facilities and management.

Integrate
Los Alamitos Town Center with schools, community
destinations, and employment centers.

Invest
in bike and pedestrian
safety and infrastructure.

Promote
a sense of community with high quality gathering spaces.

Incorporate
mixed-use development with some office and residential
to support local businesses.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
PROCESS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT | 21
Understanding City Priorities
Align Planning Efforts
with Housing Needs.

The City has a legal requirement to
provide reasonable opportunities
for the development of housing,
including housing at a range of levels of
affordability within the City. Promoting
housing development within the plan
area can support the transformation of
the Town Center into a vibrant mixed-use
district and help maintain other areas of
the City at lower density levels.

The following considerations articulate three key City priorities in the development and implementation of the Strategic Plan.

Bolster a Diverse and
Resilient Tax Base.

Tax revenues from development in the
Town Center can help support other City
priorities, including supportive projects
and programs that will further improve
quality of life and economic development
within the city.

Reduce Development
Uncertainty with a
Clear Vision.

The City’s intention is to provide a clear
vision and set of expectations whereby
developers can have a stronger sense
of certainty about project approvals,
encouraging investment and the potential
for a catalytic project in the Town Center.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
3 STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
22 | STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
An adaptive “kit of parts”
approach with a clear vision
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Adaptive and Flexible
Market-Based Approach
Given the composition of the plan area as a collection of largely built out parcels with fragmented land ownership and few City resources to spur a catalytic development, this Strategic Plan is presented as a “Kit of Parts”. This approach is imagined as a menu of urban design strategies that individually and in combination promote the vision of the Strategic Plan. Together they are intended to overcome challenges and capitalize on the opportunities in creating a vibrant Town Center in Los Alamitos.

The drawings on the following pages represent a best-guess of probable development over the next 5 to 15 years based upon current property ownership and land-uses. However, this is but one possible way of arranging all future development throughout the Town Center area. These drawings do not dictate the specific projects on specific properties, but merely anticipate the probable behavior of the real estate market. To illustrate other possibilities, alternative build out scenarios are presented in the Appendix.

This Strategic Framework can serve as a guide for understanding the overall vision of the Town Center Strategic Plan: to create a walkable, mixed-use district that features a central gathering place, a healthy mix of housing and commercial uses, and a place that both enlivens surrounding neighborhoods and secures the City’s future.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK | 23
Development Framework
The diagram below illustrates a probable distribution of uses and development types within the Town Center area. Represented in this diagram is the continued emphasis of community services and non-profits fronting Reagan Street, with a core of mixed-use development focused around Pine Street and the intersection of Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue. Radiating from this core are buildings with a residential emphasis although mixed-use and commercial development is allowed anywhere in the Town Center (in accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.12.040, General Development Standards for the Town Center Mixed Use Zone). 24 | STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Clear Vision for a Vibrant Town Center
The illustration below depicts the evolution of the strategic framework diagram into a walkable urban core with generous tree canopy, a variety of connected public spaces, and a mix of uses, and a diversity of building types.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK | 25
4 RECOMMENDED

STRATEGIES
The recommended strategies and accompanying
figures and diagrams presented here are the
result of an iterative design process incorporating
stakeholder feedback and consultation with City
staff, commissioners, and councilmembers.
26 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 Recommended
Strategies
Throughout the planning and design process,
a set of common elements emerged and are
articulated here as key planning and design
aspirations that support the overarching
vision for this planning process. The following
chapter presents a consideration related to
the implementation of these recommended
strategies.

4.1 Mark the Town Center

4.2 Reimagine Pine Street

4.3 Build a Mixed-Use Core

4.4 Create a Place to Gather

4.5 Consider Parking

4.6 Promote Housing

4.7 Connect to Neighborhoods
RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 27
Mark
Reimagine
Create
Consider
Connect
Promote
Build
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Mark the Town Center
Create a sense of arrival and define a sense of place
28 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Mark
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
The Town Center’s location at the intersection of
two major arterials presents a great opportunity
for the City to announce that there is in fact a
center at the crossing of Los Alamitos Boulevard
and Katella Avenue. The trees could serve to create
a sense of arrival and quickly establish a strong
placemaking feature.

The recommended strategy is to plant a
regimented row of signature columnar trees, such
as king date palms or canary island pines, to mark
all four corners of the intersection. To be effective,
the trees should be planted the same distance -
roughly half a block or 150 feet) from the street
corner along all four legs of the intersection.

Signature Trees
Date palms are frequently used in Southern California and Orange County to mark key destinations.

Date palms create a sense of arrival.

Alternative trees may also be
considered, like the canary
island pines pictured here.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 29 This rendering illustrates how marking the intersection with landmark trees and architectural articulation on corner lots signals to drivers along Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard that they have arrived at a destination.
30 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Enhanced Sense of Arrival
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 31
Setbacks from avenues
provides a buffer for
street-facing residential
units
A double row of street
trees provides a
comfortable pedestrian
environment
Generous sidewalks offer
opportunities for outdoor
dining and retail
Trees with seasonal
variation create a
dynamic public realm
This street section diagram illustrates how
generous setbacks along Katella Avenue
and Los Alamitos Boulevard provide an
opportunity for a double row of trees
to buffer street fronting residences and
ground floor retail activities from traffic,
creating a comfortable and safe pedestrian
environment.

The outer row of trees are the signature
street trees located in the public right-ofway. The inner row of trees will - in most cases - be located on private property within
the setback and should be generous shade
trees to enhance both pedestrian comfort
and create attractive locations for outdoor
dining and retailing.

Additional Benefits
of Street Trees
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Reimagine Pine Street
Reconfigure Pine Street to create a “Main Street”
with additional parking and to serve a placemaking function. 32 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Reimagine
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Creating a walkable and vibrant mixed-use district
at the intersection of two large arterials is a
challenge; neither Katella Avenue nor Los Alamitos
Boulevard are conducive to the kind of pedestrianoriented restaurant and outdoor cafe environment that constitute a neighborhood center or
destination.

The recommended strategy is to identify the single
block of Pine Street between Katella Avenue and
Florista Street as the “Main Street” for the Town
Center district. Pine Street is well suited for this
purpose because of its visibility from Katella
Avenue, its proximity to St. Isidore, and the fact it is not an essential throughfare for automotive transit.

Pine Street can be reconfigured to serve a dual
function to provide additional on-street public
parking to serve Town Center businesses and
provide a community destination, with an
opportunity to close the street to vehicle traffic
for special events. The figures and diagrams that
follow illustrate the recommended placemaking
strategies for Pine Street.

Flexible Public Space
Pine Street may be rebuilt like Lancaster Blvd (in Lancaster CA) to provide additional street parking.

Pine Street could host a Farmer’s Market like Lancaster Blvd when closed to vehicular traffic.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 33 Parking on Pine Street
This plan diagram illustrates how Pine Street can be reconfigured to provide both on-street parking and serve as a key community destination with ample landscaping to support a comfortable pedestrian environment.

In the proposed configuration, modeled after Lancaster Boulevard in Lancaster, CA a single lane of travel is provided in each direction, with parallel parking at the curb. Diagonal parking is provided down the center of the street, landscaped with unique paving materials (such as cobblestone), regular shade trees and street lighting.

Although this street configuration will be comfortable and attractive to pedestrians, locations can and should be identified for mid-block crossings.

Additionally, because vehicle movements on/off Katella Avenue are limited by a median to right-in and right-out only, a portion of the Pine Street right-of-way can be dedicated to a small plaza, marked with a clock-tower, fountain, or public artwork, serving as a visual marker and identity to the Town Center.
0’ 100’ N

PARKING
Existing:
66 spaces
Proposed:
80-130 spaces
Central pedestrian
crossing
Diagonal parking on
permeable pavers
Parallel parking
Entry plaza with
gateway monument,
special paving, and
accent tree planting
Existing curb-cut,
typ.

PLAN VIEW
Katella Avenue
Florista Street

SECTION VIEW
10’
Sidewalk
10’
Sidewalk
9’
Parallel Parking
9’
Parallel Parking
14’
Drive Aisle
14’
Drive Aisle
30’
Diagonal Parking
34 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 35
This conceptual rendering demonstrates how the intersection of Pine Street and Katella Avenue can also serve as a key gateway to the heart of the Town Center District, as well as establish a connection to the courtyard at St. Isidore. The plaza shown here with a clock tower provides landmark destination and fulcrum connecting the reimagined Pine Street with St. Isidore.

Pine Street Serves as Connection to Community Destinations CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Build a Mixed-Use Core
Encourage a mix of housing, retail, restaurants, office, and hotel focused on Pine Street to support a vibrant district at all times of day.
36 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Build
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Mixed-use development is most likely to be
successful where ground floor uses such as retail
and restaurant are viable, and in a walkable
environment where residents and visitors can
patronize multiple businesses and engage in a
range of activities without having to get in their car
and drive to a new location.

The recommended strategy is to focus the mixeduse core within the plan area on the blocks to the northeast of the Los Alamitos-Katella intersection,
including the Pine Street Corridor and connections
to St. Isidore. Land ownership here is relatively
consolidated and a large amount of existing
surface parking provides some flexibility in creating
phasing and development strategies. If executed
in a coordinated effort with the development of
Pine Street as an attractive community destination,
this mixed-use core holds great promise as a
catalytic project for the Town Center district.

The Heart of
Los Alamitos
RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 37
Ground floor retail and restaurants with residential units above.

High quality public space supports mixed-use development.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Benefits of Mixed-Use
Development
The proposed mixed-use core takes advantage of its adjacency to the reimagined Pine Street. As is the case with much of the Plan Area, this central core is largely built out, but there is clear potential for a phased strategy to concentrate a diversity of uses that may serve as a catalyst for development throughout the Town Center.

There are dozens of potential development scenarios for the mixed-use core and its implementation will largely be dependent on market factors and the priorities and intentions of property owners. The scenario illustrated here is meant to show just one of these potential options and as an illustration intentionally includes a wide range of different uses and building types to demonstrate the development potential of these properties.

Mixed-use development has many benefits including mitigating traffic congestion and creating efficiencies in parking. Residents, employees, and visitors can come to a single destination and participate in a range of activities and support several local businesses without having to drive to another location.

Successful mixed-use developments incorporate public spaces and a comfortable and walkable pedestrian environment that encourage people to spend time. These public spaces also serve to differentiate the district as a desirable destination that can compete with other activity centers in the region, attracting economic activity and providing opportunities for formal and informal community gatherings. Additionally, a diverse mixeduse center will be more resilient economically in comparison to a single-use or limited-use development that is susceptible to specific types of economic impacts.

PEDESTRIAN PASEO

RETAIL / RESTAURANT
OFFICE

WRAPPED GARAGE

RETAIL-LINED PLAZA

MIXED-INCOME HOUSING

EXISTING USES

MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING
HOTEL

PINE STREET RETAIL

MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING
Retail and Restaurant Public Space Hotel
Office Residential Structured Parking
38 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 A range of parking options support local
businesses and accomodate residents
A network of public spaces is
integrated with a mix of uses
Existing uses and community destinations
contribute to the mixed-use core
An activated ground floor provides Landmarks foster a unique sense of amenities for visitors and residents place and community New residents and hotel patrons
add vitality to the Town Center
This conceptual illustration provides one vision for how incremental development focused around Pine Street may be organized into a cohesive mixed-use core that serves as the heart of the Los Alamitos community and the economic engine for the City.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 39 Create Places to Gather
Enhance the public realm with a network of public gathering spaces. 40 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Create
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
An essential component of a socially and economically vibrant Town Center is high quality and inviting public space that supports a range of activities. Los Alamitos Town Center will benefit from public space specifically geared toward families with children, students from nearby schools, and connection to St. Isidore.

Rather than a singular town square or plaza, the recommended strategy is to develop a network of different unique places in various sizes and configurations, each suitable for different kinds of events or gatherings. The network in Los Alamitos Town Center will be a combination of the configured Pine Street, public sidewalks, and plazas, paseos and squares created through private development.

1. Pine Street can serve as prominent and flexible civic space, closed to traffic during certain occasions to accommodate farmers markets, festivals, or other events. At other times, it can also provide a comfortable street with generous shade trees and sidewalks to support café seating, for example.

2. A central plaza incorporated within the mixed-use core could provide a secondary public space, and one that is designated for pedestrians only. A well-designed plaza could be an economic lightning rod for the district and support economic development.

3. Pedestrian Paseos could be considered to link the central plaza with Pine Street.

4. A generous setback with high quality landscaping along Katella Avenue could provide a link between Pine Street and St. Isidore Historical Plaza. Engaging this historic asset is critical to developing a unique sense of place for the Town Center.

A Network of Public Space
Pine St already provides space for community events and can be improved.

Attractive central plaza lined with retail integrated in mixed-use development.

Generous setbacks with high quality paving and landscaping.

Pedestrian paseos can create connections among public spaces.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 41 Consider Parking Choices
Provide parking through a range of efficient strategies that support local businesses and public life.
42 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Consider
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Accommodating parking is
often a significant barrier
in reimagining commercial
zones that were built in
the 1960s -90s as strip
malls. Creative strategies
and some flexibility on the
part of both the City and
developers will be required
to address this issue and
deliver an appropriate
amount of parking to
support existing and
forthcoming businesses
without making economic
development infeasible.

Recommended strategies
for providing and managing
parking should include
both parking facility and
management consideration.

Coordinated
Parking
Approach

1. Reconfiguration of Pine Street to provide
additional on-street parking
The reimagination of Pine Street has the potential
to accommodate more parking, while also serving
as a community gathering space for special events.

Investment in such a parking facility with these dual
benefits is a cost-efficient way to achieve additional
parking (especially in comparison to a structure).

2. Stand-alone parking structure
Parking structures are more efficient than surface
parking and provide space for other land uses that
are beneficial to the Town Center. They are also more
expensive and given limited City ownership of land,
may require partnerships between the public and
private sectors.

3. Structured parking wrapped with residential
as part of a mixed-use development
Though necessary to support local businesses,
parking structures do not always contribute to an
activated street frontage and a walkable district. A
parking structure wrapped with residential or other
uses along the street frontage could mitigate this
concern.

4. Pricing on-street parking
Providing additional parking facilities requires
substantial capital investment in addition to
maintenance costs. Pricing of on-street parking can
encourage the use of these facilities and help ensure
on-street parking that supports local businesses.

5. Creating restricted residential parking
districts in adjacent neighborhoods
A successful mixed-use Town Center may attract
additional users and there is a risk that visitors
and employees may choose to park in adjacent
neighborhoods, limiting parking supply for residents.

Creating a preferential parking district in residential neighborhoods near the Town Center may mitigate
this concern.

6. Coordinating overflow parking with Medical
Center (when Pine Street is closed for events)
The proposed reimagination of Pine Street includes
the potential to close the street for pedestrian
only activities for special events such as festivals or farmers markets. Partnerships with nearby parking
facilities, such as those located at the Los Alamitos
Medical Center may be beneficial for these special
occasions.

Parking Facility Considerations Parking Management Considerations CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 43 Promote Housing
A primary goal of the Strategic Plan is to encourage
housing development in the Town Center.
44 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Promote
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Housing is an essential component of a successful
mixed-use district and is a key City priority in
the development of this Strategic Plan. While
townhome development is likely the most
economically feasible housing type in the current
market, it delivers relatively low density and does
not achieve many of the other goals of the mixeduse district.

The recommended strategy is to encourage a
range of housing types with densities up to 60
dwelling units per acre, and may include:

1. 4-story mixed-use multifamily podium
buildings, with underground parking as part of
a vertical mixed-use development

2. Multifamily apartments as part of a horizontal
mixed-use development

3. 3-story Townhomes
The scenario presented on the next page illustrates
a scheme that could accommodate 350-450
new residential units. Other scenarios are also
presented in the appendix.

An important consideration related to housing is
the integration and coordination of this planning
effort with the concurrent Housing Element
update, especially as it relates to accomodating
affordable housing.

A Range of
Housing Options
Townhomes are a popular housing type in Orange County.

Vertical mixed-use development with housing units above ground floor retail.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 45 Vertical and Horizontal Mixed-Use
Vertical mixed-use is a development type
that typically includes a ground floor with
an active use, such as restaurant or retail,
with additional uses on upper floors such as
residential units or offices.

The existing development standards for the
Town Center Mixed-Use zone support vertical
mixed-use development with a maximum
density of 30 dwelling units per acre, a
maximum Floor-Area Ratio (FAR) of 2.0, and
maximum height of 60 feet.

The development code also notes that “For a
development project consisting of residential
and nonresidential uses in the same building
or group of buildings, the residential density
and FAR shall be additive, meaning that the
residential density shall be calculated for
the residential component and the FAR for
nonresidential component.”
While these development standards
do not inhibit vertical mixed-use
development, this building type is costly
and requires favorable market conditions
to make feasible.

RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE
RETAIL
Horizontal mixed-use is a development
type that typically includes a set of single use
buildings conceived together as a cohesive
development and may include two or more
adjacent parcels.

The existing development standards for
the Town Center Mixed-Use zone support
horizontal mixed-use development with the
same density, FAR, and height as vertical
mixed-use.

The development code also notes that “For
residential and nonresidential uses on the
same development site but separate legal
lots, the residential density shall be calculated
for the lot or lots dedicated solely to
residential use. The FAR for the nonresidential
use shall be calculated for the lot or lots
dedicated solely to the nonresidential use.”
Horizontal mixed-use development is
more conducive to a phased construction
approach and may be appropriate in some
cases where a number of parcels can be
assembled.

RESIDENTIAL OFFICE
RETAIL
46 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 Townhomes are a common and popular
housing type in Los Alamitos and northern
Orange County. They are typically three-story
in height, with the first floor largely dedicated
to a two-car garage and front door; the
second floor given to kitchen, dining room
and living room; and bedrooms provided
on the third floor. They are often arranged
in blocks of 3 to 8 individual homes with
common walls. This type of townhome is
usually built as a for-sale ownership unit.

It is assumed a certain percentage of new
development within the Town Center will be
this type of townhome. Such townhomes
should be allowed on side streets within
the Town Center or on the “back” side of
larger mixed-use developments fronting Los
Alamitos Boulevard or Katella Avenue, where
they can serve as a transition use to adjoining
residential neighborhoods.

Townhomes and Design Guidelines
To ensure livablity and comfort, ground-level
residential units in the Town Center should
employ the following standards:

1. Ground floors should be raised at least 4
feet above the sidewalk level.

2. Front doors should be accessed from the
sidewalk by stoops or porches.

3. Units should be setback from the sidewalk
with landscaping.

Considering the contracting market for retail
space in both the internet and post-COVID
era, it is probable that a strict requirement for
ground-floor commercial uses fronting Los
Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue may
be an impediment to attracting development
in the Town Center.

To address this market reality, the City should
allow live-work units facing the sidewalk on
these streets. In this configuration, the first
floor should be at sidewalk level to facilitate
commercial uses, with sleeping and private
rooms located in a mezzanine or second
floor. In the post-COVID jobs market of workfrom-home and entrepreneurs, the demand for live-work units may prove to be very
robust.

Ground floor entry with landscaping.

Live-work units facing the sidewalk.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 47 Connect to Neighborhoods
Designating key corridors as multi-modal bike and pedestrian throughfares will reinforce the plan area as the heart of the Los Alamitos. 48 | RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
Connect
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Designating key corridors as multi-modal bike and
pedestrian throughfares will reinforce the plan
area as the heart of the Los Alamitos, provide
improved access to adjacent neighborhoods,
enhance pedestrian and bicyclist safety, and
reduce the amount of vehicle trips generated by
Town Center destinations.

The recommended strategy, consistent with the
City’s Active Transportation Plan, is to invest in
streetscape improvements along Florista Street
and Reagan Street, including a signalized street
crossing at Katella Avenue and Reagan Street.

Florista and Reagan are well suited to safely host
bike and pedestrian traffic to and from the Town
Center while maintaining Katella Avenue and Los
Alamitos Boulevard as primarily auto-serving.

Investments in Bike
and Pedestrian
Infrastructure
Pedestrian improvements like this crossing in Brea can improve safety and accessibility.

Protected bike lanes along Florista and Reagan Streets can improve multi-modal access.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES | 49 50 | IMPLEMENTATION
5 IMPLEMENTATION
The Town Center will be implemented over a
number of years, and even decades, by actions
taken by both the City and private property
owners and developers. This chapter outlines
some the steps recommended to begin this
evolution.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Recommended Implementation Actions and Timeline 5.1
Recommended Action Recommended
Strategy
Responsibility
Party
Recommended
Timeframe Following
Adoption of Strategic
Plan
Amend General Plan 4.4. 4.6 City Concurrent with
Strategic Plan Adoption
Amend Municipal Code 4.1, 4.3, 4.4. 4.5,

4.6 City Within 1 Year
Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 4.4. 4.6 City Within 1 Year Explore a Transfer of Development Rights Ordinance 4.4. 4.6 City Within 1 Year Plant Signature Trees at Los Alamitos / Katella Intersection 4.1 City 1-5 years Commission detailed design study for reconfiguration of Pine Street 4.2 City 1-5 years Implement Bike Lanes on Reagan Street and Florista Street 4.7 City 1-5 years Issue an RFP (Request for Proposal) or RFQ (Request for Qualifications) to identify a development partner willing to incorporate the Cityowned parking lot on Pine Street within a larger project that will advance the Town Center Vision

4.3, 4.6 City 1-5 years
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 IMPLEMENTATION | 51
To advance the Strategic Plan Vision, the City will need to initiate and adopt a number of regulatory and legislative actions:

General Plan Amendment
Concurrent with the adoption of this Strategic Plan,
the City should amend the General Plan to modify
the allowed density within the Town Center Land Use
Designation from 30 units per acre to 60 units an acre.

Zoning Code Amendment
Within one year of adoption of this Strategic Plan, the City should initiate an Amendment to the Municipal
Code, Chapter 17, to modify:

1. The allowed density within the Town Center MixedUse Zone up to 60 dwelling units per acre.

2. The setback standards within the Town Center
Mixed-Use Zone consistent with this plan.

3. The on-site parking standards for uses within the
Town Center Mixed-Use Zone.

Transfer of Development Rights
Concurrent with the Municipal Code Amendment the
City should consider adopting an ordinance to enable
the transfer of development rights between properties
within the Town Center Mixed-Use.

Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Within one year of adoption of this Strategic Plan, the City should initiate an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
applicable to the Town Center Mixed-Use Zone. This
ordinance should require a certain percentage of
housing units built in the Zone to be dedicated as
affordable units. In analogous cities, such an ordinance applies to developments 10 units or more, and requires
10 to 20% of units to be deed restricted for affordable dwellers. Such an ordinance may also be crafted to
apportion affordable units towards specific income
thresholds.

The adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
would be a significant implementation program towards
meeting the City’s Housing Needs.

Pine Street Parking Credit
Once the City has committed to a design, financing and
construction schedule for the Pine Street project as
described in this Plan, it should also institute a “parking credit” for ground floor retail or restaurant related
uses located on properties with Pine Street frontage.

This credit will likely take the form of a Zoning Code
Amendment to the required on-site parking such uses,
and granted to private development on a prorated
formula based on linear property frontage on Pine
Street.

Regulatory Amendments 5.2
52 | IMPLEMENTATION CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
First Projects 5.3
0’ 100’
N
Central pedestrian
crossing
Diagonal parking on
permeable pavers
Parallel parking
Entry plaza with
gateway monument,
special paving, and
accent tree planting
Existing curb-cut,
typ.

PLAN VIEW
Katella Avenue
Florista Street
While the City can set the stage for the longterm evolution of the Town Center through favorable regulatory changes, the Vision
articulated in this Strategic Plan will largely be
executed by private development initiative.

However, the City does control the right-ofway on Pine Street and the reconstruction of this streetscape could be a powerful initiative
towards the Strategic Plan’s Vision. The City
also owns a small surface parking lot on
the east side of Pine Street, which could be
combined with the adjacent parking lot to the
north to create a significant first project in the
Town Center. Since through its contribution
of land, the City would be a partner in such
a development, the City would be in a strong
position to ensure that this first project sets
an appropriate template for future Town
Center projects.

The City could also achieve other communitybuilding goals with this initial project, such as soliciting development interest in affordable
housing. Certain types of affordable housing
can be compatible with the Strategic Plan
Vision, such as an artist community with
ground-level galleries or senior housing with
ground-level retail/restaurant leased to local
businesses.

CATALYTIC

PROJECT SITE
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 IMPLEMENTATION | 53
54 | APPENDIX
6 APPENDIX
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Appendix 6.0

6.1 - Existing Conditions - Site Inventory

6.2 - Development Scenario A

6.3 - Development Scenario B

6.4 - Pine Street Design Scenarios

6.5 - Recommended Municipal Code Amendments
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 55
Existing Conditions - Site Inventory 6.1
The following pages present an
inventory of existing uses and other
characteristics for parcels within the
Plan Area.

The adjacent diagram illustrates
the Plan Area divided into blocks
labeled A through F. The following
pages assign numbers to parcels
(or groups of parcels under single
ownership) on each block.

The summary table on the following
page presents key statistics for each
block.

Data in this section was collected
from County Assessor parcel
records dated January 2021 and
visual analysis of Google aerial
imagery.

N
0’ 250’ 500’
A B C
D
E
F
56 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

BLOCK ACRES NON-RESIDENTIAL

SQFT RESIDENTIAL UNITS OFF STREET PARKING STALLS
A 3.65 ~40,000 3 ~200
B 3.78 ~95,000 0 ~210
C 3.84 ~60,000 1 ~205
D 3.24 ~60,000 0 ~225
E 2.45 ~69,000 0 ~200
F 2.64 ~81,000 ~8 ~190
TOTAL 19.60 ~405,000 ~12 ~1,230
Existing Conditions - Site Inventory Summary Table 6.1
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 57
Northwest Block 6.1
(A)
The Northwest Block is bounded by Los
Alamitos Boulevard, Katella Avenue,
Florista Street, and Chestnut Street. The
block is primarily defined by commercial
retail land use and also includes two
residential parcels. Prominent tenants
near the major intersection include a
CVS pharmacy and Shell gas station. The
block is bisected by a north-south alley
and includes 199 off street parking stalls.

The block contains 39,919 square feet
of commercial development with a 0.25
floor-to-area ratio. A parcel-based analysis
follows on the following page.
1234
13 2
4 LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

FLORISTA STREET

KATELLA AVENUE

CHESTNUT STREET

BLOCK SUMMARY

3.65 Acres
39,919 sqft Retail
199 Off Street Parking Stalls
1:200 sqft Parking Ratio

0.25 FAR Commercial
58 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

6.1 LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

FLORISTA STREET

KATELLA AVENUE

CHESTNUT STREET
A1
A2
A3
A4a
A4b
A5
A6
A1
10862 Chestnut Street
William Poe Family Trust
1 parcel, 0.16 Acres, Residential, 2 Units
Built 1944, Sale 2012
Density: 12.5 u/a
10876 Chestnut Street
Abigail Rodriguez Family Trust
1 parcel, 0.16 Acres, Residential, 1 Unit
Built 1916, Sale 2014
Density: 6.25 u/a
10909 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Jack and Patricia Ernandez
7 parcels, 1.43 acres, Commercial Retail
2 single story structures; 20,320 sqft
Built 1986, Sale 2001
~103 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:197 sqft
FAR: ~0.33
Tenants: 5th Ave Bagelry, Ross Health Mart,
State Farm, Red Wok Chinese Restaurant,
NHC Martial Arts, Western States Cabinets,
Perfection Nails, A La Waffle, Chiang Mai
Thai Restaurant, Tutoring Club, Mr. Inkwells
Tattoo, New Attitude Hair Salon, Coliseum
Antiques
10861 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Paul Nikolau
1 parcel, .28 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure; 1,969 sqft
Built 1946, Sale 2005
~9 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:219 sqft
FAR: ~0.16
Tenant: Sunrise Glass & Mirror
10931 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Paul Nikolau
1 parcel, .44 acres, Commercial Retail
1 story structure; 3,818 sqft
Built 1986, Sale 2008
~30 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:127 sqft
FAR: ~0.2
Tenant: Wahoo’s Fish Taco
A2
A3
A4a
A4b
3401 Katella Avenue
North West Katella LLC, Garfield Beach CVS LLC
1 parcel, .78 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure; 11,362 sqft
Built 1973, Sale 2011
~45 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:252 sqft
FAR: ~0.33
Tenant: CVS Pharmacy
10961 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Tesoro South Coast Company LLC
1 parcel, 0.4 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure: 2,450 sqft
Built 1969, Sale 2007
~12 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:204 sqft
FAR: ~0.14
Tenant: Shell Gas Station
A5
A6
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 59

6.1 1234
1 3
2 4

PINE STREET

FLORISTA STREET

KATELLA AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD
Northeast Block (B)
The Northeast Block is bounded by Los
Alamitos Boulevard, Katella Avenue,
Florista Street, and Pine Street. The
block is primarily defined by commercial
retail and office land use and includes
the Los Alamitos Plaza retail district. The
block consists of only two parcels and
contains 95,369 square feet of commercial
development with a cumulative 0.58 floorto-area ratio. The block hosts 213 parking stalls. The primary property holder also
owns land on the adjacent block which
is used for additional surface parking.

A parcel-based analysis follows on the
following page.

BLOCK SUMMARY

3.78 Acres
95,369 sqft Commercial/Services
213 Off Street Parking Stalls
1:447 sqft Parking Ratio

0.58 FAR
60 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

6.1 PINE STREET

FLORISTA STREET

KATELLA AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD
B1
B2
10900 Los Alamitos Boulevard
NSPS LTD.
1 parcel, 3.1 acres, Commercial Retail and
Office
4 single story structures, 1 two story structure; 84,232 sqft total Built 1972, Sale 2000
~174 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:484 sqft
FAR: ~0.62
Tenants: Sherwin-Williams Paints, Starbucks,
Onstage Dance Center, Thailusion, Bella
Hair Design, Cassidy’s Nail & Spa, Hof ’s Hut
Restaurant & Bakery, Fasion Eyewear, California Cocina, Nick’s Deli II, Old Traditions Gentlemen’s Parlor, Kampai Sushi, Allstate,
Farmer’s Insurance, Johnston Insurance,
Love Affair Salon, Diva Dancewear, Mehta
Dental Group, Applied Music Studio, Vitality Wellness, Cutting Edge Landscape Design B1 B2
10956 Los Alamitos Boulevard
10956 Los Alamitos Katella LLC
1 parcel, .68 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure; 11,137 sqft
Built 1970, Sale 2013
~39 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:285 sqft
FAR: ~0.37
Tenants: Shoe City, Shoe Repair, Fantastic Sams,
Talyn Cleaners
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 61

6.1 1234
1 3
2 4

REAGAN STREET

FLORISTA STREET

KATELLA AVENUE

PINE STREET

BLOCK SUMMARY

3.84 Acres
59,894 sqft Commercial/Services
203 Off Street Parking Stalls
1:295 sqft Parking Ratio

0.35 FAR
Pine-Reagan Block
(C)
The Pine-Reagan Block is bounded by
Katella Avenue, Florista Street, Pine Street,
and Reagan Street. The block is primarily
defined by small-scale community services
along Reagan Street, including the historic
Saint Isidore Historical Plaza. The block
also contains several surface parking
lots along Pine street with a total of 203
parking stalls on the block. Along Pine
Street, there is a US Bank branch on the
corner of Katella Avenue and the CIF
building near the middle of the block. The
block is bisected by a north-south access
alley. Overall, the block contains 59,894
square feet of commercial and community
service structures built out at 0.35 FAR.

A parcel-based analysis follows on the
following page.
62 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

6.1 REAGAN STREET

FLORISTA STREET

KATELLA AVENUE

PINE STREET
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
10900 Pine Street

NSPS LTD
1 parcel, .48 acres, Surface Parking
~76 off street parking stalls
Sale 1995
10902 Pine Street
City Owned Property, City of Los Alamitos
1 parcel, .17 acres, Surface Parking
~26 off street parking stalls
Sale 1976
10932 Pine Street
California Interscholastic Federation
2 parcels, .51 acres, Non-Profit
1 single story structure; 9,186 sqft
Built 1963, Sale 2002
~29 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:317 sqft
FAR: ~0.41
10942 Pine Street
US Bank National Assoc
1 parcel, .74 acres, Commerical Office
1 single story structure; 9,055 sqft
Built 1973, Sale 2001
~41 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:220 sqft
FAR: ~0.27
3612 Florista Street
Karl Kaiser Family Trust
1 parcel, 0.08 acres, Commercial Office
1 single story structure, 1292 sqft
Built 1901, Sale 2014
~5 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:258 sqft
FAR: ~0.38
Tenant: Montage Dentistry
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
3622 Florista Street, 10881-10895 Reagan Street
Precious Life Center LLC
3 parcels, .66 acres, Mixed-Use, Community Services
5 two story structures, 1 single story structure;
24,629 sqft total
Built 1906,1939,1950 ; Sale 1991,2000
~11 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:2,239 sqft
FAR: ~0.86
10901 Reagan Street
Rose Urbina
1 parcel, 0.17 acres, Residential, 1 unit
Built 1947, Sale 1993
Density: ~6.25 u/a
10911-10935 Reagan Street
Casa Youth Shelter
2 parcels, 0.43 acres, Mixed-Use, Community Services
1 single story structure, 1 two story structure;
including 1 SFR; and 8,011 sqft non-residential
Built 1901,1962; Sale 1982, 2018
~0 off street parking stalls
Density: ~2.3 u/a
FAR: ~0.43
10941-10961 Reagan Street
Comite Del Amor
2 parcels, 0.6 acres, Community Services
Historic Structure; St. Isidore
3 single story structures; 7,721 sqft
Built 1926,1946; Sale 2014
~15 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:514 sqft
FAR: ~0.30
C6
C7
C8
C9
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 63
Southeast Block (D) 6.1
The Southeast Block is bounded by Katella
Avenue, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Green
Avenue, and Reagan Street. The block is
primarily defined by commercial retail
and office uses including Chase Bank,
McDonald’s, and a small strip mall. The
Los Alamitos Museum is located along
Los Alamitos Boulevard. There have been
some recent efforts to improve the northsouth alley that runs through the interior of the block, including pedestrian-scaled
street lighting. The block contains 222
off street parking stalls including a below
grade structured parking facility along
Green Avenue. Overall, the block contains
59,851 square feet of commercial space at

0.42 FAR. The block also includes several
multifamily parcels on the southeastern
part of the block, which are not included
in the Plan Area. A parcel-based analysis
follows on the following page.
123
1 3
2 KATELLA AVENUE

GREEN AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

REAGAN STREET

BLOCK SUMMARY

3.24 Acres
59,851 sqft Commercial/Services
222 Off Street Parking Stalls
1:270 sqft Parking Ratio

0.42 FAR
64 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

KATELLA AVENUE

6.1 LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

GREEN AVENUE

REAGAN STREET
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5 D6
D1 D2 D3
D4
D5
D6
3502 Katella Avenue
JP Morgan Chase
1 parcel, .70 acres, Commercial Office
1 two story structure; 16,482 sqft
Built NODATA, Sale 1994
~46 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:358 sqft
FAR: ~0.54
11062 Los Alamitos Boulevard
City Owned Property, City of Los Alamitos
1 parcel, .10 acres, Civic/Public Resource
Los Alamitos Museum
1 single story structure; 2,755 sqft
Built NODATA, Sale 1976
~0 off street parking stalls
FAR: ~0.63
11072 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Imperial Jewelry Manufacturing Co. Inc.
1 parcel, .11 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure; 2287 sqft
Built 1986, Sale 1984
~7 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:327 sqft
FAR: ~0.48
3532 Katella Avenue, 3531 Green Avenue
R. Robert Family Trust
2 parcels, .58 acres, Commercial Office
1 two story structure; 18,573 sqft
Built 1954, Sale 2014
~50 off street parking stalls (21 assumed below grade)
Parking Ratio: ~1:371 sqft
FAR: ~0.74
3562 Katella Avenue
McDonalds Corp
1 parcel, 0.7 acres, Commercial Retail, Fast Food
1 single story structure; 4,214 sqft
Built 1973, Sale NODATA
~36 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:117 sqft
FAR: ~0.13
3636 Katella Avenue, 11021 Reagan Street
Steven J Gerschultz
2 parcels, 1.05 acres, Commercial Retail
2 single story structures; 15,540 sqft
Built 1987; Sale 2003
~83 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:187 sqft
FAR: ~0.34
Tenants: Rustic Eats, Kid’s Resale, Fyt Gym, Katella Hair, Mustard’s Hot Dogs, Los Alamitos Liquor & Market, Top it! Pizzas & Salads, Madera’s Steak House
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 65
Green-Howard 6.1
Block (E)
The Green-Howard Block is bounded by Green
Avenue, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Howard
Avenue, and Reagan Street. The block is
primarily defined by commercial retail and
office uses including a well-defined edge
of commercial facades along Los Alamitos
Boulevard, and a pair of three-story office
structures near the middle of the block. There
have been some recent efforts to improve
the north-south alley that runs through the
interior of the block, including pedestrianscaled street lighting and the alley-facing entry of Mighty Kitchen. The block also contains a
substantial number of multi-family residential
parcels on the eastern two thirds of the block,
which are not included in the Plan Area. The
block contains 196 off street parking stalls and
68,843 square feet of commercial structures
at 0.65 FAR. A parcel-based analysis follows on
the following page.
123
1 32

GREEN AVENUE

HOWARD AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

REAGAN STREET

BLOCK SUMMARY

2.45 Acres
68,843 sqft Commercial/Services
196 Off Street Parking Stalls
1:351 sqft Parking Ratio

0.65 FAR
66 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
GREEN AVENUE 6.1

HOWARD AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

REAGAN STREET
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
E6
E2
E3
E4
E1 E2 E3
E4
E5
E6
11102 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Two Brothers LLC
1 parcel, 0.13 acres, Commercial Retail
1 two story structure; ~3,600 sqft
Built 1981, Sale 2018
~5 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:720 sqft
FAR: ~0.64
Tenant: Enchanted Florist
11110 Los Alamitos Blvd, 3532 Green Ave
11110 Los Alamitos LLC
2 parcels, 0.47 acres, Commercial Retail
1 two story structure; 17,527 sqft
Built 1956, Sale 2015
~53 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:331 sqft
FAR: ~0.86
Tenants: Le Paperie & Company, Antica Oil
& Vinegars, Simply O Juice Bar, Pop Ice
11122 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Olde Las Building LLC
2 parcels, 0.47 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure; 6,026 sqft
Built 1965, Sale 2010
~38 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:159 sqft
FAR: ~0.29
Tenant: Mighty Kitchen
11130-11142 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Helen Perez Family Trust
2 parcels, 0.56 acres, Commercial Retail
1 two story structures, 1 single story structure;
12,321 sqft total
Built 1975, Sale 2016
~47 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:262 sqft
FAR: ~0.51
Tenants: Boon Docks Cocktails, Sundara Yoga, Katella
Beaut Supply, iTrain Fitness, Label Me Lindsay
3552 Green Avenue
3611 Farquhar Investments LLC
1 parcel, 0.41 acres, Commercial Office
1 three story structure; 15,344 sqft
Built 1979, Sale 2012
~33 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:465 sqft
FAR: ~0.86
3561 Howard Avenue
JGB Properties LLC
1 parcel, 0.41 acres, Commercial Office
1 three story structure; 14,025 sqft
Built 1978, Sale 2020
~20 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:700 sqft
FAR: ~0.78
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 67
Howard-Farquhar 6.1
Block (F)
The Howard-Farquhar Block is bounded
by Howard Avenue, Farquhar Avenue,
Los Alamitos Boulevard, and Reagan
Street. The block is primarily defined by
commercial retail and office uses including
a substantial number of dental offices.

There have been some recent efforts
to improve the north-south alley that
runs through the interior of the block,
including pedestrian-scaled street lighting.

Multifamily structures on the eastern part
of the block are not included in the Plan
Area. Overall, the block contains 189 off
street parking stalls, 81,100 square feet of
commercial space at 0.71 FAR. A parcelbased analysis follows on the following page.
123
1 3
2 HOWARD AVENUE

FARQUHAR AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

REAGAN STREET

BLOCK SUMMARY

2.64 Acres
81,100 sqft Commercial/Services
189 Off Street Parking Stalls
1:429 sqft Parking Ratio

0.71 FAR
68 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
HOWARD AVENUE 6.1

FARQUHAR AVENUE

LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD

REAGAN STREET
F1
F2
F3
F4 F5
F6 F7
F1 F2 F3
F4
F5
F6
11162 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Richard Ahn
1 parcel, 0.13 acres, Commercial Office
1 single story parcel; 2,443 sqft
Built 1950, Sale 2007
~11 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:222 sqft
FAR: ~0.43
Tenant: Los Al Dental Implants
11182 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Spot Investments
1 parcel, 0.74 acres, Commercial Retail
1 two story structure; 17,082 sqft
Built 1981, Sale 2012
~44 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:388 sqft
FAR: ~0.53
Tentants: Best Cleaners, Flame Broiler, Nevin’s Donuts, Threading Salon, Great Dane Baking Company, Big Picture Home Loans,
Meyer Appraisal, Cowan Insurance
11232 Los Alamitos Boulevard
Shabtai Itzhak Ins Trust
1 parcel, 0.13 acres, Commercial Retail
1 single story structure; 3,680 sqft
Built 1958, Sale 2008
~17 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: ~1:216 sqft
FAR: ~0.64
Tenants: Elegance Nail & Spa, Computer
Repair Orange County
3532 Howard Avenue
Howard Street Partners
1 parcel, .52 Acres, Commercial Office
1 two story structure; 28,172 sqft
Built NODATA, Sale 1990
~37 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:761 sqft
FAR: ~1.24
3562 Howard Avenue
Robert Gough
1 parcel, .21 acres, Commercial Office,
Residential, ~8 units
1 two-story office structure; 5,486 sqft
Built 1980, Sale 2012
~10 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:549 sqft
FAR: ~0.6
3535 Farquhar Avenue
Allegro Holdings LLC
2 parcels, .31 acres, Commercial Office/Residential
2 single story structures, 1 two story structure;
8,961 sqft total
Built 1965, Sale 2019
~20 off street parking stalls, including covered
Parking Ratio: ~1:448 sqft
FAR: ~0.66
3551 Farquhar Avenue
Farquar Investment Group
2 parcels, .6 acres, Commercial Office
1 two story structure; 15,276 sqft
Built NODATA, Sale NODATA
~50 off street parking stalls
Parking Ratio: 1:306 sqft
FAR: ~0.58
Tenant: Los Alamitos Dental Care
F7
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 69
Development Scenario A 6.2
F3
F2
F6
E4
E2
E1
D6
C1
C2
C4
B1
B2
A3
A4a
A4b
The development scenario presented here is not
intended as a master plan, but to present one possible
way in which property owners may choose to develop
in a way that is consistent with this Plan. Scenario A is presented throughout chapter 4.
70 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Development Scenario A 6.2

SITE ID ACRES NON-RESIDENTIAL SQFT RESIDENTIAL UNITS
A3 1.43 ~6,000 ~45
A4a 0.28 0 ~5
A4b 0.44 ~3,500 ~25
B1 3.10 ~70,000 ~70*
B2 0.68 ~7,000 ~35
C1/2 0.65 ~6,000 ~35
C4 0.74 ~7,000 ~30
D6 1.05 ~12,500 ~60
E1/2 0.60 ~5,000 ~40
E4 0.56 ~3,500 ~40
F2/3 0.87 ~7,000 ~50
F6 0.31 0 5
TOTAL 10.71 ~127,500 ~440*
* +100 hotel rooms
The figures and totals presented in this table
represent a major transformation of the city. In
reality, development will be incremental over a long
time frame and the data presented here should be
understood as a “kit of parts”.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 71
Development Scenario B 6.3
F3
F2
F7
C1
C2
B1
A3
A4a
A4b
F4
F5
E3
E5
E6 D2/3
D1
D4
D5
A6
A5
The development scenario presented here is not
intended as a master plan, but to present one possible
way in which property owners may choose to develop
in a way that is consistent with this Plan. Scenario
B was developed to demonstrate that all property
owners have the potential to be involved in realizing
the vision and benefiting from this Plan.
72 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

SITE ID ACRES NON-RESIDENTIAL SQFT RESIDENTIAL UNITS
A3 1.43 ~4,000 ~20
A4a 0.28 0 ~5
A4b 0.44 ~3,000 ~5
A5 0.78 ~7,000 ~45
A6 0.40 ~15,000 0
B1 3.1 ~55,000 0
C1/2 0.65 ~6,000 ~35
D1 0.70 ~9,000 ~40
D2/3 0.21 ~4,000 ~5
D4 0.58 ~3,000 ~10
D5 0.70 ~8,000 ~40
E3 0.47 ~4,000 ~25
E5/E6 0.82 0 ~15
F2/3 0.87 0 ~15
F4/F5 0.73 0 ~15
F7 0.60 0 ~10
TOTAL 12.76 ~118,000 ~285
Development Scenario B 6.3
The figures and totals presented in this table
represent a major transformation of the City. In
reality, development will be incremental over a long
time frame and the data presented here should be
understood as a “kit of parts”.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 73
Alternative Pine Street Design Schemes 6.4
This section presents three design schemes for
reimaging Pine Street as described in Chapter 4.

The prefered scheme is presented first, followed by
two alternatives. Each of the schemes has the potential to increase on-street parking capacity and improve the
public realm.

1. Entry Plaza with Diagonal and Parallel Parking

2. Central Plaza with Diagonal Parking

3. Central Plaza with Perpendicular Parking
74 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
0’ 100’ N

SECTION VIEW

PARKING
Existing:
66 spaces
Proposed:
80-130 spaces
Precedent example: Lancaster, CA
Central pedestrian
crossing
Diagonal parking
on permeable
pavers
Parallel parking
Entry plaza
with gateway
monument, special
paving, and accent
tree planting
Existing curb-cut,
typ.

PLAN VIEW
Katella Avenue
Florista Street
10’
Sidewalk
10’
Sidewalk
9’
Parallel Parking
9’
Parallel Parking
14’
Drive Aisle
14’
Drive Aisle
30’
Diagonal
Parking

PINE STREET - ENTRY PLAZA WITH DIAGONAL AND PARALLEL PARKING PlaceWorks 4/14/2021

6.4 CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 75
0’ 100’ N

SECTION VIEW
22’
Sidewalk
22’
Sidewalk
16’
Diagonal
Parking
16’
Diagonal
Parking
20’
Drive Aisle
Central Plaza with
special paving
and accent tree
planting. Drive aisle
surface is flush with
plaza surface.

Existing curb-cut,
typ.

PLAN VIEW
Katella Avenue
Florista Street
Diagonal parking

PINE STREET - CENTRAL PLAZA WITH DIAGONAL PARKING
PlaceWorks 4/14/2021

PARKING
Existing:
66 spaces
Proposed:
50-90 spaces
Precedent example: Newhall, CA

6.4 76 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
0’ 100’ N

SECTION VIEW

PARKING
Existing:
66 spaces
Proposed:
60-130 spaces
Precedent example: Glendale, CA
Central Plaza with
special paving
and accent tree
planting. Drive aisle
surface is flush with
plaza surface.

Existing curb-cut,
typ.

PLAN VIEW
Katella Avenue
Florista Street
17’
Sidewalk
17’
Sidewalk
18’
Perpendicular
Parking
18’
Perpendicular
Parking
26’
Drive Aisle
Perpendicular
parking

PINE STREET - CENTRAL PLAZA WITH PERPENDICULAR PARKING
PlaceWorks 4/14/2021

6.4 CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 77
Recommended Municipal Code Amendments 6.5
The following pages present the zoning and development standards for the TCMU zone (Chapter 17.12 of the Municipal Code), including proposed amendments, represented with redline strikethrough/underlines, recommended to implement the Strategic Plan.

17.12.010 Purpose of Zone

17.12.020 Land Uses and Permit Reguations

17.12.030 Commercial Uses Required along Streetfrontages

17.12.040 Development Standards for TCMU Zone

17.12.050 Design Standards

17.12.060 Live/Work Standards

17.12.070 Open Space Requirements for Residential Uses

17.12.080 Mixed-Use Lot Consolidation Incentive Program

17.12.090 Other Application Regulations
78 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

17.12.010 Purpose of Zone
The Town Center Mixed-Use (TCMU) zone is established to provide opportunities for commercial and residential mixeduse development that takes advantage of easy access to transit and proximity to commerce, and that encourages pedestrian activity. A wide range of integrated commercial and residential uses are appropriate. The Town Center Mixed-Use zone requires the inclusion of a ground-floor, street-frontage commercial or live/work components for all projects. Exclusive residential structures are not allowed permitted as part of horizontal mixed-use developments. This zone implements the General Plan Mixed-Use land use designation and the Town Center Strategic Plan. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)

17.12.020 Land Uses and Permit Requirements
A. Use Regulations. This section, and Table 2-06 (Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Town Center Mixed-Use Zone) in particular, identifies the uses of land that may be allowed within the TCMU zone and indicates whether any special permit is required for each allowable use.

B. Permitted Uses, Use Permits, and Uses Not Allowed.

1. Permitted Use (“P”). A permitted use is a use permitted as a matter of right, subject to compliance with applicable provisions of this Zoning Code, including Site Development Permit—Major and Minor (Chapter 17.44) and a building permit or other permit required by the Municipal Code.

2. Permitted as an Accessory Use (“A”). Accessory uses that are clearly incidental to a primary permitted or conditionally permitted use are permitted as a matter of right, subject to the requirements of this Zoning Code, including Section 17.28.035 (Accessory Structures—Nonresidenti=al Zones).

3. Administrative Use Permit (“AUP”). Uses that are allowed subject to the approval of an Administrative Use Permit (Chapter 17.32).

4. Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”). Uses that are allowed subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (Chapter 17.32).

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 79

5. Temporary Use Permit (“TUP”). Temporary uses are subject to the approval of a Temporary Use Permit (Chapter 17.46).

6. Uses Not Allowed (“—”). Uses with an “—” indication in Table 2-06 are not allowed in the specified zone.

C. Specific Use Regulations. All uses, regardless of the type of permit that may be required, shall comply with applicable provision of this Zoning Code. In addition, if there is a section number in the last column of the Table 2-06 labeled Specific Use Regulations, the use is also subject to the referenced provisions.

D. Zoning Permit Required. For any use permitted as a matter of right, such use shall require approval of a Zoning Permit in compliance with Chapter 17.50 (Zoning Consistency Review).

E. Multiple Uses on a Single Site. When a proposed project includes multiple land uses and more than one type of land use permit is required, the most restrictive land use permit shall apply to the entire project application.

F. Director Determination. Land uses are defined in Division 7 (Definitions). In cases where a specific land use or activity is not defined, the Director shall assign the land use or activity to a classification substantially similar in character. Land uses not listed in Table 2-06 or not found to be substantially similar to the land uses, as determined by the Director, are prohibited.

G. Prohibited Uses. The following uses are specifically prohibited in the TCMU zone:

1. All Cannabis Activities, including Cannabis Deliveries, Commercial Cannabis Activities, and Commercial Cultivation, even by Qualified Patients and Caregivers

2. Donation Boxes

3. Freight and/or Truck Terminals

4. Gun and Ammunition Stores

5. Manufacturing—Heavy

6. Recycling, Large Collection

7. Recycling, Processing Facility
80 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

8. Salvage Yard

9. Secondhand Stores

10.Swap Meets—Indoor or Outdoor

11.Tobacco and Vape Stores. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)

17.12.030 Commercial Uses Required along Street Frontages To maintain an active pedestrian environment in the TCMU zone, commercial uses shall be the predominant along street frontages. At least 75 percent of the ground floor frontage along Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard shall be occupied by commercial uses and/or live/work units. At least 75 percent of the ground floor frontage along Pine Street shall be occupied by commercial and/or cultural uses.

Table 2-06: Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Town Center Mixed-Use Zone P: Permitted Use CUP: Conditional Use Permit
A: Permitted as an Accessory Use —: Use not allowed
AUP: Administrative Use Permit TUP: Temporary Use Permit UF: Permitted Only on Upper Floor
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
Business, Financial, and Professional
Automated Teller Machines (ATMs)—
Drive Up
—
Business Support Services P
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
Check Cashing and/or Payday Loans —
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 81
Financial Institutions and Related
Services (without drive-through
facilities)
P
Offices—Business, and Professional
(but not including Medical and Dental
Office)
P 1) In multi-story structures, offices may occupy up to 100 percent of the gross floor area in the second and higher stories, and up to 15 percent of the ground floor upon verification of the square footage by the Director. In no case shall any single office space on the ground floor exceed 3,000 square feet total 2) In single-story structures located in shopvping centers, up to 15 percent of the gross floor area of the center is allowed for office uses upon verification of the square footage by the Director. In no case shall any single office space exceed 3,000 square feet total
Cannabis Uses
Cannabis Deliveries — See Section 17.28.090 (Cannabis Uses) Commercial Cannabis Activities — See Section 17.28.090 (Cannabis Uses) Cannabis Cultivation, even by
Qualified Patients and Caregivers
— See Section 17.28.090 (Cannabis Uses)
Eating and Drinking Establishments
Restaurant—No Alcohol Sales P
Restaurant—Accessory Outside
Seating Areas
AUP See Section 17.28.200 (Outdoor Dining) and Chapter 17.32 (Administrative Use Permits and Conditional Use Permits)
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
82 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Restaurant—Full or Limited Service
with Late Hours (open between
midnight and 6:00 a.m.)
CUP
Restaurant—Full or Limited Service,
Serving Alcohol
CUP See Section 17.28.060 (Alcoholic Beverage Retail Sales) Restaurant with Drive-Through
Facilities
—
Education
Schools, Private CUP
Trade and Vocational Schools CUP
Turoting and Education Centers CUP
Lodging
Hotel and Motel CUP
Homeless Shelters - up to 20 beds —
Homeless Shelters - more than 20 beds —
Medical-Related and Care Uses
Ambulance Services —
Clinic and Urgent Care —
Day Care Center CUP 17.28.130 (Day Care, General)
Health Facilities, Therapy, and
Rehabilitation
CUP Prohibited on ground floor. No larger than 3,000 sq. ft.

Hospital —
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 83
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
Medical and Dental Office P/CUP 1) CUP required on ground-floor tenant spaces on properties with arterial street frontage
2) In multi-story structures, offices may occupy up to 100 percent of the gross floor area in the second and higher stories, and up to 15 percent of the ground floor upon verification of the square footage by the Director. In no case shall any single office space on the ground floor exceed 3,000 square feet total.

These standards shall apply to all office uses, including Professional. Such determination/verification shall occur through the Zoning Permit process 3) In single-story structures located in shopping centers, up to 15 percent of the gross floor area of the center is allowed for office uses upon verification of the square footage by the Director. In no case shall any single office space exceed 3,000 square feet total. These standards shall apply to all office uses, including Professional. Such determination/verification shall occur through the Zoning Permit process
Residential Care Facilities —
Recreation and Entertainment
Arcade (Electronic Game Center) CUP See Section 17.28.070 (Arcades) Commercial Recreation—Indoors CUP
Commercial Recreation—Outdoors —
Entertainment, Indoor CUP Excludes uses that are regulated under Section 17.28.040 (Adult Businesses) Health/Fitness Facilities, Small AUP
Health/Fitness Facilities, Large CUP
Residential
Live/Work Unit AUP
Multi-Family Dwelling AUP
Senior Residential Housing Projects P
Single-Family Dwelling —
Supportive Housing—Housing Type AUP
84 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
Transitional Housing—Housing Type AUP
Retail Sales
Alcohol Beverage Sales
Alcohol Sales, for Off-Site
Consumption
CUP See Section 17.28.060 (Alcoholic Beverage Retail Sales) Alcoholic Beverage Sales (for on-site
or off-site consumption, in conjunction
with an allowed use)
CUP See Section 17.28.060 (Alcoholic Beverage Retail Sales) Animal Retail Sales —
Building Materials and Services,
Indoor
—
Building Materials and Services,
Outdoor
—
Convenience Store CUP
Farmers’ Market TUP
Outdoor Temporary and/or Seasonal
Sales
TUP
Recreational Equipment Rentals—
Indoor Only
P
Retail—General P
Retail—Restricted CUP
Vehicle Sales and Rental P Office only; no storage of cars on property.

Large Vehicle, Construction, and
Heavy Equipment Sales, Service, and
Rental
—
Service Uses
Animal Boarding/Kennels, Grooming —
Cultural Institutions CUP
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 85
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
Funeral Parlors and Interment Services —
Instructional Services P
Maintenance and Repair Services—
Indoor
—
Personal Services, General P
Personal Services, Restricted CUP
Moving Companies, Storage Allowed —
Social Service Facilities —
Vehicle Repair and Services —
Service/Fueling Station —
Vehicle Washing/Detailing —
Vehicle Service, Major —
Veterinary Services, Large Animal —
Veterinary Services, Small Animal CUP All operations must be conducted completely within a masonry structure. No overnight boarding permitted
Transportation, Communications, and Infrastructure Uses Car Sharing—Parking AUP Car sharing parking spaces may not occupy any space required for another use Freight/Truck Terminals —
Vehicle Charging Stations A
Utility Facilities CUP
Vehicle Storage —
Wireless Telecommunication
Facilities—Minor
AUP
Wireless Telecommunication
Facilities—Major
CUP
Wireless Telecommunication Facilities,
Satellite Dish Antenna
P
86 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Land Use TCMU Special Use Regulations
Other Uses
Caretaker Quarters —
Drive-Through or Drive-Up Facilities —
Public Assembly Facilities CUP
Religious Assembly Facilities CUP
Vending Machine A

17.12.040 Development Standards for Town Center Mixed-use Zone A. General. The general property development standards for the TCMU zone shall be as set forth in Table 2-07:

General Development Standards for Town Center Mixed-Use Zone.

B. Calculation of Density and Intensity.

1. Horizontal Mixed-Use. For residential and nonresidential uses on the same development site but separate legal lots, the residential density shall be calculated for the lot or lots dedicated solely to residential use. The FAR for the nonresidential use shall be calculated for the lot or lots dedicated solely to the nonresidential use.

2. Vertical Mixed-Use. For a development project consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in the same building or group of buildings, the residential density and FAR shall be additive, meaning that the development in total shall not exceed the allowed the residential density shall be as calculated for the residential component and plus the maximum the FAR as calculated for nonresidential component.

Table 2-07: General Development Standards for Town Center Mixed-Use Zone Development Features Requirement by Zone
TCMU
Additional Requirements
Minimum Lot Area (for new
mixed-use development)
10,000 5,000 sq. ft. For new mixed-use development. Single-purpose uses can be constructed on lots smaller than 10,000
5,000 sq. ft.

CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 87
Structure Form and Location
Standards
Development Features Requirement by Zone
TCMU
Additional Requirements
Residential Density—Maximum 30 60 units/acre The cumulative residential development in the TCMU district shall not exceed 588 total units.

FAR Maximum—Nonresidential
Components

2.00 Storefront Width—Minimum 50% of street frontage lot width Minimum Setback
Fronting Los Alamitos Boulevard and/or Katella Avenue12 ft. minimum The setback shall be developed as passable walkway, contiguous with the public sidewalk. Shade trees (species to be required by the City) shall be planted in the first 4 ft. of the setback; the rear 5 ft. of the setback may be used for outdoor dining or other outdoor commercial uses.

Fronting Pine Street 6 ft. minimum
Front or Adjacent to a Street 0 ft. minimum; 10 ft. maximum Side—Interior
Abutting Nonresidential or
Mixed-Use Zone
0 ft. minimum
Abutting Residential Zone 10 ft. minimum
Side—Street Side 10 ft. minimum
Rear
Abutting Nonresidential Zone 0 ft. minimum
Abutting Residential Zone 15 ft. minimum
Height—Maximum 60 ft.
88 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
Open Space for Residential Uses 200 sq. ft. per unit combined common and private
C. Parking Restricted within Front and/or Street Side Setbacks. Parking shall only be allowed within required front and/or street side setbacks where the responsible review authority finds that no feasible alternative exists to design a project and further, where such parking can be well integrated into overall project design and can adequately screened.

D. Minimum Ground Floor Height. The minimum ground-floor height for structures with commercial uses on the ground floor shall be not less than 12 feet, six inches. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)

17.12.050 Design Standards
A. Generally.

1. Site and building design shall provide for internal compatibility among the different uses in terms of noise, hours of operation, vehicle and pedestrian circulation, access, use of open space, and similar operating characteristics.

2. Potential noise, odors, glare, pedestrian traffic, and other potentially significant impacts on residents shall be minimized to allow a compatible mix of residential and nonresidential uses on the same site. The design of any live/ work or mixed-use project shall take into consideration potential impacts, including, but not limited to, noise, odors, and hours of operation, on adjacent properties. The design shall include specific design features to minimize potential impacts.

3. The design of the mixed-use project shall ensure that the residential units are of a residential character and that privacy between residential units and between other uses on the site is maximized.

4. The design of the structures and site planning shall encourage integration of the street pedestrian environment with the nonresidential uses through the use of plazas, paseos, courtyards, and walkways, as well as pedestrian scale amenities and street furniture.

5. Site planning and building design shall be compatible with and enhance the adjacent and surrounding built CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 89
environment in terms of scale, building design, color, exterior materials, roof styles, lighting, landscaping, and signage.

6. Any mixed-use development in which two-thirds or more of the gross floor area is developed with residential uses, in addition to complying with the design standards set forth in this section, shall comply with the provisions of Section 17.08.045 (Design Standards for Multi-Family Housing).

B. Building Orientation, Entrances, and Articulation

1. Orientation. The main building of a development shall be oriented to face a public street. Building frontages shall be generally parallel to streets. For all residential, retail, and office uses, at least one primary entrance to a groundfloor use shall face the adjacent street right-of-way. Ground-related entrances include entrances to ground-floor uses.

2. Ground Floor Transparency. At least 65 percent of the exterior walls on the ground floor facing the street shall include windows, doors, or other openings.

3. Nonresidential Entrances. Entries shall include clearly defined features of front façades and be of a scale that is in proportion to the size of the building and number of units being accessed. Larger buildings shall have a more prominent building entrance while maintaining a pedestrian scale.

4. Transitional Space at Residential Entries. New residential buildings shall provide transitional spaces in the form of stoops, overhangs, and porches between public areas fronting the primary street(s) and entrances. This type of element or equivalent shall be required for each unit or group of units, but no less than one of this type of element shall be provided.

5. Building Articulation. No street frontage wall may run in a continuous plane for more than 25 feet without building openings or offsets, or as approved by the Review Authority if the project is constrained by unusual parcel size, shape, use, or other features that the responsible Review Authority accepts as rendering this requirement infeasible. Offsets shall vary in depth and/or direction of at least 18 inches, or a repeated pattern of offsets, recesses, or projections of similar depth.
90 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022

6. Structured Parking. Structured parking facing public streets shall be fronted or wrapped with actively occupied spaces such as storefronts, live/work units, residential community amenities, and lobbies. Access to parking shall be designed so that it is not prominent and ties into the adjacent architectural style. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019) C. Stoops are a unique opportunity to engage residential entries with the public realm, creating activation, opportunities for engagement, and safety. Additionally, stoops create a design aesthetic that supports a residential character on appropriate urban streets. All stoops shall conform to the following design standards:

1. Stoops shall be required for ground level residential units on all streets, regardless of typology.

2. Stoops shall be designed to address the street to provide the most direct access path and allow for the greatest amount of landscaping.

3.. Stoop or storefront access shall be required for all ground level live-work units, where the street frontage of the building exceeds 100 feet, unless otherwise explicitly approved by the design review authority, provided an alternative accessible path is included.

4. Stoops shall be elevated a maximum of 36 inches above grade or sidewalk.

5. Stoop porches, not including stairs, shall be a minimum of 20 square feet.

6. Stoops shall correspond directly to the building entry and be at least 4 feet wide.

7. Stoops and/or adjacent entry porches shall not be enclosed with solid walls or railings, or vegetation that creates a visual obstruction between the stoop/porch and the public sidewalk in order to maintain a sense of openness.

8. Stoops may have an over-hanging roof or awning no wider than the stoop.

9. Planter or porch walls parallel to the sidewalk and taller than 18 inches shall have an irrigated 18 inch planting bed at its base.

D. Courtyards and Plazas are outdoor rooms designed for public use and are defined by surrounding buildings and/or streets. Primary functions are to encourage a diversity of opportunities for social interaction and activities, to provide relief and relaxation, to expand and reinforce the public realm, and to contribute to the livability and general amenity of the Town Center and adjacent parts of the city. Proposed uses and design should be determined as part of the overall project design process and CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 91
shall comply with the established design standards:

1. Dimensions
a. Shall have a minimum area of 1,200 square feet and minimum dimensions of 30 feet by 40 feet.

2. Accessibility
a. Courtyards and plazas shall be open to a public street and sidewalk, on one or two-sides with an unobstructed opening dimension of 30 feet on any open side. An alley shall not be considered a public street b. Security fences, walls, and entry gates shall not obstruct access from the sidewalk. c. Raised planters shall not be located along the perimeter and used to privatize publicly accessible open space. d. Shall be open and accessible to the public at a minimum from 7am to 10pm. e. Signage shall identify the open space as a public amenity and the hours of accessibility. f. Vehicular access, loading and parking uses shall be prohibited.

3. Materials.
a.Courtyards and plazas shall be of high-quality materials. Careful detailing shall include consideration of materials, their durability and appearance. No more than 25% of the area may be paved in standard concrete.

4. Landscaping
a. At least 25% of the courtyard surface shall be landscaped with live vegetation. Shade trees and gardens are strongly encouraged. All landscaped areas shall contain a combination of low, medium, and tall plant materials as appropriate. b. A minimum of one 36-inch box shade tree shall be provided per 600 square feet of publicly accessible open space in a planting area of at least 6 ft x 6 ft x 3 ft deep. At the time of planting, trees shall be at least 12-feet tall with a 2-inch caliper, 6-inch above the topmost root.
c. The property owner or agent shall maintain open space and landscaping within the publicly accessible open space.

5. Amenities
a. Seating at the ratio of one seat per 200 square feet of courtyard/plaza area shall be provided, in addition to any permitted outdoor dining, in dispersed locations throughout the space. Seating shall be either movable chairs, or fixed seats or benches, where such seats shall be 18 lineal inches each. Movable seating is strongly encouraged. 92 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
b. Storefront and unit entries fronting on the open space shall be designed and lighted to address safety and avoid unsafe conditions such as limited visibility, poor illumination, or dark corners. c. A majority of the open space should have access to sunlight for the duration of daylight hours. A mix of direct sunlight and shade is encouraged. Freestanding shading devices (single installation on the ground, such as trellis, patio covers, etc) shall be permitted within the open space, provided no more than 50% of the open space is covered. d. Permanent building projections, including cantilevered overhangs or balconies, may not project over the open space.
e. Open space shall be inviting and well-illuminated at night with pedestrian-scaled lighting to address public safety.

Fixtures may include low-level lights and overhead lights attached to building walls. f. A special feature (public art, water feature, specimen tree, or other such focal point) shall be provided for each publicly accessible open space plaza or courtyard.
g. Bike racks, scooter parking areas, waste receptacles, and other street furnishings shall be provided. h. All publicly accessible open space shall follow the safety standards and considerations as defined by Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED).
i. Lighting shall be pedestrian-scaled and may include low-level bollard lights or overhead wall mounted fixture for a well illuminated area.

E. Paseos are narrow pedestrian passages that serve as mid-block crossings or access to interior courtyards. Their intimate scale and safety from vehicular traffic/noise makes them potentially vibrant destinations. Paseos are common to warm climates, where their sense of enclosure and relative shade also makes them an attractive alternative to street retail. Paseos should comply with the following design standards:

1. Dimensions
a. Paseos shall not be more than 30 feet nor less than 20 feet wide. The directly adjacent building walls framing the paseo may not be greater than three times in elevation height than the width of the paseo. The building above this height must be setback a minimum of 20 feet.

2. Accessibility
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 93
a. Paseos shall be physically and visually accessible from the public sidewalk, and must connect a public street with a different public street, alley or interior courtyard. b. Paseos must be at the same elevation as the public sidewalk. No security fences, walls or entry gates shall block passage during established hours.
c. Signage shall identify the paseo as a public amenity. d. Vehicular access, loading and parking uses shall be prohibited within the paseo during hours of public accessibility.

3. Materials
a. Paseos shall feature high quality, durable materials applied in a carefully detailed manner. b. Decorative paving compatible with the style of the adjacent structures shall be applied with no more than 25% of the paseo being paved in standard concrete.
c. Street-level facade standards shall be applied to facades fronting onto the open space.

4. Landscaping
a. A minimum of 10% of the paseo area shall be landscaped with live landscaping. All landscaped areas shall contain a combination of low, medium, and tall plant materials as appropriate. b. A minimum of one 24-inch box shade tree shall be installed per 750 square feet of paseo area. c. Planters shall have a minimum soils area of 24 inches by 24 inches by 24 inches (24” x 24” x 24”), except where a tree is required, at which point the area and depth shall be increased to a minimum of 42 inches by 42 inches by 36 inches (42” x 42” x 36”).
e. The property owner or agent shall maintain open space and landscaping within the publicly accessible open space.

5. Amenities
a. Seating at the ratio of one seat per 200 square feet of paseo area shall be provided, in addition to any permitted 94 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
outdoor dining, in dispersed locations throughout the space. Seating shall be either movable chairs, or fixed seats or benches, where such seats shall be construed to be 18 lineal inches each. Movable seating is strongly encouraged.
b. Storefronts, unit entries or stoops shall front onto the paseo when possible and shall be designed and lighted to address safety.
c. A majority of the paseo should have access to sunlight for the duration of daylight hours. A mix of direct sunlight and shade should be provided.
d. Overhead structures, including canopies, awnings, cantilevered overhangs, or balconies, cannot cover greater than 25% of the paseo area. The remaining 75% must be open to the sky, although freestanding shade structures (trellises, patio covers, etc) shall be allowed, but a minimum of 50% of the paseo must remain uncovered. e. Bike racks, scooter parking areas, waste receptacles, and other street furnishings shall be provided in the paseo. f. Lighting shall be pedestrian-scaled and may include low-level bollard lights or overhead wall mounted fixtures for a well illuminated area.

17.12.060 Live/Work Standards
All live/work units shall comply with the regulations established in Division 4, Section 17.28.180 (Live/Work Units) of this title. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)

17.12.070 Open Space Requirements for Residential Uses
A. Type. Open space shall be in the form of private or common open space such as balconies, courtyards, atgrade patios (rear and side of the units), rooftop gardens, or terraces. Open standards for the R-3 zone shall apply.

B. Minimum Dimension. Balconies that are 30 inches or less in width or depth shall not be counted as open space.

C. Encroachment. Balconies that project over a public right-of-way shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)

17.12.080 Mixed-Use Lot Consolidation Incentive Program CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 95
To encourage the assemblage of smaller lots into larger lots that can be developed more efficiently into a mixed-use project, the following incentives may be provided to a qualifying development at the Director’s discretion:

A. Reduction of planning permit application fees.

B. Priority in permit processing. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019)

17.12.090 Other Application Regulations
New land uses and structures, and alterations to existing land uses and structures, shall be designed, constructed, and/or established in compliance with the requirements in Division 3—Site Planning and General Development Standards and Division 4—Regulations for Specific Land Uses and Activities. (Ord. 19-03 § 3, 2019) 96 | APPENDIX CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022
CC HEARING DRAFT 03.21.2022 APPENDIX | 97
December 2021 | General Plan EIR Addendum
Los Alamitos Town Center Project
General Plan EIR Addendum
City of Los Alamitos
Prepared for:

City of Los Alamitos
Contact: Tom Oliver, Associate Planner
3191 Katella Avenue
Los Alamitos, CA 90720
562.431.3538 x303
Prepared by:

PlaceWorks
Contact: Addie Farrell, Principal
700 S. Flower Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, California 90017
213.623.1443
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com
Attachment 2

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
Table of Contents
December 2021 Page i
Section Page

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE.................................................................................................. 1

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES ............................................................................................................ 3

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION................................................................................................. 4

2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................................... 5

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING....................................................................................................................... 5

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................. 17

3.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................. 17

3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................... 17

3.3 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS ........................................................................................................................ 17

4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .................................................................................................. 19

4.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................................. 19

4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED........................................................... 21

4.3 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)......................................... 21

4.4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................................................ 22

5. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 25

5.1 AESTHETICS ...................................................................................................................................................... 25

5.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ................................................................................... 28

5.3 AIR QUALITY ..................................................................................................................................................... 30

5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................................................................................... 37

5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 40

5.6 ENERGY............................................................................................................................................................... 43

5.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS.................................................................................................................................. 44

5.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS............................................................................................................... 48

5.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS......................................................................................... 51

5.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................................................................................... 55

5.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING ...................................................................................................................... 58

5.12 MINERAL RESOURCES.................................................................................................................................. 60

5.13 NOISE.................................................................................................................................................................... 61

5.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................................................. 65

5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES............................................................................................................................................ 66

5.16 RECREATION .................................................................................................................................................... 69

5.17 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.................................................................................................................... 70

5.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................................. 73

5.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ........................................................................................................ 74

5.20 WILDFIRE............................................................................................................................................................ 77

5.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................... 79

6. LIST OF PREPARERS .................................................................................................................. 81

7. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................... 83

APPENDICES
Appendix A. Tribal Consultation

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1 Regional Location................................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2 Local Vicinity.......................................................................................................................................11 Figure 3 Aerial Photograph...............................................................................................................................13 Figure 4 Project Site Blocks..............................................................................................................................15 November 2021 Page 1

1. Introduction
This document is an Addendum to the previously certified 2015 Los Alamitos General Plan Environmental Impact Report (Certified EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2013121055, which was certified in March 2015 (Los Alamitos 2015). This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Sections 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines. This addendum evaluates whether the proposed Los Alamitos Town Center General Plan Amendment (Proposed Project) would modify the Approved Project in such a way as to result in new environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects or would otherwise trigger a need for subsequent environmental review. The City of Los Alamitos is the lead agency responsible for the Certified EIR and this Addendum.

The Project Site is defined by the Town Center Mixed-Use (TCMU) zoning designation and a corresponding Mixed Use General Plan land use designation that was established in the 2015 General Plan update. The Proposed Project includes a General Plan amendment (GPA) to increase allowable residential density of the existing Mixed Use land use designation, applicable in the Project Site, from 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre. The GPA would retain the same overall development limit of 588 net new residential units within the Project Site as the approved General Plan. The Project Site is an approximately 19.6-acre area at the intersection of Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue encompassing roughly six blocks of generally developed urban uses.

1.1 BACKGROUND, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE

1.1.1 CEQA Requirements
Where a previous program EIR has been prepared, subsequent activities within the program must be examined in light of that EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)). Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the program EIR. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(4)).

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, when an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines that one or more of the following conditions are met:

1. Substantial project changes are proposed that will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF L OS ALAMITOS

1. Introduction

2. Substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that require major revisions to the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

3. New information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified, or the negative declaration was adopted shows any of the following:
a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration.
b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than identified in the previous EIR.
c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. d) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.

A supplement to an EIR (supplemental EIR), which is narrower in scope than a subsequent EIR, may be prepared if any of the above criteria apply, but “[o]nly minor changes or additions would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15163(a)).

An Addendum can be prepared to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 and Section 15163(a) (above) calling for preparation of a subsequent or supplement EIR have occurred (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164).

Modifications to the Los Alamitos General Plan (Approved Project) and regulatory conditions, described in Chapter 3, Project Description, would fulfill none of the conditions outlined in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(1) to (3) because these changes would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects requiring major revisions to the Certified EIR. Accordingly, this checklist provides the substantial evidence required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(e) to support the finding that a subsequent and supplement EIR are not required and an addendum to the Certified EIR is the appropriate environmental document to address changes to the project.

As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration):
a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

1. Introduction
December 2021 Page 3
b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

After careful consideration of the potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project, the City of Los Alamitos has determined that 1) none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplement to an EIR have occurred, and 2) the circumstances described in Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines exist.

Therefore, an Addendum to the Los Alamitos General Plan EIR has been deemed appropriate.

1.1.2 Scope of Analysis in This Addendum
Changes to the Certified EIR and regulatory conditions would fulfill none of the conditions outlined in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(1) to (3) because these changes would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects requiring major revisions to the Certified EIR. Accordingly, this checklist provides the substantial evidence required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(e) to support the finding that a subsequent EIR is not required and an addendum to the Certified EIR is the appropriate environmental document to address changes to the project.

As lead agency under CEQA, the City of Los Alamitos is required to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with discretionary approvals. The scope of the review for project-related impacts for this Addendum is limited to differences between impacts analyzed by the Certified EIR for implementation of the General Plan Update (Approved Project) and the Proposed Project. The Approved Project will serve as the “baseline” for the environmental impact analysis. The baseline includes all applicable mitigation measures from the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), approved in conjunction with the Certified EIR. As required by CEQA, this Addendum also addresses changes in circumstances or new information that would potentially involve new environmental impacts.

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
This Addendum relies on the Appendix G CEQA checklist, which addresses environmental issues section by section. The completed checklist is included in Section 5.0, Environmental Analysis. Each environmental topic has the following subheadings:
 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis (see also Section 3.1, Project Background)  Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project (including environmental checklist)

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF L OS ALAMITOS

1. Introduction

 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
For a detailed description of adopted land use planning documents that apply to the Certified EIR and associated environmental documentation, see Section 3.1, Project Background, of this Addendum.

December 2021 Page 5

2. Environmental Setting

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Los Alamitos is in northwest Orange County and well connected to the region by Interstate (I-) 605 and I-405. The Proposed Project encompasses the parcels zoned Town Center Mixed Use with the corresponding Mixed-Use General Plan land use designation (Project Site) near the intersection of Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue near the northwest side of Los Alamitos. (See Figure 1, Regional Location, and Figure 2, Local Vicinity). The Project Site is generally bounded by Florista Street to the north, Reagan Street and multifamily residential to the east, Farquhar Avenue to the south, and Los Alamitos Boulevard and Chestnut Street to the west (see Figure 3, Aerial Photograph).

The Project Site includes 53 parcels with a total land area of 19.6 acres near the intersection of Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard (Intersection). As shown in Figure 4, Project Site Blocks, the Project Site consists of six blocks. Three blocks are to the north of Katella Avenue and three blocks are south of Katella Avenue along Los Alamitos Boulevard.

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.2.1 Existing Land Use
The City of Los Alamitos and the Project Site are urbanized. Commercial, retail, and office facilities are the dominant land use type within the Project Site. Community and public facilities are also present in the Project Site, with a notable concentration in the northeastern most block bounded by Pine Street and Reagan Street.

The Project Site is defined by the Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU) zoning designation with a General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed-Use. Existing conditions for each of the blocks are provided in sections 2.2.1.1 through 2.2.1.6.

2.2.1.1 NORTHWEST BLOCK
The Northwest Block is bounded by Los Alamitos Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Florista Street, and Chestnut Street. The block is primarily defined by commercial retail land use and includes two residential parcels.

Prominent tenants near the major intersection include a CVS pharmacy and Shell gas station. The block is bisected by a north-south alley and includes 199 off-street parking stalls. The block contains 39,919 square feet of commercial development with a 0.25 floor-to-area ratio (FAR).

2.2.1.2 NORTHEAST BLOCK
The Northeast Block is bounded by Los Alamitos Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Florista Street, and Pine Street.

The block is primarily defined by commercial retail and office land use and includes the Los Alamitos Plaza retail district. The block consists of two parcels and contains 95,369 square feet of commercial development

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting

with a cumulative 0.58 FAR. The block has 213 parking stalls; the primary property holder also owns land on the adjacent block, which is used for additional surface parking. There is no residential in this block.

2.2.1.3 PINE-REAGAN BLOCK
The Pine-Reagan Block is bounded by Katella Avenue, Florista Street, Pine Street, and Reagan Street. The block is primarily defined by small-scale community services along Reagan Street, including the Saint Isidore Historical Plaza. The block also contains several surface parking lots along Pine Street, with a total of 203 parking stalls on the block. Along Pine Street, there is a US Bank branch on the corner of Katella Avenue and the CIF building near the middle of the block. The block is bisected by a north-south access alley. Overall, the block contains 59,894 square feet of commercial and community service structures built out at 0.35 FAR. The block contains three parcels with an existing single family residential land use.

2.2.1.4 SOUTHEAST BLOCK
The Southeast Block is bounded by Katella Avenue, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Green Avenue, and Reagan Street.

The block is primarily defined by commercial retail and office uses, including Chase Bank, McDonald’s, and a small strip mall. The Los Alamitos Museum is located along Los Alamitos Boulevard. The block contains 222 off-street parking stalls, including a below-grade parking facility along Green Avenue. Overall, the block contains 59,851 square feet of commercial space at 0.42 FAR. The block also includes several multifamily parcels on the southeastern part of the block that are not included on the Project Site and are not a part of the Proposed Project.

2.2.1.5 GREEN-HOWARD BLOCK
The Green-Howard Block is bounded by Green Avenue, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Howard Avenue, and Reagan Street. The block is primarily defined by commercial retail and office uses, including a well-defined edge of commercial facades along Los Alamitos Boulevard and a pair of three-story office structures near the middle of the block. The block also contains multifamily residential parcels on the eastern two thirds of the block, which are not included on the Project Site and are not a part of the Proposed Project. The block contains 196 off-street parking stalls and 68,843 square feet of commercial structures at 0.65 FAR.

2.2.1.6 HOWARD-FARQUHAR BLOCK
The Howard-Farquhar Block is bounded by Howard Avenue, Farquhar Avenue, Los Alamitos Boulevard, and Reagan Street. The block is primarily defined by commercial retail and office uses, including a substantial number of dental offices. Multifamily structures on the eastern part of the block are not included on the Project Site and are not a part of the Proposed Project. One multifamily parcel is located within the Project Site.

Overall, the block contains 189 off-street parking stalls and 81,100 square feet of commercial space at 0.71 FAR.

2.2.2 Surrounding Land Use
The Project Site is surrounded by existing commercial uses, including the Los Alamitos Medical Center, and adjacent residential neighborhoods, including the Rossmoor community in unincorporated Orange County.

The surrounding land uses include multifamily and single-family residential to the southeast, northeast, and

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting
December 2021 Page 7
northwest; commercial/retail to the south, southwest, and north; community/public to the east and north; and office to the east. Adjacent zoning designations include General Commercial (C-G) to the south and north, Commercial-Professional Office (C-O) to the east, Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) to the southeast and northwest, and Live/Work Overlay Zone (LWOZ)to the north.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting

This page intentionally left blank.

PlaceWorks
Figure 1 - Regional Location

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
Source: ESRI, 2021
0 Scale (Miles)
3 City of Los Alamitos
405
405
405
5 105
710
605
91 CALIFORNIA
91 CALIFORNIA
47 CALIFORNIA
1 CALIFORNIA
22 CALIFORNIA
39 CALIFORNIA
72 CALIFORNIA
42 CALIFORNIA
90 CALIFORNIA
County of Los Angeles
County of Orange
Downey
County Boundary
Project Site

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting

This page intentionally left blank.

PlaceWorks
Figure 2 - Local Vicinity

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
0 Scale (Miles)
1 Katella Ave
Los Alamitos Blvd
Lampson Ave
Bolsa Chica Rd
Valley View St
Westminster Blvd
N Studebaker Rd
Bellflower Blvd
405
405
605
22 CALIFORNIA
W Cerritos Ave
Ball Rd
Pacific Coast Hwy
1 CALIFORNIA
Seal Beach
Naval Weapon Station
Joint Forces
Training Base
Los Alamitos
22 CALIFORNIA
Bloomfield St
Moody St
Pioneer Blvd
Norwalk Blvd
Los Coyotes Diagonal
Lincoln Ave
La Palma Ave
E Carson St
Del Amo Blvd
Chapman Ave
91 CALIFORNIA
County of Los Angeles
County of Orange
City of Los Alamitos County Boundary Palo Verde Ave
E Atherton Ave
Cal State University
at Long Beach
VA Long Beach
Healthcare
System
E Willow St
Source: ESRI, 2021
Project Site

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting

This page intentionally left blank.

PlaceWorks
Figure 3 - Aerial Photograph

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
Source: Nearmap, 2021
0 Scale (Feet)
400
City Boundary
Los Alamitos
Unincorporated
Orange County
Residential
Commercial
Residential
Residential
Residential
Retail
Commercial
Katella Ave
Los Alamitos Blvd
Florista St
Green Ave
Howard Ave
Farquhar Ave
Ruth Elaine Dr
Quail Run Rd
Donnie Ann Rd
Hedwig Rd
Pine St
Reagan St
Cherry St
Chestnut St
Walnut St
Weatherby Rd
Davenport Rd
Wallingsford Rd
Pemberton Rd
Pine St
Reagan St
Cherry St
Residential
Project Site
Catalina St

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting

This page intentionally left blank.

PC REVIEW DRAFT 09/15/21 - 62
Existing Conditions - Site Inventory 6.1
The following pages present an
inventory of existing uses and other
characteristics for parcels within the
Plan Area.

The adjacent diagram illustrates
the Plan Area divided into blocks
labeled A through F. The following
pages assign numbers to parcels
(or groups of parcels under single
ownership) on each block.

The summary table on the following
page presents key statistics for each
block.

Data in this section was collected
from County Assessor parcel
records dated January 2021 and
visual analysis of Google aerial
imagery.

N 0’ 250’ 500’
A B C
D
E

DRAFT F
D
PlaceWorks
Source: PlaceWorks, 2021
Figure 4 - Project Site Blocks

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS
0 Scale (Feet)
500
A
B
C
D
E
F
Northwest Block
Northeast Block
Pine-Reagan Block
Southeast Block
Green-Howard Block
Howard-Farquhar Block
Project Site

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

2. Environmental Setting

This page intentionally left blank.

December 2021 Page 17

3. Project Description

3.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
In 2015, the City of Los Alamitos certified the EIR for the Los Alamitos General Plan Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2013121055). The Certified EIR determined that most potential impacts could be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, it concluded that the following topic areas would result in significant unavoidable adverse impacts even after mitigation:
 Air Quality (Air Quality Management Plan [AQMP] consistency, construction and operation air pollutant emissions, and localized air quality)
 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions (Consistency with GHG reduction plans)  Noise (Construction-related noise and vibration)
 Transportation (Local segments and intersections)

3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Town Center Strategic Plan describes the desired development pattern for the properties and public rights-of-way encompassed within the existing Project Site, including streetscape improvements and desired mix of land uses. The Town Center Strategic Plan recommends a multiyear list of actions needed to implement the desired vision for the Project Site. The Town Center Strategic Plan provides recommendations for future actions, but it is an informational document that in and of itself does not constitute a project under CEQA (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies). One of its recommendations is a general plan amendment to increase the allowable residential density on the Project Site. The general plan amendment is considered a project under CEQA and is the focus of this Addendum.

The Proposed Project amends the General Plan Land Use Element to increase allowed residential density on the existing Project Site from the existing 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre, with an overall development cap for the Project Site of 588 net new residential units. The development cap of 588 units is within the overall adopted General Plan limits for the Project Site and within the scope of what is evaluated in the Certified EIR.

Therefore, the Proposed Project would not increase residential development beyond what is allowed under the General Plan and Certified EIR (Approved Project).

3.3 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
This Addendum to the Certified EIR is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for the City’s discretionary approvals to implement the Proposed Project. No individual development projects are proposed under this Addendum; it only addresses the proposed general plan amendment. Any future development would require separate environmental review to determine its consistency with the Certified EIR and this Addendum.

All the approved, applicable measures from the Certified EIR have been incorporated into this document. This

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

3. Project Description

document is intended to provide sufficient information to allow the City of Los Alamitos to evaluate the potential impacts from implementation of the Proposed Project. The following discretionary actions have been requested:
 General Plan Amendment to increase allowable residential density from 30 dwelling units per acre to 60 dwelling units per acre within the Mixed-Use Land Use designation, with the maximum cumulative total dwelling units within the Project Site remaining at 588.

December 2021 Page 19

4. Environmental Checklist

4.1 BACKGROUND

1. Project Title: Los Alamitos Town Center Project

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Los Alamitos
3191 Katella Avenue
Los Alamitos, CA 90720

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Tom Oliver, Associate Planner
(562) 431-3538 x303

4. Project Location: The City of Los Alamitos is in northwest Orange County and well connected to the region by I-605 and I-405. The Proposed Project encompasses the parcels zoned Town Center Mixed Use with the corresponding General Plan land use designation of Mixed-Use (Project Site) near the intersection of Los Alamitos Boulevard and Katella Avenue on the northwest side of the City of Los Alamitos. The Project Site is generally bounded by Florista Street to the north, Reagan Street and multifamily residential to the east, Farquhar Avenue to the south, and Los Alamitos Boulevard and Chestnut Street to the west.

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

City of Los Alamitos
3191 Katella Avenue
Los Alamitos, CA 90720

6. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use

7. Zoning: Town Center Mixed Use

8. Description of Project: The general plan amendment would increase the allowable residential density within the Project Site from the existing 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre while maintaining the existing overall development cap for the Project Site of 588 net new residential units. The development cap of 588 units is within the overall adopted General Plan limits for the Project Site and within the scope of what is evaluated in the Certified EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not increase residential development beyond what is already allowed under the General Plan and Certified EIR (Approved Project).

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

4. Environmental Checklist

The Project Site is surrounded by existing commercial uses, including the Los Alamitos Medical Center, and adjacent residential neighborhoods, including the Rossmoor community in unincorporated Orange County. The surrounding land uses include multifamily and single family residential to the southeast, northeast, and northwest; commercial/retail to the south, southwest, and north; community/public to the east and north; and office to the east. Adjacent zoning designations include General Commercial (C-G) to the south and north, Commercial-Professional Office (C-O) to the east, Multiple-Family Residential (R3)3) to the southeast and northwest, and Live/Work Overlay Zone (LWOZ)to the north.

10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):

None.

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 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

Assembly Bill (AB) 52 tribal notification is not required for an addendum; however, the Proposed Project includes a general plan amendment and is therefore subject to Senate Bill (SB) 18. The City of Los Alamitos sent tribal consultation invitations to 18 tribes provided from the Native American Heritage Commission’s list. The City received one response from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The response indicates that no consultation is requested for the Proposed Project. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation would request consultation for any future ground-disturbing activities.

Therefore, no further action is needed at this time (see Appendix A, Tribal Consultation).

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

4. Environmental Checklist
December 2021 Page 21

4.2 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 Agricultural and Forest Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation / Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

4.3 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a EIR ADDENDUM 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
Printed Name For

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

4. Environmental Checklist

4.4 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 15063(c)(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. 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.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

4. Environmental Checklist
December 2021 Page 23

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

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

4. Environmental Checklist

This page intentionally left blank.

December 2021 Page 25

5. Environmental Analysis
This section provides evidence to substantiate the conclusions in the environmental checklist. The section briefly summarizes the conclusions of the Certified EIR and then discusses whether the Proposed Project is consistent with the findings in the Certified EIR. Mitigation measures referenced are from the Certified EIR.

This section discusses the following three conditions pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162:

Condition 1. Whether or not the proposed project represents a substantial change that will require major revisions to the Certified EIR due to new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; Condition 2. Whether or not substantial changes in the circumstances under which the proposed project is being undertaken will require major revisions to the EIR due to new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
Condition 3. If new information shows that the proposed project would have one or more new significant effects; that significant effects would be substantially more severe than previously described; that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would be feasible and substantially reduce impacts, but project proponents decline to adopt them; or that new or previously rejected mitigation measures or alternatives would be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more project impacts, but project proponents decline to adopt them.

If none of these conditions is met, the analysis identifies where impacts of the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact or no impact.

5.1 AESTHETICS

5.1.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Certified EIR The Certified EIR determined that the land use and circulation changes could alter the visual appearance and character of Los Alamitos, but the Approved Project’s goals and policies would result in a beneficial aesthetic impact. Additionally, compliance with polices related to design would ensure new development would not degrade the existing visual characteristics.

The Certified EIR determined that the city is primarily built out, and infill and redevelopment would not impact any major scenic vistas in the region. Additionally, Los Alamitos does not have any officially designated state scenic highways and there would be no impact to any scenic highways.

As concluded in the Certified EIR, the areas proposed for land use intensification were within existing, developed areas of the city and not adjacent to open space or natural areas. Any future development as a result

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

of the Approved Project would be required to comply with applicable municipal code sections, which ensured that lighting impacts were less than significant.

5.1.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
X
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?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Proposed Project would amend the City’s General Plan Land Use Element to allow density within the Project Site to increase from 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre. The Proposed Project includes a development cap at 588 units and would therefore would not result in the development of additional units beyond what is allowed by the Approved Project (the General Plan). All other applicable General Plan and Los Alamitos Municipal Code development requirements would still apply, such as building height restrictions (60 feet above grade within the Project Site) and setbacks (Los Alamitos Municipal Code Title 17, Division 2, Chapter

17.12.040). Therefore, any changes to the aesthetic or visual character of the Project Site or its surroundings has already been accounted for in the Certified EIR. No new or substantially greater impacts related to scenic vistas would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 27
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

As concluded in the Certified EIR, the City of Los Alamitos does not contain any officially designated state scenic highways (Caltrans 2021). Additionally, the city is primarily built out, and the Proposed Project would not impact and scenic resources. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in similar impacts as the Approved Project. Any changes to the aesthetic or visual character of the Project Site or its surroundings has already been accounted for in the Certified EIR. No new or substantially greater impacts related to aesthetics would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 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 Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Certified EIR analyzed the Approved Project’s impact on character and views. The Proposed Project would amend the existing General Plan land use element to allow an increase in residential density from 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre, with a maximum of 588 total dwelling units within the Project Site, consistent with the existing General Plan limit. Additionally, the Proposed Project would still be required to comply with all other applicable building height restrictions and massing as identified in the General Plan and the Los Alamitos Municipal Code within the Town Center Mixed Use Zoning. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in new aesthetic impacts or impact regulations affecting scenic quality. No new or substantially greater impacts related to scenic quality would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
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 Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

Overall development within the Project Site would remain capped at 588 units and therefore would not result in the development of additional units beyond what is allowed under the Approved Project. Without additional dwelling units, the Proposed Project would not add light and glare to the area. Additionally, the Proposed Project would still be required to comply with all applicable building requirements mandated by the Los Alamitos Municipal Code, including lighting. Therefore, any changes to the aesthetic or visual character of the Project Site or its surroundings has already been accounted for in the Certified EIR. No new or substantially greater impacts related to aesthetics would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

5.1.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to aesthetics are applicable to the Proposed Project.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

5.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

5.2.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Certified EIR With respect to agricultural resources, the Certified EIR concluded that the city is in an urbanized area, is developed with residential and commercial uses, and no land in the city is designated for agricultural uses. Prime farmlands are located on the southern and northeastern corners of the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) property. In addition, no areas in the Project Site are under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur with respect to agricultural uses. With respect to forestry resources, the Certified EIR concluded that the Project Site does not have any designated areas for forestland or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur with respect to forestry resources.

5.2.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the Proposed Project:

Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
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?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
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))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X
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?
X

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 29
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. The Project Site is not zoned for agricultural uses, and no farmland or agricultural activity exist on-site. Prime farmlands are on the southern and northeastern corners of the Los Alamitos JFTB property, approximately two miles away from the Project Site (DOC 2021a). Similar to the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would not convert important farmland to a nonagricultural use. No new or substantially greater impacts related to mapped farmland would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project Site is not designated for agricultural use, and no active Williamson Act contracts exist on site. As with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with agricultural zones or a Williamson Act contract No new or substantially greater impacts related to existing zoning for agricultural uses or Williamson Act contracts would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
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. The Project Site is not designated for forestland or timberland. As with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with forestland or timberland zoning. No new or substantially greater impacts related to forestland and timberland would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project Site is not designated for forest land. As with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with forest land zoning or convert forest land to nonforest use. No new or substantially greater impacts related to converting forest land to nonforest use would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 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. The Project Site and surroundings contain no designated farmland or forest land (DOC 2021a).

The implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to nonforest uses. No new or substantially greater impacts related to converting farmland to nonagricultural use or converting forest land to nonforest use would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

5.2.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to agricultural resources were outlined in the Certified EIR.

5.3 AIR QUALITY

5.3.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Program EIR
The Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Approved Project (the General Plan Update) would generate less population but more employment and slightly more vehicle miles traveled (VMT) than the previous General Plan. The Certified EIR identified Mitigation Measure 2-1 and Mitigation Measure 2-2 to reduce criteria air pollutant emissions associated with buildout of the Approved Project. However, no mitigation measures were available that would reduce impacts associated with inconsistency with the air quality management plan due to the magnitude of growth and associated emissions that would be generated by the buildout of the Approved Project. Therefore, the Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would be inconsistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and impacts were significant and unavoidable.

The Certified EIR determined that construction activities associated with the buildout of the Approved Project would generate a substantial increase in short-term criteria air pollutant emissions. Construction activities associated with the buildout of the Approved Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (South Coast AQMD) regional significance thresholds, contributing to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) and to known health effects from poor air quality. The Certified EIR identified goals and policies that would reduce air pollutant emissions. However, due to the magnitude of emissions generated by future construction activities associated with the buildout of the Approved Project, impacts remained significant and unavoidable.

The Certified EIR determined that the long-term operation of the Approved Project would generate a substantial increase in criteria air pollutant emissions. Buildout of the proposed land use plan would generate additional vehicle trips and area sources of criteria air pollutant emissions that exceeded South Coast AQMD’s regional significance thresholds and contributed to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB and to known health effects from poor air quality—e.g., worsening of bronchitis, asthma, and emphysema; a decrease in lung function; premature death of people with heart or lung disease; nonfatal heart attacks; and irregular heartbeat. The Certified EIR identified goals and policies that would reduce air pollutant emissions. However, due to the magnitude of emissions generated by the buildout of Approved Project, no mitigation measures were available that would reduce impacts below South Coast AQMD’s thresholds, and impacts remained significant and unavoidable.

The Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Approved Project could result in new sources of criteria air pollutant emissions and/or toxic air contaminants (TAC) near existing or planned sensitive receptors. The Certified EIR identified Mitigation Measure 2-2 to ensure mobile sources of TACs not covered under South Coast AQMD permits were considered during subsequent project-level environmental review. The Certified EIR found that development of individual projects would be required to achieve the incremental risk thresholds established by South Coast AQMD, and TACs would be less than significant. However, localized emissions of

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 31
criteria air pollutants could exceed the South Coast AQMD significance thresholds because of the scale of development activity associated with buildout of the Approved Project. For the broad-based Approved Project, it was not possible to determine whether the scale and phasing of individual projects would result in the exceedance of the localized emissions thresholds and contribute to known health effects. Therefore, in accordance with the South Coast AQMD methodology, impacts remained significant and unavoidable.

The Certified EIR determined that placement of new sensitive receptors near major sources of TACs in Los Alamitos and Rossmoor could expose people to substantial pollutant concentrations. The Certified EIR identified goals and policies that would reduce concentrations of criteria air pollutant emissions and air toxics generated by new development. Mitigation Measure 2-3 ensured that placement of sensitive receptors near major sources of air pollution would achieve the incremental risk thresholds established by South Coast AQMD, and impacts were less than significant.

The Certified EIR determined that industrial land uses associated with the Approved Project could create objectionable odors. Mitigation Measure 2-4 ensured that odor impacts would be minimized and facilities would comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 402. Consequently, impacts were less than significant.

5.3.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
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:

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

Air quality in Orange County is regulated by South Coast AQMD, which is the agency principally responsible

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

for comprehensive air pollution control in the SoCAB. The South Coast AQMD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary, over a 10,743 square-mile area. The South Coast AQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. The Proposed Project supports AQMP objectives to reduce trips, promote infill development, and balance jobs and housing and would not conflict with implementation of the AQMP.

In March of 2017, the South Coast AQMD Governing Board released the Final 2016 AQMP, which continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) and to explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches use incentive programs, recognize existing co-benefit programs from other sectors, and develop a strategy with fair-share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels.

The two principal criteria for conformance with the AQMP are:

1. Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.

2. Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of project buildout phase.

With respect to the first criterion, implementation of the Proposed Project would not exceed the regional significance thresholds for construction or operational activity after implementation. The Proposed Project would be capped at 588 units, and therefore would not result in the development of additional units beyond what is allowed by the Approved Project. Thus, the Proposed Project’s construction-related air quality emissions would be within the scope of the Approved Project. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the AQMP according to this criterion. The Proposed Project would not generate short-term or long-term emissions of criteria pollutants that could potentially cause an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of air quality standards beyond the impacts considered in the Certified EIR. It would be consistent with the AQMP because no change in short-term or long-term emissions would occur.

With respect to the second criterion, implementation of the Proposed Project would not exceed regional or local thresholds for construction or operational impacts and would therefore have less than significant impacts.

The Proposed Project would maintain the existing General Plan limit of 588 units for consistency with the overall development limits allowed by the Approved Project. The Proposed Project would not exceed SCAG’s population, housing, or employment projections. It would not result in or cause National or California AAQS violations, nor would it result in any regional daily construction-source or operational-source emissions exceedances. The Proposed Project would support AQMP objectives to reduce trips, promote infill development, and balance jobs and housing; it would not conflict with implementation of the AQMP. The Proposed Project is therefore considered consistent with the AQMP. There would be no new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 33
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

Construction of the Proposed Project would occur within the building envelope of the Approved Project and would not expand the building footprint nor require additional grading or excavation. The Proposed Project amends the City’s General Plan Land Use Element to increase residential density within the Project Site, but total dwelling units would be within the limits of the Approved Project. Thus, the Proposed Project’s construction-related air quality emissions would be within the scope of the Approved Project. Further, the Proposed Project would incorporate Mitigation Measure 2-1. As with the Approved Project, implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-1 would ensure that the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact relating to substantial pollution concentrations. The Certified EIR found that the Approved Project would ensure that review of air quality compatibility would be conducted when siting receptors near major sources. As discussed above, buildout of the Proposed Project would be within the limits of the Approved Project. The Proposed Project amends the City’s General Plan Land Use Element to allow density within the Project Site to increase from 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre, with a residential unit development cap of 588 units. It would not develop more units than is allowed by the Approved Project. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact relating to objectionable odors. According to Mitigation Measure 2-4 of the Certified EIR, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include wastewater treatment plants; composting, greenwaste, or recycling facilities; fiberglass manufacturing facilities; painting/coating operations; large-capacity coffee roasters; and food processing plants. South Coast AQMD further identifies other odor sources, including agricultural uses, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, and dairies. The Proposed Project would allow for residential uses within the Project Site and would not include any uses identified by the South Coast AQMD as being associated with odors. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no impact related to objectionable odors.

Further, the Proposed Project would incorporate Mitigation Measures 2-2 and 2-3, which would ensure that the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. No new or substantially greater impacts related to objectionable odors would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

5.3.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The following mitigation measures have been carried through from the Certified EIR. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the MMRP for this Addendum. 2-1 If, during subsequent project-level environmental review, construction-related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) adopted thresholds of significance, the City of Los Alamitos shall require that applicants for new development projects incorporate mitigation measures as identified in the CEQA document prepared for the project to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities. Mitigation measures that may be identified during the environmental review include but are not limited to:
 Using construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 3 (model year 2006 or newer) or Tier 4 (model year 2008 or newer) emission limits, applicable for engines between 50 and 750 horsepower.  Ensuring construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained to the manufacturer’s standards.
 Limiting nonessential idling of construction equipment to no more than five consecutive minutes.
 Water all active construction areas at least three times daily, or as often as needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency may be necessary whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible.  Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., the minimum required space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer).
 Pave, apply water three times daily or as often as necessary to control dust, or apply (nontoxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites.
 Sweep daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible), or as often as needed, all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site to control dust.
 Sweep public streets daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) in the vicinity of the Project Site, or as often as needed, to keep streets free of visible soil material.
 Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 35
 Enclose, cover, water three times daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.).
2-2 New industrial or warehousing land uses that: 1) have the potential to generate 40 or more diesel trucks per day and 2) are located within 1,000 feet of a sensitive land use (e.g. residential, schools, hospitals, nursing homes), as measured from the property line of the project to the property line of the nearest sensitive use, shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA) to the City of Los Alamitos prior to future discretionary project approval. The HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the applicable air quality management district. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds ten in one million (I0E-06), particulate matter concentrations would exceed 2.5 μg/m3, or the appropriate noncancer hazard index exceeds

1.0, the applicant will be required to identify and demonstrate that best available control technologies for toxics (T-BACTs) are capable of reducing potential cancer and noncancer risks to an acceptable level, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. T-BACTs may include, but are not limited to, restricting idling onsite or electrifying warehousing docks to reduce diesel particulate matter, or requiring use of newer equipment and/or vehicles.

T-BACTs identified in the HRA shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site development plan as a component of the project. 2-3 Applicants for sensitive land uses within the following distances as measured from the property line of the project to the property line of the source/edge of the nearest travel lane, from these facilities:
 Industrial facilities within 1000 feet
 Distribution centers (40 or more trucks per day) within 1,000 feet  High volume roadways (100,000 or more vehicles per day) within 1,000 feet  Dry cleaners using perchloroethylene within 500 feet
 Gasoline dispensing facilities within 300 feet
Applicants shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA) to the City of Los Alamitos prior to future discretionary project approval. The HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the applicable air quality management district. The latest OEHHA guidelines shall be used for the analysis, including age sensitivity factors, breathing rates, and body weights appropriate for children age 0 to 6 years. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds ten in one million (10E-06) or the appropriate noncancer hazard index exceeds 1.0, the applicant will be required to identify that mitigation measures are capable of reducing potential cancer and non-cancer risks to an acceptable level (i.e., below ten in one million or a hazard index of

1.0), including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. Measures to reduce risk may include but are not limited to:

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

 Air intakes located away from high volume roadways and/or truck loading zones, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Los Alamitos that there are operational limitations.  Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems of the buildings provided with appropriately sized maximum efficiency rating value (MERV) filters.  Mitigation measures identified in the HRA shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site development plan as a component of the project. The air intake design and MERV filter requirements shall be noted and/or reflected on all building plans submitted to the City and shall be verified by the City of Los Alamitos.
2-4 If it is determined during project-level environmental review that a project has the potential to emit nuisance odors beyond the property line, an odor management plan may be required, subject to City’s regulations. Facilities that have the potential to generate nuisance odors include but are not limited to:
 Wastewater treatment plants
 Composting, greenwaste, or recycling facilities
 Fiberglass manufacturing facilities
 Painting/coating operations
 Large-capacity coffee roasters
 Food-processing facilities
If an odor management plan is determined to be required through CEQA review, the City of Los Alamitos shall require the project applicant to submit the plan prior to approval to ensure compliance with the applicable Air Quality Management District’s Rule 402, for nuisance odors. If applicable, the Odor Management Plan shall identify the Best Available Control Technologies for Toxics (T-BACTs) that will be utilized to reduce potential odors to acceptable levels, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. T-BACTs may include, but are not limited to, scrubbers (e.g., air pollution control devices) at the industrial facility. T-BACTs identified in the odor management plan shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site plan.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 37

5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

5.4.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Certified EIR The Certified EIR determined that Approved Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status; on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; or on federally protected wetlands. Los Alamitos had potential habitat for sensitive species and wetlands on the Los Alamitos JFTB land, but the Approved Project did not include any changes on the base and therefore, no impact would occur. The Approved Project did not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildfire corridor or impede native wildlife nursery sites.

The Approved Project did not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, since there were no significant biological resources in the city.

The California Coastal Conservancy (CCC) identified nearby cities on the San Gabriel River, including Los Alamitos, as sensitive habitat. The San Gabriel River flows to the west and outside of Los Alamitos, with the mouth of the San Gabriel River in the Los Alamitos JFTB Since the city did not contain any wetlands and any potentially sensitive habitat is located within the Los Alamitos JFTB land, there was no conflict with the CCC plan. No other adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation, or other habitat conservation plan exist in the city.

5.4.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the project:

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
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?
X
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?
X

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
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?
X
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?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
X
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?
X
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? No Impact. The city is urbanized, surrounded by urban cities, and lacks natural habitat. Los Alamitos JFTB land may contain sensitive species, but the Approved Project did not include any changes on the base. The Project Site is outside of the Los Alamitos JFTB and does not contain habitat for candidate, sensitive, or special status species. The Proposed Project is in an urbanized area and would have no impact on candidate, sensitive, or special status species directly or indirectly. No new or substantially greater impacts related to candidate, sensitive, or special status species would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
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?
No Impact. The city is urbanized, surrounded by urban cities, and lacks natural habitat. The Project Site is urbanized and does not contain riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community (FWS 2021a). The Proposed Project would be within the building limits of the Approved Project and would not impact riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities. No new or substantially greater impacts related to riparian habitat or

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 39
sensitive natural communities would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
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?
No Impact. The City is urbanized and surrounded by urban cities. The Certified EIR determined that the Los Alamitos JFTB land may contain wetlands, but the city does not have authority over the land, and the Approved Project did not include any changes to the base. The Project Site is outside of Los Alamitos JFTB and does not contain any wetlands (FWS 2021a). The Proposed Project would be limited to the Project Site and would have no impact on state or federally protected wetlands. No new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in the Certified EIR would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
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?
No Impact. The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would have no impact on native or migratory wildlife. The Project Site does not include wildlife habitat or native wildlife nursery sites, and it is not within a movement corridor for native fish or wildlife. As with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not affect these types of biological resources. No new or substantially greater impacts related to native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. As with the Approved Project, the Proposed Project is in an urbanized area that lacks natural habitat. The Certified EIR determined that vegetation and wildlife were limited to those typical for urban areas.

Los Alamitos JFTB land may contain wildlife and vegetation, but the Approved Project did not include any changes to the base. The Proposed Project does not conflict with any policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The Proposed Project would be capped at 588 units and therefore would not develop more units than allowed under the Approved Project. No new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in the Certified EIR would occur related to conflicts with any local policies or ordinances. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 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. The Proposed Project is not within any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCPP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan (FWS 2021b).

The Certified EIR determined that since the city does not contain any wetlands, there would be no conflict with the CCC plan. Development under the Proposed Project would be within the building limits of the

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

Approved Project. No new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in the Certified EIR would occur related to an adopted habitat conservation plan, NCPP, or other local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

5.4.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to biological resources were outlined in the Certified EIR.

5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

5.5.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Certified EIR The Certified EIR determined that any future development associated with buildout of the General Plan (implementation of the Approved Project) could impact historic resources. Mitigation Measure 3-1 ensured that impacts to historic resources were reduced to less than significant. Long-term implementation of the Approved Project could allow development—e.g., grading and construction in undeveloped areas or redevelopment that requires more intensive soil excavation—that could potentially cause the disturbance of archeological or paleontological resources. The Certified EIR identified Mitigation Measures 3-2 and 3-3 to address the Approved Project’s impact on archeological and paleontological resources. With incorporation of the identified mitigation measures, the Approved Project resulted in less than significant impact.

The Certified EIR determined that impacts to human remains would be less than significant.

5.5.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the project:

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? X

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 41
Comments:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Proposed Project would not change the overall development in the city beyond what is allowed under the Approved Project. As with the Approved Project, development under the Proposed Project would comply with Mitigation Measure 3-1, and impacts would be less than significant. No impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in the Certified EIR would occur, and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

As with the Approved Project, individual projects within the Project Site have the potential to unearth unknown archaeological resources. The Proposed Project would be capped at 588 units and would not develop more units than is allowed under the Approved Project. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than what was previously identified in the Certified EIR. The Proposed Project would also incorporate Mitigation Measures 3-2 and 3-3 to ensure that impacts related to archaeological resources would be less than significant. No impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in the Certified EIR would occur, and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Proposed Project would be capped at 588 units and would not develop more units than allowed under the Approved Project. The Certified EIR determined that impacts to human remains were less than significant. As with the Approved Project, the Proposed Project comply with the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 in the event that human remains are discovered. Therefore, no impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in the Certified EIR would occur, and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

5.5.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The following mitigation measures have been carried through from the Certified EIR. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the MMRP for this Addendum. One modification to mitigation measure 3-3 from the Certified EIR is shown as strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text, clarifying the appropriate department name.
3-1 Applicants for future development projects with intact extant building(s) more than 45 years old shall provide a historic resource technical study to the City of Los Alamitos. The historic resources technical study shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian meeting Secretary of the Interior Standards. The study shall evaluate the significance and data potential

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

of the resource in accordance with these standards. If the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code Section 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852), mitigation shall be identified within the technical study that ensures the value of the historic resource is maintained.
3-2 Applicants for future development projects that require grading of undisturbed soil in areas of known or inferred archaeological resources, prehistoric or historic, shall provide a technical cultural resources assessment to the City of Los Alamitos prior to the issuance of grading permits. The cultural resources assessment shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist to assess the cultural and historical significance of any known archaeological resources on or next to each respective development site, and to assess the sensitivity of sites for buried archaeological resources. On properties where resources are identified, or that are determined to be moderately to highly sensitive for buried archaeological resources, such studies shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified cultural preservation expert. The mitigation plan shall include the following requirements:
a) An archaeologist shall be retained for the development project and shall be on call during grading and other significant ground-disturbing activities. b) Should any cultural/scientific resources be discovered, no further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Community Development Director concurs in writing that adequate provisions are in place to protect these resources. c) Unanticipated discoveries shall be evaluated for significance by an Orange County Certified Professional Archaeologist. 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; submit materials to the California State University, Fullerton; and provide a comprehensive final report including appropriate records for the California Department of Parks and Recreation (Building, Structure, and Object Record; Archaeological Site Record; or District Record, as applicable). 3-3 Applicants for future development projects that require excavation greater than five feet below the current ground surface in undisturbed sediments with a moderate or higher fossil yield potential shall provide a technical paleontological assessment prepared by a qualified paleontologist assessing the sensitivity of sites for buried paleontological resources to the City of Los Alamitos prior to issuance of grading permits. If resources are known or reasonably anticipated, the assessment shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified paleontologist. The mitigation plan shall include the following requirements:
a) A paleontologist shall be retained for the project and shall be on call during grading and other significant ground-disturbing activities.
b) Should any potentially significant fossil resources be discovered, no further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Community Development Director

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 43
Development Services Director concurs in writing that adequate provisions are in place to protect these resources.
c) Unanticipated discoveries shall be evaluated for significance by an Orange County Certified Professional Paleontologist. 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; submit materials to the California State University, Fullerton; and provide a comprehensive final report, including catalog with museum numbers.

5.6 ENERGY

5.6.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Certified EIR Energy was not analyzed as a separate topic in the Certified EIR but was addressed in the Utilities and Service Systems section of the Certified EIR. The Certified EIR found that the Approved Project would increase demand for electricity and natural gas. The Certified EIR found that Southern California Edison (SCE) had sufficient capacity to accommodate the demand for electricity. The Approved Project did not require electricity services beyond those planned or readily available, or a substantial expansion of existing facilities. The Certified EIR found that Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) had sufficient capacity to accommodate the demand for natural gas. The Approved Project did not require natural gas facilities beyond those planned or readily available, or a substantial expansion of existing facilities. The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project’s impact on energy was less than significant.

5.6.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the project:

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency? X

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would be adequately served by the existing electricity and natural gas infrastructure and facilities. The Proposed Project would increase allowable residential density within the Project Site from 30 units per acre to 60 units per acre but maintained the same allowed total dwelling units as the Approved Project. Also, the Proposed Project would allow for increased density within a mixeduse area, which often reduces VMT. The Proposed Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. No new or substantially greater impacts related to energy consumption would occur. No change or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

Energy consumption by new buildings in California is regulated by the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards, embodied in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), which establishes “energy budgets” and efficiency standards to regulate heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting. As with the Approved Project, electricity and natural gas consumption and transportation fuel use generated by development would be in accordance with State and City regulations and practices, such as the California Building Code, as amended by the Los Alamitos Municipal Code Section 15.04.020. Additionally, the state’s electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under California’s Renewable Energy Program. Although the statewide renewable energy goal is not directly applicable to individual developments, but to the utilities and energy providers, the Proposed Project is within the existing utilities and energy service area and would be consistent with the state renewable energy goals.

Goals and policies of the Open Space, Recreation, and Conservation Element of the General Plan would still be applicable to future development. Compliance with local, state, and federal laws would ensure that the Proposed Project would not conflict with state or local energy plans. No new or substantially greater impacts related to state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency would occur. No change or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

5.6.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to energy are applicable to the Proposed Project.

5.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

5.7.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Certified EIR The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would have no impact related to fault surface rupture because there were no Alquist-Priolo fault zones in the vicinity of the city. The city was still in a high seismic risk zone, so there was potential for seismic ground shaking, but new development would be required to follow all applicable California Building Code (CBC) regulations and would result in a less than significant impact. The

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 45
city was zoned for historical liquification, but liquefaction potential is site specific, and any new development would require geotechnical studies and hazards assessment to determine the site-specific properties.

Additionally, any future development was required to comply with the CBC requirements and therefore the impact was less than significant. The city was largely built out and had a flat topography, so impacts from landslides, soil erosion, and unstable soils were less than significant. As with liquefaction and seismic ground shaking, expansive soils could be present in the City but are site specific and would be identified with each new potential development; therefore, the impact from expansive soils was less than significant. The city does not use any septic tanks, and there was no impact from septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

The Certified EIR analyzed paleontological resources as part of Cultural Resources. Within incorporation of the identified Mitigation Measure 3-3, the Approved Project resulted in less than significant impacts.

5.7.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the project:

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map, issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
X

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis

Environmental Issues
Condition 1:

Substantial
Change in
Project
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 2:

Substantial
Change in
Circumstances
Requiring
Major
Revisions
Condition 3:

New
Information
Showing New
or Increased
Significant
Effects
Less Than
Significant
Impacts/No
Changes or
New
Information
Requiring
Preparation of
an EIR No Impact
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

No Impact. As concluded in the Certified EIR, no Alquist-Priolo fault zones are in the city. Fault rupture is not expected to impact the Project Site. No new or substantially greater impacts would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As concluded in the Certified EIR, impacts related to strong seismic shaking would be site specific with future developments. As with any development under the General Plan, any future development as a result of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable CBC regulations. No new or substantially greater impacts would occur. No changes or new information require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact. As concluded in the Certified EIR, there may be areas with the potential for liquefaction in the city, but impacts would be site specific, and any future development as a result of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with CBC requirements (CGS 1999). Future development within the Project Site would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to liquefaction compared to the Approved Project, and impacts would remain less than significant. No changes or new information would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis
December 2021 Page 47
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. The city, including the Project Site, has low vulnerability for landslides, mudslides, or rock fall due to its flat topography—i.e., less than 2 percent slopes. No new or substantially greater impacts would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

Consistent with the Approved Project, any new developments within the Project Site would be required to comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which would include a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the soil erosion or loss of topsoil. No new or substantially greater impacts would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR.
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

As concluded in the Certified EIR, the city is near the Los Alamitos Fault and within a zone of potential liquefaction, but all new development impacts would be site specific. The Project Site is 1.5 miles from the Los Alamitos Fault and not in an Alquist Priolo Zone (DOC 2021b). Consistent with the Approved Project, any new development within the Project Site would be required to comply with CBC requirements. As such, the Proposed Project would not result in impacts related to unstable soils. No new or substantially greater impacts would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impacts/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

As concluded in the Certified EIR, all new development in the city is required to include preliminary soil reports based on test borings, pursuant to Los Alamitos Municipal Code Section 16.08.070, Soils Report. Therefore, all impacts from expansive soils would be project specific, and all new developments in the city would be required to comply with the CBC and City requirements regarding development standards, including expansive soils. As with the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to expansive soils. No changes or new information would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR.

LOS ALAMITOS TOWN CENTER PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS

5. Environmental Analysis