4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Page 4.8-16 of the Draft EIR has been revised as shown in Section 5.0 of this Final EIR to include the above discussion regarding the potential of PCBs and mercury.
E-5 The commenter states that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to ensure any contaminants of concern are within DTSC’s and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for the intended land use. As stated in Section
3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, approximately 6,280 cubic yards of soil import would be required. As a condition of approval, prior to importation onsite, the Project Applicant shall submit evidence to the Planning Department that all imported fill materials have been tested and meet the regulatory screening levels. Thus, no further response is required.
E-6 The commenter provides concluding remarks. The City acknowledges Tamara Purvis as the contact person for DTSC for the Project. Thus, no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter F
¦
¦
¦P[[fpfP{¦P
f!¦
¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
,7BLNO¦QRLST¦
{7BLUVS¦VUS7VWS¦
¦¦
pQWBX¦{7BLUYQ7SBSVQL¦
PRSZQ7VST¦
¦
!O7\VWO¦PRSZQ7VST¦]Q7¦¦
[7OO^BT¦_O7NOLWVOU¦
¦
QLUQXV`BSO`¦{7BLUYQ7SBSVQL¦
!O7\VWO¦PNOLWT¦
¦
QLNOUSVQL¦aBLBNO_OLS¦
PNOLWT¦
¦
¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
¦
¦
¦
¦
¦
¦
bcdegh¦ijkelm¦ncdeoqjcldlrje¦skltjcrlm¦
uuv¦wjklt¦xdre¦wlchhl¦y¦z|b¦}j~¦¦y¦bcdegh¦y¦idrjcerd¦ u¦y¦¦uvbins¦
¦
¦¦¦
¦
¦¦ ¦
¡¢£¦¤¦¥¦¢¦¦
¦¢¢¦¦
¦
¢¦ ¦¦
¥¦¢¦¡¦
¦
¦
¦¦¢ ¢£¤¢¦¦¦
¦
¦
¦
¦
¦ "#
$#
$
%¦&
' (¦
¦#¦)*# ¦+-"
*
-.-#$¦/.0#¦
10
*¦2¦3445¦6#.08
-¦ "-¦9*
¦¦¦
¦
¦¦ ¦
¦
:¦¦¡¢£¦¢¢¦¢:¢£¦;¡<¦¢¦¢:¦¢¢£¦ ¢¦ =¦>¦¢¦¦¢:¦??¦¥¦ ¦@¢¦:¦¤=¦ ¢¦¦ >>¦¤¦£¦
¦
A¦ ¦¦C
¦D¢¦
¦;¢¢<¦¦ ¦£¦
¤¦¤¦¢:¦@¢¦¦E¦ >¦E£¦¡¦F¢¦¦>¦ ¦
G¢:¦¢¦:¦¢¦=¢:¦¦¦¢:¦@¢¦¦¢:¦¡¦¢¢¦ E¢£¦¢>>¦
A¦¦¦
C¦£¦¦;¢¦¢<¦¦¢¦¢:¢¦¢:¦¢¦ ¡¦E¦¢¦¤¦¢:¦@¢¦¢¦¦
¦¦¤¦F¢¦
¦;¢>¦¢¦
¢:¦¢¢¦¤¦£¦=¦D¢¢¦>¦¥¦ <¦>¦ ?¦¦
¤¦F¢¦¦;¢>¦¢¦¢:¦¢¢¦¤¦D¦H:¦H >¦>¦ ¥¦ <¦¦ ¦¢:¦>¢¦¢¦¤¢¦¢:¦¢¦ >¢¦¦
A¦¦¦
C
¦D¢¦H¦;IJ¢¦¢¦D <¦¦ ¦£¦ ¢¦¤¦¢:¦@¢¦¢¦E¦ >¦E£¦¡¦E¦¢¦¡¦ >¦¢¦=¢:¦¦C¦>¦¤¦¦E¦¢¦¢¦E¦ >¦E£¦ ¢:¢¦¢K¢¦:¦¢¦¡¦¢¦;¦?¦
<¦: ¦¢¦¢:¢¦
¦E¢=¦
¦>¦
?¦¦¤¦¢:¦@¢¦¢¦=::¦¦¢¦¢:¦
¢:¦C¦¡¦¢¢¦E¢£¦¢>>¦:¤¦¢:¦@¢¦ ¢¦¦¢¦ >¦E£¦¢:¦¢¦
A¦¦¦
C
¦¦¢:¦¢E¦£¦¦;¢¦¢<¦¢:¦¢¦¢¦ ¤¦F¢¦
¦¦
¦¦=£¦¤¦¢:¦@¢¦¢¦>¦¢:¦¢¦¢¦ ¤¦F¢¦¦¦
?¦¦=£¦¤¦¢:¦@¢¦¢¦¦ ¦¢¦¤¢¦ ¢:¦¢¦>¢¦¦
M¦¦: ¦¢:¦¤=¦¢¦¤¦>J¦G
¦;¤¤¦£<¦
¦ F-5
F-1
F-2
F-3
F-4
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
]!,7]BMX]
] ]
]
]
]
]
] ]
]
]"#
]
$$%]&#]' ]&](])*]+-]./.0/](]](]1 2 ]340568.$0/](]9:./;]$5%8 "]95404;]
<]B]=]
> ]?@AX,]>
]C!DXA]?X@E ]=MD]7,]F]G@]
,G]AH]=,I@A]]JX]DK]JF]BL!N]O,AD]
]K]
>
]]PXAH]
,A]HD]DA,=D]QXAHX]
]7XMD],G]AH]=,I@A] ]AH]BL!N]ADXA]
@@DDXJXMXAF]DAKK
]
R]@,],=]@,77X@AX,]QXAH]BL!N],]F]7AAD]KXD@DDK]HX ]
?H,MK]F,]H]F]@,77AD],]SDAX,D ]=MD]@,A@A]7]A]CT E]U
VW
T]
,]A]K=HY,@A
A
]]
]
?X@MF ]
]
]
]
Z]H]
][X,7AM],7D]]
]
Z\A@]]]
F-5
(CONT.)
F-6
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment F
Orange County Transporation Authority (OCTA), dated June 5, 2024.
F-1 The commenter requests that the Draft EIR remove any reference of the Project area being served by OCTA Routes 42 and 123 and that neither route has stops within 0.5 miles the project area, the OCTA transit accessibility standard. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Page 2-11 of the Draft EIR has been revised as shown below and in Section 5.0 of this Final EIR.
The Project site is currently served by Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) with currently provides bus service along Seal Beach Boulevard, Valley View Street, and Lampson Avenue (east of Valley View Street). The Project site is served by OCTA bus routes 42 and 123. The nearest OCTA bus stops to the Project site are Route 123, located at the intersection of Valley View Street and Lampson Avenue (approximately 1.2 miles from the Project site) and Route 42, located at the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue (approximately
1.6 miles from the Project site).
F-2 The commenter provides the distance to the nearest OCTA bus stops and requests revisions to the Draft EIR to reflect the correct distances. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Page 4.10- 27 of the Draft EIR has been revised as shown below and in Section 5.0 of this Final EIR.
Policy 4.7 Transit stops. Improve and
maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well-lit,
and rider friendly transit stops that are well
marked and visible to motorists.
Not Applicable. The nearest OCTA Route
123 bus stop from the Project site is
approximately 1.21.6 miles walking distance
at the intersection of Valley View Street and
LampsonChampman Avenue. The nearest
OCTA Route 42 bus stop from the Project
site is approximately 1.63.5 miles walking
distance at the intersection of Seal Beach
Boulevard and Lampson Avenue.Katella
Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard
Therefore, this policy is not applicable to the
Project.
F-3 The commenter requests to removal of any mention of the Project site being served by OCTA bus routes. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Page 4.15-1 of the Draft EIR has been revised as shown below and in Section 5.0 of this Final EIR.
As shown in Figure 4.15-1, Existing Transit Routes, the Project site is currently served by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) with currently provides bus service along Seal Beach Boulevard, Valley View Street, and Lampson Avenue (east of Valley View Street).
OCTA route 42 runs along Seal Beach Boulevard and serves Seal Beach to Orange with an
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
existing stop provided at the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard. The existing stop is approximately 1.63.5 miles walking distance from the Project site. Bus service frequency is approximately 20-minute intervals during the peak commute hours and 40 minutes during other times of the day during a typical weekday. OCTA Route 123 serves the city of Anaheim to city of Huntington Beach via Malvern Avenue, Valley View Street, and Bolsa Chica. There are existing stops along Valley View Street with an existing stop at Chapman Avenue. The nearest OCTA Route 123 existing stop is located approximately 1.21.6 miles walking distance from the Project site to the intersection of LampsonChampman Avenue and Valley View Street. Bus service frequency is approximately 60-minute intervals on a typical weekday for OCTA Route 123.
F-4 The commenter requests revisions to the Draft EIR to reflect the correct distances of the Project site’s proximity to the nearest bus stops. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Page 4.15-13 of the Draft EIR has been revised as shown below and in Section 5.0 of this Final EIR.
Policy 4.7 Transit stops. Improve and
maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well-lit,
and rider friendly transit stops that are well
marked and visible to motorists.
Not Applicable. The nearest OCTA Route
123 bus stop from the Project site is
approximately 1.21.6 miles walking distance
at the intersection of Valley View Street and
LampsonChampman Avenue. The nearest
OCTA Route 42 bus stop from the Project
site is approximately 1.63.5 miles walking
distance at the intersection of Seal Beach
Boulevard and Lampson Avenue.Katella
Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard
Therefore, this policy is not applicable to the
Project.
F-5 The commenter requests removal of any reference of the Project area being served by OCTA in the Project’s Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix N1 of the Draft EIR). Pursuant to the commenter’s request, the Project’s Traffic Analysis has been updated accordingly and revisions have been included in Section 5.0 and Attachment G to this Final EIR.
F-6 The commenter provides concluding remarks The City acknowledges Dan Phu as the contact person for OCTA. Thus, no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 1
From: Alexandria A
To: Tom Oliver
Subject: DEIR comments
Date: Friday, May 24, 2024 8:06:16 PM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender [email protected]
I strongly approve this project site to build more housing on Lampson. Selfish NIMBYs who want to protect their property values at the expense of limiting housing availability for millenials and gen z are absolutely disgusting and are parasitic to our community. There is a culture of fear mongering and hatred of “poor people” who will move into losal and the boomers who live here use that to stop necessary development and modernization for our community.
Boomers dont get to ruin the future of young people. Millenials are the first generation who are poorer than their parents. Boomers have already ruined so much - the environment, the economy, and now housing. Boomers have lived lavish and excessive lives.
Build housing and let young people have a chance at living a good life!!! 1-1
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 1
Alexandria, A., dated May 24, 2024.
1-1 The commenter expresses approval of the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 2
From: Lelisa Balderama
To: [email protected]
Subject: Lampson Project
Date: Sunday, May 19, 2024 2:25:47 PM
Hello,
Please convey to those who are making the decisions:
Of the items listed regarding concerns and comments about this project, this is the one that caught my most attention:
"7. This area is a lovely and relatively quiet community where most households are families where we feel safe and it's not congested by traffic, pollution or too much housing squeezed into a small area.
This project causes a HUGE loss to the hundreds of families calling College Park East and the surrounding area “home”. Only a win for the developer." Please listen to the COMMUNITY, not the developer.
Thank you.
Kindly,
Lelisa
Rossmoor resident
2-1
2-2
2-3
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 2
Balderama, Lelisa, dated May 19, 2024.
2-1 The commenter requests that comments and concerns about the Project be conveyed to the decision maker. No further response to this comment is required. 2-2 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic congestion, pollution, and the Project’s proposed density. The commenter does not provide any specific comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. However, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
2-3 The commenter expresses general opposition to the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 3
From: Lelisa Balderama
To: Tom Oliver
Subject: Re: Lampson Project...edited message...there was an error on previous message...I meant "OPPOSE the project" not "proposed" Thank You!
Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 11:20:27 AM
Attachments: image004.png
image003.png
image002.png
Hello Mr. Oliver,
" Two State Agencies (CalTrans Division of Aeronautics and the California Airport Land Use Commission)
issued written findings that “Lampson” location was not suitable for residential development. due to public safety and health risks as a result of
activities at the Joint Forces Training Base
that borders Lampson Park Place.
The State Agencies’ warnings have been omitted from
the Draft Environmental Impact Report
prepared by Lampson Consultants."
Given this information I greatly oppose the project. Not to mention the increased traffic and pollution this project will bring into our neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Lelisa
(Rossmoor Resident)
On Tuesday, April 30, 2024 at 07:52:43 AM PDT, Tom Oliver <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for your response, Lelisa. I will forward your response to the Environmental Impact Report consultant.
As always, if you have any questions, please email or call me, Tom Oliver
Associate Planner
City of Los Alamitos
3191 Katella Avenue
Los Alamitos, CA 90720
(562) 431-3538 x303
3-1
3-2
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
From: Lelisa Balderama <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2024 5:34 PM
To: Tom Oliver <[email protected]>
Subject: Lampson Project
Hello Mr. Oliver,
I was emailed the following information:
" Two State Agencies (CalTrans Division of Aeronautics and the California Airport Land Use Commission)
issued written findings that “Lampson” location was not suitable for residential development.
due to public safety and health risks as a result of
activities at the Joint Forces Training Base
that borders Lampson Park Place.
The State Agencies’ warnings have been omitted from
the Draft Environmental Impact Report
prepared by Lampson Consultants."
Given this information I greatly proposed the project. Not to mention the increased traffic and pollution this project will bring into our neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Lelisa
(Rossmoor Resident)
3-3
3-4
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 3
Balderama, Lelisa, dated April 30, 2024.
3-1 The commenter expresses concerns related to ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics findings related to the Project site. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB).
3-2 The commenter opposes the Project based on the ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics findings, increased traffic and pollution. The City acknowledges the commenter’s concerns and will be forwarded to decision makers.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns.
As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, the Project would not exceed the South Coast AQMD localized significance thresholds for assessing localized health impacts from criteria air pollutants during construction. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during Project construction. Further, Project traffic would not create or result in a CO “hotspot.” Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations due to the Project, and impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.2-26 through 4.2-29 of the Draft EIR). 3-3 The commenter expresses concerns with ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics findings as to the Project site. This comment is duplicative of Comment 3-1; refer to Response to Comment 3-1 and refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB).
3-4 The commenter opposes the Project due to increased traffic and pollution. This comment is duplicative of Comment 3-2; refer to Response to Comment 3-2.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 4
d$/9dCNCYd
d
d
9d
d
d
ddd
d
d
d
/$$d
d
d
d
9ddN
CNd
d
d
9d
d
d!
d"
dd
#
dd%
d&
!d
d/'d
d d
d
d
d
(d)d*)+d
,!
!d
d!
d
!"
!#d
!d
d!
d
d
d!
d
#dd
(d
d#
d d
d
d!
d#
dd!
d
-
d!
d
dd!
dd!
d
d
d"
d
,!d!
#dd
.
d
d!
d
0
dd
dd
d
#
d d!
d d
d
#9d!
d0
dd
d
d
!
d
#
d
dd
!"
!#d#d!
d
#
d
!"
!#9d,
d
d!
d
d!
d,
d!
d
d
dd!
d
1d
dd
d d
!
2d
d
34d56788:;d
d
<
d=>?@Ad>BdDEFGHFIGHGJKd>BdFdLMFOdPQEGM>QRAQJFHdSRTF@JdUAT>MJd dV
d
,
#d
d
1d#d
#"
Wd!
d
#
dd)9d
(
,#Xd
9dZ
d[
#
d[
d#d
d
d,!d
d
ddd
d
d
#d,
d,
dd!
d
\d
"
d,
d
d
d!
d
##
. d
\d
dd
(d
9d#d
" d!
d #d]!d[ d
d
-
9d,
d
d
d
\d#
d#d
d
#
d!
d
!d
dd
d"
,
d^
!
d%
d#d#
"
d
d
d
#d
V
#d_d
Wd#
dd!
d
d
#
9d
d,
!d
.
9d!d
!
d
#d!
d`
d
9dd#
d d
d#da
#d!
d
dd
d#d]
d%
d!
d
.ddd#d
9d-
d
dd
d
#d#
9d!d d"
d!
d
dd
#
9d
d
.d
d#
! dd
d
d!
d d,dd
d,!
d"
d!
dbc&d
dd
!
d
!d#d!
d
dZ
d%.d
dd!
d
!d
d
9d
ddd,
.dd
d
!dd%
d&
!d&
#d
#
d
(d!
d
d
.
d"(
#d
d d!
d,dd&,#d
d
d
4-2
4-1
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
#-8I
GHI-I
G-II
I
I
I
GI#-
IH
I
-IHI
I
8I-HGI#HI
-I
GI
##-8I
HIHI
I
-
I
IGI
HIHIG
I
IHI
IH-I
-I#-HIH
HI
#
#HI
--HI
HI
IHI
GI
-IHI
II
-I#IHIGHI IIH
I
GIH
#-8I#-IHI
I
-IGHIG-
IGHII!#
I
-8I
-GIHI
#I
#G#-GI"#GI
HGII
$
GIG#H
-GII ##
I#GIH-#-8I
I#-HIHI
G-I
%
I%
I-#8
I
I
IG##
I#GGGI
I
"I
#-II
-HI
#8HI
H-I&
HI
-IGI HHGI#
I
GI
'
HI
HI IIH
I"IGI#-I%(IH
HI
IIHI
G-I
HIH
HIG#8-
I#
I
I
G
)
HIHI-#GI
-I
#8HI
-I#
IHI
-H
II-HI#-
I
-I
H
#-
I-I
HIHI-IHI
GIH#IGI
I
*+I,I./012324/I156217I
I
"I&
8IHIGH
HGIH
HIIG-H
GI#I
-GI#HI#HII
I
IGH
'IGIIG
I
I
IIHI
)I #-8I#GGGI%(I
#-
GII&
HI HHI
IHI
IHIHIIGHI-IIHIH
HI"#GI
I
GI#GHIG#-
IHI-#8
9GI#-
-IIHI#I8
#-8I
IHI
IIHI
G
I
-I-IIGI#-8IHGIGHI
-HI
GHGI#-I:
-
I
-I;
IIH#GI
I #-8I
GI
GIG#8-#<
-HI
#GHGGI
-I
8IHIHI=
-I
GII I
-IGGH
#-I
H#
I
8II
IHH
I
GGI"I I
HGI-HI#-HI8
8GI
-I-I#-HIGI
IG- -I
##-8IGIIG
GH
-
I I
-IG#-HGI
IHII
HI
I
-IIHIH8
IIHI
GI%
I
I-HI-I
I
H#IGI IG#-HGI#HI
8IH
GI
IHIG
I
II
I-HI
8HII
GIH#I
GIGH
I#-IHII
HGI-IG
IH
I-I
I
IHIGI
IGH
I-I>-I-I##-8II
#
-II
IG
I&I
IHI
#
-IHIII
I#-G
IG
IHI#-I#GI
H
I
-IIIHI
I
-I-HIHI8
GGIHI
#IHIG
IHIH#I
-HIII"IGHI
#-I
HI(
I
-I>-I
I-I8
HI
-IHI
HI
GIGIIH
HI#HII
IHI#
I
I
I
G#
IGHI
I
#
I
?I
I
@
#-8IHIHIABBCI
-IABDEIGH#GI-IIHI#HII
I
I
I@F=I
-G
-8I(-8#-G
IHIGH
HIH
HI#-I
#-IHIHI#-
!
HI
#-
8I
#
#GI#-I%(I#
I#-IIGHI
HI-'II
#-8I#HIIHIHI
I
-
I
IG
I-IHI
I
GI
I#HGI
#H
IHIGHI
HI
4-3
4-2
(CONT.)
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
L-7BJLKLLK -
LB7
L7L
L-KL-LLL
LL7L 7L L
7LLLBL
KL7L
L
L LLL L
L
7B L
L
-L L L L
LB7L
BL7BB
7L L
7LL
!"#L
L
KLKL-L7-LL7JL
L
LLL
L
$L
L
KLLB%L&L7JLKLL
LLBL'#LB7KL
LL
7LL
!"L7JKLKLL LL
B$L 7L
LB7L7L
LL7B LK7
L
K L
L
L
7LLL7&B
LL
L
LL L7L 7LKL LL
LL7
L
7L
LL
LBLLLL KL#L L L77L KLKLLL L
LL(7L)
L7L7 L*LLL
L7L 7L L
LKLB
LBL7
LB7LBL
L L7L 7
L#L L
&LB
L-LL
LL(7L 7LKLKL7-
L LB-L7
L
L L
-7BJ7
LL L LL
L7
L
L L+7B-7L L
KL
L
L)LL7L7
7#L L
KLL*7L7B LBL 7LL
KLL
K7L7LB7K7LK
LL7
K7L L
KLKL
!"LL
L
,.L/L01234156L08985L121:6030L
L
L
KLL*7L7B LKLKL LBLLKL7L;7<* L7LKB7L
LKK7L7L
7LL7L=>?@LKB7L
L L+L'
L7LAKL L
7
#L*7&L7
L 7L LKB7L
7LB7L7L7LL LKLKL
LBKL7L
L=??L7L
L7
L L7L 7
LKK'B7L
K7
L
C7LK
LB7K
LL L L7LKB7L7
L LBLKLBL
L
LL
L
L*7K7L*
L)7KLBB
L 7L L
L
LL
LLL
BL
KLLK7BL L+K
L
KL7K7L
LL L L
7L 7L7L L
L7KL7L LK
LB7
L
KL 7
L
<AL
L
L?DL L7L 7L L7 LL"
#LCE)FD#L 7L7L+K
L
<ALL
?GHDIL7
L7L LB
LL LBL
KL 7
L
<ALL?>>=L
KB LKL
L
L?DL KL
L-L7L=?F>@LKB7L
KB LB
L-LKK'B7L LK
L
L
L7
7LLCL)EFDLL"
L)
L7L7#L L
LBJL
L
BL7LLB7L LKLKL 7L7 LL
L
4-4
4-3
(CONT.)
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
#-VBMUV
UU#BVB
V#V#
V#
V
U
VVUVB#UU
V
UV
#-VBVVBMUV#MUV#V
U
VB
UUBV#
V
#
VU#UV
UU
MV
MVBMBVU
UUV
#V#VUVVBB
MUV MUV
U
UV
VV
-UV
#VBMUVUU
V#UV
!U
V
VBMUV
U#V#"
VVBU
V#VUVUU
V#UVBV
V#
VUU#V
B$V MUV#
UUVVU-UV
V
V
UU
U#BV
U
VBV
V
U
V
UBU
%#-V
UV
VUVU
VU
V#
V#
U#BV
UV
MMV
V
UB V&UBV
VU%#VVBMUV#U-M
M
V
V
'()*+V,../*.V
V
0 V!#VU#BV
UV#V
U-
VBVBMUV1234536V789:V/;<V=5>48?@2A26CV
1;;<;;><96V#
VBMUVD52;<V.6E:CVB%#-VBMBVBMUV
U
V
FUBVV
UUU
V
BM#VBMUV#UVBV#
VV#BV
UVU
%
UVBV
GV
U#BV
U #-V
VU
U
U#UVBMUV#UV
VBMUV
V
GVBVBMUV
HV#V
UVU
B
UU V
VBV%UVIU
BU
VB
##-V
V#UVB U&V#
V#
#-VMMV#UV
#-V
#
V#VV
JU
#V
U
UBU
V
VBMUVU#%
UV
VKMU#VBMUVM-UVLNOVB UV
&V
VBMUV
UVUV#VMU
VBMUV
U
VU#-#UV
U#-V
V#
VBMUV#UVVV
VBMBVBVUV
V#
VBV
JUV#
VMUVBVM UVVBV V UVBV
U#BVU
V
VMUVV#VBMUVU
V# VVBMUV
GVBMBV
%
BUV#V
BMUVI#%#-B#VHUMV
VMVB UV&V#
V#
VBVBMUV
HVPUVBVVU
%#-VBV
UUVBMUVFUBV
BV# V
U
UV#
V#V
UV#V
B
UV
#-VBMUV
V
V
U#VV
V
U%UV
U
V
UV V#
U
V
U
UV
#-VVMUV#V
V
UU
U#BVBMU VV
UVM U
VBVFBVMV
V#
VMVMV%B VBMU V
V
UVU
U
VBV#
V
VB VV
UUUV
#BV
V
M# V V
VB #-V VU#BV#BV#
U
%#V
V
#VH
U
V
QRV
U
VU#UV
UVHUMVV
LU-UVS
VBV
#
U
T MV
4-4
(CONT.)
4-5
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 4
Barembaum, Susan, dated May 13, 2024.
4-1 The commenter expresses general opposition to the Project. The commenter acknowledges the need for housing in California but states that growth should not negatively impact the quality of life of current residents. The commenter expresses concerns related to specific environmental issues related to traffic, hydrology, sanitary sewer, airport compatibility and noise addressed in Response to Comments 4-2 through 4-5, below. Please note that “quality of life” is not considered an impact under CEQA. However, comments related to quality of life are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
4-2 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic stating that transportation impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, and the project would create massive traffic delays and more accidents. The commenter provides an example of an accident that occurred at Lampson and Rose Street and provides examples of congestion in the area. The commenter also states that the addition of the proposed traffic signal will affect the flow of traffic and will subject residents to noise and light pollution. Please refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns related to congestion, and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, related to accidents and safety. The Project no longer proposes installation of a traffic signal. A Safety Evaluation was prepared to confirm that the Project would have no safety impacts on public roadways and Project access points (see Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, and Attachment H of this Final EIR).
The Safety Evaluation further confirms the analysis and determination in the Transportation Section (Section 4.15) of the Draft EIR that the Project would not result in a safety impact or substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature. 4-3 The commenter expresses concerns with existing flooding issues in the area and provides examples of recent flooding events. The commenter references 2008 and 2029 studies done for the City of Seal Beach by AKM Consulting Engineers, which confirms inadequate drainage within the residential area of College Park East (CPE). The commenter expresses concern that both of the Project’s storm drainage alternates will exacerbate existing flooding conditions, considering also that the City of Seal Beach currently has no timeline to install capital improvements to alleviate flooding in CPE. Please refer to Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, for hydrology concerns. Per Master Response 2.1.4, flooding will not be an issue because the Project’s storm drainage infrastructure would adequately detain 100-year flows, discharge detained flows at rate that do not exceed existing flows, and the Project’s finish floor elevations would be at least 1 foot above the water surface elevation.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
4-4 The commenter states the City of Seal Beach’s process of proposing a Water/Sewer rate increase due to the age of existing sewer pipes is currently on hold due to residents’ complaints.
The commenter also summarizes the results of the Project’s Sanitary Sewer Analysis (Technical Appendix O of the Draft EIR) and expresses concern with regular sewer maintenance, the amount of increase to Manhole A-25 on Elder Avenue as well as the effect of flooding on sewer facilities. Refer to Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, related to sanitary sewer impacts. Per Master Response 2.1.4, wastewater volumes produced by the proposed development would not significantly impact or exceed the existing sewer capacity in the public system, and that the existing sewer system has adequate capacity for the proposed development.
4-5 The commenter expresses concerns with the ALUC assessment and noise study regarding noise impacts from the JFTB. The commenter provides examples of her experience with extremely loud noise from takeoffs and landings at JFTB. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 5
From: Maria Beaini
To: Tom Oliver
Subject: Written Comment from Los Alamitos Resident
Date: Monday, April 29, 2024 6:59:47 PM
Attention Tom OliverAs a resident and owner of the property in the beautiful city of Los Alamitos it is disheartening to hear about your site development
The negative effects of traffic, noise, and pollution will be hazardous to our community.
Please do not develop your proposed community of 246 residential units. Your development will add about one thousand vehicles on our two lane street of Lampson which will be devastating for current residents.
We will have a community polluted with vehicles and traffic jams resulting in loss of property values.
Thank you for your time,
Maria Beaini
Los Alamitos Home owner
5-1
5-2
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 5
Beaini, Maria, dated April 19, 2024.
5-1 The commenter expresses opposition to the Project and states that traffic, noise, and pollution will be hazardous to the community. The commenter does not provide any specific comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. However, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 6
$$/9DOy9ycnDy9
n9$/9D y $!"Dy#/!nDynyD%/y&''(y)$!O9y*
/9+/y,n-/"D
.0123y45267y8:0123;5267<70=>>?@>1A
B>CyEFGHFIHIJyGIKJLyMB
N>KyN>1yPQ5R26y8N>Q5R26<@5S7>TQ>30Q015S>3?>6UAy
[email protected]:0123;5267<70=>>?@>1Ay
WXyYZ[y\]^_[`aybdyef_e`[gaya^yh]i^]yje]kybdy^lg[fyimyaZ[yopyh]qmyegfy^r[]d[[gyimyaZ[yh]qmyed l[ssyedyaZ[yt^bgayu^]`[dyY]ebgbgvywed[xtYwygdaesseab^gy^qqegf[]Xyhgmyq^fbb`eab^gdyegf e``[ddya^yaZ[yh]i^]yje]kydba[yq dayi[ye\\]^r[fyimyaZ[qXyYZbdybg`s f[dyaekbgvyf^lgy^]yq^rbgv [g`bgvyegfyeffbgvyeyW
y^^ayeffbab^gyedy\]^\^d[fybgyaZ[y
]eay
XyYZ[ywhp
yZedyg^a
e\\]^r[fyaZbdy`Zegv[yegfyqemyg^aye\\]^r[ybaXyy
YZbdybg^]qeab^gyq dayi[ybg`s f[fybgyaZ[y
yf^` q[gadXygyeffbab^g
yaZ[][yq dayi[
f^` q[gaeab^gy^ye\\]^resyy^y`Zegv[dya^yaZ[ydba[yimyaZ[y][[][g`[fy\e]ab[dX XyYZ[y`bamy^yp[esyw[e`ZyZedyeys[ed[y^]yaZ[y` ]][gayh]i^]yje]kydba[ylZb`Zyesd^yq dayi[ bg`s f[fyegfy][[][g`[fybgyaZ[yf^` q[gadyegfy][sea[fyda fb[dXy Xyh]i^]yje]ky^\[]ea[dy^gsmyedy\[]qbaa[fyimyaZ[yh]qmyegfyaZ[ywed[y^gyeyfelgya^yf dkyiedbdX YZbdydZ^ sfyi[ybg`s f[fybgyaZ[y][\^]aXy
Xyea[yq^fbb`eab^gd
y[g`[y`Zegv[d
yegfyfb][`aye``[ddy]^qyaZ[y\]^\^d[fyf[r[s^\q[gaybga^
aZ[yh]i^]yje]kyZer[yg^ayi[[gye\\]^r[fyimyaZ[yh]qmyegfyaZ[ywed[XyYZ[ybamy^yp[esyw[e`Zy^] ^dyhseqba^dy^]yaZ[y
[r[s^\[]y`egyg^ayqek[yaZ[d[y`Zegv[dy gf[]yaZ[y` ]][gays[ed[ya^yp[es w[e`ZXy
yYZ[yi bsfbgvdyeayye][y` ]][gasmyd \\sb[fylbaZyf^q[dab`ylea[]yegfyd[l[]yimyaZ[ybamy^ p[esyw[e`ZXyYZ[][ybdyey\]^\^desya^y`Zegv[yaZ[ylea[]yd \\sb[]y^]yaZ[y\]^_[`aya^y^sf[gypaea[ ea[]Xyyaybdyg^ay`s[e]ylZ^ylbssyd \\smylea[]y^]yh]i^]yje]kXyYZbdydZ^ sfyi[y`se]bb[fyegf f[d`]bi[fy ssmyedyl[ssyedyaZ[ybq\e`ady]^qy`^gda] `ab^gy^yg[lylea[]yqebgdXyyp[esyw[e`Zyl^ sf `^gabg [ya^y\]^rbf[yd[l[]yd[]rb`[ybgyeq\d^gyhr[g [XyyYZ[ybamy^yp[esyw[e`Zy d[dylea[]y d[ a^y`es` sea[yd[l[]y`Ze]v[dXyYZ[ylea[]y d[yybg^]qeab^gylbssyi[yg[[fya^ya]egd[]][fya^yp[es w[e`Zya^yf[a[]qbg[yd[l[]y`Ze]v[dXXyy
XyYZ[yda^]qyf]ebgev[y]^qyaZ[y\]^\[]amyedyf[d`]bi[fybgyaZ[y][\^]aylbssyf]ebgybga^yd[r[]esye][ed bg`s fbgvy gf[]v]^ gfy^gdba[yda^]ev[
y`^gg[`ab^gybga^yeyfba`ZylZb`Zy] gdybga^yaZ[ytuYwyegf
aZ[gybga^yaZ[ysfyeg`Zyj]^\[]am
yegfyesd^yeq\d^gyhr[g [XyyYZ[ybq\e`ayegfy`e\e`bamy^yaZ[ fba`ZyegfyaZ[ysfyeg`Zyj]^\[]amybdyg^ayf[d`]bi[fXyyYZ[y^r[]s^ly^ylea[]y]^qyeq\d^g hr[g [ybga^y[eaZ[]ypa][[aybdyesd^yg^ayf[d`]bi[fy^]yegesm[fXy[eaZ[]ypa][[ayaZ[gy[[fdybga^ ]^gl^^fyhr[g [ylZb`Zybdyd i_[`aya^y`^gdaegay^r[]s^lyes][efmXyYZbdy\]^_[`ayf]ebgev[ylbssybq\e`a ^ss[v[yje]ky
edaXyyYZbdyledyg^ayegesm[fXy
Xyhyg[lya]eb`ydbvgesybdyg^ly\]^\^d[fy^gyeq\d^gyhr[g [ yi aybdyg^lyd \\^d[fya^yi[y
y[[a
l[day^y^d[XyyYZbdydZ^ sfyi[yr[]bb[fyegfy\segdy \fea[fXygyeffbab^g yaZ[ybq\e`ay^yaZbdydbvges
egfyaZ[yeffbgvy^yaZbdydbvgesya^yaZ[ybamy^yp[esyw[e`Zyg[al^]kyq dayi[yf[d`]bi[fyegf egesm[fXyy
y
y
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
6-5
6-6
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 6
Biery, James, dated June 10, 2024.
6-1 The commenter states that the United States Army must approve any modifications and access to Arbor Park and has not approved this change. Project Applicant proposes to dedicate or grant an easement for the northern 10 feet of property abutting Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park to the City of Los Alamitos with authority over the two parks. The City acknowledges that any improvements to Arbor Park, owned by JFTB, would require JFTB approval, which is not guaranteed. Because the Project does not include any improvements to Arbor Park, the Draft EIR analysis does not assume any improvements to Arbor Park as a result of the dedication. 6-2 The commenter states that the City of Seal Beach has a lease for the current Arbor Park and must be included and referenced in the EIR documents and related studies. The commenter also states that Arbor Park operates only as permitted by the Army and JFTB on a dawn to dusk basis and should be included in the report. The Draft EIR states that Arbor Park and Dog Park are currently leased by the City of Seal Beach from the JFTB for its residents, although the two parks are within the jurisdiction of Los Alamitos (see Page 4.14-4 of the Draft EIR).
Arbor Park operations are discussed on Pages 4.14-4 and 4.14-5 of the Draft EIR. 6-3 The commenter states that gate modifications, fence changes, direct access from the Project site into Arbor Park have not been approved by the Army and the Base. The commenter states that the City of Seal Beach, Los Alamitos, or the Project cannot make the proposed changes under the current lease to Seal Beach. The Project is not proposing any gate/fencing improvements on JFTB property and on-site improvements do not require JFTB approval. 6-4 The commenter states that the Project site is currently supplied with domestic water and sewer from the City of Seal Beach. The commenter states that there is a proposal to change the water supplier to Golden State Water Company (GSWC) and inquires who will supply water for Arbor Park. The commenter states that the water supplier for Arbor Park should be clarified and described fully as well as impacts from construction of new water mains. The commenter states that water use will need to be provided to Seal Beach to determine sewer fees.
As stated in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR, GSWC provides potable water to the Project site. The Project site will be served by GWSC and infrastructure improvements have been analyzed in the Draft EIR (see the water supply will-serve letter provided as Attachment K of this Final EIR). Arbor Park is not part of the Project; therefore, there will be no changes to the water supply for the park as a result of the Project. Sewer service to the Project site would be provided by the City of Seal Beach, and the Project Applicant will be required to pay any applicable sewer connection fees. 6-5 The commenter states that the impact and capacity of the ditch that runs into the JFTB and Old Ranch property and overflow of water from Lampson Avenue into Heather Street is not described or analyzed. The commenter states that Project drainage impacts to College Park
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
East were not analyzed. Refer to Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, for a detail discussion on the Project’s proposed storm drain routes and impacts.
6-6 The commenter states that the proposed traffic signal should be verified and the plans should be updated along with an analysis of the proposed traffic signal impacts to the City of Seal Beach network. The Project no longer proposes installation of a traffic signal. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 7
e%e0;EeP;[
e
e
!e"#"#$&$'e"()e*+
(e
e,-
e
-
./
1
.
e
23456789:6e<=>?@ABCeDF<=GAHIFeCJHKeFLMH?eMKeCJHKeHKeCJFeNHDKCeCHLFeO=>eDF<FHQF@eMAeFLMH?eND=LeCJHKeKFA@FD D=KFR=?MA@STGLMH?U<=L
+
e,-
Veee
W.
eXY)W/
Ze
e
\
eeVee1!/ee1-
e
1e.
e]e.
e!e!.]
\e
!
e!.
e
e^]
e_-
!
e
e`
.ea
ee
e
e
/e
!
!
e/e
!
e
e
ee
e!
.e. .e.e\
!e
e!
1
e.
e!e
e
!
e
e^]
e
!
e
1e.
ee]
./e
1e
1.e
.
e
e
e
.e
!
e.
!
e
1e]
]
e -
e
e-
e
e]
b./e.
e.
e
e1
e/
ee/
e\.
!.e
e-
/e11
.
ea!.
ceVe
.e
-
e
.
e
-
.e]
.e
]
.e
e
eVe
!
]
.e. .ee
.e
1e]
]
e
]]
e.
\e
!
e.e.
e
.
e1
ee1!be
1e
\e
ee
./e!/
ed
.e1e.
e]!
e
.e -
e.
e\e.
e]
.e]
.
e
!
e
e.
e^]
e
-
]
.ce\
e\e
-
e
!.
/
e.
e]
e
1ee
e
1e11
e
!
ee.
e].e
1e,
e
!./
`
e
7-1
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 7
Boland, Rose, dated June 06, 2024.
7-1 The commenter expresses approval of the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 8
From: Barbara Boyer
To: Tom Oliver
Subject: Lampson Project
Date: Monday, May 20, 2024 6:54:19 AM
Mr. Oliver,
From my position as a resident that lives off of Lampson I oppose the project that is proposed in our community. The density proposed per acre is too high. The neighboring Parkview neighborhood is far less dense than what is being proposed and that should be taken into consideration when building.
The impact of the traffic and safety to this area is such a concern for me. We have seen fatalities and serious accidents living in College Park East. Lampson, Safety needs to be addressed for the families that drive in our area everyday. This proposal of a minimum of 500 vehicles added to Lampson is unreasonable for this community. I drive here everyday and there are concerns as it is now with visibility and bends in the road. When I think of the stress this will put on our Emergency Response and daily commute it does not make sense.
I am in disagreement with the proposal of this site.
Barbara Boyer
8-1
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 8
Boyer, Barbara, dated May 20, 2024.
8-1 The commenter opposes the Project and states the proposed density is too high. The commenter also expresses concerns with traffic, safety, and emergency response. The commenter does not provide any specific comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. However, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
For reference, the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning designations for the site, including allowable density. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.7, Emergency Vehicle Access, and 2.1.8, Public Safety for emergency response concerns.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 9
!v5@JJU`kvJ@`v
5Uv
@
U5k
"#$%v&' "()v*(+' "(),,-./0 #%12304
63"v,78-79-9:v:;<=v>6
?3;v?30vA%#B$'v*?3%#B$'.2#)C3D%3E % 0#)3E13'/4v
FGGHvIKLMNOGGOP
v
QvIRvSNTLTOVvLGvWGXvIYvIvNMYTHMOLvGKvLZMv[TLWvGKv\MI]v^MI_ZPvSZGvTYv_GO_MNOMHvIaGXLvLZMv bNGbGYMHvbNGcM_LvILvdeefvgIRbYGOvhiMjvlWvOIRMvTYvmIOTM]v^NIOHLvIOHvQvZIiMv]TiMHvILvnoepv q]MIOHMNv\LNMMLvKGNvLZMvbIYLvevWMINYjvqXNvOMTVZaGNZGGHvTOvLZMv\MI]v^MI_ZvYXaHTiTYTGOvTYv NMKMNNMHvLGvIYv[G]]MVMvrINsvtIYLvu[rtjvZTYvOMTVZaGNZGGHvTYvIvXTMLvYXaXNavGKvYTOV]MvKIRT]Wv NMYTHMO_MYjvlWvSTKMvIOHvQvRGiMHvLGv[rtvKNGRvgGOVv^MI_ZvLGvVMLvISIWvKNGRvLZMvaXYWv_TLWv]TKMv IOHvMOcGWvIvOMTVZaGNZGGHvSZT_ZvTYvYIKMvKGNvRWv_ZT]HNMOvLGvVNGSvXbvTOjvMvKMM]vYIKMvI]]GSTOVvRWv WGXOVv_ZT]HNMOvLGvNTHMvLZMTNvaTsMYvTOvLZMvYLNMMLvIOHvb]IWvTOvGXNvYRI]]PvaXLvXITOLvbINsYjv QvZIiMvTHMOLTKTMHvRIOWvbGLMOLTI]vOMVILTiMvTRbI_LYvGOvLZMv_GRRXOTLTMYvYXNNGXOHTOVvLZMvbNGbGYMHv HMiM]GbRMOLvILvdeefvgIRbYGOvhiMjvQvST]]vIHHNMYYvLZGYMvbGLMOLTI]vOMVILTiMvMOiTNGORMOLI]v TRbI_LYvIOHvNMXTNMvIOHvIOYSMNvLGvMI_ZvGKvLZMvKG]]GSTOVv_GO_MNOY QvZIiMvNMiTMSMHvLZMvtQ jvZMvV]INTOVvKI_LvSIYvLZILvLZMNMvSIYvOGLvMOGXVZvbINsTOVvKGNvLZMvHMOYTLWv GKvLZMvbNGcM_LjvQvSIYvI]YGv_GO_MNOMHvLZILvSTLZvLZMvTO_NMIYMHvOXRaMNvGKviMZT_]MYvLZILvST]]vaMvGOv gIRbYGOvhiMjvZIYvaMMOvIvHIOVMNGXYvYLNMMLvIOHvZIYvaMMOvLZMvY_MOMvGKvRIOWvYMNTGXY HMIH]Wv
LNIKKT_v_G]]TYTGOYjv
QvXOHMNYLIOHvLZILvgIRbYGOvhiMjvTYvLM_ZOT_I]]Wv_GOYTHMNMHvIv _GRRMN_TI]v_GNNTHGNP
vaXLvLZMvNMI]TLWv
TYvLZILvLZTYvINMIvTYvIvNMYTHMOLTI]vINMIPvYXNNGXOHMHvaWvLSGvVG]Kv_GXNYMYjv TNYLPvLZMNMvTYvOGvYLNMMLv
bINsTOVvGOvgIRbYGOvhiMjv\M_GOHPvgIRbYGOvhiMjvTYvIvLSG
]IOMvZTVZSIWPvSTLZvRIOWv_XNiMYvIOHv
GO]WvGOMvYTHMSI]sjvgIYL]WPvLZMvINMIvGKvLZMvbNGbGYI]vTYvOGLvSI]sIa]MvGNvYIKMvKGNvaT_W_]TYLYvu]TLL]MvLGv OGO
MTYLMOLvaTsMv]IOMYjv
XNLZMNRGNMPvgIRbYGOvhiMjvTYvI]NMIHWvGiMNXYMHvIOHvXOHMNHMiM]GbMHv LGvZIOH]MvIHHTLTGOI]viMZT_]MYjv
h__GNHTOVvLGvLZMvtQ PvLZMNMvST]]vaMvIvLNIKKT_vYTVOI]vTOYLI]]MHvGOvgIRbYGOvhiMjvaMLSMMOvMILZMN hiMjvIOHv GYMjvZTYvSGX]HvaMvnvLNIKKT_vYTVOI]YvTOvIviMNWvYZGNLvHTYLIO_MjvQvaM]TMiMvLZMvTOYX]ILTGOvGK IOGLZMNvLNIKKT_vYTVOI]vST]]vIHHvIHHTLTGOI]vOGTYMvKGNvI__M]MNILTGOvGKvMOVTOMYPvaNIsTOVvOGTYMvIOHv]TVZL bG]]XLTGOvLGvLZMvNMYTHMOLYv]TiTOVvGOvgIRbYGOvhiMjvaMLSMMOvMILZMNvhOHv GYMjvQvSGX]HvNMXMYLvI ]TVZLvIOHvOGTYMvYLXHWvNMVINHTOVvLZMvTRbI_LvGOvLZMvNMYTHMOLYvSTLZvLZMvTOYX]ILTGOvGKvIvLNIKKT_vYTVOI]j v
v
QvaM]TMiMvLZMNMvST]]vaMvIbbNGTRILM]Wvfvb]XYviMZT_]MYvLZILvST]]vaMvXLT]TMHvaWvNMYTHMOLYvGKvLZMv bNGcM_LPvaIYMHvGOvLZMvbGLMOLTI]vG__XbIO_Wv]MiM]YPvSZT_ZvQvST]]vHMY_NTaMv]ILMNvTOvLZTYvMRIT]jvQvST]]v YbM_TKT_I]]WvIHHNMYYvLZMvbGLMOLTI]vTRbI_LYvLZMvIHHTLTGOI]viMZT_]MYvST]]vZIiMvGOvgIRbYGOvhiMjv v
9-4
9-1
9-2
9-3
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
777777!,34567747!7 5
!67!4
47!43
!
747
7!73547437
,7577
7 67!
7!
7
7!67!
7 77567!,345677
7!74
7
4
7
7!4474
7!67 ! 6"7!567,475747!335!
6"7
645647567!,345677#67
73!4
7
7
!7 67,!67!75
45647567
!,345677 67!
7!
7
7!67!
7 77!6757
475
45647
!75
7!7645647
747,! 6"7$
6475,7 4 5
67!,34567
757!4 5
67!,345677#67!56757
7
4767
75! !
7
7!7
!4767,!647
7 !"747!67 5
4
7
7!
457!4474
757
47%
757
4747!67 5
4
7
47!
6"7!4 5
67!,345677
!335!
6"7&!6
77!67!
7%7
!7
74
757
47
!
6"7 4 5
67567!,345677!47567
7!7
!7
47
6"7
735'7
,
47,! 7"
7
6475
757
735'
7
47
7 75757,! 7$
647!7
7
!44 557
7&!6
7
7!67!
7%77
747 !64757!
757!
7
77(
7
7
7,! 7$
647!7
7
7!5,6567645647577
5 !47!
7 77!47567
7437
,75777567!,34567
7
7
47567
75! !
7
7
74
75,7
7 5
47!674767
767
,!64
7#7
7
7!7
47
7 7!74!7
!)!7!67
74
767!56!
7 !75
45647#7!,7*
46"7
6!
74
47567
7 ! 6"7!567,4757
47!
6"7!4 5
67!,345677!7
764564757!44 557
7 &!6
77!67!
7%7#7 5
7
7
74
757!447!67!56!
7!7
565
74"6!
474757,5!56476757
7
46"74
7 +777777%
6"7
7,566"7
5 4
7!7 5,47
!
756"4757
47!
6"7
4 5
67!,345677!7
76456757!
7!
7
7#67
47!!
7
7!7
57!7
7
67
!647!67567!7"
7
67
!6757
!7!7
666"757
6765
5 675745
5 67!
7!
7
7-
4765
757!,34567
7!7!
7!
7
747
7.7/ !70
7
7!56!
7!7666"7567
!
6"757
7.7 !
7#7!,75667! 5
7
7 5
7
67
!647567!,34567
7!7!
7!
7
7
7657
!7
7!3!757
!6
7
7!56!
7
47
(
7
7 7!56!
756"456767
7 57!7
7
67
!64757
47
!
6"757
7.7/ !7
7
45 7,!6757
7464757
7
53,67
7 !75
6"7 4
7 57
7!67
4
55 4767
7547
!,547$67
55 7%47(
74
55 47!7
5!767
747
57
71544,55
7547
!,54
757!
7!
7#675757!64357
7
6
7
7
76757!
7 4 5
67567!,3456775 !47!
7!
7
7(
76 7
4647
76!47
7!756"4567
6"7
7,566"7
5 47!47567
7!7
!756
7567
,6!74
55 747
5!745
757!,345677!67
7!7
!7
7
5
77
,6!74
55 4
7 57,
74
55 4
7!67567
"
74
55 7!7
5!765
7 57!,34567
747
7,547
7!
765
5 67567!
7!
7
75,7
!,345677(
7!
!756"47567!7"
7
67
!67 4 5
67!,34567
7!7!
7!
7
7
7 5,76!46"
756"477#7
7!74567
!7"
7
67
!674
5 7 7!757
!6
7
7!56!
7
47,! 6"7"
7
647565765
5 67!
7!
7
7#7!,7*
46"7!7
6!
74
7567
73
!46"7
57
7!7565
747!7!,345677!67!
7!
7
7!67
7!7"
7
67
!674
5 7 7!7
!4
7
7
474533767
7 4 5
67
!64757!,34567767
7"
7
67
!67!7
!
7!
7
7*
6
7 ! 7
3757
764567!,345677!672
71!6
7
!)!7(
47 9-7
9-4
(CONT.)
9-5
9-6
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
!,58677
8!58
8 8
, 6
!,8!78
!,8
8,858,85888
6
,88 ,
58677
8
8 8!78 8677
8!,6!58
88 8
, 6
!,8!7858
,858,8
!,8
8,8!585
8!8,!88,
8!68!
7
!,
8!8
8 677
8!,6!58
8!58
8
888888,8 8!6,
,8,87 6,!!,8!6
8677
876!8
!!,8
58 8 58!8
!,8
!,8
8
8!7 ,8!,
8 6 86 8!8
85 786,85,
88
85!
!,888!, 6, 88677
8
558 8 88!8
8"5!8#68,8
88
7 8
87!68!
88 8
, 6
!,8!78
58 8 58,8
8"5!8#688!8,!8
5
8 8!8
85 786,85,
86 8
77
,87!68 8
,75$8!78
5
8,
,8!8
885 786,8!,!8
!,8
!,8
8
,8 8!6,
,
8,87 6,!!,
888
6
,88
8!78 8677
8!,6!58
88
!!,8
58 8 588
!,8
8,8
!,585,
8!68!
7
!,
8!8 8677
8!,6!58
88
5
8 8!%85 786,85,
8, 8!8 85 , , 8!8,5 8 8
!,58
5
8
,85 786,
8 &
8888
!,8
8
88!%5, 8
8
,8 8
6
!,8 ,8
58 8 58,8
'55 8'
8#68 86 8
5 85,
8 88
8!7887 87 8!8,!,% $
,8
,8
! 85!
!,
888!, 6, 88 8
!,58677
876!8 8 5! ,8
558 88
7 8687!68
5
86 5
,8!,8
!,8
8
,8 8
5 85, 88!8,!8 5
8
8 8
5 85,
86 8
7 8!8
8,8
!58,!8 8!,
6 8
886,
!6
!,8
!6 87!68, 86
,
88 86!!
8 5! ,
8 (
8888888
!,8
8!,58
88,66!8
58!,8 8
!8
8!78 8
6 8!,8
!,8
8 ,8
58 8 58,8 5
8#6
8
8 8 $
!,8!788
58
!,8 8,!68
8
,876!,8!78 86!!
8 5! ,888!, 6, 8!8
6
,
86!
,8
!,8
8!858!8) 6868
,8
58 8 8
5! ,8!
8,!8 885,, 868,8
6!6868!
8,!8 8,858
66
88
85 5886
,
8
558
8) 6868
8
686
686 6
!,58
85!
!,8,8
!,
8"5
7!6,
*
8+-5
,.858
558, 8
,8/,68!780108
,855!87!68 !5 8!86!
8,8
6
8
85!,8
8 8
7 586!
8
!8
,8
568677
88 5
8
8
5585 8
6
,
86!
,876!8 8
5! ,8!86!
8
!,8
8!
8!78 86!
5888!, 6, 88
8
8 6
8
5 8!786
6
86 5
,8
!,8
!,8
8 8!8 86
8 ,8
86!
8
8 558
8 8!5 6
8,86
8 ,8 8 , 68
,
8 6 8
558 8,8
,6
8 ,8
6
,8
,-6
8275
88886
,88
8!,8 8
8!787!!8
677
8!,8
!,8
8 8!8 8 5! ,885
!8!585
88
58 8!8
8,!68
8!78
!,8
8 ,8
58 8 58,8 5
8#6
8 3
88'55 8'
8
8
88-!686 6
58
8
8
, 6
8
8
!,8
8,8
8 , 6
!,8
85! 8
8!78 8 5! ,8 8
!,8
,
8!78
!,8
856 8 ! 8!,
88 8
, 6
!,84
!,8
!,8
88'55 8
'
8
8!,
8!78!8
8
6
85,
87!68
!,8677
8,8!, 8
8
5 786,85, 87!68
5 86 5
,8,!6!,8'55 8'
8
8
8!,8 8
!,58
8
5 8!78 8 5! ,
8886
,88 ,
58
8!,8 8677
8
,58
8,8 6 8
!,58677
8
,58
8, 8!8 8 8!68!
7 8
5 !
8 9-11
9-7
(CONT.)
9-8
9-9
9-10
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
#T7BTLST##L7BTLTT##T7B
L7BTL7TLSTB
TL7TBT7T
L7
B#T
7BTTLTTTLTSTBLB#B T7BTLB T 7 LS7
B#TTT
LTBT7#TL7T#TL7TLSTTTTTTTT 7#T
T
T
LB TT
##L#T SLTL
BTBTT###TBTLS
TT7TS
T
B TT SLTL
BT7
T
7BTTL7T
7 LS7
B#TTT
!TTS
TB TLST7"LTBLB#B TL7TLTL7TTTLTTL TLST
LT
7
LT7
T$BTS
TLB T
L7
B#T
7BTTL7#
TTTLT
BLT
TT SLTL
BT7BL7T%
TLTB#TL7T
LTLS7
STLST
#BLT
B S7S77#TL7TSTTTLT&STS
TT'LT7BT(
BTT7T&BT
T)*#BT*7!TL7TTT TBT7#TL7T
TLT7B
L7BT7BT
L7
B#T
7BTTLTTT T
TTLST##L7BTS
T7
TLST
#7
BLTT
LTLST
LT7TLST77B T
LLTBT*#BT*7+T%
TL,T
&BLLT,T(
BTT&
B
LTL,TLT$
TL,TB#T&BTT%
#T7BTLST
##L7BTST
LTLS7
STL,T
T
T
LB TTLSBTLT
L
#T7BTLST
7
BL7B#T
LL
TBT*#BT*7
-./0123
T
BT##L7BTL7TLT
,T7T
TST7
BT#7BTLST7LBLT7
BT7TLSTL
BLT
#7
BL,T
TT
TLST
LL7BS7
T#7
BL
T
45./68926T:;;<5.2;=TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
><.2616=TTTTTTT:;;<5.2;=TTT?1218<8TTTTT?.@18<8
TL7LT
BL
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT )A!TTTT#77
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCDTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAECT7TTTTTTTTTTCDTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAF )!TTTT#77
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTE7TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTA )C!TTTT#77
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCE 7TTTTTTTTTTDCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTA &7L+TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTTTTTTT T
H7
T
L#T7
BL
TB T
TACGECT
#BL
TBT7BT TL
BLT
BL
T
T7T
B +
ETTTTTTTTTTGFT
B T
7L
T7TLBTACGECT
#BL
ETTTTTTTTTTCT
B#T
TB#TDFT7BT
B T
T)
LT7
,T
LT
!
(7B
7B+T&ST
T7T
B TT#TL7T
#BL
TB#T
L
T
B TBT(HITB#T
7
B#B T7
BL
T&ST
TB7T
B T7BT
7BT
T
JK<M69/T.2NTOPQ2TRP89MT:;;<5.2;=
9-13
9-11
(CONT.)
9-12
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
",7PKO,
PP
PPP
OO,
P
PP
P
P
P!P#
$%
&PPPPPPPPPP
P
'()
&PPPPPPPPPP*P#
P#
$P
#
&PPPPPPPPPP
+P$$P
#
-
%P./P
P
P
P#
$P
P/P##
P
$//P
P$$
P
)P
P
P
P
P!P#
$0P1
!
P!P
$P$$
P( P/'PPP
P P)P/P
#
P234P!P/P
P
P(
/
P
0P2345
PP
!!
'P
P
!
$P
##PP #P/
P$$
P#
P!P#
$0P6
)P!P/P'/
P(
PP#
$P
P-81P
P
$P
0P./P P!P#
$P(
P
P
# P/P-
)P!P
P4
9P P(
P
# P
P!P:P; /P<-81=0
P
>P
'P/P
P
P/P
P!P #
P
P/
P'#
P
P/P
P
P
!P#
P#
$9P/P(
PP##?
)PP#
P'/
P# P
P-81P
P
PP
)
$/)P
0P./
P P!P#
$P(
P
P'/
P!!
P
P/P
P!P-810P>P
( P
PP #/
'P
)P
P/P#
P #
)P!P/P'#
P
P/(P
)P'/
P( PP
P(
/P/P
0P./P
P'/
P#
$P
P/P
P
$/)P(
P/'P
P
# P
P()
P
P-810P>P( P
PP /
P
)P!P/(P/P
?P'/
P!!
P!P/P'#
P(
P
P(P
PP!P/P
P(
/
P-81P
P
#
P4'0
P
@A7B
P
./P##
P'#
P
)P/
PP
9P#
PP!P
P
'
0P./PP
P#)P
P##
P? #P!PPCPDP
P/P#
P
$P4P8 P/
P#
P
!
P
PP$P# 9P P
P#)PE
#
0PF
/ PP# P
$P
P
P/P
)9P
2/P8 P
P/P
P!P/P'#
P(
PP/'
)P
# 0P2/P8 P
P
/P
P
P# P
P-810P./P
P
P
P/P##
P'#
P(
P#
)P
GP2/P8 9P
$P
P$
$P
P'
P# PP (0PH PP/P P!P
#
$P
P/P'#
9P
)P!P/
P'/
P(
P P #P/P
P#
$P
$P
2/P8 9P
$P
PP2/P8 P)P-81P
0 P
8
$P
#
PP4P8 P(
P
PP
P)P
P
P$
P!P/P'#
P
/P/
P'
P!P4P8 P
P/P$P# 0P
P
>PPE
$PP /
P
)P
P/P
# P!P#
$PP4P8 9P(/
/P(
PP
# P
)P/P'#
P
P
P# P
0
P
@
IJLPM,7NJL,
P
./P'#
P
P P
P/P-
)P!P
P4
9P(/
/P
P P!P()P!P/P
P
4
P8
PH#
0P./P
P!P/P
P4
P8
PH#
P(
P
P
#
P
P!P/P
P
P/P##
P'#
0P>
P
9P/P
P 9-15
9-13
(CONT.)
9-14
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
#.7BNM7#N
..N
M
N
N.N
N
NM7#N
..N M
N.##N.N
B
N
#7NN
NB7
N.7N
N7.BN
BN7NB#NN#N.
.N.N
N
NM7#N
..N
#NN.##
N.7NB7
N.7N#7#.N
BN.7N.N
7.N#N
7BN
#.7BN
N
BN.NB#NN.7N
N
NB#
.BNN
NB.#
N
N.#
N
B.
N7N.N#
.N.N
7.N
#N
N7N.NMNB#BN#
N
7
N.7N.N
7.N.7N
BB#B.N
M
N
B#
.BN7N.N
7.N
#NN
#
N7N M!NB..BN#N.N
.#N
N7#
.N
7BN
N.7N.N
N7N
#
N#N.N
7.NMN
#N
N#
B
N
BN7NB#N
7NB#
.BN
#
N#
N
N#BN"BN#
B
NB#N
N7BN
#N
BN.N
#.N7NMN.7NB7
N.7N#7#.N
BN#N.N #.N7N
N
NN
7
N# N
N.#
NB.
N7N
.N
#.#7
N7#N7#BN
#N
N.7NN#
NN.N
N
N
M7#N
..
N
"N$
N 7.N%#N
..N $ %
NB#BN
N#.#BN#N$
N 7.&N#
#
N
7BN
#.7B&N
7BB77N
N
N
N"N7BB.N$ %NB.
.#7N#BN
.N
N
N
N
N
N'
7N .
.#7N()
N"#BNB.
.#7N#
#NB#BN
#BN*7
&N
#N#BN
N
NB#7N
7#.&N
#N
BN
N#
N
N7N.#BN#NB.
.#7N*#.N.N
#.#7N7N
7+#
.N
),,NB#
.BN#N.N
7.&N.NB#BN7N$ %N
#NNB.
#
N
NB#
.BN7N
M!N
N.NB7
#
N7#.#BN
#NN#
.
NN
#.#7&NB7BN.#N.7N
#BN
*7
N
N.#N
N7
.#7N
#NN
B
N
BN7N.N
7
.#7N7NB#N
BN
.7N.N
7.N"N+.N7BB.N$ %N#NB.
.#7N#BN#N
7BN
#.7B&N
#N#
#N
B#BN
7BN
#.7BN
N
7BB77NN
NB.#
N
N.#
NB.
N7N.N#
.N7N.N
#.#7
NB#
.BN
N.NB7BN.#BN7N.N$ %N.7N.N77B
N
7.BN
B#
.-BN
NB#
.BN7N M!N
N
#BN*7
N
/012N3451689N:;04N<=1>?N=@A354=C8
N
"N #.N7N
N
N7##.BN. BN
#.N
N
7BBN#N
#
.N7ND&,,,N7
BN7N
.
#
N7N
B7N&N
#.N##.
N+.#7BN"#BN7##.#7N#BN
N.7N.N
N
N
#BN
N
7N.7N.N7
NN
7
N# N.#BN
#
.N##.N.7NN7
N
#
N.N
7#.#7N
N7B..#7N7N.N77B
N
7.NN
7
N# N
N7B#NB.
N
7N7
N.N
7N
7
N
N.N
7#.#7&N7
N7N
#B&N
N.
B7.
.#7N7N
7B..#7N#.N
N
.#
BN"#BNB.
NB7
N#
N.N#
.N7N.N
N
#.N
N7
BN
#N
N.7N.N#.
#.N7N
B7N
N
NE0C98;A6830CNF039=N1C2N;012N6G09A;=
"N
BN7N.N7BN7N7
77 NN
#.N
7BBN7N.N
7.N
#NN
BN#
.
NN7B..#7N7#BN
N+BBN
#BN
#.
N"N#
N7 N
BN
7
N
B7NN.
N.NB#
N
N.#NB#
.BN
NB7.N
N
N.7NN7B..
N
.7N
BN.N#
.N7N7B..#7N7#BN"NB#
.BN.
N(H,IN7
77 NN
N
(J,KN7
77 NN
#NN#
.
N
N
N.7N
N.#N#
N7 N
BN#
N#
NN
N
B7NB.#
N
N.#
NB.
N7N.N7B..#7N
#N7#BNBN
N.N#
.N7N
.N7
77 NNB#
.BN
.N*
.N
#NN#N
N.7N7#.7N.N
#NBN
#
N
7B..#7L
9-19
9-15
(CONT.)
9-18
9-16
9-17
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
G!,G!7
GB,EFG,B
GFBG!7
G,!B!,G!7
B
G G
GEGB
E
GG!G!7B,7G!BE
G
G!7
G
G
7
,B7,,FGE,GG,GEG! ,GE
G77 EG!E!
FG
!
G!,GE,BG
EB!
BEG77 EGE
G
G!GEFG
EG
E7GFG
G!7
B
GG,!B!,GEFGE
G
,B
G,GE,G
G
7
G!G!7B,7G
GEFG
EBF
G
B,
G!,GB
E7GE
G
G
!G,BG
EG
E7GF 7G!G!7B,7G!BE
G GF
B
E
G!7
GE
!G,
G
GGEFG
EBF
G
B,
GB
F
!G
G ,FG
GEG!FG,G!G!7B,7G!BE
GG
GEFG
EBF
G
B,
G
B,G
,!B!,G,GE,G
G
G
"#$%&#%'($
7 G
B,!G,
G!7
GF
,
!GFB
!G,
G,
GE,G
G G
G! ,)!,B
G77G 7
GEG,
G
!7
G,!7
BGB
F
G G
G!7B
G!,B
G77G 7
GE
,BFE
GEEB!
!G
FG G
G*G
!,B
G77G
EGE,G
GE
FG,G!7
G77G,
G!7
G,!B!,GEFG!7
G, GF
B
, G
EG,
GB
F
!G,G
B, ,,FG
G!7
B
G G
G
BEGE!G!,G!7
BG
B,
!G
+
GE!G G
G,G!7
GEB
G
B,G!7
G-G 77GG,
B7
EFG!,G!7
G,!7GG!7
GE
!
B,,G
7G GE
GEG
B7!GEB
G
B,G!7
GB
!,G,
G!7
G F, G,
G!7
G! ,GEFG!7B
G!,BG
FG,
G!7
GF
,
!G!,G!7
GB
F
!G,E!
FG
!
G./01G
B, ,,FG
GEFG.203G
B, ,,FG
G
GEGB
4
!GEG!
7EG!FG,
G!7
GE!G,
G!7
GE
G,
G!7
GGEFG!7
G
,!
!EGEB
G
B,G!7
GF
,
!GB
F
!GEFG!7
G
B, ,,FG
GB
F
!
,F-G!7
G7
7!G,
G!7
G! ,GEFG!7B
)!,BG,!B!,G,
G!7
GF
,
!GEFG!7
G7,B!G
F
BG
, G EG G
EFG!,GEGE G,
GBEG
,BG!7
G
B, ,,FG
GB
F
!G
GEGB
4
!G
EGEGE!,G
B,G!7
GB
F
!G
!
G./01G
B, ,,FG
GEFG.203G
B, ,,FG
568#9%$
BGEB
G,!B!,GB,
!GB,F
!GEB
GF
B
FG!,G
EB
GB
F
!EG
7
,B7,,FG
:7E!GEB
G!7
GEG!,G,!B,GEFGE
E!
G!7
G
;G,
GB,F
!GG!7
G,G
E!,GEB
,,F-G
-GEFG
EBF
G
B,
G
7
,B7,,F<G=,F
!GFE
!G,BGFBG!7
G
;EE!,G
,B!,G,
G!7
GF
,
!-G,!B!,G7E
-GEFGE!G!7
G,
!,G,
G!7
G,!B!,G
GEG
B
4
!GEG,B
7
G!FG,G!7
GB,F
!G,E!,GG!7
GF
,
!GEFG!7
GE!G
!,G!7
GBB,FG,!
G
>'?8?'@#
7 GA,!GC,B
G BEGE
GAC GG7,
G!,GEGEB
G,,!
GEFGBE
!G,E!,G
GEG
,
B
FGE
,!G!7
GF
,
!DGE!G,G!7
BG
,!
GEFG
GEGB
4
!GEG!
7EG
!FG,G!7
G,!B!,G,
G!7
GF
,
!GEFG!7
GE!G!,G!7
G,,!
GEFGBE
!G
,E!,G,GAC -G 77GG,E!
FGEFE
!G!,G!7
GF
,
!
G
7E G,G
,BG!
G!,GG,
BGB
EBFG!7GF
,
!GEFG
G,, G
,B EBFG!,G
E
BG!,GG
GEFG,
B-GFG!7
G!F
G!,G
G!7
GE!G,
G!7G
F
,
!
9-19
(CONT.)
9-20
9-21
9-22
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 9
Brandt, Daniel, dated June 10, 2024.
9-1 The commenter provides introductory remarks as a resident of Seal Beach and expresses the concerns which are responded to below.
9-2 The commenter expresses concerns with insufficient parking and increased number of vehicles.
The commenter states that Lampson Avenue is a dangerous street and there have been many traffic collisions. The commenter also states that there is no street parking on Lampson, it is not walkable or safe for bicyclists, and it is already overused and underdeveloped to handle additional vehicles.
The City acknowledges that there is no street parking on Lampson. However, there are sidewalks and Class II (on-street, striped) bicycle lanes on Lampson. Refer to Master Response
2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic/congestions concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for vehicle and pedestrian safety concerns. 9-3 The commenter states that with the installation of the traffic signal at Lampson Ave. there would be 3 signals in short proximity and it would add additional noise due to the acceleration of engines, braking noise and light pollution to residents living on Lampson Ave. between Heather and Rose. The commenter requests a light noise study regarding the impact to residents due to the installation of the signal.
The Project no longer proposes installation of a traffic signal. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue. Additionally, lighting from car headlights would be temporary and be shielded from the existing residential use on Lampson through existing landscaping and walls within the private residences’ backyard. 9-4 The commenter expresses concerns with safety and traffic on Lampson and estimates that the Project would generate 500 vehicles. The commenter states that Lampson is unsafe due to poor visibility and drivers making U-turns and requests a study to address additional traffic control signal devices or modifications.
The Project is estimated to generate 1,658 two-way trip-ends per day with 112 AM peak hour trips and 147 PM peak hour trips (Draft EIR, p. 3-17). Existing trees and boulders in the medians within Lampson Avenue are existing conditions, and the Project will not place any additional trees, boulders, or other objects within the median resulting in any further decrease in visibility. Moreover, the Project will not exacerbate any existing visibility concerns because Lampson Avenue has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional trips generated by the Project. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, according to the City of Seal Beach General Plan, Lampson Avenue is a divided roadway with a raised median and designed to accommodate a maximum of 37,500 daily vehicle trips. At General Plan
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Buildout with the Project, these two segments comprising this portion of Lampson Avenue would carry between 15,350 and 15,750 daily trips (see Technical Appendix N1 of the Draft EIR and Attachment G of the Final EIR). Therefore, the Project’s anticipated generation of 1,658 daily trips is well within the capacity of Lampson Avenue even at General Plan Buildout (refer to Page 3-17 of the Draft EIR). Finally, CEQA requires an evaluation of the Project’s potential impacts on the environment, and not the impacts of environmental conditions on the Project. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic/congestions concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for vehicle and pedestrian safety concerns.
9-5 The commenter states that vehicles traveling westbound on Lampson Ave. at the intersection of Seal Beach Blvd. during the morning hours is heavily congested. The commenter is concerned about two left turn lanes on Lampson Ave. at Seal Beach will not have capacity to handle additional vehicles. And there will be additional congestion at the two dedicated left turns for vehicles traveling to the 405 Freeway. The updated Traffic Analysis (Attachment G of this Final EIR) identifies the Project’s contribution to a level of service deficiency at Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue. The recommended improvement is to restripe the number 2 westbound left as a shared left-right turn lane, which will improve the level of service at this intersection (see Table 6-3 of Attachment G of this Final EIR). The Project Applicant would be required to pay fair share fees towards this improvement. The Project’s contribution to the level of service deficiency at this intersection is 5.1% and therefore negligible. In any event, a project’s effects on an intersection or roadway segment level of service is not considered a CEQA impact, and as such, the Project’s contribution to a level of service deficiency at this intersection would not constitute a new or substantially more severe impact under CEQA.
9-6 The commenter states that the Project would generate students who would attend schools in either Rossmoor, Los Alamitos, or Seal Beach. The commenter states that residents will need to travel westbound on Lampson Ave. towards Seal Beach and will likely turn northbound on Seal Beach Blvd. from Lampson Ave. The commenter states that Lampson and Seal Beach Blvd. are already congested and believes that a second dedicated right turn lane should be added to handle the additional vehicles. The commentator requests a study on the phasing of traffic control devices for nearby intersections. Refer to Response to Comment 9-5 for the recommended improvement to the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue. 9-7 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic congestion at Lampson Avenue and Old Ranch Plaza and requests a study on the traffic control devices at Lampson Avenue and Old Ranch Plaza. The commenter states that the two-way left turns need to be lengthened to handle the additional vehicles. The Project’s Traffic Analysis (Attachment G of this Final EIR) analyzed the intersection of Old Ranch Plaza and Lampson Avenue and determined that this intersection operates at an acceptable level of service under with and without Project conditions under all scenarios.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
9-8 The commenter states that traffic from southbound Seal Beach to eastbound Lampson Ave. is often congested. The commenter is concerned that traffic will back up to Saint Cloud Drive and cause a safety issue for those at the intersection of Seal Beach Blvd. and Saint Cloud Drive.
The commenter does not believe the two dedicated left turn lanes are sufficient for the influx of vehicles wanting to make a left turn to eastbound Lampson Ave. in the in the morning and afternoon and request a study of traffic control devices at southbound Seal Beach Blvd. at Lampson Ave. Refer to Response to Comment 9-5 for the analysis and recommended improvement to the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue 9-9 The commenter states that additional traffic from the development will be a safety hazard for bicycles traveling on Lampson Ave. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian/bicycle safety concerns. 9-10 The commenter expresses concerns with pedestrian crossing Lampson Avenue to walk to Heather Park, the lack of onsite park amenities, decreased visibility for drivers and pedestrian safety and requests impact on foot traffic on Lampson Avenue. Refer to Master Response
2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for impacts to existing parks. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns.
9-11 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic and requests a study on the traffic signal time and a dedicated right turn lane from Lampson Avenue to southbound Valley View Drive. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, regarding the traffic signal. 9-12 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic and requests a traffic study on streets in Garden Grove. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, and Response to Comment C-2 for a discussion on the selection of studied intersections. 9-13 The commenter expresses concerns with parking and requests study on road impacts from extra traffic. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. 9-14 The commenter expresses concerns with parking and impacts to Arbor Park and Heather Park.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. Refer to Master Response
2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for impacts to existing parks.
9-15 The commenter expresses concerns with public service and requests study on Seal Beach Police Department (SBPD) and response times. The Project site is located within the City of Los Alamitos; therefore, it will be served by LAPD, which was also acknowledged by SBPD (see Technical Appendix L of the Draft EIR). Refer to Master Response 2.1.8, Public Safety, for emergency response concerns. SBPD stated that it will not be expanding service capacity
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
as a result of the Project because the Project is located within the City of Los Alamitos.
However, SBPD has a mutual aid agreement with LAPD and can assist with public services in the event of an emergency, if needed.
9-16 The commenter states that SBPD will experience an increase in calls from services due to illegal parked vehicles from the Project and requests a study on whether additional police officers will be needed. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. The commenter assumes that residents of the Project will be parking on streets within the CPE neighborhood. The Project includes 577 parking spaces, which is in exceedance of the City of Seal Beach’s parking standards (by 84 spaces). Based on parking requirements specific to the City of Seal Beach, the Project would comply with Seal Beach parking requirements. Residents are not expected to park anywhere other than in the parking spaces located on the Project site. 9-17 The commenter expresses concern with the decrease in response time to Leisure World that is currently served by the closest OCFA station from the Project site, Station 48, and requests a study to analyze the impacts of response times to the Project, residents of College Park East and Leisure World. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, considering the existing firefighting resources available in the City, implementation of the Project is not expected to result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impact. Per correspondence with the OCFA, there are currently no deficiencies in fire protection service provided to the Project site. OCFA has not indicated the need for a new fire station or expansion of existing facilities due to the Project. The Secured Fire Protection Agreement would ensure that response times and service ratios are met due to the implementation of the Project and no new fire station facilities would be required (refer to Page 4.13-9 of the Draft EIR) 9-18 The commenter states the City of Seal Beach’s weight requirements for trucks traveling on Lampson Avenue and requests this be enforced during demolition and construction of the proposed development. The commenter also requests a study analyzing the management of demolition, removal of debris, and transportation of construction equipment and materials. The Project would be required to comply with all applicable local regulations related to vehicle weight limits. If the Project requires the use of an oversize vehicle in excess of the eight, width, height or length permitted by the Vehicle Code, a permit shall be obtained from the City of Seal Beach in accordance with the City of Seal Beach Municipal Code 8.10.135, Movement of Oversize Vehicles.
9-19 The commenter expresses concerns with construction noise and road closure, specifically the homes located between 4509 and 4701 Ironwood Avenue. As discussed in Section 4.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR, the construction noise analysis shows that noise impacts at the nearest receiver locations will be less than the daytime 80 dBA Leq significance threshold during Project construction activities. Because the highest construction related noise level is 63.31 dBA Leq at the nearest sensitive receiver (Location R3 at the existing noise sensitive residence at 4625 Ironwood Avenue, approximately 82 feet south of the Project site), the noise impacts due to
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Project construction noise are considered less than significant and no mitigation is required (refer to Pages 4.11-23 through 4.11-24 of the Draft EIR). Therefore, noise monitoring during construction is not needed or required.
During construction, the Project would result in roadway improvements along Lampson, including replacement of the existing median curb and construction of the two proposed driveways. Construction on Lampson will require an encroachment permit and approval from the City Engineer. Lane closures that may be required for median improvements would be temporary and require a permit and compliance with LAMC 12.08.200, Safety precautions– Obstruction of traffic. Compliance with LAMC 12.08.200 would ensure safe crossing and access for all vehicle and pedestrians at all times. Pursuant to LAMC 12.08.200, a construction management plan would be prepared to identify construction activity, notification of construction activity, and to ensure that construction activity would not re-route/detour commuter or other pass-through or cut-through traffic through local residential streets. 9-20 The commenter expresses concerns with aesthetics and glare and requests a visual simulation of the Project site. Refer to Figure 4.1-2 and 4.1-3 for visual renderings (refer to Pages 4.1-11 through 4.1-12 of the Draft EIR). As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft EIR, buildout of the Project would change the existing visual character of the site from a two-story, 88,000 sf commercial office building to a two- to three-story residential development consisting of 246 units. The Project would be attractive and of quality design and visually compatible with the existing residential and park uses in the Project site’s vicinity.
Additionally, the Project would be compliant with the zoning development standards and City requirements pertaining to scenic quality. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts would be less than significant (refer to Page 4.1-18 of the Draft EIR).
As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft EIR, the Project would redevelop the Project site with residential uses which would produce artificial light. The Project would be required to adhere to the light and glare requirements as set forth in t LAMC (Chapter 8.48 - Lighting Performance Standards and Section 17.24.040 Light and Glare). Chapter 8.48 addresses the visual impacts of exterior lighting on adjacent property owners and neighborhoods. The chapter outlines guidelines for the design, scale, location, and illumination level of lighting fixtures. The guidelines aim to reduce light trespass and prevent glare. Section
17.24.040 would require shielding of light sources to reduce impacts on surrounding land uses.
The City would confirm compliance with applicable lighting requirements during future review of building permit applications/plans. Mandatory compliance with LAMC Chapter 8.48 and Section 17.24.040 would ensure that the Project would not introduce any permanent design features that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area (refer to Page 4.1-19 of the Draft EIR).
Moreover, a shade and shadow study was conducted for the Project (Attachment I of this Final EIR). The study provides 3 shade and shadow conditions (9 AM, 11AM, 3PM) for winter
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
solstice (December) and summer solstice (June) periods. The longest shadows are cast during the winter months and the shortest shadows are cast during the summer months. In the Northern Hemisphere, the longest day and shortest night of the year occur on the Summer Solstice (on June 21 or 22), marking the beginning of summer. The shortest day and longest night of the year occur on the Winter Solstice (December 21 or 22), marking the beginning of winter. The measurement of shadow lengths that occur at the winter and summer solstices therefore represent the most extreme shadow patterns that occur throughout the year. As shown, during the summer period, the shade and shadow would mostly be confined to the Project site without spillover to adjacent properties. During the winter period, shade and shadow would spillover in the northwestern direction during 9AM and in the northeastern direction during 11 AM.
However, the shade and shadow footprint would be minimal and would occur on roadway to the east and parking lot to the north. Therefore, the Project would not result in a significant change in the shade or shadow footprint to nearby properties, and this analysis confirms that the Project will not result in any impacts related to shade or shadow footprint to nearby properties.
9-21 The commenter expresses concerns with rodents. The Project site is located in a highly urbanized area and is surrounded by open spaces to the north, east, and west. If rodents were encountered during construction activities, rodents would travel to the nearby open spaces area instead of traveling south across Lampson Avenue to the existing residential communities.
Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, the Project site is not located within or part of a wildlife movement corridor. Therefore, the Project would not substantially interfere with an established migratory wildlife corridor. (refer to Page 4.3- 33 through 4.3-34 of the Draft EIR). However, this comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required. 9-22 The commenter expresses concerns with wildlife and impacts to coyote and rabbit population at JFTB. While coyotes and rabbits are common species that may currently inhabit the Project site, as discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, the Project site does not include any species listed as special-status animals under either the federal Endangered Species Act or California Endangered Species Act. Also as discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, no special-status plants were detected on the Project site.
However, the Project does provide limited suitable habitat for nesting birds and common raptor species. Construction activities have the potential to adversely impact nesting birds and raptors and roosting bats. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through MM 4.3-3 would ensure that pre-construction surveys are conducted for nesting birds, nesting raptors, and bat roosts prior to site disturbance. If nesting birds or raptors are present on the Project site, mitigation requires avoidance of active nests. With implementation of the required mitigation, potential impacts to nesting birds and common raptors would be reduced to below a level of significance (refer to Pages 4.3-29 through 4.3-39 of the Draft EIR).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 10
From: Valerie B
To: [email protected]
Subject: Lampson Project Concerns
Date: Monday, May 20, 2024 10:34:45 PM
Dear Tom Oliver,
We live in College Park East in Seal Beach and I want to express my concern regarding the Lampson Project.
This project will affect CPE the most yet we are not considered in any of the planning.
Our concern is multifold and none of the issues have really been addressed:
1. CPE already does not have enough parking, especially on street sweeping days its hard enough without the addition of these 246 units, which easily means additional 500 vehicles not counting visitors/company.
2. Vehicle access into that site is dangerous, just pulling into dog park/AYSO field is hard with the speed of traffic and divider, adding 500 cars to that daily will be a mess and will cause traffic back up across all of Lampson.
3. There is no playground/play area/park for the new residents so all of them will be impacting CPE parks/play areas which already need repair.
Without the play area, the kids will be dangerously crossing Lampson via walking or biking to access Heather Park.
4. Vehicle miles travel will be significantly increased on Lampson, Seal Beach Blvd, and Valley View.
The current Park and Ride lot that supports car pooling and van pooling will be eliminated increasing vehicle miles traveled further. Project should providing a Telework Center in the project to mitigate travel impacts.
5. California law requires solar panels on new housing and zero emission electric vehicle charging stations. Neither are mentioned in the draft plan.
6. This area is a lovely and relatively quiet community where most households are families where we feel safe and its not congested by traffic, pollution or too much housing squeezed into a small area. This project causes a HUGE loss to the hundred of families calling College Park East and the surrounding area “home”. Only a win for the developer.
7. Lampson Avenue is not only used by the over 1,700 households in College Park East, but those who live nearby in Rossmoor and Los Al and Garden Grove who go shopping, drop/pick up kids at school and bypass the freeway. Lampson is only a two lane street with constant use and at times extremely congested. By adding one 246 units and potentially 500 additional car trips daily, Lampson will be a nightmare. There are already accidents on Lampson all the time, often affecting the homeowners on both sides of the neighborhoods.
8. I am also requesting a study on the impact of foot traffic on Lampson due to the development.
I would also like a sidewalk added to the north side of Lampson between Seal Beach Blvd and Tulip Drive.
10-1
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-5
10-6
10-7
10-8
10-9
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
I am concerned that with the decreased visibility of drivers traveling eastbound on Lampson due to curves in the roadway, as well as the boulders and trees in the center divider, there will be an increase in pedestrian injuries and fatalities.
- Valerie Burstein
4224 Ironwood Ave.
Seal Beach, CA 90740
10-10
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 10
Burstein, Valerie, dated May 20, 2024.
10-1 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project’s impact on College Park East which are addressed below.
10-2 The commenter states that CPE currently has insufficient parking. Refer to Master Response
2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
10-3 The commenter states that vehicle access onto the Project site is dangerous and the additional traffic will cause backup along Lampson. The Project initially proposed to install a traffic signal at the primary neighborhood to alleviate neighborhood concerns related to safety.
Subsequent public comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period expressed concern with installing a traffic signal and after further traffic signal warrant and safety analyses, it was determined that the proposed traffic signal is not warranted (see Attachment G of this Final EIR). Therefore, the Project no longer proposes a traffic signal at this entryway. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns.
10-4 The commenter states that there is no playground, play area or park for the new residents, so they will be impacting CPE parks and kids will dangerously cross Lampson Avenue to get to Heather Park. Refer to Master Response 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for impacts to existing parks. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns. 10-5 The commenter expresses concerns with VMT, states that the elimination of the current Park and Ride Lot will further increase VMT, and recommends the Project provide a Telework Center. The existing Park-n-Ride that previously occupied the Project site has not been in operation for the past 18 months and when in operation had limited usage. As discussed in
4.15, Transportation, of the Draft EIR, the Project would result in significant VMT impacts with the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.15-1. Mitigation Measure MM 4.15-1 includes implementing CAPCOA strategiessuch as installing broadband infrastructure or other communication technologies that encourages telecommuting and working from home, which would reduce mobile source emission (refer to Page 4.15-19 of the Draft EIR). 10-6 The commenter states that California law requires solar panels on new housing and zero emission electric vehicle charging stations which are not mentioned in the Draft EIR. Contrary to the commenter’s assertions, as part of the Project’s Project Design Features (PDFs), the Project will include solar photovoltaic with the capability to generate up to 1,229,520 kWh/annually (PDF GHG-1) and the Project’s parking areas will be designed to provide electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. At minimum, the number of EV charging stations will equal the Tier 2 Residential Voluntary Measures of the California Green Building Standards
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Code, Section A4.106.8.2.1 (PDF GHG-4) (refer to Page 4.5-6 to 4.5-7 of the Draft EIR) Thus, no revision to the Draft EIR is required.
10-7 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic congestion, pollution, and the proposed density and states that it will be a loss of CPE residents. The commenter does not provide any specific comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. However, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
10-8 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic congestion and accidents on Lampson Avenue.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for safety concerns. 10-9 The commenter requests a study on impact of foot traffic on Lampson Avenue and requests a sidewalk on the north side of Lampson Avenue between Seal Beach Boulevard and Tulip Drive.
A Safety Evaluation was prepared to confirm that the Project would have no safety impacts on public roadways and Project access points (see Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, and Attachment H of this Final EIR). The Safety Evaluation further confirms the analysis and determination in the Transportation Section (Section 4.15) of the Draft EIR that the Project would not result in a safety impact or substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for a summary of the Safety Evaluation and issues relating to pedestrian safety.
Regarding the request for an additional sidewalk on Lampson Avenue between Seal Beach Boulevard and Tulip Drive, the Project would include improvements to sidewalks along the Project’s frontage on Lampson Avenue; areas beyond the Project site’s frontage is not part of the Project boundary or a requirement of the Project Applicant. However, this comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. 10-10 The commenter expresses concerns with safety due to decreased visibility of drivers traveling eastbound on Lampson due to curves in the roadway. Refer to Master Responses 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns and 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 11
?IT_?sTs~
#.9;<==9<>#@=A@.B#.9;<==9<>#@=A@.C
D@EFGHJGKJKLMNMOPD
Q@NQ@.R=SU<VBQ@=SU<V>SWX@Y=@Z#=#.SW@ZA@V[C
H#WW#\.<EWZ]KM^`a
b<Z9@EZ<W@cdbFeHJeKLAf@gh
ijjklmnopqjjqrjtuu
lnnvwxokvpotywjttoqnznjnxo{|}
}vtvzjjznqnxot
ojzjzoxwxoopzovzoznnjponpoovqkpovk myjxvovqyoznjqzovzokjqnxoznvnonjwvjpwjqnvwnto rxvqyjzjtwx
vnnyvt
o
}pjqjjklo
ovovwx
uu
ympznvpovjmwjqwopqznxoqzmmwoqnvpqmjpnxzpjownonzjjvnzjtoqt opz
mpjtnxzkjwtoqnrxo{|}znvnoknxopo
ovqvopvojmojoopxjzqqn
qnz
joopnxoyvzjpjownpozkoqnz
!"$!"%"&'
nvnopopotoqnkoqzny
jqzz(vpqzvwoz
rxopjownpjkozzvwoz
}mnxoyjnjnxozoqjpwjtjqoqnqznovkjmmvtozvpqjoznjzvwoz rxonyjmjzlvtnjzpopokzvwozxwxzztvpn)tvozmjpxvoppozkoqnzvqk qox
jpz
rxonvnoznpyqnjvwvztvqyojovzjzz
oqnjxjzqvqknxoykjqntwxwvpo
v
jnvpq*nzvzjnpyqnjzxojoqnjzq wnpvqzjpnvnjqnjozzoqnxoqook
mjpoxwoz
joopnxopoz+
wnpvqzjpnvnjqjqvtzjqjqyjqovovwxk
vqkjq,voy,onpoonrxoqovpozn
zznjopnxo{|}ztozvqkznvqwouu
tozzqjnovwnyxvnjqojkwvpovzjqv
ovqkznvqwoioqnxovwjm
wnpvqzjpnvnjqnxojqyvynjvwwozznxopjownzno o
ywvpzjyjwvqoown
oopyopzjqxjwvqkponjxvovwvprxzqwpovzozvpqkotvqk-jpovtov jqo
okpjjtvvpntoqnxvovpqzvwoz}mvwjopoqnzwxvqvvpntoqnvqk ovwxxvzvwvp!
/
&!012345&!0"4&
$34%"6&
78:%23$0%'
11-3
11-1
11-2
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
r'11<G<R]rGhr<rGhr'<r1'1rRr
r h< hrR r!rGhr"<G<r'<r#RG$r
%hrGhr&R( Gr<r R#G1]rGh'Gr'<r#RGr <##r 'rGRr"<Gr'1r" r
r'<r <##
G)rGRr!r*R##r&'r+'Gr'r <##rR,#R r'<rRrGhr&R( Gr<G#$rr-.r/0234/5r67869r236 :6;670=6>r/66:8r20r=>0;4:6r?:6@A?26rr=?>B4/5r.0>r348rC>0D6E2F r
%hrGhr1R !GrrGRrH','<#'I#r'<rRJ<G]KrGh)r'r<rGRrGhrGGrR *R##r&'r+'GrRrIRGhr
r'1r&R( GrR,#R r'<$rr*&+r<rRGr'r'<r#RGrRrGh'G " <,rG'< r'1r r1RrRGr 'GrRr#<rGhr<G!<Rr<GRrR!r<hIRhRR1$rrrrGr <## <Gr <GhrR!r'I<#<G)rGRr'r<rRGrRrR!rhRr'1rGhr8?.62LrRrR!rGG$r%h, Ghr<r'r' <1GrRrM'RrIG r*'1#I)r'1rN'Gh]rM'RrGrI#R 1rR 'GrGhRrG Rr<G G<Rr'1rG'< r<rR!G1r1R rR RR1rOrGRRr')r 'rR<rGRRr'Gr< Gh<r<1G<'#r<hIRhRR1r hrGhr1r#<<Gr<rPQrh$rrSh'GTrhR r rR rGhr<r' ' <1GUrrh!r< 'r<rG'< r<rRGrRr)rhR$ r
&'rV$WXJPW
&R#< )rV$WWrG'GrGh)r <##rR<GRr!#G<'<#)r'<rY!<G$rr rGhrR( Gr<
R#G1]rGhr <##rIrRrRRG!<G<rGRr'1(!GrRr< 'r'<]r80rZ3?2r500:r48 [\0/420>4/5^r236r=?>B4/5r.?E4742468_
r
r'11<G<R]r236>6r48r/0r=7?/r.0>r5A682r=?>B4/5r?2r236rC>0D6E2r8426r?/:r236>6r/66:8r20r`6$ r
ShrhRG'rRr'<r <##rIr1!1rRrGhr<1GrRr*R##r&'r+'Gr'1rGh'Gr<rRG <hG$rrShr&R( Gr1rGRrR,<1r'1Y!'G#)rRr<GrR r'<r1$ r
abcdefegbrijcrkledmrnilodrpqje
P$Q$UrrN)1R#R)UrrH%'Gr!RUrr#R r <Gh<r'r'Ghr h'#r'1rGhr R## G1rI)r' "<G<rPVKr*&rGh'Gr#R r G#)]r1< h'r<GRr'r G#)r#R <r'Ghr h'#r <Gh< GhrS r'1rGhr1'<rGRrGhr
#1r
' hr*R!G)r*#!IrGRrGhrR!Gh$rH
0ZrZ477r42r:0r23?2_rrShr'rRr!1R!1r !#,GrRr1'<'r<rGRr #1r
' hr'#R
M'Rr,rRrGhrRGhr<1$rrShrR!Ghr<1rRrM'Rr<rGhr*<G)rRr '#r ' hr'1rGh
'rRr!1R!1r1'<'r<rIh<1rR!rhR$
477r2348r>A/0..r.>0\r236rC>0D6E2rr4/26>.6>6rZ423r236r>A/0..r.>0\r C_
r
GRr 'Gr!Rr <##r,r'r<GrGRr
#1r
' hrI)rR<r1R rM'RUrrGhr Gr1<,<1
'r RG'<rGhr 'Gr!G<#rGhr Gr1<,<1r1r'GrGhr !GR!GrRrN'Ghr GrrGhrGhr 'G
<##r<#)r!r1R h<##r1R rN'Ghr
Gr 'Gr'# ')rrGhr#R Gr#,#r'1rRrRGRrIRGh R RR1r'1rN'#!Gr,!rh'1<rGR '1r!','r'1rr,G!'##)r*'1#I)rrGh '#'1)r<r<<< 'Gr#RR1<r<rGh'Gr''rr1RTGr<' Gr<Grr')rR$r r
11-7
11-4
11-5
11-6
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
1<FQF\grr<#r+1,-./02.,03456-Q7g-18\998<-FQg-1<r#1-:F:;=g#1F\--=1 6g\>g?F1<+F@10ABF-1:\-.F-1\:8,\C<+g\;=><9D<8?F\-=1<gE1:0
r<#rG7g-1H8g<F-r4:11I0JK3L
>8\7g-18\9945;\\1;-F\#-:-QgF\g->8g@g98\-?1F\91g:F?<181-- ;\9<F;-:7F-=1MF:-F\#8-F<F-F1:F\-=1#8\47g-1.:171g\#g:/IAQgF\N-=1QgF\<F\19Q 6g\OF1#-6g\-gPg?ggR6Dg<>g:D1Q,<r11-<8:-=g-F9-=g-<F\1?<7:.F-7F<<-gE1 8-g:H8g1QF<1S0
56-Q7g-17F<<8\F\-g?F9F<-g-F\1@F;1g;g-;=?g:F\g1-1\-F\:r:-1Q97g-1 H8g<F-r-1g-Q1\-0A+1g<<rTU9-=g-1:\V-7E.g\-=11F:-Q8;=7g-1.F-7F<<8\7\ WgQ,:\X@1KKQ1<FE1<r:;1\gF0X::-g-1g?@1.-=1;1\-1F@F1;g\;\-gF\F-.?8- \<r8\-F<F-1g;=1:1g-=16-11-g\-=1\F-7F<<#7\1g-=1-?-=U\7g\ gY1<\8-X@1\81:.1Mg;1?g-F\#g\g<1gr1MF:-F\#:F#\F9F;g\-9<F\#,?<1Q9-=1 1:F1\-:9DZ0
[=11MF:-F\#:-QgF\:F\DZg1\-g1H8g-19-=1@<8Q1:9gF\71=g@11;1F@1 -=1:1,g:--7r1g:069g-=17g-1=g:F:1\F\-\1=Q1g\F-=g:;Q18,--=1 #gg#1:9-=1:0U9r8g8\999Q-=F:,]1;-.F-7F<<?1Q8;=7:10[=g-F:\-9gF --=11:F1\-:7=g1g<1grFQ,g;-19Q:-Q7g-18\990
U\gF-F\.71\-7g\-:-Q7g-18\999Q-=1]1;-;\-gQF\g-F\#-=1DF-r961g< P1g;=V:71<<\-=1\-=:F19WgQ,:\\1g-=1;8@1.gEg.O1g^g\V:D8@10
_`aba`acdefhicjkalcimd`cndopqstu
[=1;F-r9W:X<gQF-:;g\\-,@F1g\r:1@F;1:9-=F:,]1;-1M;1,-7g-1N><1\6-g-1 vg-1DQ,g\rS0[=1r,<g\--F1F\-g<<:1@F;1:9-=1DF-r961g<P1g;=0
wajxyj`zefh_dc{ynnaddayf
[=1XW|D98\-=F:,]1;--?1F\;\:F:-1\-}~ ~
~
~
~
~~
0[=1gF?g:1F::-F<<-=11g\
-=1,<g\1:g\=1<F;,-1:g1:-F<<9<rF\#0^g--199g;-.-=1?g:1\7=8:1:g<<?g\;=1:9 -=1:1@F;1:g\F:-=1ZQ1#1\;rOF:g:-168,,-g1g9g<<9:8-=1\DX.:F-=g:Q1 FQ,-g\;1-gr-=g\?g;EF\LJ20
5C\61,-1Q?13L.323/.-=1XW|D@-1-1H8F1-=1DF-r-:8?QF-g<<F:;1-F\grg;-F\:
1<g-1-8:F\#Z<1Q1\-6F-1NIWgQ,:\X@1\81.6F-1NWg81<gESg\6F-1L2 N2/2K2Ig-1<<gSA--=1XW|D91@F178\-F<:8;=-FQ1g:-=1>1\1g<g\F:1@F:1-=1 ;F-r@18<1:-=1XW|D1-1QF\g-F\0611,0I0L2KJ0
!"!$ % $& '&((!' )*
11-12
11-7
(CONT.)
11-8
11-9
11-10
11-11
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
%/zDOYdozYOzOz
d !
dz"#Y!O$z
d"YdozYOzY&dz"'($Oz(
O)d#Yz"ozOYzY&dzOY&d
$zYOz#O'd
*d+O
dzY&dz%/z+O
z
dD!d,-
z
.z012345z6377z85z95:;395<z10z=77z>=75>z<14;?502>z21z=7592z2@5z95>3<502>z1Az2@5zB95>5045z1Az2@5 8=>5z=0<z1Az=39B192z013>5-zzC #&z"zOY!#dzddo$zYOz
z,!Y&zY&dz"oEz012zF;>2zA39>2G23?5z8;H59>E
8;2z=77z>;8>5:;502z8;H59>z055<z21z85z0123A35<z=0<z>3I0z1AAz10z32z2@=2z2@5Hz@=J5z95=<z32z=0<z=95 =6=95z1Az2@5zB95>5045z1Az2@5zK1302zL1945>zM9=3030IzN=>5z=0<z1Az2@5z013>5z3>>;5>- z
z
PQRSQzTUQVzUWXzPQRSQzZS[zTUQV
\]^_Ez`-a`z_5495=2310bzz.9819zc=9ez=0<z.9819z\1Izc=9ez=95z012z;0<59z2@5zF;93><342310z1Az2@5zf32H 1Azg1>z.7=?321>Ez8;2z;0<59z2@5zF;93><342310z1Az2@5zf32Hz1Azh5=7zN5=4@-zzM@5zf32Hz1Azh5=7zN5=4@ @=>z=z75=>5z632@[email protected]?Hzf19B>z1Az]0I30559>zA19z2@5z7=0<zA19z2@1>5z261zB=9e>ziz012z2@5zf32Hz1A g1>z.7=?321>jzz.9819zc=9ezkz.9819z\1Izc=9ez@=J5z05J59z8550z;0<59z2@5zF;93><342310z1Az2@5z432Hz1A g1>z.7=?321>Ez>1z21z73>2z2@5?z=>zf32Hz1Azg1>z.7=?321>zB=9e>zlmzWSnzpSQQqpnrzzM@5zf32Hz1Azh5=7 N5=4@z<5J571B5<z2@1>5z261zB=9e>z=0<z?=302=30>z2@5?-zzs9-zL9=0ezg=>t71Ez=zA19?59zA1;9G259? 41;0437?5?859zA91?zfc]Ez05I123=25<z632@[email protected]?Hzf19B>z1Az]0I30559>z=0<z2@5zN=>5 B59>10057zA19z.9819zc=9ez21z85z75=>5<z8Hz=0<zA19z2@5zf32Hz1Azh5=7zN5=4@- z
.9819zc=9ezN1;0<=9Hz=0<z2@5z=<<32310z1AzauzA552zA19zB=9e30I .<<50<;?z.9819zc=9ezg=H1;2bzz<3=I9=?>z>2=25z2@5zv5w3>230Iz0192@zA5045zx=710Iz2@5zc91F542 0192@590z81;0<=9HyEz=<F=4502z21z.9819zc=9eEzv21z85z95?1J5<-zzM@5Hz6=02z2@3>zauzA552z<5<34=25< 21z2@5zf32Hz1Azg1>z.7=?321>-zzM@5zf32Hz1Azh5=7zN5=4@z@=>z2@5z75=>5z10z.9819zc=9ez=0<z.9819z\1I c=9e-zz\5<34=25z2@=2zauz21z2@5zf32Hz1Azg1>z.7=?321>z@=>z41?B734=2310>z2@=2z6377z950<59z32z012 A5=>3875-zz&"Yz+d#dz!$zY&dz$O Y&d
z*O o"
zO+zY&dzO!YzO
#d$z
"!! z
"$dz"oz#"OY
"
*!Y
"
!zO
z#"(
!#!O $z*dz
d'ODdoz,!Y&O Yzd
(
d$$z(d
'!$$!Oz+
O'zY&dz
'z/O
($zO+
!dd
$z"ozY&dz
"$dz/O''"od
zz^2z3>zB9=I?=234z1Az2@5z<5J571B59z21zI3J5z;BzauzA552z1A >B=45zA19z=<<32310=7zB=9ez=0<zc91F542zB=9e30Iz8;2z32z95:;395>z5wB95>>zB59?3>>310z1Az2@5zN=>5 f1??=0<59z=0<z.9?Hzf19B>z1Az]0I30559>-zzO,dDd
z!+zY&dz,!$&zYOzoddozY&"YzzYOzY&dz%C
'z"ozOYzY&dz/!YzO+zO$z"'!YO$zzY&"Yz'! &Yz*dz+d"$!*d-zzM@3>zauz61;7<zI1z=z710Iz6=Hz21 @57Bz.hzB=9e30I-zzzz.72590=257HEz2@=2zauz41;7<z=7>1zz85z41?B75257Hz>5B=9=25z=0<z=J=37=875z21 812@z.hz=0<z2@5zc91F542Ez632@z2@5z5w3>230Iz81;0<=9HzA5045ze5B2z302=42z19z30zB7=45-zz^2z61;7< =7>1z95:;395z=0z5029=045zA91?z2@5zB=9ez50<z1Az2@5z<93J56=Hz3021z.9819zc=9eEz05=9z2@5zA357<- z
nXSSQzllW[zmUpq
zzM@5zB91F542z61;7<z85z>@192z1Az?55230Iz2@5z41??10z=95=z95:;395?502 8Hz
Eu`uz>Az<;5z21z95:;5>2>zA91?z2@5zf32Hz1Azg1>z.7z95I=9<30Iz2@5z<5<34=2310z1Az2@5z0192@597HauG A2z>293Bz1Az7=0<z=8;2230Iz.9819zc=9ez=0<z.9819z\1Izc=9eEz6@34@z41?B93>5>z=0z=95=z1A =BB91w3?=257HzaEuuuz>Az1AzB91B592Hz21z2@5zf32H-zz^Az2@3>z=95=z3>z<5<34=25<z21z2@5zf32HEz2@50z2@5 B91F542z6377z85z;0=875z21z?552z2@5z41??10z=95=z95:;395?502z854=;>5z41?B73=045z632@z2@3> 95:;395?502z61;7<zB@H>34=77HzB9547;<5z410>29;42310z1Az2@5zB91F542z=2z2@5z<50>3235>z=77165<z=0< 632@z2@5z41045>>310>zB91B1>5<-zz.>z>2=25<z=81J5Ez<55<30Iz2@=2zauz1AzB91B592Hz21z2@5zN=>5Ez35E .9?Hzf19B>z1Az]0I30559>z?3I@2z85z?195zA5=>3875z21z=441?B73>@z2@5zI1=7z1AzB91J3<30Iz?195 B=9e30I11-12
(CONT.)
11-13
11-14
11-15
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
µ
_jµujªµ
"-"µ8B"Lµ8B"LWª^µ`uaµBªuµbBacµ^jdµªµµdBaeµf_jµg"hjµiWkkµg"lWuj kWgkjµgjujd"WBªµªªjWªdµiW_µ"-"µ8B"Lm"-"µn^µ8B"Lµµ_jµª"_opµµ_Bµ"jqW"jdµ_j gj"WddWªµrµ_jµ-BdjµBªuj"µBªuµ_jµ"aµs"gdµrµtª^Wªjj"dµµuµ_BoµµvµWdµ_jµwBdj _Bµ_BdµdBjuµ_Bµ_jµgB"LµiWkkµkdjµBµdªdjµBªuµgjªµBµdª"WdjeµBªuµ_Bµ_j"jr"jµ_j"j iWkkµ-jµªµlj"ªW^_µgB"LWª^o
_jµ8Bddx_"µ^Bjdyµµz{||µ}~µµ
µµ_jaµij"jµWªdBkkjuµ-aµ`µBªuµ_jµ`b
rkLdoµµvrµ_jµgB"LWª^µkµWdµ"jljueµ_Bµ^BjµiWkkµªµkª^j"µ-jµªjjddB"aµBªuµiWkkµ-jµ"jlju -aµwBdjµgj"dªªjko
µ
µ
8"gdjuµgB"LdµiW_Wªµ_jµ8"hjµB"jµdBkkµiW_µujrWªjuµdjdµµLWudµiWkkµ"ddµbBgdªµµdj jB_j"µ8B"Loµµoµµ"ddWª^µbBgdªµWdµ
eµjljªµiW_µ_jµ"BrrWµkW^_µµ oµ_jaµªjjuµ
g"lWujµ"jµgB"LµdgBjµr"µ_jW"µiªµ_Wku"jªµBªuµ¡oµªµWgBµjB_j"µ8B"Loµµ"µgB"LdµB"j ijkkµdjuµ-aµµs8tµLWudµBªuµrBWkWjdµµBLjµB"jµrµ_jµªjjudµrµa"µiªµ"jdWujªdoµµnª¢µdjj "µgB"LµBdµa"µdkWªµµWªBujqBjµgB"LµdgBjo
µ
£¤¤¥¦µ§¤¨
©~µµ}~{µ«~
|µµ}
¬µµvªdWujµ_jµg"hjµ
Bª¢µgWLµgµLWudµªµbBgdªµljªjc
"µBµjB_j"µ8B"Lµ®¯°±²³´µµ³µ±³ µ±
°µ
µ ±µ
±
µµ±´±µ²¯´´µ
µ±µ³´±µµ²³´µµ
µ ±µ
µ¯°±µ
³
µ³µ ±µ±
°µ
µ ±µ
±
µ´¯
±µµ ±µ²¯´´µ ³±µµ±µ ±µ µ¯°±µ³
°µ ±µ³
±³µ
±³ ±
µµ³
°´±±
µ
³¯
µ² ³µ ³µ±±µ³´´±°µ±³°µ³
µ
±µ°±µµ ±µ³
±
±
µ³¯°±
µ³´
µ ³µ
± µ
µ
³°²³µ
µ± ¯´±µ
³ µ¯
µ ±µ²³´´µ
µ ±µ µ¯°±µ
±µ
±±µ³¯
µ²³´¯
µ°¯±µ³µ± µµ µ
±³´´µ°
µ±±µ³
µ²³´±
µ
µ±³ ±
µ
³
°´±±
µ³´
µ³
µµ! ±µ³
±³µ¯µ±
µ
³¯
±°#µµ
±µµ³
µ²³´¯
µ¯µ ±
±µ¯µ
²³µµ
µµ ³±µµ²³´µµ ±µ±
°µ
µ±¯ ±
µ±³ ±
µ
µµ³
°´±±
µµ$µ%µµ ±µ´
²³´´µ³
°µ
¯
µ
³
&¯ µµ! ¯µ¯µ³µ°³
±
µ
± µ
µ
³°²³µ
µ± ¯´±µ´±µ³´
±
±°±
¯³
'(
µ
µ³
µ³µ±³ ±
µµ)± ¯´±µ±*¯¯
µ±¯ ±
µ+
µ,³
µ
µ+
µ
µ,³
µµ³±
³µ
¯
µ
µ
µ³
µ°±µµ ±µ
±±
±µ
µ ±µ±
±
µ°¯¯°±
µµ
±
±
´µ³
µ
µ ±
°
¯±
µ³±µ³µ'(
µ³µ±³ ±
µ®
±± µµ$
µ$µ³µ³µ ±µ´¯
µ³µ±³ ±
µ
¯
µµ
µ
¯
µµ³
°
±
±µ¯µ±
±µ
µ³
µ.//0.1234µµ
µ´±
µ¯
µ ±µ ³±µ³µ°
µ¯
µ ±µ³
µ¯µ³µ³
±µ±
±µ³
±µ¯
µ
µ ±µ°
µ³
µ³
°µ²¯´´µ±µ³¯
µ³µ'(
µ
¯
µ¯
µ
µ
µ± µµ! ¯µ¯³¯
³µ³±°µ³
µ¯
¯°±
µ³µ ³µ¯
±
±¯
µ
µ,5µ
´µ
¯
µµ
µ
¯
µ³µ±³ ±
µ®
±± µ
67µ29µ:39.;0
µ
<=>?@AµCDEF@ADµGHEEDIJHKMDKADNµµO
±
±µ¯±µ
µ ±µµ+´³¯µ,µµ ±µ
%±µ¯±#µ
¯
¯µP#µµ´±µ ³
µQµ¯
± Rµ5±
µ²¯ µ¯
±
µ´³
¯
µ³
°µ
¯
µ³´´µµ´¯
µ¯µ²¯´´µ³±
±µ ³
µQµ¯
µµ$
µ ±µ
¯
µ
µµ ±µSTTUUµ$
²°VµµX³±´´³µYµµ+´µZ´°µ¯
³±µµ³µ
°µ[\µ¯
±µ³
°µ ³µ¯µ
µ³µ
°µ°³ µµ]¯±
µ
³
&¯µ³
°µ°¯³
±µ ³µ¯µ%µ ±µ²³
11-20
11-16
11-17
11-18
11-19
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
HR]hr}#-8H:;<=>?H<@H@H:@AB<H?@HC@#A:?D]hr}?E@D8H?@HH A:?DEFr}?E@D8H?R
GIJKLMNOPNLIQSNTULVTQWNLSXJYYSZTP[\J^WTQ_`WLQTJI\J^WTQ_a bcdefgijkllkgmnopqcnedsetfufdtjqoivflldfcnjuqcnedwetndgoefucgenxfyjqoizujxnif{|~ zguncdzgfdsgcncufgdfjkdzgfdzognczguncncetfcjuetyfdejucfujketf zuj
feytntndytfufnendetfcjndnfdeyncyncetgetfozddjoxfeyjnddqfdcjndfgcimjuf zguncbcgiinenjcsetfufyjqoivfofddifmgcijczguddfcnjudgufmjufonfopcjeejtgxf tnoiufcytjyjqoiqdfzgudetgezqedofdddeufddjcetfzguynetncetfuj fegcigodjjc
fgetfugubcgiinenjcsytnofmgcpdfcnjudyjuetfdfigpdsetfufyjqoimjdeonfopvfofdd ifmgcigezfgeugxfoenmfdncetfmjucncgciogefgkefucjjcdfcnjudzgunccffidyjqoi godjvfofddetgcetjdfjkejyctjmfgcidncofkgmnoptjmfufdnifcedqedenoomjufetgc{ zguncdzgfdzfuqcnefgufyfoogygufjketfzguncifmgcidjcetfyfdefucdnifjktf tjzdgejddmjjugojcjcefnejtjdfjcijdyfufjunncgoopvqnoekjudfcnjudynetjcf zguncdzgfzfuqcnejyetgeetfptgxfkgmnonfdetfufsetfzguncndcjedqkknnfcegcietfp zgujcjcefnejgcincjddmjjusmqtejetftguncjketfufdnifcedjkjddmjjuytj jkefckncigudzguengoopvojncetfnuiunxfygpdtfmgcgfmfcejketftjzdgejddmjju tgdejoietfufdnifcedejcjezguncvgjketfjcijdbendcjegzofgdgcedneqgenjcgcijcfej gxjnincetnduj
fe
JJQ
ILLW R
FH><H
etufdtjoivpfdogcgoodkjuufmjxgojkgooeuffdetuffjketjdfeuffdguf ufiyjjidgciyftgxfufgdjcejvfonfxfetfpgufjjcuffdbc|lszjooj~ejjg gcndefukqoojkdffidejetfmjjctgegccndefujcegncfidffidkujmmgcpzogcedncoqinc{ euffxgunfenfdsjcfjkytntygdufiyjjidzjcufequcsetfdfdffidyfufzogcefigoojxfuetf jqceupjdenkcjegoojketfufiyjjidffioncdinfigdetfpyfufcjencetfnucgenxftgvnege fiyjjidgufcjecgenxfejetndgufgsdjetfptgiejvfzogcefindtgcigmfjceujoofi ytfufetfdfdffioncdyfufzogcefigcindtgcigmfygdojgefigeetgevqnoincsdjnend jcfnxgvofetfpzogcefietfmwetjdfeuffdgufgzzujnmgefop{pfgudjoiytntknedncynet etfgfjketjdfdffioncdgcidtjqoicjevfqeijyccfeuffijfdcjeojjgdnknendijnc yfoosvqeetfjetfueyjgufkncfunncgoopetfufyfuf{euffdsvqejketfminfigcicjyetf etnuigzzfgudejvfjcnedygpjqesvqeetfeyjetgegufijncyfoosdtjqoivffze
!
"
$%tfnetfcdynoovfjcetfdfjcikojjujjcfygcedej guupujfunfdqzgkontejkdegnud&'()*+),.*/0123,4(*567
9cijkjmmfced
11-20
(CONT.)
11-21
11-22
11-23
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
6AL_juA$
/1L234/15789:A3;8uu9u<A=365Au6>96?1@B1CD85961C
E315L;66?>5=FA88>188A<A;3GHC6
IjFJAK6L>155Au6C1u6MAHNO@136MAB5=C1u;31JAK6
PQRSTUV
WXYZ[\]^[`^aYbacb`[cZ\]d`Zc\eYYZbZ`c]f^[gZchYa[]dZ\f[ai`b]kl`]m\naag^]\ao` uj5FA3C@3156M9Cp1Kj5Au64/MAHNOC66Ap6MA3Aq988FAu:A3<A1@$=A1=8A=A3 M1jC9u<ju96r$sju96Ct$vwx$y4z1qA:A36MA?8C1=31JAK6s${3AC9pAu6C4 |}~
I66A3Aj93A5Au6rpAuC96?F1ujCy9C$$=3G9u<C=KAC4 /MA;31JAK6=31:9pAC{{C=KAC4
N@6MA?<1616MACAu913K15=1uAu69uC6Ap1@@5989AC=3G9u<<1AC61w$C=KAC4 /MA>96?1@B1CD85961C3Aj93Aps{wC=KACqM9KM9CC5365GAC@13M==9A33AC9pAu6C upuA9<MF13C4
d`]^]`Z\][XZch]af^bg^\o^cXf`afn`^\fa\\Zn`Zc]adae\Zch^c]d`Xacm]oebd K3AF1j6=3G9u<969C8C163?9u<61=jCM=A1=8A9u61jC9u<=jF89K63uC=136691u61 8ACCAu6MAuAAp@13:AM9K8AC4z1qA:A36MA3A9CU =jF89K63uC=136691u1uB5=C1u1u8? 1uIA8
AKM
8:pup1u
88A?
9AqI63AA64/MAuA3AC6FjCC61==A36MAHNO9C
4
598ACq8G9u<p9C6uKA
4598AC9Cu16AtK68?qM61uAq1j8pK883AC1uF8Aq8G9u< p9C6uKA49:Au6MA8KG1@=jF89K63uC=136691u6MA1u8?q?61KKACC6MA;31JAK6C96Aq988 FAF?K3C1?1jKuAt=AK6A:A3?=A3C1uqM1Kup39:A61M:AK34/M9C9uK3ACAC =3G9u<pA5up4E13At5=8A1uAFAp3115=365Au6q988M:A4=3G9u<C=KAC4N@ K1j=8A3Au6CjKMu=365Au6upAKMMCK3}}
}
}
Nupp9691u6MA3A9C6MA=3G9u<pA5up@315D
I7qM9KMu1qjCAC6MAAt9C69u<=3G9u<
8164
MAu6MA;31JAK69CK15=8A6Ap6M6=3G9u<816q988KACA61At9C6upAtKACCD I7
=3G9u<q98863?61jCA>188A<A;3GHC6Cq9881:A3@81q=3G9u<@3156MA;31JAK696CA8@4
}
!~
"!}
}}"#%
}&}'
(d`c]d`abeo`c][`Y`[\]a)^*^Zn^n`f^[gZchaYY
\Z]`+,]d`X^[`[`Y`[[Zch]a]d`\][``]\aY
>188A<A;3GHC6@13F16MD
I7up;31JAK61:A3@81q=3G9u<4>;H9Cu16=3G9u<816@13 6M6AtKACC9:A63@@9KupqAp1u16qu6u1389GA6MA9u63jC91u9u611j3uA9<MF13M11p4N6 q9889u6A3@A3Aq96M1j3F9896?61=3G9u@31u61@1j3M15ACup6MA 1@1j3C63AA6C4
MAuA:A36MA3A9CuKK9pAu61uB5=C1uFA6qAAu>up8AFA33?upzA6MA3B5=C1u <A6CF81KGAp1@@66M1CA6q19u6A3CAK691uCup63@@9K9C31j6App1quN31uq11p6115u? b^[\haZch]aaY^\]Zc]dZ\[`\Z`c]Z^nc`Zhda[daa-d`[`]d`\f``nZoZ]Z\.0ofdkd^]m\ M1qqAGu1q6MA3A9CuKK9pAu6LMj<A9uK3ACA9u63@@9K9u@31u61@5?M15A4
;<A$4
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
T_is¨¨
#¨
.#s¨9_TT¨DO_
R¨DST
_UD_Ts¨VRW_OX¨R#YS_R#D#O
¨¨ZOi#¨
.#¨VR[#i
¨_¨
iDVT#
#\]¨
.#R#¨9_TT¨^#¨O¨VVR
SO_
_#¨
¨\[S
¨R¨_OiR##¨VRW_OX]¨`a¨bcde¨faag¨h`¨
jklmnolpnmqr¨otu¨vwpxnmq¨ywzn{nonu|}¨
¨
~O¨\\_
_O]¨ec¨h`¨a¨d¨a¨f
`e¨dhf¨de¨ec¨ae¨`he¨dg¨ec¨g`¨ea¨¨ ¨
.#¨.R
X#¨U¨VRW_OX¨9_TT¨^#¨\SDV#\¨O¨
.#¨R#_\#O
¨U¨TT#X#¨RW¨
¨O\¨
.
¨_¨
O
¨R_X.
¨¨.#¨R[#i
¨O##\¨
¨VR_\#¨\#YS
#Ts¨UR¨_
¨9O¨VRW_OX¨O##\¨
¨
¨
¨¨¨¨ ¡¢¢¨
£¤¥¦¨¨§s\RTXs¦¨¨
#R¨RSOUU¦¨¨UT9¨9_
._O¨O¨#R
.#O¨i.OO#T¨O\¨
.#O¨iTT#i
#\¨^s¨O¨
¨¨¨
¨ ¨
¨
¨
¨¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
9_
._O¨
.#¨ !"¨O\¨
.#O¨\R_O¨
¨
.#¨ZT\¨$Oi.¨SO
Rs¨TS^¨
¨
.#¨S
.¨¨¨
%ab¨bh¨he¨ga¨ecde&¨¨.#R#¨R#¨O¨SO\#RXRSO\¨iST#R
¨R¨\R_OX#¨V_V#¨
¨ZT\¨$Oi.¨
TOX¨'DVO¨(#¨O¨
.#¨OR
.¨_\#¨¨.#¨S
.¨_\#¨U¨'DVO¨_¨
.#¨_
s¨U¨)#T¨"#i.¨
O\¨
.#R#¨R#¨O¨SO\#RXRSO\¨\R_OX#¨V_V#¨^#._O\¨SR¨.D#¨ *h¨ech`¨
a¨a+¨ec¨ae¨¨he¨bhec¨ec¨
a¨a+¨,-&¨
¨
)
RD¨9
#R¨RSOUU¨9_TT¨O##R¨DW#¨_
¨
¨ZT\¨$Oi.¨^s¨X_OX¨\9O¨'DVO¦¨¨
.#¨i#O
#R¨
\__\#R¨iO¨iO
_O¨
.#¨9
#R¨SO
_T¨
.#¨i#O
#R¨\__\#R¨#O\¨
¨
.#¨iS
S
¨UR¨§#
.#R¨)
/¨¨
.#O¨
.#¨9
#R¨9_TT¨_DVTs¨RSO¨\9O._TT¨\9O¨§#
.#R¨)
¨09
#R¨T9s¨##W¨
.#¨T9#
¨
T##T1¨O\¨X¨O
¨^
.¨~RO9\¨O\¨§2#TOS
¨(#OS#¨.#\_OX¨
9R\¨3S¨O\¨¨
##O
STTs¨O\T#^#RRs/¨¨
.#R#¨TR#\s¨_¨_XO_U_iO
¨
¨
¨
¨4¨¨
5 ¨67
¨
¨¨
Os¨DR#¨¨¨
¨
R#T_D_ORs¨§s\RTXs¨$#VR
]¨8:]¨V¨£¦¨¨;
6¨
¨<
¨<
6
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨;
¨=>¨?@A¨¨B¨
¨
¨O
]¨_
¨#O\¨SV¨O¨ZT\¨$Oi.¨3TU¨TS^¨_O¨
.#¨TW#¨¨¨
¨
§s\RTXs¨C¨9
#R¨YST_
s¦¨¨¨##¨EF£¨
3RSO\¨9
#R¨RSOUU¦¨¨iOO#i
_OX¨
¨
RD¨\R_O¨
¨3S¨USO\¨
¨^#¨_OU#_^T#¨\S#¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨<
¨
¨
¨
<
G¨¨
¨ ¨
¨
¨H6
¨I
¨6
¨
¨
URD¨)O¨J_#X¨
¨)O
¨"R^R¨K¨)¨T¨3¨¨#DVTs##¨
T\¨S¨
.
¨_U¨
.
¨T_O#¨^T9]¨_
¨
9_TT¨
W#¨S
¨¨YSR#¨D_T#1¨
;
6¨
¨¨<
¨
¨¨>
¨
@ ¨¨¨
¨>
¨¨¨
¨
6¨¨
¨L<
¨
6
A¨¨?
M¨¨¨N¨
¨
5 ¨P
¨
¨
¨ ¨
¨6< ¨
¨
¨¨
RSO¨\9O¨'DVO¨(#¨¨FF¨¨DR#¨T_W#Ts¨i#OR_¨¨(¨
#\¨^#]¨
.#¨i#O
#R¨\__\#R¨iO¨
iO
_O¨_
]¨^S
¨OTs¨SO
_T¨_
¨R#i.#¨§#
.#R¨)
R##
¨O\¨
.#O¨_
¨9_TT¨X¨\9O¨§#
.#R¨¨
¨^
.¨
~RO9\¨O\¨§2#TOS
¨(#OS#]¨#Qi#R^
_OX¨O¨TR#\s¨#Q_
_OX¨_XO_U_iO
¨UT\_OX¨
VR^T#D¨UR¨
.#¨R#_\#O
¨U¨¨
¨
.#¨#Q_
_OX¨
RD¨\R_O¨_O¨¨R#¨O
¨\#YS
#¨UR¨
.#¨TSD#¨U¨R_O¨9#¨.#¨R#i#_#\¨
.##¨V
¨
9¨s#R¨¨)¨UR¨
.#¨9
#R¨.¨R_#O¨_O
¨O#¨.D#¨O\¨_
¨.¨iD#¨SV¨
¨
.#¨
XRX#¨\R¨U¨
.#R¨¨~U¨sS¨\\¨RSOUU¨URD¨
._¨VR[#i
]¨_
¨9_TT¨^#¨DSi.¨9R#¨¨.
¨_¨
O
¨U_R¨
¨
.#¨R#_\#O
¨9.¨R#¨TR#\s¨_DVi
#\¨URD¨
RD¨9
#R¨RSOUU¨
¨
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Í¢¸ÍÃÍÍ¢Íâ͢#ÍâÍ.99Í9#Í¢DÍNYd¢Íd¢#¢oÍ¢DÍz¢{Í9Í |}~Í}~
Í}ÍÍ}ÍÍ
}ÍÍ~
Í}~Í}Í}Í~~Í}~Í~
Í}Í
Í
Í
Í¡£¤Í¥¦§¨Í¥© ª Í«¬®¯°±Í
²DÍd¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢Íd¢Í¶·Í{Í·dÍ9Í¢DͶYd¢Í¹d¶¢Íâͺ»µÍ ¼¢¢Í½¢Íz#¶{¾¿ÍͲD{ͶµÍ¢Í¢Í͢͵µÍ·dÍ9Í¢DÍz¢{Í9ͼµÍÀdD¿ÍÍÍ Í
Í
Í
Á¦ÂĦÍÅ¡£¤Í ÍÆĪª Ä£Í
²DÍ´³ÇzÍ9.Í¢DͶYd¢Í¢ÍÈÍd¢¢ÉÍÍÊËÍÌÍ Í
Í
ÊÌ
ÍËÍ
ÊÍÌÍ
Í
Í
Í
Í
!
Í"$Í%&'()Í* Í" Í $+ Í
$Í$Í" Í" $+ Í$¿ÍͲDÍÍÈÍÍ¢µµÍ
¢DÍÍ¢DͶµÍÍDµd¶¢ÍÍ¢µµÍ9µ{o¿ÍÍ,¢¢Í9Í9d¢¸Í¢DÍÈÍÃÍD.͵µÍ ÈdDÍ9Í¢DÍ·dÍÍÍ¢DÍ-#od{Í/¢Í¼.¶¶¢ÍÍ9͵µÍ9Í.¢DÍz´¸Í Í¢ÍDÍ#Í#¶¢dÍ¢{Í¢DÍÈd0ÍÍ1234¿ÍÍÍ
Í
56ͼ¶¢#ÈÍ71¸Í7478¸Í¢DÍ´³ÇzÍ·¢Í¢Í:.Í¢DÍz¢{Í¢Í.È#¢ÍµµÍd¢{Í d¢Íµ¢Í¢Í;.oÍ-µ#¢Í¼¢Í<ͺ=<<>ͳ#¶Í´·.¸Íͼ¢Í3ͺ³.µÍN0¾ÍÍ ¼¢Í14ͺ>484?>4@=ÍA¢µµ¾B͢͢DÍ´³ÇzÍ9Í·ÃÍ.¢µÍ.dDÍ¢#ÍÍ¢DÍ»µÍNÍÍ ·ÍÍ¢DÍd¢{Í·.µÍ¢DÍ´³ÇzÍ¢#¢¿ÍͼͶ¿Í=¿14?2¿ÍÍÍÍÍCEFGÍHGFGIJIKGÍLHÍ KMGÍOMPPIOGQÍÍRÍSTUVÍWÌ ÍÌÍÍX
ÊÍZÌÊ
ÍÌ ÍÌÍÌÍT[\
Í\]ZÌÍ ÍÌÍ
ÌÍÌ
ÍÌÍZ[Í
ËÍÌÍSTUVÍËÍWÊ
¿Í
Í
´Í¢dÍõµÍÈÍ:.Í͵µÍµÍd.#¢Í¢Íµ¢Í¢DÍ¢Í9Í¢DͶdÍ9Í¢DÍ ÈÍÍ9Ͷ¢Í¿ÍÍ^
ZÍÍÌÊZÍ
ÍÌÍ
Í
ÊÌÍÌÍ ¸Í¢ÍY.¢Í9¢?¢#Í
È.{¸ÍÈ.¢ÍµµÍ.È:.¢ÍÈ.{ÍÍ¢ÍÈÍ¢9ÍÍoÍ99Í͢͢D¢Í¢D{ÍD·ÍÍ ¢ÍÍÍÃÍ9Í¢DͶdÍ9Í¢DÍ_¢Í`dͲoÍÀÍÍ9Í¢DÍÍ.¿Í Í
Í
Á¦aĦÍb¡¦cÍ¡£¤ÍÁ¦aĦÍeÄfÍb¡¦cÍ
/-g¸Í=¿1=Ígd¢hÍÍ´ÈÍN0ÍÍ´ÈÍ/oÍN0ÍÍ¢Í.Í¢DÍY.d¢Í9Í¢DÍ z¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢¸ÍÈ.¢Í.Í¢DÍY.d¢Í9Í¢DÍz¢{Í9ͼµÍÀdD¿ÍͲDÍz¢{Í9ͼµÍ ÀdDÍDÍ͵ÍâDÍ¢DÍ´#{Íz¶Í9Í-oÍ9Í¢D͵Í9Í¢DÍ¢ÃͶ0ÍiÍ¢Í ¢DÍz¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢ÉÍÍ´ÈÍN0ÍjÍ´ÈÍ/oÍN0ÍD·Í·ÍÈÍ.Í¢DÍ Y.d¢Í9Í¢DÍd¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢¸Í͢͵¢Í¢D#ÍÍz¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢Í¶0Í Í£ÄÍ ¨Ä¦¦¨®ÍͲDÍz¢{Í9ͼµÍÀdDÍ·µ¶Í¢DÍ¢ÃͶ0ÍÍ#¢Í¢D#¿ÍÍ,¿Í`0Í ³kµ¸ÍÍ9#Í9.?¢#Íd.dµ##ÈÍ9#ÍzN-¸Ío¢¢ÍâDÍ¢DÍ´#{Íz¶Í9Í -oÍÍ¢DÍÀͶµÍ9Í´ÈÍN0Í¢ÍÈ͵ÍÈ{ÍÍ9Í¢DÍz¢{Í9ͼµÍ ÀdD¿Í
Í
´ÈÍN0ÍÀ.{ÍÍ¢DÍ¢Í9Í14Í9¢Í9Ͷ0oÍ l}ÍlmÍn~Í~pqÍÍ~r~
Í
~}Í}Í5}s
rÍÍ}}Ít~rÍ}Ínu}Í
}Ím~pvÍ~u~}ÍÍlmÍn~Í5Ím}Í}}BÍÍw}pÍ~Í Í14Í9¢Í
d¢Í¢Í¢DÍz¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢¿ÍͲDÍz¢{Í9ͼµÍÀdDÍDÍ¢D͵ÍÍ´ÈÍN0Í ~ÍlmÍrÍn~ÍÍ}~}Í~ÍxyÍÍ}Íz¢{Í9ͳʹµ#¢ÍDÍd#¶µd¢Í¢D¢Í
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
TT©itti©©©t
#Tt.©©9DOS©UVWXV©YZ©SDV©Z[\SDV]W©^[\W_O]`©[U©SDV©a[YWS©b[]XVZ©9]OYWYWc© dOZV©OW_©XOWW[S©O]^YS]O]Ye`©[]©XOf]YXY[\Ze`©^V©]Vg[hV_©jYSD[\S©Vkf]VZZ©fV]gYZZY[W©U][g©SDV© l]g`©m[]fZ©[U©nWcYWVV]Z©OW_©SDV©dOZV©m[ggOW_V]o©©p©©qi rs
u©©vt©twtTqti©©rwt©
xq©yz©tt©©q
ut©i©
T©q
i{©
©|i}tu©q
i{r©#x©©it~xit©tqit©
qtis©©vt©
t©ss
ti©
©is©iq©©
rtti.©©[jVhV]©YU©SDV`©jYZD©S[©
©©©©©©©OW_©W[S©SDV©mYS`©[U©[Z©leOgYS[Z©©SDOS©gYcDS©^V©UVOZY^eV.©©© ¡© xT©r©
©Tr©
©©vtTq©¢£¤©q
i{r.©©©©Tti
tT¥©¦§© ¡©uxT©
T©©#t©usqTttT©
tq
i
t©
©
w
T
#Tt©©#v©¢£¤©
©vt©|i}tu¥©v©vt©tr©#x
i©tut©{tq©
u©i©©qT
ut.©©p©xT©
T©it~xit©
©ti
ut©is©vt©q
i{©t©©vt©iwt
©©
i#i©|
i{¥©t
i©vt©tT.©
©
¨©
©©©vt©qi}tu©xT©#t©vi©©sttr©vt©uss© it
©
it~xitst©#©¥zz©©xt©©it~xt©is©vt©©©©T©itr ir©vt©tu
©
©vt©ivtiTyz©iq©©T
©
#xr©i#i©|
i{©
©i#i©r©|
i{¥©vuv©
usqit©
©
it
©©
qqis
tT©y¥zzz©©©qiqti©©vt©.©©p©v©
it
©©
tu
t©©vt©¥©vt©vt©qi}tu©TT©#t©x
#Tt©©stt©vt©uss©
it
©it~xitst©
#tu
xt©usqT
ut©v©v©it~xitst©xT©qvu
TT©qituTxt©uixu©©vt©
qi}tu©
©vt©tt©
TTt©
©v©vt©uut©qiqt.©©©
t©
#wt¥©
©§¦§© ¡© !©"$ "
$§%©§ ©§
©&¦
'©
'©($)%©* $"© !©+
$©) §©,
©) $
©
t
#Tt©©
uusqTv©vt©r
T©©qiwr©sit©q
i{r.©
©
vt©uxst©-i#i©|
i{©|
i{r©£x©
©
x/©
©
©§ ©¦%'©0§
©"$ 1
2§©344©
qiwt©sxTqTt©qtti
©utu©3§©($, $©5¦$67($, $©8 ©5¦$6©§ ©§
©
$§:;©©
v
©it~xit©vt©qtis©©vt©#
t©uss
ti©
©vt©is©iq©©
rtti©©
©v
.©©p©©vt©
t©v
©v
©
t©v
©vt©q
i{©TT©uTt©
©xt©
©qt©
©xit¥©
©v
©vtitit©vtit©TT©#t©©wtirv©q
i{r.©
vt©|
vix©r
t<©©jYee©SDV`©^V©]Vg[hV_=©©vt©tit©
TTt©#©¢£¤©
©vt©£>?©
T{.©©p©vt©q
i{r©T©©itswt¥©v
©r
t©TT©©Trti©#t©tut
i©
©TT©#t©
itswt©#©
t©qtitT.©
©
©
@A©BC©
|iqt©q
i{©v©vt©|i}tu©
it©s
TT©v©tt©xtE©©{©TT©ui©
sq©©
xt©Ft
vti©|
i{.©©y.©©uir©
sq©©_OWcV][\Z¥©twt©v©vt©i
u©TrvE©©G.©vt©
tt©©qiwt©sit©q
i{©q
ut©i©vti©©uvTit©
©.©©sq
u©Ft
vti©|
i{.©©
¤xi©q
i{©
it©tTT©xt©#©©|
©{©
©
sTtE©©
{t©u
it©©vt©tt©©xi©©
$
§:©©8
¡§©tt©xi©q
i{©
©xi©Tx©©
t~x
t©q
i{©q
ut.©
©
©
HII
©JIK©
LDV]V©O]V©SDVY]©ZXD[[e©^\Z©ZS[fZ=©©M
©§
©"$ 1
2§©N2¦
¡§©"26©P"©6
©
©Q¦)"
©
wtxt/©i©
©Ft
vti©|
i{R©
©
£t
T{©q©
©t
uv©t©©vt©qiqti¥©©qtqTt©TT©©#t©
#Tt©©
T{©©©vt©iv©
t©©
sq©q
©vt©t©©vt©qiqti©TtE©©vt©TT©v
wt©©xt©vt©xv©t¥©
©
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
oÅ
o
Ŧ±Å»o
oŦÅ
$o.o9ÅD¦
OYÅd
Å
YÅ.oD¦±oÅD
$$oÅpo
Ås
tYÅDuvoÅ
wxyÅz{Åz|yÅ}~ÅyxyzÅ~wyzÅ~{Åz|~zÅzyz|Å{Å{~w~ÅÅy|yÅ~|Åz{Åz|yÅ ~Å{Åz|yÅ{xz|ÅwyÅ{Åz|yÅzyyzÅ}~Å~ÅwyÅ~zÅyzÅÅ{xÅy~ŦtÅYooÅ 9Å
~yÅ{}Åy~z|yÅz{Å~wyyÅ~{Å~}{ÅÅ|yÅ~y~ÅÅyÅ{z~ywÅÅ{yÅ {xÅz~zÅ~ÅzÅz|yyÅÅ{Å~Å{xzÅÅ{xÅ|~yÅz{Å~Åz{Åz|yÅywÅ{Åyz|yÅy~z|yÅ{ÅÅ ~wyyÅÅtYÅuYÅ9¦uÅz|yÅ{Å~Å~wÅ{{}Åz~ÅÅ|ÅÅ~Åw~y{xÅzyz|Å {Å{~w~Å{Åy|yÅyzÅ~{yÅywyz~Å
zxÅ{Å~}{Å~zÅy~z|yÅÅy|yÅyzÅyz|yÅ {Å¡~Å{Å {Å¢{Å¡~Å}xzÅ }~yÅ~Å|zÅzxÅ{z{Å~}{ÅwxyÅz{Åz|yÅyyyÅ{Åz|yÅyzyÅwwyÅÅ{yxyzÅ }~Å{Åz|{yÅwyÅ}~yÅ~ÅzxÅ~zÅy~z|yÅ£zyyzÅŤŤÅ~}Å~zÅz|yÅ|zÅ~zÅy~z|yÅ zÅz{ÅzxÅ|zÅÅ~wÅz|yyÅÅ{}y{yÅ{Å~}{Å¥§§¨¥©ª«¬Åz{ÅzxÅyzÅÅz|yÅ|~yÅ~Å ¦ÅOÅoÅD
®ÅOtYÅ
ÅY
oÅ.oÅo9Å~yÅ{}Å{}Åz|yÅw{Å~Å~wÅÅyÅ}~Å~ÅzxÅ |zÅÅ{zÅ{Å}yÅÅ|Åzx~z{Å|~Å~xywÅ}~ÅwyzÅ~zÅz|~zÅzyyz{Å{Å¡¯Å {ÅzÅz{ÅzxÅ|zÅ~zÅy~z|yÅ£zyyzÅÅ°²Åª³Å´«³¥µ¨Å Å
¶·¸¹º¼Å½¾¿Àº¼¾ÅÁ¿¿¾Ãľ¼¾ÅÅy{yÅz}yÅ{Åz|yÅ{Å ~}z{Å¡¢Åz{Åz|yÅ{yzÅ zyÅÅ{zÅ ÅÅyÅz|~Å
Å}xzy
ůyÅz|ÅyÅ~Å~wÅxÅ~Åz{Å|zÅzÅ Åz~yÅ}{yÅz|~Å
Å}ÅŤÅz|yÅ}{Å{}Å}Å|{xyÅ
Ť{{{wÅz{Å~zy~ÅÅ
{Å ÅwÅzÅz~yÅÅ~Å{{wÅÅ}xzyÅ~wÅz|~zÅÅ{Å~Å{{wÅw~ÅÅyÅz~Å~wÅ wz~yÅz|~zÅÅxzÅz|yÅ~ÅzÅÅÅ£¡¢ÅÅywÅxÅyÅz|{yÅ~Å~Åz~ÅÅ{zÅ~Å ~wÅ{}Å£¡¢Åz{Å~}{Å~ÅzÅÅ{}Å ¡¢Åz{Å~}{Å Å
¶¿Â¾¼Å¹¾¿ºÀ¾ÅźþÅÂ
Å
º¹
Š·ú !ÅþºÂ¿Å ·ú "ÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅÅ #%&'()*Å+,Å--Å,)/012Å3%0'&4Å'5(6(Å&5+31*Å7(Å--Å&(%0+6Å3%0'&8ÅÅ'50&Å)1'(6%)'0:(Å;+31*Å<6+:0*(Å=>?Å <)6@0%AÅ&<)B(&4Å)%Å0%B6()&(Å+,ÅCEÅ&<)B(&ÅFÅ<1)B0%AÅ<)6@0%AÅ0%Å'5(Å%+6'5Å;(&'ÅB+6%(6Å+,Å'5(Å<6+G(B'Å ;50B5Å0&Å;5(6(Å0'Å0&Å'5(Å%+0&0(&'HÅÅIÅ;0%J;0%KÅÅ'5)'Å5(1<&Å&+1:(Å';+Å0&&3(&ÅL%+0&(Å)%*Å/+6(Å <)6@0%AMHÅÅ#%Å)**0'0+%4Å'5(6(Å;+31*Å7(Å1(&&Å*(/)%*Å+%Å<)6@&ÅL&(%0+6&Å)6(Å/+6(Å10@(12Å%+'Å'+Å5):(Å B501*6(%Å;5+Å;+31*Å3&(Å<)6@&MÅFÅ'5)'Å<3'&Å1(&&Å&'6(&&Å+%Å'5(Å<)6@Å;0'50%Å'5(ÅN6+G(B'Å)%*Å)1&+Å+%Å P()'5(6ÅN)6@HÅÅ#%Å)**0'0+%4Å;501(Å/)%2Å&(%0+6&Å;+6@Å'5(&(Å*)2&4Å'5(6(Å;+31*Å/+&'Å10@(12Å7(Å1(&&Å QRSTUQÅTVÅWRTXÅVZT[R\ÅV]SR^Å]UÅV_RÅS`ZU]UaÅTUQÅ\TVRÅTbVRZU``U^cÅÅeRU]`Zf^ÅWTZX]UaÅURRQ^Åg`h\QÅ )1&+Å7(Å1(&&Å'5)%Å'5+&(Å+,Å'+;%5+/(Å)%*Å&0%A1(J,)/012Å5+/(Å6(&0*(%'&HÅÅi3'Å&'011Å/+6(Å'5)%ÅjH=Å <)6@0%AÅ&<)B(&Å<(6Å3%0'HÅÅk(Å)6(Å;(11Å);)6(Å+,Å'5(Å<)6@0%AÅ*(/)%*&Å+%Å'5(Å;(&'(6%Å&0*(Å+,Ål5(Å m5+<&Å)'Ån+&&/++6Å)1+%AÅq+%'(B0'+HÅÅl5+&(ÅB+%*+&Å;(6(Å+60A0%)112Å7301'Å,+6Å&(%0+6&Å;0'5Å+%(Å <)6@0%AÅ&<)B(Å<(6Å3%0'HÅÅr+;Å'5)'Å'5(2Å5):(Å,)/010(&Å'5(6(4Å'5(Å<)6@0%AÅ0&Å%+'Å&3,,0B0(%'Å)%*Å'5(2Å <)6@Å+%Åq+%'(B0'+Å)%*Å0%Ån+&&/++64Å/3B5Å'+Å'5(ÅB5)A60%Å+,Å'5(Å6(&0*(%'&Å+,Ån+&&/++6Å;5+Å+,'(%Å ,0%*ÅB)6&Å<)6'0)112Å71+B@0%AÅ'5(06Å*60:(;)2&HÅÅl5(Å/)%)A(/(%'Å+,Å'5(Åm5+<&Å)'Ån+&&/++6Å5)&Å'+1*Å '5(Å6(&0*(%'&Å'+Å%+'Å<)6@Å0%Å7)B@Å+,Å'5(ÅB+%*+&HÅÅ#'Å0&Å%+'Å)Å<1()&)%'Å&0'3)'0+%Å)%*Å+%(Å'+Å):+0*Å0%Å '50&ÅN6+G(B'HÅ
Å
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
c$/::Ecccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc Xc
ccccc
cc
c
c!c"#
c!c
cc%cc!ccc
c
&c
c&c
#c
cc'#cc
c( c)
cc* c+,-+.c01c+2c3c
c
'c!4c!cccc"
cc)
c
'c
' cc!"c"
c1
c' 4' 5c6c
c#
''.c c!c&' c&
c&
cc71 c4 .ccc&c1
c
c#cc
4
cc(c'!c c
c!cc&c' 5c'c
cc&c c' c'c
'#c
'
cc
8&c
c c
'#cc'c
.ccc
ccc1
cc9'c
c;
"c c&c
c' 5c&c1
c
c9'c
c;
"c&
c
c
c
c4'' 5.cc'c'c '#
c
c1
c"<cccc
c
11='"
c6>?c
cc&' c!'c' c&'cc
5c!c
c' 5c
c4c cc 4c&
cc@ ccc c3c
c'!c'c'c' 5c&.c4cc
c&c
c!'
cc@'5'
cc&c6c.c4cAc!c"c'c
c &cc'c
11
cc
c c'c&
c4.c4cc&c
c
c' 5c&.c4cc31
c
c
BCDFGHIJcKLICGcMINJOIPDFQccc)c3' c&'cc cc c! ccRc c&
cc
c
5 'c41c
c!'5c!c
'
ccSTcUVWYcVZ[Wc\]^_`ZaUWbc
c
c!c ""
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 11
Campbell, Patty, dated June 10, 2024.
11-1 The commenter provides comments to the Draft EIR which are addressed below. 11-2 The commenter states that the Draft EIR states there will be 4 people per housing unit (984 residents) and also states there is an estimated 647 residents. The commenter also expresses concerns with insufficient parking.
The commenter does not indicate where in the Draft EIR it is stated that there would be 4 people per housing unit. For purposes of evaluating Project impacts related to population and housing, the Draft EIR projects there would be approximately 647 new residents based on an average household size of 2.63, consistent with the housing household size reported in the City's 2021–2029 Housing Element (Refer to Draft EIR page 4.12-9). Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
11-3 The commenter states that there is no public transportation on Lampson Avenue and the nearest bus stop is 3.5 miles walking distance. The commenter states that this will increase the demand for parking and expresses concerns with inadequate parking. Although there is no transit service along Lampson Avenue, an OCTA bus stop for Route 123 is located approximately 1.2 miles at the intersection of Valley View Street and Lampson Avenue. Refer to Master Response
2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
11-4 The commenter expresses concerns with parking demand from AYSO states that overflow parking from AYSO will be at CPE. The commenter states that overflow parking at CPE will interfere with the CPE residents’ ability to park and impact the safety of their streets. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
11-5 The commenter states that the City General Plan Policy 4.11 to monitor multifamily parking requirements is not useful because once a project is developed there is no opportunity to adjust or increase parking. The commenter also expresses concerns with guest parking and adequate parking needs. The City’s Policy pursuant to the General Plan is to monitor the parking requirements to reduce the impact of parking requirements on multifamily development and establish strategies as appropriate. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
11-6 The commenter requests an explanation on how runoff will flow from JFTB to Old Ranch Country Club to the south, if there are no underground drainage pipes to Old Ranch along the Lampson. Additionally, the commenter asks whether runoff would interfere with CPE runoff.
Drainage from the Project site currently flows to Old Ranch Country Club. As stated in Section
4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Draft EIR, the existing site generally flows in a north to south direction into an existing westerly flowing concrete channel along the site’s southerly
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
property line. The westerly flowing channel is collected via an offsite 18-inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) that flows under the offsite driveway to Arbor Park and discharges into an offsite earthen channel on the west side of the driveway. Runoff flows within this earthen channel are then collected by an existing 24-inch CMP that flows westerly, discharges into a westerly flowing earthen channel within the JFTB, and then drains to the Old Ranch Country Club to the south (Draft EIR, p. 4.9-1). Refer to Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, for hydrology impacts.
11-7 The commenter expresses concerns with storm water runoff onto nearby streets and Old Ranch Golf Club and states there is significant flooding in the area. The commenter states that the Draft EIR is incorrect in stating that stormwater runoff is ultimately discharged into the San Gabriel River; and instead states that it ends up in the lakes of Old Ranch Golf Club.
Refer to Response to Comment 11-6 and Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, for hydrology concerns. On a regional basis, stormwater drainage in the City is ultimately conveyed to the San Gabriel River. 11-8 The commenter states that if the water quality detention system does not work and there is too much water then it will flow to Lampson down Heather to Ironwood and Hazelnut Avenues, exacerbating flooding in CPE. Refer to Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, for hydrology concerns.
11-9 The commenter states that the existing storm drains in CPE are not adequate for the amount of rain received in the last two years and states there is a potential that stormwater runoff from the Project could contaminate the City of Seal Beach’s well on the north side of Lampson.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.4, Hydrology and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, for hydrology concerns. The Project has been designed to ensure that Project peak flows do not exceed existing flows based on a conservative 100-year storm event (a rainfall event that statistically has the same 1% chance of occurring).
As stated in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Draft EIR, the Project site conditions do not support infiltration and the Project site is not within and is not a part of a recharge facility for the Orange County Groundwater Basin. Implementation of the Project would not result in substantial adverse effects to local groundwater supplies. Further, the Project has been designed to incorporate best management practices to address the pollutants of concern from residential development. Therefore, the Project would have a beneficial impact on water quality.
11-10 The commenter provides a general statement that the City of Los Alamitos cannot provide any utility services for the Project except for water (Golden State Water Company) and the Project plans to tie in all utility services for the City of Seal Beach. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and no further response is required.
11-11 The commenter states that ALUC found the Project inconsistent. Refer to Master Response
2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB). 11-12 The commenter states that the statement made on Page 4.10-9 on the Draft EIR is incorrect and that ALUC voted to only require actions related to the Project site and not Housing Element Sites 7 (Laurel Park) and 10 (5030-5084 Katella) to come before the ALUC for review. The commenter is incorrect about the conclusion of the ALUC meeting on September 21, 2023.
According to the meeting minutes of the ALUC Meeting on September 21, 2023, Commissioner Murphy moved to approve Option #2, and a second by Commissioner Sustarsic, Commission voted 5-0 in favor of Option #2. Option #2 required the City to submit the actions listed in Option #1, limited to Site 6 at 4655 Lampson Avenue; Site 7 Laurel Park APN 241- 241 -35; and Site l0 located at 5030- 5084 Katella5
. Therefore, the Draft EIR’s statement is
accurate and no revisions to the Draft EIR are required.
The commenter also states that a notice is required on all sales documents to alert residents of the presence of the JFTB and of airport noise. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB), related to buyer’s awareness. 11-13 The commenter states that listing Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park under the jurisdiction of Los Alamitos is incorrect and the City of Seal Beach developed the two parks and maintains them.
The commenter is mistaken on the language in the Draft EIR when stating the two parks are within the jurisdiction of Los Alamitos. As discussed in Section 4.14, Recreation, of the Draft EIR, the Arbor Dog Park and Fields are currently leased by the City of Seal Beach from the JFTB for its residents, although the two parks are within the jurisdiction of Los Alamitos (refer to Page 4.14-4 of the Draft EIR). The use of the language for jurisdiction in this case meant that the parks are located within the City of Los Alamitos. However, the Draft EIR acknowledges that the parks are owned by JFTB and operated by the City of Seal Beach. 11-14 The commenter states that the 10 feet of parking would be dedicated to the City of Los Alamitos and would have complications that render it infeasible. The 10 feet dedication requires permission from JFTB. The ownership of the 10 feet dedication will be granted to the appropriate municipality governing the site at that time and is not an environmental issue analyzed under CEQA; however, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action 5 https://files.ocair.com/media/2024-
01/ALUC%20Meeting%20Minutes%2009.21.2023_web.pdf?VersionId=Dc8GuySf9k7xwiPQexQBKGVScqtIfcfG
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required. 11-15 The commenter states that the Project is short of meeting the common area requirement by 33,040 sf if the 10 foot strip of land is dedicated to the City, the Project will not meet the common area requirement. The commenter is correct that the Project Applicant is seeking a waiver pursuant the State’s Density Bonus Law for reduced common area requirement. The commenter states that deeding the 10 feet of property to the JFTB is more feasible to accomplish the goal of providing more parking. Refer to Response to Comment 11-14 above for the dedication of the 10-foot strip of land on the Project site. 11-16 The commenter states that providing the proposed pedestrian connections with Arbor Park/Arbor Dog Park requires permission from JFTB and inquires if the pass-thru gates will be removed. The proposed pedestrian connections will be self-locking to match the current operational hours of the parks. The exact configuration and implementation of the proposed pedestrian connections are speculative at this time and are not an environmental issue analyzed under CEQA; however, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required. 11-17 The commenter expresses concerns with street crossing on Lampson, provision of park space, and impacts to Heather Park. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities for impacts to existing parks. 11-18 The commenter inquires about the location school bus stops and expresses concerns with traffic safety on Lampson Avenue. There are no school bus stops anticipated at the Project site or along Lampson Avenue. This is currently an existing school bus stop at Heather Park which serves the following schools: McGaugh Elementary, Weaver Elementary, McAuliffe Middle, and Los Alamitos HS. Children from the Project would have access to the existing school bus stop. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. Refer also to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns.
11-19 The commenter expresses safety concerns with U-turns on Lampson Avenue at Heather Street.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns.
11-20 The commenter states that SBPD will end up servicing police calls instead of Los Alamitos Police Department (LAPD) due to traffic levels. The Project site is located within the City of Los Alamitos; therefore, it will be served by LAPD. Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, Los Alamitos Police Department has indicated that this
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
increase would not adversely impact Los Alamitos Police Department’s existing resources.
The existing resources would be adequate to meet the additional demands generated by the Project. Responses times and service ratios would be met and would not require the construction of new facilities (refer to Page 4.13-10 of the Draft EIR). However, SBPD has a mutual aid agreement with LAPD and can assist with public services in the event of an emergency, if needed.
11-21 The commenter advocates for the Senior Housing Alternatives for its ability to alleviate noise, parking, park, and traffic issues. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required. 11-22 The commenter states that three of the trees on the Project site are redwoods and believed to be Moon Trees. In response to this comment, T&B Planning, Inc. retained LSA to conduct research to determine if the redwood trees located at the southwest corner of the property at 4665 Lampson Avenue are Moon Trees (see Attachment N of this Final EIR).
Research found no evidence that the redwood trees at 4665 Lampson Avenue are Moon Trees.
Neither the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) nor the United States Forest Service (USFS) has found any record of the Apollo 14 Moon Trees being planted in Orange County. CDFW was not part of the 1970s Moon Tree program and was not responsible for distributing Moon Tree seedlings. CDFW staff thinks it unlikely they would have been allowed to plant trees at the Lampson Avenue location since they only leased the building.
Additionally, it appears the CDFW lease was several decades after the mid-1970s timeframe when the trees would most likely have been planted and therefore the commentor’s speculation that “it is conceivable [CDFW] planted them” is unlikely to be accurate. Moreover, according to City records, there are no Moon Trees in Los Alamitos. In addition, none of the other sources that responded to requests for information could confirm that the redwood trees at 4665 Lampson Avenue are Moon Trees or even that any Moon Trees were planted in Orange County. 11-23 The commenter inquires whether there are dumbwaiters so residents do not have to carry grocery to a second story. There are no dumbwaiters proposed at this time. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 12
12-3
12-1
12-2
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
12-3
(CONT.)
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 12
Chesser, Steven, dated May 18, 2024.
12-1 The commenter expresses opposition to the Project and states that the Draft EIR fails to acknowledge all impacts that fall on the City of Seal Beach, specifically College Park East.
The Draft EIR analyzes the environmental impacts of the Project, including potential impacts that occur across jurisdictional boundaries. Additionally, the City of Seal Beach is acknowledged as a Responsible Agency for the Project (see Table 3-6, of the Draft EIR). 12-2 The commenter expresses concerns with increased traffic, access, traffic accidents, density, significant and unavoidable transportation impacts, and parking. The commenter does not provide specific comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. However, these comments are noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
Explanation of potential impacts related to increased traffic, traffic accidents, significant and unavoidable transportation impacts, and parking are provided in Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, and Master Response 2.1.3, Parking. The Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning designations for the site, including allowable density. Vehicle access to the Project site would be provided via two driveways on Lampson Avenue, one for the apartment entry on the western side and one for the primary neighborhood entry central to the site.
Additionally, a restricted emergency vehicle access point with Lampson Avenue would be provided at the eastern end of the site.
12-3 The commenter states that the Draft EIR completely ignores the potential of airplane accidents and attendant danger of residential encroachment near JFTB and states that ALUC has advised the residential development is incompatible with public health and safety. The commenter states the Draft EIR ignored the National Commission on Military Aviation Safety Report, released on December 1, 2020 and states that it is relevant to the Project site. The commenter requests the Draft EIR be modified to reflect the true impacts of the Project.
Contrary to the commenter’s assertion, the Draft EIR included an analysis of safety hazards of JFTB on the Project (see Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft EIR). The National Commission on Military Aviation Safety is a report on military aviation nationwide and does not provide safety information or accident data specific to JFTB. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 13
"H7AFHGHH
G
HH
H
! #!#$H%& 'H(
)
&H)
H*+,-H)
+,-./
0
1.
1
-
H
(,1,H0
-+,H,H0H.1H1H-,/H2,HH.,H-0.3H42.H5HH .H0H.,H-,12.1H
0HH.-00H0
6 1.2/H81H/
2H-,H9-
44/H6-,3H.,H,4
-
H
0H
,,H(-:H;1.HH<,H=,H1H/
,-1H4
2.H.,H.
H.-00H..H.,H9-
9 1,H,+,
9,.H6
2H4-H>
2H.,-,H4,H
,0.H.2-H,H0
-H,1.4
2H-1H.H.,H,+,
9,.H,.-,?H5.H6
2H1,,H..H.,-,H6
2H4,H
4H4:H29H
0H.-003H,19,/H2-H.,H
-HH,+,H-21H9,-
1H
>,H-,H1
H
,-,H4
2.H.,H24,-H
0H.
H-1H
+,-H;+,H.
2H.H99,-1H..H.,
9-
9 1H1H.,H,/H-,@2-,H24,-H
0H9-:H19,13H5H4,,+,H..H
-,H19,1H6
2H4,
,H0
-H
,,H(-:H;1.H
,1H
.H+,H.,H9./H0
-H9
.,.H
+,-0
6H9-:H
B1./3H.,H9-
9 1,H9-
C,.H6
2H-,9,H-,1H..H-,H9-,1,./H
+,-,H6.H+,,..
HD,
+
0H.2-,H.-,,13HH-113H.
HH,11,-H,E.,.3H1H,0.,/HH,.+,H9.H.
H.,H,+-
,.H5.
6 2H,1.-
/H4..H0
-H
H4-1HH
.,-H60,HH-,2,H-4
H..H9./H
<,-,/3
H
,,H(-:H;1.3H<,H=,
13-1
13-2
13-3
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 13
Chinn, Donna, dated June 10, 2024.
13-1 The commenter inquires about the results of a traffic flow study. The commenter asks whether there would be a left turn lane for eastbound cars at the development entrance and whether it would cause a backup of traffic during the morning and evening peak hours. The Project proposes a cross-street stop-controlled intersection at the primary neighborhood entry, which will allow for full access, including left turns for eastbound vehicles. A queuing analysis was performed at the Project driveways to determine whether there is adequate storage length during the AM and PM peak hours. The analysis demonstrates that there is adequate storage at both driveways to accommodate peak hour queues (see Section 1.7, Queuing Analysis, of Attachment G of this Final EIR). Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns.
13-2 The commenter expresses concerns about the increased number of vehicles and inadequate parking. The commenter states that College Park East does not have the capacity for potential overflow parking. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. 13-3 The commenter expresses concerns with removal of mature trees and grass as it would destroy habitat for local birds and other wildlife and also reduce carbon mitigating capacity. The Project would result in the removal of existing trees. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, a variety of trees, shrubs, accent plants, and ground cover are proposed along the perimeter of the Project site, in common areas, recreational amenities, open space areas, and parking areas. Landscaping will feature drought-tolerant plant materials. A total of 441 trees, including 51 36” box focal trees, 190 15-gallon trees, 5 10x10’specimen canopy trees, and 195 24/36” box trees, would be planted throughout the Project site (refer to
As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, no special-status plants were detected on the Project site. However, the Project does provide limited suitable habitat for nesting birds and common raptor species. Construction activities have the potential to adversely impact nesting birds and raptors and roosting bats. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through MM 4.3-3 would ensure that pre-construction surveys are conducted for nesting birds, nesting raptors, and bat roosts prior to site disturbance. If nesting birds or raptors are present on the Project site, mitigation requires avoidance of active nests.
With implementation of the required mitigation, potential impacts to nesting birds and common raptors would be reduced to below a level of significance (refer to Pages 4.3-29 through 4.3- 39 of the Draft EIR).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 14
"-8\LW-\-"-8
\
\
! !#!$\$% \&'
(%\(\)
*\(
*
+,.
.\
/012345673\9:;<=>?@\AB9:C>DEB\@FDG\BHID<\IG\@FDG\DG\@FB\JDAG@\@DHB\K:;\AB9BDMB=\I>\BHID<\JA:H\@FDG\GB>=BA MD@I9FDA9:A=NCHID<O9:H
P*
\'\)
*Q
RS\T
\
\.
*\+\UU.
\
\
*\V
U.
\* *U*
\UX*
**+Q
Y
\Z
*
\[*
\*.
*
14-1
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 14
Chirco, Vita, dated May 12, 2024.
14-1 The commenter expresses opposition to the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their required review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. This comment does not raise any issues concerning the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 15
From: [email protected]
To: Tom Oliver
Subject: LAMPSON HOUSING
Date: Sunday, April 28, 2024 7:21:48 PM
Dear Mr. Oliver:
As a homeowner at CPE, I would like to voice my concern regarding Lampson not suitable for more residential development.
Back on Dec 22 2019, a car crashed through the block wall facing Lampson into my property in the middle of the night, missing the pool by a few feet. I was thankful that the car didn’t plunge into the pool. Police Officer Kieth Phan came the next day and filed a police report. It took me six trips to the police station and over a year including filing at small claim court to get the driver’s insurance to pay for repairing the wall. Building more houses on Lampson would definitely worsen public safety and I hope the city would put a brake in the Lampson project.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Mark & Julia Chow.
4357 Ironwood, Seal Beach, CA 90740
15-1
15-2
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 15
Chow, Mark and Julia, dated April 28, 2024.
15-1 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project which are responded below. 15-2 The commenter provides a car accident history onto their property from Lampson Avenue and expresses concerns with public safety. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.8, Public Safety.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 16
16-1
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-5
16-2
16-3
16-4
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-5
(CONT.)
16-6
16-7
16-8
16-9
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-11
16-10
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-11
(CONT.)
16-12
16-13
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-14
16-15
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-18
16-16
16-17
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-18
(CONT.)
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-18
(CONT.)
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-19
16-18
(CONT.)
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-19
(CONT.)
16-20
16-21
16-22
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-23
16-24
16-25
16-26
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-30
16-27
16-28
16-29
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-30
(CONT.)
16-31
16-32
16-33
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-34
16-35
16-36
16-37
16-38
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-38
(CONT.)
16-39
16-40
16-41
16-42
16-43
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-44
16-45
16-46
16-47
16-48
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 16
Churchill, Carol, dated June 09, 2024.
16-1 The commenter provides introductory remarks and a summary of the comments on the Draft EIR’s technical reports made in the body of the letter. Refer to Response to Comment 16-1 through 16-48 for responses to these comments. No further response is required. Attachments provided as part of this Comment 16 are included in Attachment A of this Final EIR. 16-2 The commenter summarizes the regulatory requirements under the executive summary section of the Project’s Air Quality Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix B1 to this EIR) related to South Coast AQMD Rules 402 and 403. The City acknowledges that these rules apply to the Project. This comment does not raise any issues regarding the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and no further response is required.
16-3 The commenter states that Exhibit 1-B, Site Plan, in the Project’s Air Quality Analysis is not consistent throughout all technical studies. All technical reports show consistent and accurate site plans relevant to the particular environmental topic being addressed. However, the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis (Technical Appendix N2 of the Draft EIR) included a preliminary site plan, which has been updated and included as Attachment B to this Final EIR pursuant to the commenter’s request.
16-4 The commenter asserts that the Air Quality Impact Analysis failed to address the pollutants identified in the Phase I ESA (Technical Appendix H1 of the Draft EIR) which includes asbestos, lead, and arsenic.
The Air Quality Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix B1 of the Draft EIR) provides an analysis of air quality impacts consistent with South Coast AQMD methodology. Section 3.2 of the Air Quality Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix B1 of the Draft EIR) explains that the criteria used to determine the significance of potential Project-related air quality impacts are taken from the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §§15000, et seq.). Based on these thresholds, a project would result in a significant impact related to air quality if it would: 1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; 2) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment [emphasis added] under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; 3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; 4) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
South Coast AQMD has developed regional significance thresholds for criteria pollutants that are regulated by federal and state laws through the development of human health based and/or environmentally based criteria for setting permissible levels. In May 2022, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Associated (CAPCOA) in conjunction with other California air districts, including South Coast AQMD, released the latest version of California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1. The purpose of this model is to calculate
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
construction-source and operational-source criteria pollutants (VOCs, NOx, SOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5) and GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources; and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures. Based on the analysis presented in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR and the Air Quality Impact Analysis, the Project’s air quality impacts were determined to be less than significant. No changes in the Draft EIR are required.
The Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA; Technical Appendix H2 of the Draft EIR), determined that there was no evidence of a significant release of potential chemicals of concern to the subsurface in the area investigated, including lead and arsenic. With respect to arsenic concentrations, the original Phase II ESA included a typographical error. The Phase II ESA (see Section 5.0 and Attachment C1 to this Final EIR) has been updated to correct this typographical error and to more accurately reflect the fact that the detected arsenic concentrations found at the Project site are all below the upper bound concentration of 12 mg/kg, and thus, they are trace or background concentrations that do not warrant further investigation or mitigation. The corrected Phase II ESA now reads: “Although the detected concentrations of arsenic found at the site exceed the residential screening level, all levels are less than the DTSC upper bound background concentration of 12 mg/kg.” Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft EIR identifies the potential for encountering asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and lead based paint (LBP) during demolition activities. The use of ACM (a known carcinogen) and LBP (a known toxic), both of which are considered hazardous materials, was a common building construction method prior to 1978 and may be present in the existing building. All proposed demolition activities would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local hazardous materials regulation, which includes mandatory provisions for the safe removal, transport, and disposal of PCBs, ACMs and LBP.
Additionally, the Project is required to comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions) and Title 17 of the CCR, Division 1, Chapter 8: Accreditation, Certification, and Work Practices for Lead-Based Paint and Lead Hazards applies. South Coast AQMD Rule 1403 establishes survey requirements, notification, and work practice requirements to prevent asbestos emissions from emanating during building renovation and demolition activities.
Assuming that ACMs are present in the existing structure located on-site, then Rule 1403 requires notification of the South Coast AQMD prior to commencing any demolition activities.
Rule 1403 also sets forth specific procedures for the removal of asbestos and requires that an on-site representative trained in the requirements of Rule 1403 be present during the stripping, removing, handling, or disturbing of ACM. Mandatory compliance with the provisions of Rule 1403 would ensure that construction-related grading, clearing, and demolition activities do not expose construction workers or nearby sensitive receptors to significant health risks associated with ACMs. Because future development on the Project site would be required to comply with AQMD Rule 1403 during demolition activities, impacts due to ACMs would be less than significant.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Title 17, CCR, Division 1, Chapter 8: Accreditation, Certification and Work Practices for LeadBased Paint and Lead Hazards, defines and regulates lead-based paint. Any detectable amount of lead is regulated. During the demolition of the existing structure, there is a potential for exposing construction workers to health hazards associated with lead. The Project would be required to comply with Title 17, CCR, Division 1, Chapter 8, which includes requirements such as employer-provided training, air monitoring, protective clothing, respirators, and handwashing facilities. Mandatory compliance with these requirements would ensure that construction workers and the public are not exposed to significant LBP health hazards or upset during demolition and/or during transport of demolition waste to an appropriate disposal facility and would ensure that impacts related to LBP remain less than significant. Compliance with the above regulatory requirements would ensure that removal of ACMs or LBPs would result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required and no revisions to the Draft EIR are required. 16-5 The commenter asserts that the Air Quality Impact Analysis failed to take into account of burning of significant qualities of fuel at JFTB into consideration in determining the extent of Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Ozone produced during construction.
The purpose of the Project’s construction analysis is to determine whether Project-generated emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant in the South Coast Air Basin. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, according to South Coast AQMD, projects that exceed its project-specific significance thresholds are considered by the South Coast AQMD to be cumulatively considerable. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project-specific thresholds are not considered to be cumulatively significant. As shown in Table 4.2-5, Overall Construction Emission Summary, of the Draft EIR, construction activities associated with the Project would not exceed South Coast AQMD thresholds for any criteria pollutants, including carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and ozone.
Therefore, impacts associated with Project-related construction emissions would be less than cumulatively considerable (refer to Page 4.2-30 of the Draft EIR). Thus, the Air Quality Impact Analysis adequately analyzes cumulative impacts that would result from construction activity. 16-6 The commenter states general information about particulate matter. This comment does not raise any issues regarding the environmental analysis provided in the Draft EIR and thus no further response is required.
16-7 The commenter restates the previous comments made related to the Air Quality Impact Analysis not including asbestos, lead, and arsenic into its analysis. The commenter states that arsenic at the site is 42 times higher than the screening levels and grading of the site will release particulate matter containing lead and arsenic that will danger the public health given the extent of contamination. Although the Project site is not a California Air Force Base, EFI Global’s report was informed by the fact that the Project site is adjacent to a base installation (the JFTB) in order to evaluate background arsenic levels. The comments here regarding potential health
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
risk impacts related to air quality and contamination are fully addressed in Response to Comment 16-4. Comments related to arsenic are also addressed in Response to Comment 16-
12. No further response is required.
16-8 The commenter states that grading will create particulates that can run untreated into the storm drain running to the ocean, sewer system, and well water in the City of Seal Beach untreated.
Construction-related water quality impacts were evaluated in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, and Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality. As stated, the Project will be required to implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction-related activities. The SWPPP will specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that the Project Applicant will be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that waterborne pollution – including erosion/sedimentation – is prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to surface runoff being discharged from the subject property. Examples of BMPs that may be utilized during construction include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers, geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-seeding. In addition, the Project would be required to implement erosion and dust control measures pursuant to South Coast AQMD Rule 403 to minimize water- and windborne erosion. Mandatory compliance with the SWPPP and the erosion control and dust control measures would reduce, prevent, or minimize soil erosion from Project-related construction activities. Therefore, impacts related to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Additionally, pursuant to the LAMC Chapter 8.44, the Project Applicant would be required to implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to demonstrate compliance with the City’s NPDES municipal stormwater permit, and to minimize the release of potential waterborne pollutants, including pollutants of concern for downstream receiving waters. Therefore, the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality during long term operation and impacts would be less than significant.
16-9 The commenter states that the site will require extensive mitigation to remediate the concentration of arsenic for public safety and health before grading can occur. Refer to Response to Comment 16-4 regarding the significance of arsenic levels found on the Project site. A typographical error has been corrected. Detected arsenic concentrations found at the Project site were all below the upper bound concentration of 12 mg/kg, and thus, they constitute trace or background concentrations that do not warrant further investigation or mitigation, including remediation.
16-10 The commenter cites select text on limitations on liability in the Project’s Phase I ESA (Technical Appendix H1 of the Draft EIR) [“It should be noted that compounds or materials other than those described could be present in the site environment.”]. Additionally, the commenter asserts that the Project’s Phase I ESA is deficient because the property owner/user failed to provide a past Phase I ESA that was conducted by Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech; included in Attachment C1 of the Final EIR) in 2016.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Section 1.2 of the Phase I ESA report states that the report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted environmental methodologies referred to in ASTM E1527-13 and E1527-21 and contains all of the limitations inherent in these methodologies (Refer to Pages 12 and 13 of the Phase I ESA). Language related to limitations on liability and exceptions are commonly found in Phase I ESAs and do not represent a deficiency of the analysis. Moreover, if any other contaminants are discovered during construction that were not identified in the ESA, construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations, including but not limited requirements imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
EFI reviewed the above-referenced 2016 Tetra Tech report and found that no recognized environmental conditions (RECs) or recommendations for additional investigation were noted (see Attachment C2 to this Final EIR). The findings of the above-referenced Tetra Tech report do not alter the results of EFI’s Phase I ESA, dated January 18, 2023. Additionally, a Phase II ESA (Technical Appendix H2 of the Draft EIR) was conducted for the Project which included further geological survey and soil sampling of the Project site. 16-11 The commenter states findings from the 2016 Tetra Tech report related to previous listings of the Project site that contends that they were not provided to the ESA consultant. As discussed in the Project’s Phase I ESA (Technical Appendix H1 of the Draft EIR), the Project’s listings in HAZNET in 2000 for generating asbestos containing waste with disposal in landfill, in 2003 as a generator of off-specification aged or surplus organics with a disposal method as transfer station, in 2010 as generating ages/surplus organics identified as other treatment, in 2012 as a generator of hazardous waste with a disposal method of storage, bulking, and/or transfer offsite with no treatment or recovery were all listed within the tables under Section 5.1, Subject Property. Therefore, all previous listings related to the Project site were adequately identified in the Project’s Phase I ESA.
16-12 The commenter states the findings related to arsenic in the Phase II ESA and expresses concern with ground water, storm drain runoff, and air borne contaminants during construction. For clarification, the arsenic screening levels were not compared to an Air Force Base land use scenario. EFI recognizes that the arsenic detected in near-surface soils exceeds the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) screening level (SL) for residential use. It is well documented and accepted by regulatory agencies, including the DTSC, that background or trace concentrations of naturally occurring arsenic in soil throughout the state of California often exceeds the DTSC-SL value of 0.11 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). As described in the Phase II, as a result of this analysis, an upper bound background concentration of 12.7 mg/kg can be used as an initial screening level for arsenic concentrations, which has been further proven by the following studies. A statistical analysis was performed at 14 Air Force installations in California to evaluate background levels of arsenic. The result of the analysis detected that an upper bound background concentration of 12.7 mg/kg can be used as an initial screening level for arsenic concentrations.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Furthermore, in a study titled Determination of a Southern California Regional Background Arsenic Concentration in Soil (Chernoff, et al., 2008), which was prepared by DTSC staff, the authors concluded, “A Probability Plot and statistical analysis of a large data set from school sites in Los Angeles County gave an upper-bound arsenic concentration of 12 mg/kg. A Probability Plot for school sites from 5 counties in Southern California also gave an upperbound background arsenic concentration of 12 mg/kg.” The study concluded, “This finding suggests that 12 mg/kg [may be] a useful screening number for evaluating arsenic as a chemical of potential concern.”
Based on the aforementioned studies, which included both Air Force Base installations and school sites in California, 12 mg/kg is a useful screening number for evaluating arsenic as a chemical of potential concern. All arsenic concentrations in the soil samples analyzed at the Project site were detected at concentrations less than the upper-bound arsenic concentration of 12 mg/kg, and therefore, is not considered a significant environmental concern that would warrant further investigation or mitigation or result in an unacceptable health risk to future occupants.
16-13 The commenter states that additional chemical analysis for other hazardous materials that may become wind borne during construction should be conducted. The commenter does not identify specific materials of concern. The potential for hazardous materials on the Project site were fully analyzed in the Phase I and II ESAs (Technical Appendix H1and H2 of the Draft EIR).
Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft EIR, with mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase (refer to Pages 4.8-16 and 4.8- 17 of the Draft EIR) Thus, no additional analysis is required. 16-14 The commenter expresses concern with asbestos, lead, arsenic, and radon. EFI notes that lead and arsenic were not detected at concentrations that would pose an unacceptable health risk to future site occupants, the surrounding community or underlying groundwater. Furthermore, construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be employed as a part of the proposed Project to mitigate fugitive dust. Prior to any future demolition or site improvements, the existing structures will undergo routine abatement for asbestos and lead, which will be performed by a properly licensed contractor. Furthermore, such activities will be performed following South Coast Air Quality Management District requirements for the removal and disposal of any suspect asbestos containing material or lead-based paint. Therefore, ongoing monitoring and reporting is not warranted. Refer to Response to Comment 16-4.
As noted in the Phase I ESA, based on research by the USEPA, the average radon concentrations for Orange County are less than 2.0 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), which is below the 4.0 pCi/L action level set by the USEPA. Furthermore, the Radon Potential Zone Map for Orange County, California, dated 2015 notes that the subject property and surrounding area are located in an area of “Low Potential for Indoor Radon Levels Above Four PicoCuries per
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Liter”6. Therefore, radon is not an environmental concern for the proposed future development, and further investigation or mitigation is not warranted.
The Project will result in the demolition of the currently existing vacant office building in order to allow for project construction, and thus radon testing associated with the existing office building would not result in any relevant results as to the project. Even after demolition of the building, as a general rule it is not industry standard to test a vacant lot for radon and receive accurate results representative of what future construction conditions may be and given that the Project site is located within a low potential area for radon, no testing of radon after construction would be required.
16-15 The commenter states additional testing for TPHd is required to protect the water supply, prevent air pollution, and protect the public’s safety. Based on the results of the Phase II ESA, the concentrations of TPH-d detected in site soils does not warrant further investigation.
Furthermore, the concentrations do not pose an unacceptable health risk to site occupants, the environment, water supply, or groundwater. Thus, no additional testing for TPHd is required.
Refer also to Response to Comment 16-8 related to the SWPPP and BMPs that the Project will implement to protect water quality.
16-16 The commenter states that T&B Planning, Inc. has a conflict of interest in that it is financially obligated to both the City of Los Alamitos and the owner of the Property. The Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, which allow a lead agency to either prepare an EIR directly with its own staff or accept a draft prepared by a consultant retained by an applicant. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15084(3).) Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15084 states that “before using a draft prepared by another person, the Lead Agency shall subject the draft to the agency’s own review and analysis and must reflect the independent judgment of the Lead Agency. The Lead Agency is responsible for the adequacy and objectivity of the draft EIR.”
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21067 and CEQA Guidelines Article 4 and Section 15367, the City is the Lead Agency under whose authority this EIR has been prepared. “Lead Agency” refers to the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. As documented in the Draft EIR, the EIR represents the independent judgment of the City of Los Alamitos (as the CEQA Lead Agency) and presents an objective evaluation of the physical environmental effects that could result from construction and operation of the proposed 4665 Lampson Avenue Project refer to Pages S-1, 1-1, and 1-4 of the Draft EIR). The City staff and the City’s environmental consultants conducted peer review of the Draft EIR prior to release of the Draft EIR for public review. The City conducted independent review, evaluated, and exercised judgment over the documents and the issues raised and addressed prior to their release for public review. Therefore, the Draft EIR for the 6 https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/Special-Reports/SR_232-Radon-Map.pdf
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Project is prepared adequately in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and no revisions to the Draft EIR are required.
This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. 16-17 The commenter states that Nick Johnson, the preparer of the Project’s Airport Land Use Assessment (Technical Appendix J1 of the Draft EIR), has no experience in evaluating the operation of a Military Airport and lacks knowledge and expertise to express an opinion on whether the Airport Land Use Plan for the JFTB is inconsistent with findings by ALUC and Caltrans. Contrary to the commenter’s assertions, Nick Johnson has several years of experience with military airports including the land use compatibility plan for the joint use Colorado Springs Airport and Peterson Space Force Base, March Air Reserve Base, Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, and Naval Air Station North Island (see Attachment D of this Final EIR). 16-18 The commenter states that Nick Johnson failed to provide the findings from a report by the National Commission on Military Safety in 2020. The commenter goes on to quote portions of text from the executive summary of the report. The report provides a comprehensive review of military aviation safety.
The Draft EIR included an analysis of safety hazards of JFTB on the Project (see Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft EIR). The National Commission on Military Aviation Safety is a report on military aviation nationwide and does not provide safety information or accident data specific to JFTB. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB).
16-19 The commenter restates that the consultant’s opinion is biased due to a financial conflict of interest. Refer to Responses to Comments 16-16 and 16-17. 16-20 The commenter states that cumulative noise impacts were not considered and that the mitigation measures on windows would not reduce the interior noise impacts at four test sites.
The commenter may be conflating the operational noise analysis conducted to analyze noise impacts at the four nearest receiver locations with the on-site aircraft noise impacts. The commenter states that the noise measurement at the four nearest receiver locations would exceed the 45dBA standards for interior noise level standards. As discussed in Table 4.11-4, Summary of Noise Significance Criteria, the significance of threshold for operational noise analysis is 55 dbA during daytime and 50 dBA during nighttime. The interior noise level standard of 45 dBA is for onsite aircraft noise impacts. The commenter’s remark that mitigation measures on windows would not reduce the noise impacts at four test sites were based on applying the results from the operational noise analysis to the on-site aircraft noise threshold.
Nevertheless, the Project cumulative noise impacts were fully addressed in Section 4.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR, under Subsection 4.11.8, Cumulative Impact Analysis (refer to Pages 4.11-34
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
through 4.11-36). Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts.
Additionally, the commenter states that the proposed sound wall appears to eliminate the emergency access on Lampson Avenue. As shown in Figure 3-38, Wall and Fence Plan, of the Draft EIR, the proposed wall would not eliminate emergency access on Lampson Avenue.
Exhibit ES-A of the Project’s Noise Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix K of the Draft EIR) has been updated accordingly and included as Attachment F to this Final EIR. 16-21 The commenter requests additional mitigation measures to be imposed in a Development Agreement that include written disclosure for all sales/leasing/rental materials to include the findings of the findings from a report by the National Commission on Military Safety in 2020.
Refer to Response to Comment 16-18 related to the findings of this report. As stated in Technical Appendix J1, of the Draft EIR, the ALUC mandates compliance with the State’s real estate disclosure provisions requiring buyer and renter notification for new residential land uses within an airport influence area (even if these state laws were to be revised or rescinded).
The ALUC also requires that signs providing these disclosures and notices be “prominently posted” in real estate sales offices and within the new development depicting overflight areas and helicopter traffic patterns. Please note that a development agreement is not being proposed as part of the Project entitlements. The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because requirements for notifications such as these are already required, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
16-22 The commenter requests that additional mitigation measures be imposed in a Development Agreement to require construction of residential units to include sound cancelling insulation in the walls and ceilings. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts. Project Design Feature PDF N-2 specifies architectural upgrades that are incorporated into the Project design to ensure the Project meets the State and City interior noise standards. Please note that a development agreement is not being proposed as part of the Project entitlements. Thus, no additional mitigation measures are required. The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because noise impacts were evaluated and determined to be less than significant with incorporation of PDF N-2, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. 16-23 The commenter requests additional mitigation measures to be imposed in a Development Agreement to install sound monitoring sites with the Project and require the owner/seller/lessor to pay for all mitigation costs associated with decibel readings above the City’s standard of 45 dBA from the date of sale of the unit to the original purchaser. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts.
The City’s interior noise standards will be enforced as outlined Los Alamitos Municipal Code Section 7.20, Noise. The Municipal Code establishes noise regulations and enforcement
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
mechanisms to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sounds emanating from all properties and land uses in the City. No further mitigation is needed. The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because noise impacts were evaluated and determined to be less than significant, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. 16-24 The commenter states that Exhibit ES-A, Noise Control Measure Summary, in the Project’s Noise Impact Analysis appears to remove the emergency access on Lampson Avenue and that the site plan is not consistent throughout all technical studies. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, the Project’s Noise Impact Analysis has been updated accordingly and included as Attachment F to this Final EIR.
16-25 The commenter restates previous comments made about Nick Johnson’s expertise and the findings of from a report by the National Commission on Military Safety in 2020 and requests mitigation measure for the employment of a consultant with expertise in the operation of a military airport. Refer to Responses to Comments 16-17 and 16-18 related to Nick Johnson’s experience and the findings of the 2020 report.
16-26 The commenter states that mitigation measures should include adequate setbacks from JFTB boundary, submission of a final site plan to OCFA, Los Alamitos and Seal Beach Police Departments to establish adequate ingress and egress for emergency vehicles, and reduction in building height for buildings closer to the boundary of JFTB. As discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazards Materials, of the Draft EIR, the FAA issued Determinations of No Hazard to Air Navigation (Technical Appendix J2) after its aeronautical study of the proposed Project revealed that the structures would not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air on January 26, 2022 (refer to Page 4.8-18 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, the Project’s Fire Master Plan is being reviewed by OCFA as part of the Project’s entitlement process. Thus, the City determines no additional mitigation measures are required. Los Alamitos and Seal Beach Police Department were both contacted during the preparation of the Draft EIR and were provided with a copy of the site plan. Responses from both agencies are found in Technical Appendix L of the Draft EIR. The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because safety hazards with the Project proximity to the Los Alamitos JFTB were evaluated and determined to be less than significant, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
16-27 The commenter states that the onsite traffic noise analysis starts with the false premise that onsite exterior and interior noise impacts are from traffic related noise levels and that both ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics issued findings that noise levels from JFTB have significant noise levels that negatively impact the health and welfare of the public. The commenter is conflating two separate issues: Section 7, On-site Traffic Noise Impact, in the Noise Impact Analysis (Technical Analysis K of the Draft EIR), which is to determine the noise exposure levels that would result from adjacent traffic noise sources in the Project study area,
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
and Section 12, Onsite Aircraft Noise Impacts. Noise from aircraft is discussed under Section 12, Onsite Aircraft Noise Impacts, of the Noise Impact Analysis. Refer also to Master Response
2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts.
16-28 The commenter cites to the Noise Impact Analysis related to the City of Los Alamitos 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level criteria and installation of windows and soundwall. The commenter also states that the installation of the noise wall has no impact on noise from aircraft, maintenance, operations of JFTB. The commenter is correct that the noise wall is not intended to reduce noise levels from aircraft operations. Refer also to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts. 16-29 The commenter states the four noise measurement locations that Urban Crossroads, Inc. recorded under existing noise conditions and the measurement daytime and nighttime reading.
The noise measurements provided by the commenter are incorrect and higher than those in the Draft EIR and Noise Impact Analysis. As discussed in Section 4.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR, o Location L1, represents the noise levels located approximately 10 feet north of the Project site near Arbor Dog Park at 4665 Lampson Avenue. The noise level measurements collected show an average daytime noise level calculated to be 49.9 dBA Leq and an average nighttime noise level calculated to be 42.4 dBA Leq at location L1.
o Location L2 represents the noise levels located approximately 845 feet east of the Project site near single-family residence at 5001 Lunar Drive. The noise level measurements collected show an average daytime noise level calculated to be 60.8 dBA Leq and an average nighttime noise level calculated to be 52.4 dBA Leq at location L2.
o Location L3 represents the noise levels located approximately 540 feet southwest of the Project site near single-family residence at 4701 Ironwood Avenue. The noise level measurements collected show an average daytime noise level calculated to be
68.7 dBA Leq and an average nighttime noise level calculated to be 60.7 dBA Leq at location L3.
o Location L4 represents the noise levels located approximately 5,486 feet west of the Project site near Old Ranch Country Club Golf Course at 3901 Lampson Avenue.
The noise level measurements collected show an average daytime noise level calculated to be 56.5 dBA Leq and an average nighttime noise level calculated to be
55.1 dBA Leq at location L4 (refer to Page 4.11-4 pf the Draft EIR). 16-30 The commenter incorrectly asserts that the Project does not meet the interior noise standards of 45 dBA. The commenter requests that additional mitigation measures be required to include written disclosure for all sales/leasing/rental materials to include the findings from a report by
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
the National Commission on Military Safety in 2020. Refer to Response to Comment 16-18 related to the findings of this report. Refer also to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), related to buyer awareness. The Project Applicant will make all required airport disclosures in accordance with State and federal laws. As discussed in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of the Draft EIR, the ALUC mandates the provision of the State’s real estate disclosure regarding buyer and renter notification for new residential land uses within an airport influence area even if these state laws were to be revised or rescinded. The ALUC also requires that signs providing these disclosures and notices be “prominently posted” in real estate sales offices and within the new development depicting overflight areas and helicopter traffic patterns. Buyer awareness is required as part of the City’s approval process for the Project. The buyer awareness notification process is built into the real estate disclosure laws of the State to ensure that potential buyers are fully informed before buying a home near an airport if they are sensitive to the types of annoyances or disruptions that may come with the location (refer to Page 4.10-18 of the Draft EIR). The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because requirements for notifications such as these are already required for the Project, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. 16-31 The commenter requests additional mitigation measures to require construction of residential units to include sound cancelling insulation in the walls and ceilings. Refer to Master Response
2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts. Refer to Response to Comment 16-22 related to architectural updates. The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because noise impacts were evaluated and determined to be less than significant with incorporation of PDF N-2, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
16-32 The commenter requests additional mitigation measures to require the installation of sound monitoring sites within the Project and require the owner/seller/lessor to pay for all mitigation costs associated with decibel readings above the City’s standard of 45 dBA from the date of sale of the unit to the original purchaser. Refer to Master Response 2.1.9, Proximity to the Los Alamitos Joint Force Training Base (JFTB), for airport noise impacts. Refer to Response to Comment 16-23. The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because noise impacts were evaluated and determined to be less than significant, and therefore does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
16-33 The commenter states that Exhibit ES-A, Noise Control Measure Summary, in the Project’s Noise Impact Analysis appears to remove the emergency access on Lampson Avenue and that the site plan is not consistent throughout all technical studies. Refer to Response to Comments 16-3, 16-24 and 16-26.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
16-34 The commenter states that the mitigation measure to prevent destruction of nests and that nests be cordoned off until nests are empty should be included in a written Development Agreement.
As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure MM
4.3-1 includes measures for establishing appropriate avoidance buffers around the nest (based on the species detected), and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied. Moreover, as discussed in Section S.0, Executive Summary, of the Draft EIR, State law requires the preparation of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) to ensure that measures that would avoid or lessen significant environmental effects of the project are implemented after project approval. The mitigation measures identified in this EIR have been described in sufficient detail to provide the necessary information to identify the party or parties responsible for carrying out the mitigation, when the mitigation will be implemented, and why the mitigation has been required. An MMRP would be adopted by the City at the time that the Project is considered for approval (refer to Page S-5 of the Draft EIR). The requested mitigation measures would not clearly lessen any environmental impacts of the Project because a Development Agreement is unnecessary to address any such impacts in light of the CEQA requirement that an MMRP be prepared and approved to ensure the existing mitigation measures identified in the Biological Resources section of the Draft EIR are implemented. As such, the commenter’s recommendation that this mitigation measure be included does not constitute significant new information pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. Please note that a development agreement is not being proposed as part of the Project entitlements. 16-35 The commenter recommends a condition of approval for an archaeologist to be retained to conduct periodic spot checks related to ground disturbance activities and includes details of the recommended mitigation measure. The commenter’s requested mitigation is already provided under Mitigation Measures MM 4.4-1 and MM 4.4-2 in the Draft EIR, which requires an archaeologist to conduct periodic spot checks during construction, among other things. Thus, the City determines that no additional mitigation measures are required. 16-36 The commenter first states that a questionnaire was prepared instead of a report by OCFA, summarizes OCFA responses to the questionnaire provided in Technical Appendix L, of the Draft EIR, and recommends a mitigation for a condition of approval for the Developer to enter into a written Fire Protection Agreement with OCFA to determine the fair share funding necessary to provide adequate fire protection. The commenter states that these fees should be included to the Homeowners Association (HOA) Fee to be paid to OCFA annually.
In accordance with OCFA Guideline B-09, Fire Master Plans for Commercial & Residential Development, Firesafe Planning Solutions prepared a Fire Master Plan for the Project (see Figure 4.8-3, Fire Master Plan, in the Draft EIR). The Fire Master Plan demonstrates the Project’s compliance with the California Fire and Building Codes and other regulations governing water availability for firefighting and emergency access to the Project site, including but not limited to fire access and roadway design, fire lane identification, and access to structures. A report prepared by OCFA for the Project is typically not a requirement during OCFA’s review process of the Project’s plans; however, OCFA is responsible for reviewing
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
and approving the Project’s site plan and Fire Master Plan. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, the Project Applicant is required to enter into a Secured Fire Protection Agreement to provide for fair-share funding of capital improvements necessary to establish adequate fire protection facilities and equipment, and/or personnel as a condition of approval (refer to Page 4.13-9 of the Draft EIR). Any fees associated with the Secured Fire Protection Agreement would be paid by the Project Applicant prior to construction and not by the future HOA. Thus, the City determines no additional mitigation measures are required. 16-37 The commenter states that the City of Los Alamitos should be a part of HOA Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, to enforce the payment of adequate HOA fees to cover the cost of Fire Protection funding. Refer to Response to Comment 16-36 related to the Secured Fire Projection Agreement. Payment of fair-share funding and timing would be agreed upon with OCFA; these fees would not be paid through the HOA.
16-38 The commenter states that there is no site plan exhibit that identified the access roads for emergency vehicles in the questionnaire, Exhibit 1-4 of the Traffic Analysis does not show fire equipment can navigate around all sides of the buildings, and Exhibit 3-1 does not show the emergency access at Driveway 8. The commenter is incorrect in all three assertions made for the following reasons. When conducting public service correspondence with OCFA, a cover letter describing the Project, the Project location maps, and Site Plan was provided along with the questionnaire. As discussed in the Traffic Analysis, Exhibit 1-4 depicts driveway intersection recommendations needed to accommodate site access and maintain acceptable peak hour operations for the proposed Project. The purpose of Exhibit 1-4 is not to depict fire equipment access. Figure 4.8-3, Fire Master Plan, of the Draft EIR demonstrates the Project’s compliance with the California Fire and Building Codes and other regulations regarding emergency access to the Project site, including but not limited to fire access and roadway design, fire lane identification, and access to structures. Moreover, as discussed in the Traffic Analysis, Exhibit 3-1 illustrates the study area intersections located near the proposed Project and identifies the number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and intersection traffic controls. Exhibit 3-1 does not include the proposed conditions of the Project site and is intended to depict the existing circulation network.
16-39 The commenter recommends additional conditions of approval including review by OCFA of construction documents including the site plans to confirm applicable fire safety codes and regulations are implemented. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, site plans would be submitted to OCFA to ensure compliance with OCFA standard conditions, including fire flow requirements based upon the tenant type, building size, and building type (refer to Page 4.13-9 of the Draft EIR).
16-40 The commenter states that the Traffic Analysis does not contain a current site plan and that the report needs to be revised to include width of interior streets, turning radius, location of fire hydrants, restricted parking curbs and signs and adequate setbacks. Note that Project’s Traffic Analysis has been updated and included as Attachment G to this Final EIR. The commenter’s
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
request for a plan that shows the width of interior streets, turning radius, location of fire hydrants, restricted parking curbs and signs and adequate setbacks are shown in the Figure 4.8- 3, Fire Master Plan, of the Draft EIR.
16-41 The commenter restates the Seal Beach Police Department’s concern on parking impacts to College Park East and Arbor Park and existing resource may not be adequate to manage traffic and safety concerns on Lampson Avenue. The commenter states that the Draft EIR should carefully consider these issues and mitigation measures for traffic enforcement, road maintenance, signalization, and parking restrictions. Refer to Master Responses 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, 2.1.3, Parking, and 2.1.8, Public Safety. SBPD stated that it will not be expanding service capacity as a result of the Project because the Project is located within the City of Los Alamitos.
However, SBPD has a mutual aid agreement with LAPD and can assist with public services in the event of an emergency, if needed.
16-42 The commenter states that a traffic mitigation plan and traffic signal should be considered.
Impacts to automobile delay-based LOS is no longer a CEQA topic pursuant to SB 743. A Traffic Analysis was prepared for non-CEQA purposes and included as Technical Appendix N1 of the Draft EIR. An updated Traffic Analysis was prepared and included as Attachment G of this Final EIR. The Traffic Analysis considered the Project’s contribution to intersection deficiencies, if any, as well as a traffic signal. Refer to Master Responses 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion and 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue. 16-43 The commenter expresses concern with overflow parking to College Park East leading to public safety hazard due to pedestrian crossing and lack of traffic signal. The commenter also states that parking overflow would place a burden on SBPD for enforcement. SBPD stated that it will not be expanding service capacity as a result of the Project because the Project is located within the City of Los Alamitos. However, SBPD has a mutual aid agreement with LAPD and can assist with public services in the event of an emergency, if needed. The Project would install a high visibility crosswalk at the primary neighborhood entry. A Safety Evaluation was prepared to evaluate the Project’s safety impact on public roadways and Project access points, including the design of the proposed high visibility crosswalk (see Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, and Attachment H of this Final EIR). The Safety Evaluation identifies the on-site circulation for the site, including various vehicle paths (frontloading garbage trucks, fire trucks, delivery trucks, etc.) for various internal drive aisles, which allow for two-way traffic. Access to and from the site will be accommodated via driveways on Lampson Avenue. The vehicle turning templates show acceptable turning movements for the various vehicles and trucks anticipated to access the site (see Attachment D of Attachment H of this Final EIR). Table 1 of the Safety Evaluation provides a summary of the types of collisions by intersection for eight intersections. The existing crash rates for the study area intersections are lower than the statewide average crash rates as determined by the 2021 Crash Report. A Project would have the potential to create an increase in collision rate if it introduced a geometric design feature that did not meet safety standards or incompatible uses (e.g. farm
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
equipment). Implementation of Project improvements (within the public right-of-way) per Los Alamitos and Seal Beach standards ensures all that sight distance requirements, pedestrian crossing requirements, and street design requirements are met. Additionally, the Project vehicle mix is consistent with the adjacent land uses, including the residential neighborhood to the south. As demonstrated, the Project would not result in a safety impact or substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature. Refer also to Master Responses 2.1.3, Parking, and
2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue.
16-44 The commenter states that Urban Crossroads, Inc. did not provide mitigation measures required to address the public safety concerns expressed by the Seal Beach Police Department. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue. As analyzed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, the Project would not result in a significant impact to police protection services, including SBPD. Therefore, no mitigation is required. 16-45 The commenter states that the County of Orange should be consulted and be the lead agency in coordinating safety plans to prevent the Lampson property owner from avoiding its financial responsibility for public safety improvements. Refer to Master Response 2.1.8, Public Safety, for the Project’s potential public safety impacts. For CEQA purposes, the lead agency for the proposed Project is the City of Los Alamitos. The City of Seal Beach is a responsible agency for the proposed Project because the Project site requires approvals from the City of Seal Beach for certain infrastructure improvements. Enforcement of the Project’s conditions of approval and mitigation measures will occur through the City of Los Alamitos. The County of Orange does not have jurisdiction over the proposed Project.
16-46 The commenter states that the Traffic Analysis failed to consider the cumulative impacts of multiple projects along Lampson, including Old Ranch Country Club in Seal Beach. Refer to Response to Comment D-9 regarding the analysis of the proposed Project’s cumulative traffic impacts.
16-47 The commenter states that the Traffic Analysis does not recognize the proposed 7-foot soundwall that would block the emergency vehicle access entry. As shown in Figure 3-38, Wall and Fence Plan, the proposed wall would not eliminate emergency access on Lampson Avenue. Refer to Response to Comments 16-3 and 16-24.
16-48 The commenter states that there is no consistent use of the site plan throughout the Draft EIR and that the public safety concerns from the Seal Beach Police Department were not included in the Project’s Traffic Analysis. All technical reports show the correct site plan, with the exception that the site plan in the VMT Report was updated (Attachment B of this Final EIR).
This does not result in a change to any of the findings of the VMT analysis.
A Safety Evaluation was prepared to confirm that the proposed Project would have no safety impacts on public roadways and Project access points after taking into consideration the Project’s implementation of the proposed high visibility crosswalk (see Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, and Attachment H of this Final EIR). The Safety
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Evaluation further confirms the analysis and determination in the Transportation Section (Section 4.15) of the Draft EIR that the proposed Project would not result in a safety impact or substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature. Refer to Response to Comments 16-3 and 16-24 regarding the Project’s site plan.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report
Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment Letter 17
Attachment available until Jun 19, 2024
From: Carol Churchill
To: Jordan Nefulda; Shelley Hasselbrink; Trisha Murphy; Emily Hibard; Tanya Doby; Tom Oliver; Chet Simmons Subject: DEIR Comments on Lampson Project
Date: Monday, May 20, 2024 7:08:40 PM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender [email protected]
To Tom Oliver, Planning Department, City of Los Alamitos May 20, 2024 Click to Download
Comment Letters 4 Sets Los Alamitos.zip
67 MB
The attached "Lampson Comment emails" are intended to be a partial response the Request for Comments to the Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and the Notice of Preparation of DEIR for the Lampson Project, Los Alamitos, California.
The Lampson Comment emails are public records produced by the City Clerk of the City of Los Alamitos pursuant to a Public Records Request. The Comments address the potential significant effects generated by the proposed project in relation to the following Environmental Analysis Check List Categories: biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soil, transportation and tribal cultural resources.
Please acknowledge receipt of the 4 SETS of Comments, and your ability to open the Attachment containing
Set 1 - 108 pages
Set 2 - 96 pages
Set 3 - 65 pages
Set 4 - 71 pages
In the absence of a response, written copies of the Comments will be delivered to Tom Oliver in the Planning Department prior to June 10, 2024
Respectfully
Carol Churchill
On Behalf of
Protect Our Community
Los Alamitos-Rossmoor-Seal Beach
17-1
17-2
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Responses to Comment 17
Churchill, Carol, dated May 20, 2024.
17-1 The commenter provides a set of comment letters as a partial response to the NOA for the Draft EIR. The commenter notes that the comment letters are public records produced by the City Clerk pursuant to a Public Records Request and addresses the potential significant effects related to biological resources cultural resources, geology and soil, transportation, and tribal cultural resources. The Draft EIR analyzed the above-mentioned environmental topics in Sections 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 4.15, and 4.16, respectively.
17-2 The commenter requests receipt of the four sets of comment letters, which contain comment letters received on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the Draft EIR. These comment letters were incorporated as Technical Appendix A in the Draft EIR and are provided in Attachment A of this Final EIR (refer to this attachment for comment numbering). Written responses to NOP comments are not required but are used to inform the scope of the Draft EIR. However, because the commenter included all the NOP comments as part of this comment letter, responses to the four sets of comment letters are provided below. However, it should be noted that, since these NOP comments were written prior to the preparation and release of the Draft EIR, the comment letters do not address the adequacy of the environmental analysis in the Draft EIR. However, NOP comments provided during the scoping process were taken into consideration during the preparation of the Draft EIR (see Table 1-1, of the Draft EIR). 17-3 The commenter inquires about access to the open space/park for the low-income housing area.
As shown in Figure 3-22, Site Plan, of Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, there are two open space areas with the affordable housing units portion of the site: a tot lot park area and young adult zone (refer to Page 3-7 of the Draft EIR). 17-4 The commenter inquires about Project parking and increased traffic on Lampson Avenue with the Project and the Interstate 405 (I-405) expansion. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, and 2.1.3, Parking. 17-5 The commenter requests trees to be studied in the Draft EIR. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, on April 18, 2022, the City of Los Alamitos adopted a Parkway Tree Master Plan as part of its Urban Forest Program. This plan addresses City parkway trees. There are currently no parkway trees along the Project’s frontage. The Project would not result in an impact to the City parkway trees. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. No impact would occur and mitigation is not required (refer to Page 4.3-34 of the Draft EIR). See also Response to Comment 17-6. 17-6 The commenter inquires about tree removal during Project construction. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, the Project requires removal of existing
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
ornamental trees (refer to Page 4.3-33of the Draft EIR). Impacts would be less than significant, as explained in the Draft EIR.
17-7 The commenter expresses concerns about the need for trees in the community, lack of open space, removal of trees, automobile pollution, and requests for only one entry whether the primary apartment entryway is proposed. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft EIR, the Project site does contain a number of ornamental trees onsite that will be removed and replaced. As shown in Figure 3- 18, Landscape Plan, a total of 441 trees would be planted throughout the Project site (refer to Page 4.1-10 of the Draft EIR). Refer to Master Response
2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for the discussion of the open space. See also Response to Comment 17-6 regarding air quality.
Moreover, as discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, implementation of the Project which includes mobile emissions sources would not: 1) exceed applicable South Coast AQMD localized criteria pollution emissions thresholds during construction and operation; 2) would not cause or measurably contribute to the formation of a CO “hot spot;” and 3) would not result in a health risk for nearby residents during construction (refer to Pages 4.2-26 through
4.2-29 of the Draft EIR). The commenter’ suggestion for one entry way is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
17-8 The commenter expresses concerns regarding impacts to AYSO operations and states that the Project would eliminate kids ability to play soccer. The Project would not eliminate kids ability to play soccer in connection with AYSO events. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, AYSO uses the abutting Arbor Park (north of Project) on weeknights and weekends for soccer practice and games, utilizing the existing paved parking lot on the Project site for overflow parking, particularly on weekends. To allow for additional parking at Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park, located adjacent to the north boundary of the Project site, the Project Applicant proposes to dedicate or grant an easement for the northern 10 feet of property abutting Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park to the City of Los Alamitos or jurisdiction with authority over the two parks. This dedication or grant of easement would support the use of this area for parking after construction of the Project by allowing an approximate capacity of 154 to 200 parking spaces to serve the parks, depending on the ultimate configuration (refer to Page 3-4 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, the Project Applicant has agreed to coordinate with the City of Seal Beach and AYSO, as needed, with respect to parking for Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking. 17-9 The commenter opposes the Project due to traffic issues and removal of AYSO operations.
Project. Refer to Response to Comment D-30, 17-8, and Master Responses 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, regarding traffic and 2.1.3, Parking, and regarding AYSO operations.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
17-10 The commenter expresses concerns regarding overflow parking to Arbor Park and College Park East and the lack of signal control from the Project. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for a detailed discussion on the proposed Project’s potential parking impacts. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, the primary neighborhood entry is not anticipated to meet a peak hour or planning level (daily volume) that would warrant a traffic signal. Therefore, the Project no longer proposes installation of a traffic signal. A Safety Evaluation was prepared to confirm that the Project would have no safety impacts on public roadways (see Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, and Attachment H of this Final EIR). The Safety Evaluation further confirms the analysis and determination in the Transportation Section (Section 4.15) of the Draft EIR that the Project would not result in a safety impact or substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature. 17-11 The commenter expresses concerns regarding provision of open space/park space for residents of the proposed Project. The commenter requests that the Draft EIR include a listing of existing parks within a ½ mile of the Project and an evaluation of Project impacts to recreational facilities. Refer to Master Response 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of OnSite Amenities. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Section 4.14, Recreation, of the Draft EIR includes a listing of existing parks within a ½ mile of the Project and an evaluation of Project impacts to recreational facilities.
17-12 The commenter requests that the Draft EIR include an evaluation of noise impacts at Arbor Park during weekends to the proposed Project. The commenter requests the noise study to include all hours of the day on Saturdays when whistles, loud voices, cheering, and other noises are made. CEQA does not require an analysis of the impact of existing environmental conditions on a proposed Project. Therefore, an evaluation of activities at Arbor Park and related noise impacts to the future residents of the Project were not evaluated. Noise impacts associated with the Project were evaluated in Section 4.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR. 17-13 The commenter expresses general opposition to the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. However, it should be noted that, since these NOP comments were written prior to the preparation and release of the Draft EIR, the comment letters do not address the adequacy of the environmental analysis in the Draft EIR. Thus, no further response is required.
17-14 The commenter expresses concerns with parking and open space for the Project. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking impacts and 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for recreation impacts. 17-15 The commenter opposes the Project due to congestion on Lampson Avenue and parking. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns, and
2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
17-16 The commenter opposes the Project due to existing conditions of parks and limited green space in the Project area. Refer to Master Response 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for recreation impacts. 17-17 The commenter recommends the Draft EIR focus on biological resources due to the Project’s adjacency to both the JFTB Los Alamitos and Arbor Park. The commenter requests significant impacts analysis to several species of protected birds known to utilize the immediate surrounding area of the Project. Pursuant to the commenter’s request, Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR discuss impacts to biological resources including protected bird species. Thus, no further response is required.
17-18 The commenter requests analysis on Swainson’s Hawk, White-tailed Kite, Northern Harrier, and Vermilion Flycatcher. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, the above-mentioned species were analyzed. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.3- 1 through MM 4.3-3 would ensure that pre-construction surveys are conducted for nesting birds, nesting raptors, and bat roosts prior to site disturbance. If nesting birds or raptors are present on the Project site, mitigation requires avoidance of active nests. With implementation of the required mitigation, potential impacts to nesting birds and common raptors would be reduced to below a level of significance (refer to Pages 4.3-37 through 4.3-39 of the Draft EIR). 17-19 The commenter recommends a thorough and extensive literature review of the abovementioned sensitive species and to investigate rigorous nesting bird protection measures as well as possible compensatory mitigation for direct and indirect loss of foraging habitat both on- and offsite as a result of the Project. The commenter also recommends analysis of impacts to Peregrine Falcon, Horned Lark, Swainson's Hawks, or others, including non-avian species.
A Project-specific biological technical report was prepared for the Draft EIR (included as Technical Appendix C1 of the Draft EIR), which included a thorough and extensive literature review, general biological surveys, habitat assessments, and focused bat surveys. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, peregrine falcon was not detected on the site and foraging potential is very limited and nesting sites are absent (refer to Page 4.13- 17 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, the California horned lark was not detected onsite during all surveys and not expected to nest onsite due to proximity of large trees adjacent to the open field (refer to Page 4.13-17 of the Draft EIR). The Swainson’s hawk would not be expected to nest onsite due to the lack of solitary trees and level of nearby human disturbance such as development and traffic, but would be expected to forage opportunistically onsite, but primarily over large open fields, including open areas within the JFTB, Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, Old Ranch Country Club and the Navy golf course (refer to Page 4.13-18 of the Draft EIR). Moreover, implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through MM
4.3-3 would ensure that pre-construction surveys are conducted for nesting birds, nesting raptors, and bat roosts prior to site disturbance. If nesting birds or raptors are present on the Project site, the identified mitigation requires avoidance of active nests. With implementation of the required mitigation, potential impacts to nesting birds and common raptors would be reduced to below a level of significance (refer to Pages 4.3-37 through 4.3-39 of the Draft EIR).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
17-20 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project due to limited green space existing residents would have access to, traffic and parking impacts on Lampson Avenue, and lack of a signal control. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns, 2.1.3, Parking, for parking impacts, and 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities, for recreation impacts. Refer to Response to Comment 17- 10 and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for traffic signal concerns.
17-21 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project due to the insufficient number of planned parking spaces. The commenter also expresses concerns with the proposed low-income housing. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking for parking concerns. The commenter’s concern on low-income housing is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. 17-22 The commenter expresses concerns with parking during AYSO operation and traffic impacts on Lampson Avenue. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns, 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns, and 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for safety concerns.
17-23 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project and requests the Draft EIR include the environmental issues that are discussed below in Responses to Comment 17-24 to 17-28. 17-24 The commenter requests consideration of wildlife, endangered habitats, plants, nesting birds, noise from pets, rodents, and inquires about the California Natural Diversity Database. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, wildlife, special-status vegetation communities, special-status species, nesting birds, and indirect impacts to biological resources were analyzed (refer to Pages 4.3-29 through 4.3-31 of the Draft EIR). 17-25 The commenter inquires about whether the City has reviewed the CDFW’s CEQA Review website. This comment is acknowledged and no further response is required. As discussed in Section 1.0, Introduction, of the Draft EIR, the Draft EIR has been prepared in accordance with all criteria, standards, and procedures of CEQA (California Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.). Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21067 and CEQA Guidelines Article 4 and Section 15367, the City is the Lead Agency under whose authority this EIR has been prepared. “Lead Agency” refers to the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. Serving as the Lead Agency and before taking action to approve the Project, the City has the obligation to: (1) ensure that this EIR has been completed in accordance with CEQA; (2) review and consider information contained in this EIR as part of its decision making process; (3) make a statement that this EIR reflects the City’s independent judgement; (4) ensure that all significant effects on the environment are eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible; and, if necessary (5) make written findings for each unavoidable significant environmental effect stating the reasons why
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in this EIR are infeasible and citing the specific benefits of the Project that outweigh its unavoidable adverse effects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 through 15093) (refer to Page 1-3 of the Draft EIR). 17-26 The commenter requests consideration of water issues due to drought conditions. As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR, based on the water supplies available and the estimated water demand, there are sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project during average, single dry, and multiple dry years. Additionally, the Project is subject to connection and service fees to offset increased demand and assist in facility expansion and service (at the time of need). Accordingly, there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages
4.17-15 through 4.17-17 of the Draft EIR).
17-27 The commenter requests consideration of traffic impacts on Lampson Avenue and emergency access. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns, and 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for safety concerns. 17-28 The commenter requests consideration of sanitation, trucks, and landfills and requests involvement in the Project noticing. As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR, solid waste from the City is transported to Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill in the City of Irvine and the Olinda Alpha Sanitary Landfill near the City of Brea. The two landfills have a combined permitted disposal capacity of 19,500 tons per day.
The Project’s estimated solid waste generation represents approximately 0.0077 % of the two landfill’s capacity and therefore, would not contribute significantly to both of the landfill’s daily capacity. Additionally, the Project is subject to connection and service fees to offset increased demand and assist in facility expansion and service (at the time of need).
Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required (refer to Pages 4.17-19 through 4.17-20 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, as discussed above, the NOA was mailed to responsible agencies, local government agencies, and interested parties that received the NOP, to individuals who had previously requested the NOA or EIR, and to all individuals who provided NOP comments on April 24, 2024. 17-29 The commenter expresses general opposition to the Project due to inadequate Project parking and using Seal Beach Homeowners’ parking spaces. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns.
17-30 The commenter states that the Project would bring a significant increase in traffic and traffic hazards to Lampson Avenue such as making U-turns at Heather. Refer to Master Response
2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns, and 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for sight distance.
17-31 The commenter states that inadequate public facilities will cause Project residents to use Seal Beach’s public facilities, specifically College Park East’s parks. As discussed in Section 4.14, Recreation, of the Draft EIR, the Project would result in an increase in residents; however, the
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Project is not anticipated to increase the use of the existing parks such that a significant impact would result. Accordingly, implementation of the Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility could occur or be accelerated. Impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.14-8 through 4.14-10 of the Draft EIR). Refer also to Master Response 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities. 17-32 The commenter states that the Project will put a strain on the Los Alamitos Unified School District System. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, based on current enrollment, there is a deficiency of 45 students at the K-5 grade level at Project buildout. However, the District currently has open enrollment which allows students to attend schools other than the school assigned based upon their area of residence. As shown in Table
4.13-5, there are four other K-5 elementary schools within a 2.5 mile radius of the Project site with a total excess capacity of 62 students and enough excess capacity to serve the Project generated 51 K-5 students. It should be noted that the projected student population is conservative because it represents a snapshot in time. It is unlikely that all students generated by the Project would occur at Project buildout but rather would fluctuate over the life of the Project. Moreover, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees to LAUSD in compliance with SB 50 for the construction of new schools, which provides full and complete mitigation to school facilities. Development impact fees currently charged by LAUSD for residential uses are $5.17 per sf, and the Project Applicant will pay the applicable fees at the time building permits. Although project buildout would result in an increase of 135 students, the availability of schools in the area and the payment of impact fees in compliance with SB 50 would address any potential impacts. Therefore, based on the preceding, impacts from implementation of the Project on school services would be less than significant. No mitigation is required (refer to Pages 4.13-10 through 4.13-12 of the Draft EIR). 17-33 The commenter states that the change in the use of the land from a state office building to housing will necessitate major utility infrastructure changes. The commenter states that the construction work needed for these changes will cause major disruptions to Lampson Avenue and College Park East residents for many months. Section 3.3.7, Infrastructure Improvements, of the Draft EIR, discusses the Project’s proposed utility infrastructure improvements. As discussed in 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR, the construction of the Project’s infrastructure improvements necessary to serve the Project would not result in any significant physical effects on the environment. Impacts would be less-than significant and no mitigation is required (refer to Page 4.17-13 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, construction on Lampson Avenue will require an encroachment permit and approval from the City Engineer Lane closures that may be required for median improvements would be temporary and require a permit and compliance with LAMC 12.08.200, Safety precautions–Obstruction of traffic. Compliance with LAMC
12.08.200 would ensure safe crossing and access for all vehicle and pedestrians at all times (refer to Page 4.8-21 of the Draft EIR).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
17-34 The commenter states that the Project will put a strain on water supply and would cause air pollution. As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Draft EIR, based on the water supplies available and the estimated water demand, there are sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project during average, single dry, and multiple dry years.
Additionally, the Project is subject to connection and service fees to offset increased demand and assist in facility expansion and service (at the time of need). Accordingly, there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.17-15 through 4.17-17 of the Draft EIR). As discussed in Section
4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, implementation of the Project would not: 1) exceed applicable South Coast AQMD localized criteria pollution emissions thresholds during construction and operation; 2) would not cause or measurably contribute to the formation of a CO “hot spot;” and 3) would not result in a health risk for nearby residents during construction (refer to Pages 4.2-26 through 4.2-29 of the Draft EIR). 17-35 The commenter expresses opposition to the Project and states that the Project will bring hundreds of vehicles onto Lampson avenue creating more pollution, impacting wildlife, and causing traffic and safety issues. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, implementation of the Project would not: 1) exceed applicable South Coast AQMD localized criteria pollution emissions thresholds during construction and operation; 2) would not cause or measurably contribute to the formation of a CO “hot spot;” and 3) would not result in a health risk for nearby residents during construction (refer to Pages 4.2-26 through 4.2-29 of the Draft EIR). As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR, impacts to biological resources were determined to be less than significant with mitigation (refer to Pages 4.3-37 through 4.3-39 of the Draft EIR). Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns, and 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns.
17-36 The commenter states that the Project residents will utilize nearest cities for all their needs and recreation causing excessive noise, pollution, traffic congestion, and wear and tear on facilities/equipment. Refer to Response to Comment 17-34 for pollution concerns. As discussed in Section 4.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR, the Project would not exceed significance thresholds for construction noise levels, operational noise levels, or off-site traffic noise levels.
As such, the Project would not generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.11-23 through 4.11-29 of the Draft EIR). Refer to Master Response
2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. As discussed in Section
4.14, Recreation, of the Draft EIR, the Project would result in an increase in residents; however, the Project is not anticipated to increase the use of the existing parks such that substantial additional use or physical deterioration of the existing parks would occur or be accelerated.
Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.14-8 through 4.14-10 of the Draft EIR).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
17-37 The commenter recommends adding a traffic light, reducing apartments to two stories, and adding a playground and asks to consider the added noise, lights, traffic, pollution, and overcrowding of the Project. Refer to Response to Comment 17-10 and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for traffic signal concerns. The Draft EIR evaluated Project impacts related to noise, lighting, transportation, and air quality. Refer also to Master Response 2.1.10, Loss of Existing Open Space and Provision of On-Site Amenities. 17-38 The commenter expresses gratitude regarding the number of concerns for the Project. This comment is acknowledged and no further response is required. 17-39 The commenter requests the Draft EIR address safety issues for pedestrians and parking for Arbor Park. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, non-motorized circulation would include pedestrian connectivity with existing sidewalks along Lampson Avenue, including an existing signalized pedestrian connection to the south at Rose Street and Lampson Avenue and pedestrian “paseo” connections with Arbor Park and the Arbor Dog Park to the north. The Project would provide pedestrian gates to be controlled by the Homeowners’ Association to restrict residents from entering Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park outside of hours specified by JTFB. The Project would provide 577 parking spaces (475 spaces for the single family detached and townhomes and 102 for the apartments) in exceedance of the 440 parking spaces that would be required pursuant to the State’s Density Bonus Law. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns. 17-40 The commenter requests that noise impacts are addressed in the Draft EIR. As discussed in Section 4.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR, the Project would not exceed significance thresholds for construction noise levels, operational noise levels, and off-site traffic noise levels. As such, the Project would not generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.11-23 through 4.11-29 of the Draft EIR). 17-41 The commenter states that the loss of Arbor Park would be a huge detriment due to parking access. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. Additionally, the Project would be confined to the Project site with the exception of infrastructure improvements and would not remove Arbor Park as a recreational facility for the community. AYSO will be able to continue to use Arbor Park for soccer games upon Project development. 17-42 The commenter inquires about traffic flow on Lampson, use of existing facilities in the area, noise and pollution from construction, and public services be addressed in the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR includes analysis on traffic, recreation, noise, air quality, and public services in Sections 4.15, 4.14, 4.11, 4.2, and 4.13, respectively. 17-43 The commenter provides an introduction about being a nearby resident and expresses opposition to the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. However, it should be noted that, since these NOP comments were written prior to the preparation and release of the Draft EIR, the comment letters do not address the adequacy of the environmental analysis in the Draft EIR. NOP comments provided during the scoping process were taken into consideration during the preparation of the Draft EIR. Thus, no further response is required.
17-44 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic impacts on Lampson Avenue, cross streets and freeway exits and requests traffic, wildlife and safety impacts be conducted. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. A traffic analysis and biological resources report was conducted for the Project (Refer to Technical Appendix N1 and C1, of the Draft EIR respectively). Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns and Response to Comments B-2 and B-3 for impacts on the freeway system.
17-45 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project and notes being a resident that utilizes Arbor Park and Arbor Dog Park. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. However, it should be noted that, since these NOP comments were written prior to the preparation and release of the Draft EIR, the comment letters do not address the adequacy of the environmental analysis in the Draft EIR. Thus, no further response is required. 17-46 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic on Lampson Avenue. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns. 17-47 The commenter expresses concerns with recreational impacts and parking. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. As discussed in Section 4.14, Recreation, of the Draft EIR, the Project would result in an increase in residents; however, the Project is not anticipated to increase the use of the existing parks such that substantial additional use or physical deterioration of the existing parks would occur or be accelerated. Impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.14-8 through 4.14-10 of the Draft EIR). 17-48 The commenter expresses concerns about the removal of green space and greenhouse gas emissions. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, the Project would provide a total of 67,480 square feet (sf) or 1.55 acres of open space in the Project site, including 16,508 sf of usable common open space, 51,320 sf of private open space (homeowner maintained). The 51,320 sf of private open space includes 4,620 sf of multi-family private deck, 5,181 sf of townhomes private deck, and 41,519 sf of private open space (homeowner maintained) (refer to Page 3-7 of the Draft EIR). As discussed in Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the Draft EIR, construction and operation of the Project would generate a 2,757.11 MTCO2e/yr; the Project would not exceed the significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr. Thus, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required (refer to Pages 4.7-26 through 4.7-27 of the Draft EIR).
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
17-49 The commenter expresses concerns with air quality and health impacts to local residents. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, implementation of the Project would not: 1) exceed applicable South Coast AQMD localized criteria pollution emissions thresholds during construction and operation; 2) would not cause or measurably contribute to the formation of a CO “hot spot;” and 3) would not result in a health risk for nearby residents during construction (refer to Pages 4.2-26 through 4.2-29 of the Draft EIR). 17-50 The commenter concludes the comment letter and expresses general opposition to the Project.
This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project. However, it should be noted that, since these NOP comments were written prior to the preparation and release of the Draft EIR, the comment letters do not address the adequacy of the environmental analysis in the Draft EIR. Thus, no further response is required.
17-51 The commenter expresses concerns with the Project’s public noticing not extending to Garden Grove. The mailing list radius complied with the City of Los Alamitos distance requirements and was expanded to 1,000 feet to include every house within College Park East and Parkwood regardless of distance. Additionally, public notice was published in the Event News Enterprise; the notice of availability and Draft EIR were made available for review, on the City’s web site.
Therefore, the City met and exceeded its legal requirement for noticing. No further response is required.
17-52 The commenter raises concerns with the amount of on-site parking for the Project and the potential for the College Park East neighborhood or the Arbor Park parking lot to be used for overflow parking. The commenter also expresses concerns regarding lack of signal control planned for traffic in and out of the development and traffic safety on Lampson. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. A condition of approval has been added to the Project to ensure the parking garages onsite be used primarily for parking purposes. Refer to Response to Comment 17-10 and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for traffic signal concerns and concerns regarding roadway safety. 17-53 The commenter notes that College Park East has less park acreage than other Seal Beach neighborhoods, states that the Project does not show park space, requests that the Draft EIR include a listing of existing parks within a half-mile radius of the Project and requests an evaluation of whether the development should include park space to avoid further impacts to nearby parks. Refer to Response to Comment 17-11.
17-54 The commenter requests that the Draft EIR evaluate weekend noise levels at Arbor Park due to soccer games and dogs at the dog park. The commenter recommends proposing mitigation measures to avoid future complaints from residents of the Project. Refer to Response to Comment 17-12.
17-55 The commenter expresses general opposition to the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
any action being taken on the Project. However, it should be noted that, since these NOP comments were written prior to the preparation and release of the Draft EIR, the comment letters do not address the adequacy of the environmental analysis in the Draft EIR. Thus, no further response is required.
17-56 The commenter expresses gratitude for being included in the NOP of the Draft EIR, provides a summary of the Project Description as described in the NOP and notes that Caltrans is a responsible agency on the Project. This comment is acknowledged and no further response is required.
17-57 The commenter recommends the Project consider the design of Complete Streets that include high-quality pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities that are safe and comfortable for all users; encourages the Project to look at opportunities to include Complete Streets improvements; consider including long-term bicycle parking facilities for the multi-family apartment units; ensure appropriate temporary detours to maintain safe bicycle access on Lampson Avenue during construction; and coordinate with Caltrans System Planning Unit regarding the existing Park and Ride facility agreement. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, the Project would promote the use of bicycles as an alternative means of transportation by providing short-term and/or long-term bicycle parking accommodations. Along the Project frontage, Lampson Avenue is developed to its ultimate General Plan roadway classification.
Frontage improvements would include median improvements, sidewalks, driveway modifications needed to accommodate site access, and landscaping improvements as required by City standards (refer to Page 3-4 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, at the time of preparation of this Final EIR, the Park-n-Ride that previously occupied the Project site has not been in operation for the past 18 months and when in operation had limited usage. There are no requirements or proposal to provide a substitute park-and-ride location. 17-58 The commenter requests submittal of all traffic related documents for Caltrans review. The commenter requests that data used in the Traffic Impact Analysis be no more than two years old and be based on Southern California Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan Model; and recommends using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology for traffic analyses. The Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix N1 of the Draft EIR) was provided to Caltrans for review during the 45-day public review period for the Draft EIR. The Traffic Analysis was prepared in accordance with the City of Los Alamitos’ requirements, as required by CEQA. Refer also to Response to Comment B-1 through B-13. 17-59 The commenter recommends the Project ensure that truck parking, ingress and egress, and staging will not interfere with vehicle parking, pedestrian paths, or bicycle lanes/parking; establish freight pick up and drop off times that do not coincide with peak commute hours to reduce passenger vehicle conflicts and congestion for freight; consider amazon lockers or an equivalent shared drop off location depending on number of packages for residential package delivery; and work with local partners and community representatives to mitigate truck traffic routing onto residential streets or conflicting with other road users. Refer to Response to
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Comment B-11 and Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, regarding truck parking and freight pick up. As demonstrated, the Project would not result in any vehicle conflicts on-site as proposed; however, installation of an Amazon locker may be considered by the Project proponent following occupancy of the Project. 17-60 The commenter attaches a list of comments for the Project which are responded to below and expresses general opposition to the Project. This comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
17-61 The commenter expresses concerns with traffic and traffic safety on Lampson Avenue. Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns and
2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for roadway safety concerns. 17-62 The commenter states that the Project will affect the neighborhood of College Park East and that the low-income housing has the potential to bring increased crime to the neighborhood and decrease existing home values. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, implementation of the Project would generally result in an increase in calls for service (not solely related to the fact that the site will include low-income housing); however, Los Alamitos Police Department has indicated that this increase would not adversely impact Los Alamitos Police Department’s existing resources. The existing resources would be adequate to meet the additional demands generated by the Project. The Los Alamitos Police Department has not indicated the need for a new police station or expansion of existing facilities due to the Project.
Responses times and service ratios would be met and would not require the construction of new facilities. Because the Project does not include or require construction of new police facilities and does not generate a need for additional facilities, increases in demands for police protection resulting from implementation of the Project impacts would be less than significant (refer to Page 4.13-10 of the Draft EIR). Additionally, home values are not an environmental issue analyzed under CEQA; however, this comment is noted for the record and will be forwarded to the decision makers for their review and consideration prior to any action being taken on the Project.
17-63 The commenter expresses concerns with minimal parking at the Project site and how it will impact neighboring streets. Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. A condition of approval has been added to the Project to ensure the parking garages onsite be used primarily for parking purposes.
17-64 The commenter expresses concerns with an increase in the need for police presence and expresses general opposition to the Project. Refer to Response to Comment 17-62. 17-65 The commenter expresses concerns with the aesthetics of the development. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft EIR, buildout of the Project would change the existing visual character of the site from a two-story, 88,000 sf commercial office building to a two- to three-story residential development consisting of 246 units. The Project would be visually
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
compatible with the existing residential and park uses in the Project site’s vicinity.
Additionally, the Project would be compliant with the zoning development standards and City requirements pertaining to scenic quality. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts would be less than significant (refer to Page 4.1-18 of the Draft EIR).
17-66 The commenter expresses concerns with air quality from the increased traffic on Lampson and during construction. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, Project-related activities would not exceed the applicable South Coast AQMD regional thresholds of significance during construction and operation. As such, Project-related emissions would not violate South Coast AQMD air quality standards or contribute to the non-attainment of ozone standards in the SCAB, and impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.2-23 through 4.2-26 of the Draft EIR).
17-67 The commenter expresses concerns with construction noise and road closures on Lampson Avenue. Refer to Response to Comment 17-40 for noise impacts. As discussed in Section 4.15, Transportation, of the Draft EIR, during construction, frontage improvements including median improvements, sidewalks, driveway modifications needed to accommodate site access, and landscaping improvements would be constructed in accordance with City standards. Lane closures that may be required for median improvements would be temporary and require a permit and compliance with Los Alamitos Municipal Code (LAMC) 12.08.200, Safety precautions–Obstruction of traffic. This would ensure safe crossing and access for all vehicles and pedestrians at all times. (refer to Pages 4.15-16 through 4.15-17 of the Draft EIR). 17-68 The commenter expresses concerns with fire, police, and medical responses due to increased traffic. The commenter also expresses concern that more accidents will occur due to increased traffic. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, of the Draft EIR, considering the existing firefighting resources available in the City, implementation of the Project is not expected to result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impact. Per correspondence with the OCFA, there are currently no deficiencies in fire protection service provided to the Project site. OCFA has not indicated the need for a new fire station or expansion of existing facilities due to the Project.
The Secured Fire Protection Agreement would ensure that responses times and service ratios are met due to the implementation of the Project and no new fire station facilities would be required (refer to Page 4.13-9 of the Draft EIR). Refer to Response to Comment 17-62 for police protection services. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson Avenue, for roadway safety concerns.
17-69 The commenter expresses concerns with greenhouse gas emissions due to construction and increased traffic. Refer to Response to Comment 17-48 for greenhouse gas emissions. 17-70 The commenter expresses concerns with safety hazards due to speeding and increased traffic and hazardous vehicle emissions. Refer to Master Response 2.1.2, Roadway Safety on Lampson
4665 Lampson Avenue
Final Environmental Impact Report 3.0 Responses to Comments Lead Agency: City of Los Alamitos SCH No. 2022090476
Avenue, for pedestrian safety concerns. Refer to Response to Comment 17-48 and 17-66 for vehicle emissions. As discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft EIR, during construction, the Project would result in roadway improvements along Lampson, including replacement of the existing median curb and construction of the two proposed driveways. Construction on Lampson will require an encroachment permit and approval from the City Engineer Lane closures that may be required for median improvements would be temporary and require a permit and compliance with LAMC 12.08.200, Safety precautions– Obstruction of traffic. Compliance with LAMC 12.08.200 would ensure safe crossing and access for all vehicle and pedestrians at all times (refer to Page 4.8-21 of the Draft EIR). 17-71 The commenter expresses concerns with land use and planning and opines that the Project is an inconsistent use given its adjacency to the active military airfield. As discussed in Section
4.10, Land Use and Planning, of the Draft EIR, the Project would not conflict with JFTB AELUP’s safety, height, noise, or aircraft overflight criteria, and impacts would be less than significant. Table 4.10-2, General Plan Consistency Analysis, provides an analysis of the Project’s consistency with all applicable General Plan goals and policies that were adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As shown in Table 4.10-2, the Project would not conflict with any of the applicable General Plan goals and policies.
Accordingly, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to a conflict with the City of Los Alamitos General Plan and mitigation is not required (refer to Pages 4.10- 14 through 4.10-32 of the Draft EIR).
17-72 The commenter expresses concerns with noise pollution on Lampson Avenue and added vehicles on the I-405 from residents exiting onto Lampson Avenue. Refer to Response to Comment 17-36.
17-73 The commenter expresses concerns with increased population and housing and its impact on parking spaces and uses of existing parks. As discussed in Section 4.12, Population and Housing, of the Draft EIR, the Project would not result in substantial unplanned growth in the area because: 1) the Project is within the growth projections of the City’s General Plan, 2) the planned housing is a requirement of State Housing Law and in response to an existing unmet need for housing, 3) the Project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations, and 4) the Project improves the City’s job-housing balance by developing housing in a currently jobs-rich and housing-poor area. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in substantial unplanned population growth, and impacts would be less than significant (refer to Pages 4.12-8 through 4.12-10 of the Draft EIR). Refer to Master Response 2.1.3, Parking, for parking concerns. Refer to Response to Comment 17-11 for impacts to existing recreational facilities.
17-74 The commenter expresses concerns with the increase in traffic and lack of available parking in the College Park East neighborhood and recommends that parking permits be implemented.
Refer to Master Response 2.1.1, Transportation and Traffic Congestion, for traffic concerns