Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration
City of Manhattan Beach
28th Street Storm Drain Infiltration Project
also referred as 28th Street Stormwater Infiltration Project 1561 E. Orangethorpe Avenue, Suite 240
Fullerton, California 92831
TEL (714) 526-7500 | FAX (714) 526-7004
www.cwecorp.com
Final Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration
28th Street Storm Drain Infiltration Project
also referred as 28th Street Stormwater Infiltration Project
Prepared for:
City of Manhattan Beach
1400 Highland Avenue
Manhattan Beach, CA 91266
TEL (310) 802-5358
Prepared by:
1561 E. Orangethorpe Avenue, Suite 240
Fullerton, California, 92831
TEL (714) 526-7500 | FAX (714) 526-7004 | www.cwecorp.com
April 2024
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- i -
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................. I LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... II LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ II ACRONYMS .............................................................................................................................. III
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1 PURPOSE AND DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION ....................................................................................... 1
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .............................................................................................................. 1
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 2
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................................... 3
3. INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .............................................................. 6
3.1 AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................................. 8
3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ..................................................................................... 10
3.3 AIR QUALITY .......................................................................................................................... 12
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................... 16
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................. 19
3.6 ENERGY ................................................................................................................................ 22
3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................................ 23
3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS .................................................................................................... 26
3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ......................................................................................... 27
3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ........................................................................................... 29
3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING ...................................................................................................... 32
3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 33
3.13 NOISE ............................................................................................................................... 34
3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................................... 40
3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................................................................. 41
3.16 RECREATION ....................................................................................................................... 43
3.17 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 44
3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................ 46
3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................ 49
3.20 WILDFIRE .......................................................................................................................... 51
3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................... 53
4. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 55
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- ii -
Appendices
Appendix A Comments and Response to Comments
List of Figures
Figure 2-1 General Project Concept ..................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2-2 Project Location ................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2-3 28th Street Stormwater Infiltration Concept .......................................................................... 5
List of Tables
Table 3-1 Daily Emissions for Construction of the Project ................................................................... 13 Table 3-2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Project ................................................................................ 26 Table 3-3 Construction Maximum Noise Levels ................................................................................... 35 Table 3-4 Construction Vibration Damage Risk Limits ......................................................................... 37 Table 3-5 Construction Equipment Vibration Reference Levels ............................................................ 37
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- iii -
Acronyms
AF Acre-feet
AQCRs Air Quality Control Regions
BMPs Best Management Practices
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CGP Construction General Permit
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System CRHR California Register of Historic Resources
CSA Cross-Spectrum Acoustics Inc.
dBA Maximum A-Weighted Decibels
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EWMP Enhanced Watershed Management Program
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
GHG Greenhouse Gas
IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation
IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
LACCO Los Angeles County Code of Ordinances
LACDBH Los Angeles County Department of Beaches and Harbor LACFCD Los Angeles County Flood Control District
LFD Low Flow Diversion
LID Low Impact Development
MBMC City of Manhattan Beach Municipal Code
MLD Most Likely Descendant
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MT Metric Tons
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC National American Heritage Commission
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PEIR Program Environmental Impact Report
PM Particulate Matter
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
PRIMP Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SCWP Safe, Clean Water Program
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- iv -
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
WMP Watershed Management Program
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USEPA Unites States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Services
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 1 -
1. Introduction
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared on behalf of the City of Manhattan Beach (City) to identify potential site-specific environmental constraints associated with the 28th Street Stormwater Infiltration Project (Project), located within City of Manhattan Beach public right-of-way at Manhattan Avenue and on Los Angeles County Department of Beaches and Harbor (LACBH) owned parking lot at 115 26th Street, Manhattan Beach, California 90266. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) §15000 et seq).
This IS/MND is an information documentation intended for use by the City of Manhattan Beach and members of the general public as a preliminary analysis to determine if there is substantial evidence that the Project may have significant effects on the environment. If site-specific environmental constraints are found to potentially have a significant effect on the environment, with mitigation, a site-specific Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be prepared; otherwise, the lead agency may adopt a negative declaration or MND. This IS/MND was compiled for the City with the assistance of CWE. The City is serving as the Lead Agency for the proposed Project pursuant to CEQA §21067 and CEQA Guidelines Article 4 and §15367. “Lead Agency” refers to the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a Project.
1.1 Purpose and Document Organization
The purpose of this document is to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project.
Mitigation measures, if required, have been incorporated into the Project to eliminate potential significant impacts or reduce them to a less-than-significant level.
This IS/MND is organized as follows:
Section 1 – Introduction
Section 2 – Project Description
Section 3 – Initial Study/Environmental Checklist
Section 4 – References
The Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) Enhanced Watershed Management Program’s (EWMPs) Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) was used to tier off, evaluate and determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project.
1.2 Summary of Findings
The CEQA Appendix G Environmental (Initial Study) Checklist is included in Section 3. The Initial Study Checklist identifies potential environmental impacts, by section, and provides a brief discussion of each impact resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. Each response checked in the environmental checklist is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis as necessary. As appropriate, each section has a discussion that describes and identifies specific impacts anticipated with project implementation.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 2 -
2. Project Description
The City of Manhattan Beach is proposing to construct the 28th Street Stormwater Infiltration Project (Project), at the 26th Street Parking Facility located at 115 26th Street, Manhattan Beach, and within the public right-of-way on the streets surrounding the parking facility, including 26th Street, from Ocean Drive to Manhattan Avenue; 27th Street from Ocean Drive to Manhattan Avenue; Ocean Drive from 26th Street to 27th Street; and Manhattan Avenue from 26th to 28th Street; and in the green space on the lower portion of Bruce’s Beach Park east of and adjacent to Manhattan Avenue. Runoff will be diverted from the existing County-owned storm drain located below 28th Street through a pipe aligned southeast on Manhattan Avenue. The diverted runoff will be pumped to a trash removal device and sedimentation system (pretreatment) to remove trash and sediment and then distributed to a matrix of drywells located in and around the parking facility.
The infiltration system was identified as the highest priority capital project for the City in the Beach Cities Watershed Management Program (WMP). The WMP was developed in a collaborative effort involving the Cities of Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, Torrance, and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD). The WMP identifies projects in the jurisdictions that will improve water quality and address applicable sources of bacteria from entering the Santa Monica Bay. To meet these goals in Manhattan Beach, the WMP includes a conceptual plan for an infiltration in the Project area. The primary goal of the Project is to reduce bacterial and trash/debris discharge from the storm drain system in alignment with existing Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) in the Santa Monica Bay.
The Project will divert dry- and wet-weather discharges that would otherwise drain into the 28th Street Strom Drain (Bond Issue [BI] 0286) and ultimately into the Santa Monica Bay. Figure 2-1 illustrates the general concept for the Project, whereby captured runoff will be redirected into an underground system that facilitates treatment and infiltration. Up to approximately 70 acre-feet (AF) of runoff may be captured during a single storm event.
Figure 2-1 General Project Concept
Divert urban runoff from storm drainPretreat runoffRoute runoff to drywellsInfiltrate runoff City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 3 -
Project goals are summarized as follows:
Reduce bacterial discharges from the storm drain system Reduce trash/debris discharge from the storm drain system Enhance water quality locally
Reduce the potential for beach closures
Create educational and outreach opportunities for the local community Enhance an existing public parking facility
The Project is utilizing funding from the Safe, Clean Water Program (SCWP) Measure W, the State Water Resources Control Board Proposition 1 Stormwater Grant Program, and the California Natural Resources Agency Proposition 68 Urban Flood Reduction Program.
2.1 Project Location
The proposed Project will be constructed in the City of Manhattan Beach in Los Angeles County, California. The City of Manhattan Beach, as shown in the inset map in Figure 2-2, is along the coast in Los Angeles County, adjacent to the Cities of El Segundo to the north, Hermosa Beach to the south, and Redondo Beach to the east. The Project will be located at the 26th Street Parking Facility at 115 26th Street, Manhattan Beach, and within the public right-of-way on the streets surrounding the parking facility, including 26th Street, from Ocean Drive to Manhattan Avenue; 27th Street from Ocean Drive to Manhattan Avenue; Ocean Drive from 26th Street to 27th Street; and Manhattan Avenue from 26th to 28th Street; and in the green space on the lower portion of Bruce’s Beach Park east of and adjacent to Manhattan Avenue. As shown in Figure 2-3, the majority of the proposed drywells will be located underneath 26th Street Parking Facility with the diversion, pump, and pretreatment systems being located within public right-of-ways, with additional drywells proposed located at the west side of Bruce’s Beach Park.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 4 -
Figure 2-2 Project Location
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 5 -
Figure 2-3 Stormwater Infiltration Concept
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 6 -
3. Initial Study/Environmental Checklist
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Project Title: 28th Street Stormwater Infiltration Project
2. Lead Agency Name
and Address:
City of Manhattan Beach
1400 Highland Avenue
Manhattan Beach, CA 91266
3. Contact Person and
Phone Number:
Jeff Fijalka
(310) 802-5358
4. Project Location: 26th Street Parking Facility at 115 26th Street, Manhattan Beach, and within the public right-of-way on the streets surrounding the parking facility, including 26th Street, from Ocean Drive to Manhattan Avenue; 27th Street from Ocean Drive to Manhattan Avenue; Ocean Drive from 26th Street to 27th Street; and Manhattan Avenue from 26th to 28th Street; and in the green space on the lower portion of Bruce’s Beach Park east of and adjacent to Manhattan Avenue.
5. Project Sponsor’s
Name and Address:
City of Manhattan Beach
1400 Highland Avenue
Manhattan Beach, CA 91266
6. General Plan
Designation:
Public Facilities and Open Space
7. Zoning: Public, Semi Public Facilities and Open Space
8. Description of
Project:
The City of Manhattan Beach is proposing to construct and install a storm drain diversion, pretreatment, pump station, valve vault, series of drywells, and associated piping for infiltration along public right-of- way and in a public parking lot. The Project will also include retaining wall replacement and reconstruction of the driving/parking surface at the 26th Street Parking Facility.
9. Surrounding land
uses and setting:
Medium and High Density Residential
10. Other public
agencies whose
approval is required:
Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Los Angeles County Department of Beaches and Harbors, and Coastal Commission.
11. Have California
Native American
tribes traditionally
and culturally
affiliated with the
project area
requested
consultation
pursuant to Public
Resources Code
section 21080.3.1?
If so, has
consultation begun?a
The City of Manhattan Beach sent out notification letters to the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, the
Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Gabrielino/Tongva Nation, the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1. During the 30 day period, only Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation had requested consultation.
Mitigation measures provided by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation were modified and incorporated into this document.
a. Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 7 -
section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 8 -
3.1 Aesthetics
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality public views
of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from a publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area? X
Discussion:
a) The City’s General Plan does not designate any scenic vistas within the City. However, the City is located along the Pacific Ocean, which can be considered a scenic vista. The Project site is already developed and is located in an urbanized area. Construction of the Project would require temporary ground disturbance activities. During construction, the presence of construction equipment and materials would be visible from public vantage points but would not significantly affect any scenic views or vistas. Once the construction is complete the project area will have similar amenities above ground and will not restrict any additional views and vistas. Therefore, the Project does not anticipate having a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista, and impacts would be considered to be less than significant.
b) The Project is located in an urbanized area of the City and in a currently developed street and parking lot. The Project is not located within the vicinity of a designated scenic highway. According to the California Department of Transportation’s Scenic Highways Program Database, there are no Scenic Highways within 10 miles of the Project. The Project does not contain any rock outcroppings, nor are there any historic buildings on-site. Eleven trees located at the parking facility and vicinity will be removed during the construction of the drywells and for the parking facility enhancement.
However, fourteen smaller, younger trees will be planted as a part of the project. The Project is located in Area District III, therefore, is not subject to the Tree Preservation and Restoration in City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 9 -
residential zones, Area Districts I and II, City Ordinance, Chapter 10.52.120. Since trees will be replaced post-construction, the impacts are expected to be less than significant.
c) The Project is located in an urbanized area. Construction activities associated with the Project would require the use of construction equipment and storage of materials on-site, thus introducing contrasting features into the visual landscape that affect the visual quality of the Project Site and the immediate vicinity. Contrasting features would include demolition materials, excavated areas, stockpiled soils, and other materials generated and stored on-site during construction. However, adverse effects to visual character associated with Project construction would be temporary.
Additionally, as the Project is located within public right-of-way and a public parking lot, the project is not in conflict with the applicable zoning requirements. As impacts to visual character will only occur during the construction phase of the Project, impacts will be less than significant.
d) The Project site is already located in an urbanized area and is predominately surrounded by residential land uses. The Project site already has existing sources of light from the parking lot throughout the night. The Project will include the addition of photocell controls to automatically switch the existing lights on from dusk to dawn. No additional lighting will be introduced as a permanent fixture of the Project, therefore there is no significant impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 10 -
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP)
of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
X
Discussion:
a) According to the State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the Project site is not located in an area designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, there is no impact to farmlands or agricultural resources.
b) The project site is not zoned for agricultural use and is not under a Williamson Act contract.
Therefore, there is no anticipated impact.
c) The Project location is located on and adjacent to residential, public, semi-public, and open space land uses. The Project will not conflict with existing zoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production because none of those land uses exist within the Project site or in the City of Manhattan Beach itself. Therefore, there is no anticipated impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 11 -
d) As discussed above, the City of Manhattan Beach has no designated forest land or timberland within City boundaries. The site is currently zoned as public, semi-public, and open space; therefore, there is no impact to forest lands.
e) The project site is not on land designated for agricultural land use and will not result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, there is no anticipated impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 12 -
3.3 Air Quality
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people? X
Discussion:
a) The City of Manhattan Beach is in the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region 9. These agencies are county or regional governing authorities that have primary responsibility for controlling air pollution from stationary sources.
USEPA established primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50, which specifies air quality standards of six criteria pollutants: particulate matter (measured as both particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter [PM10] and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter [PM2.5]), sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), ozone, and lead.
Federal regulations designate air quality control regions (AQCRs) in violation of the NAAQS as nonattainment areas. Federal regulations designate AQCRs with levels below the NAAQS as attainment areas. Maintenance areas are AQCRs that have previously been designated as nonattainment and have been re-designated to attainment for a probationary period through implementation of maintenance plans.
USEPA has designated the portion of Los Angeles County where the action is located as a nonattainment area for lead (through December 31, 2015), PM2.5, and ozone, and as a maintenance area for PM10, carbon monoxide and NO2.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 13 -
Applicable air quality plans include:
2022 Air Quality Management Plan
Clean Communities Plan
Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan
2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS Plan
2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
2012 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
1997 Ozone NAAQS (80 ppb)
1979 1-hour Ozone NAAQS (120 ppb)
2012 Los Angeles County Lead Attainment State Implementation Plan
During construction, since the proposed project will not generate air pollutants in excess of the SCAQMD’s regional significance threshold, the proposed project will not cause or substantially contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, would not result in a cumulatively increase of any criteria pollutant, and will not impact air quality long term. The surface area will be restored to existing uses including parking that currently exists. The parking lot usage emissions were not evaluated as the project will restore those parking spaces to current uses. Additionally, the project is proposing to place at least three (3) electric vehicle charging stations, with ten (10) more EV stations to be included in the future, which will additionally reduce vehicle emissions once the project is complete. Therefore, the project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and are considered less than significant.
b) The Project is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is a non-attainment area for respirable particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and Ozone. The SCAB is a designated attainment area for all other criteria pollutants. The SCAQMD has established Regional Significance Thresholds for each criteria pollutant. Potential air emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, a model used to quantify air impacts from land use projects located throughout California. Table 3-1 shows the daily emissions rate for unmitigated construction during the duration of the construction of the Project, in comparison to the Regional Significance Thresholds.
Table 3-1 Daily Emissions for Construction of the Project Pollutant NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx CO
Maximum Emissions rate (lbs/day) 35.81 2.06a 1.53 b 0.12c 43.41 Mass Daily Thresholds (lbs/day) 100 150 55 150 550
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No
a PM10 total modeled emissions
b PM2.5 total modeled emissions
c SO2 modeled emissions
The Project is not expected to result in a measurable long-term increase in air pollutant emissions.
After construction, the Project will have minimal vehicle trips to the sites for inspection and maintenance procedures. Therefore, the impacts would be considered less than significant.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 14 -
c) Certain residents, such as the very young, the elderly, and those suffering from certain illnesses or disabilities, are particularly sensitive to air pollution and are considered sensitive receptors. The sensitive receptors of concern are Grandview Elementary School, 0.20 miles east at 455 24th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266; American Martyrs School, 0.60 miles to the southeast at 1701 Laurel Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266; and Pacific Elementary School, 0.85 miles to the southeast at 1200 Pacific Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. However, the proposed project will not exceed the Regional Significance Threshold of criteria pollutants; therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on nearby sensitive receptors with mitigation measure AIR-1.
d) Project construction equipment and activities, including diesel exhaust emissions, could generate odors. There may be situations where construction activity odors would be noticeable by persons working at or visiting nearby facilities, but these odors would not be unfamiliar or objectionable. In addition, these odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. There are no long-term odors anticipated from the construction of the Project.
Because there may be short-term odors as a result of the temporary construction of the Project, impacts will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
AIR-1 – Pursuant to Rule 403 of the SCAQMD, the following dust minimizing measures shall be implemented:
City of Manhattan Beach and its designees shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and Regulations, including Rule 403 ensuring the cleanup of construction-related dirt on approach routes to the site. Rule 403 prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active operation, open storage pile or disturbed surface area visible beyond the property line of the emission source.
City of Manhattan Beach and its designees shall comply with all SCAQMD established minimum requirements for construction activities to reduce fugitive dust and PM10 emissions. City of Manhattan Beach will encourage contractors to use low-emission equipment meeting Tier II emissions standards at a minimum, and Tier III and IV emissions standards, where available, as CARB-required emissions technologies become readily available to contractors in the region.
Adequate water application techniques shall be employed to mitigate the impact of construction- related dust particulates. Portions of the site that are undergoing surface earth moving operations shall be watered to mitigate blowing dust, and to ensure visible emissions do not exceed 100 feet in any direction. Areas with surface earth moving operations shall be re-watered at the end of each day.
Grading operations shall be suspended during first stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 mph. A high wind response plan shall be formulated for enhanced dust control if winds are forecast to exceed 25 mph in any upcoming 24-hour period. Any construction equipment using direct internal combustion engines shall use a diesel fuel with a maximum of 0.05 percent sulfur and four-degree retard. Construction operations affecting roadways within the project area including detour routes, shall be scheduled by implementing traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 15 -
The engines of idling trucks or heavy equipment shall be turned off if the expected duration of idling exceeds five minutes.
On-site heavy equipment used during grading and construction shall be equipped with diesel particulate filters unless it is demonstrated that such equipment is not available, or its use is not cost-competitive.
All haul trucks leaving or entering the site shall be covered and have at least two feet of freeboard.
Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material shall be covered or watered twice daily.
Any site access points with soil deposits on any public right-of-way shall be mechanically or manually swept within 30 minutes of deposition.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 16 -
3.4 Biological Resources
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance? X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
X
Discussion:
a) The Project is located in an urbanized area of the City, predominantly surrounded by residential and public land uses. The Project site is currently developed as a parking lot, public right-of-way, and a small portion of the park, which will all be returned to pre-construction condition. According to a report generated through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC), six federally listed species have the potential of occurring in the area: California City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 17 -
Least Tern, Coastal California Gnatcatcher, Least Bell’s Vireo, Western Snowy Plover, El Segundo Blue Butterfly, and Monarch Butterfly, but lists no critical habitat in the Project Area. The Project is located in an urbanized area, therefore it is unlikely suitable habitat exists for any of the species listed under the USFWS IPaC. Indirect impacts, such as percussive construction noise and vibration could interfere with roosting, nesting, and foraging activities in nearby ornamental trees; however, there is significant ambient noise generated from the nearby community. Implementation of various mitigation measures will be required, including conducting pre-construction species surveys and carrying out protective measures in the event that special status species are found during construction. With the implementation mitigation measure BIO-1 through BIO-3, there will be a less than significant impact to sensitive, special status, or listed species.
b) According to the National Wetlands Inventory mapped by the USFWS, Manhattan Beach, which is adjacent to the Project site, is designated as Estuarine and Marine Wetland and the ocean is designated as Estuarine and Marine Deepwater. The Project would not impact riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. As a result, there would be no impact.
c) Adjacent to the Project site is the beach, designated as Estuarine and Marine Wetland, and the ocean, designated as Estuarine and Marine Deepwater. Stormwater flows will be intercepted from the storm drains at 28th Street and Manhattan Avenue and redirected to a subsurface pretreatment system. During dry-weather, flows are anticipated to be minimal, and will be captured by the existing downstream Low Flow Diversion (LFD) maintained by the LACFCD. During wet-weather, flows intercepted by the project will not result in a significant hydrological impact. Therefore, there will be no adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.
d) Stormwater flows will be intercepted from the storm drains at 28th Street and Manhattan Avenue and redirected to a subsurface pretreatment system. During dry-weather, flows are anticipated to be minimal. Urban stormwater flows previously would drain directly into the Santa Monica Bay and flows collected by storm drains and drywells would not have an effect on any marine species.
Because the Project is located in a heavily urbanized area, and includes several ornamental trees, there is potential that these trees may provide habitat for nesting birds. Construction activities could indirectly disturb nesting bird habitat; therefore, with the incorporation of Mitigation measure BIO-1 through BIO-3, impacts from the Project would be less than significant.
e) There are eleven existing trees throughout the lot and vicinity, that will be removed for the construction of the drywells and parking lot enhancements. As part of the Project construction eleven trees will be planted. The Project does not conflict with the City’s Landscape Resources Section of the General Plan or Chapter 10.52.120 of the Municipal Code, Tree Preservation and Restoration in residential zones, Area Districts I and II, since the Project is located in Area District III, and would not be subject to the policy, therefore, there would be impact.
f) The Project will not conflict with any adopted conservation plan, nor is the Project located within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or an approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, there will be no anticipated impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 18 -
Mitigation Measures:
BIO-1 – Prior to ground-disturbing activities in areas that could support sensitive biological resources, a habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the potential for special- status wildlife species to occur within affected areas, including areas directly or indirectly impacted by construction or operation of the BMPs. If a special-status wildlife species is found, pre-construction surveys of proposed work zones shall be conducted 14 days prior to construction. Areas, including construction areas, staging areas, and right-of-ways, shall be staked, flagged, fenced, or otherwise clearly delineated to restrict the limits of construction to the minimum necessary near areas that may support special-status wildlife species. If avoidance is not possible, the City of Manhattan Beach shall consult with the appropriate regulating agency (United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)/USFWS/California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)) to determine a strategy for compliance with the Endangered Species Act, California Fish and Wildlife Code, or other regulations supporting special-status species. The City of Manhattan Beach will work together with those regulating agencies to determine appropriate impact minimization measures and compensation for any permanent impacts due to the Project.
BIO-2 – To protect nesting birds that may occur on site or adjacent to the Project boundary, no construction shall occur from February 1 through September 15, as early as January 1 for some raptors, unless a qualified biologist completes a survey for nesting bird activity within a 500-foot radius of publicly accessible area within the construction site. The nesting bird surveys shall be conducted at appropriate nesting times and concentrate on potential roosting or perch sites. The City of Manhattan Beach shall require surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to the beginning of any Project-related activity likely to impact raptors and migratory songbirds, for the entire Project site. If Project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding season, the surveys shall be repeated. If nesting raptors and migratory songbirds are identified, the following minimum no- disturbance buffers shall be implemented: 300 feet around active passerine (perching birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active non-listed raptor nests, and 0.5 mile around active listed bird nests. These buffers shall be maintained until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Any sensitive and special status species data documented by the Project shall be submitted to the California Natural Diversity Database with all applicable data fields filled out. The City of Manhattan Beach and/or a designee will notify the CDFW once submitted.
BIO-3 – The Project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and the discharge of sediment and pollutants into drainages during Project activities. BMPs shall be monitored and repaired, as necessary, to ensure maximum erosion, sediment, and pollution control. The Project proponent shall prohibit the use of erosion control materials potentially harmful to fish and wildlife species, such as mono-filament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material. All fiber rolls, straw wattles, and/or hay bales utilized within and adjacent to the Project site shall be free of nonnative plant materials. Fiber rolls or erosion control mesh shall be made of loose-weave mesh that is not fused at the intersections of the weave, such as jute, or coconut (coir) fiber, or other products without welded weaves.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 19 -
3.5 Cultural Resources
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to §
15064.5? X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to § 15064.5? X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? X
Discussion:
a) The Project includes the construction and installation of a subsurface infiltration system, piping, and drywells, which could potentially cause impacts on cultural resources during the construction phase of the Project. A Cultural Resources Assessment was conducted by LSA Associates, which included a records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC).
Data from the records search at SCCIC indicated that there have been five previous studies within a mile of the Project, two of which included a portion of the Project’s area. Although there were no resources documented within or adjacent to the Project area, seven historic-period resources are within the project area. The nearest historic period resource is Manhattan Beach Pier, approximately
0.72 miles southwest of the Project area. No archaeological resources or cultural resources were documented within a mile of the Project.
In January 2023, a Sacred Lands File search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The Sacred Land Files search came back as negative. Additionally, The City of Manhattan Beach sent out notification letters to the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Gabrielino/Tongva Nation, the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1. During the 30 day period, only Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation requested consultation. The consultation process commenced on December 7th, 2023. Over the next four months, consultation continued, with the City making various revisions to the draft mitigation measures to address concerns raised by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. Ultimately, the City and the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation were unable to come to a mutual agreement on the exact language for the mitigation measures, with the outstanding issue being whether the City could select another firm to conduct tribal monitoring in the event that the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation was not available to conduct said monitoring or charged fees above the market rate for such work.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 20 -
The mitigation measures included in the IS/MND provide the City with an alternative option in such a situation.
Mitigation measure TCR-1 through TCR-3 are incorporated in the Tribal Culture Resources section were developed to prevent any potential damage to a resource with significance to a California Native American tribe.
b) See discussion above in part a). However, if during construction any archaeological remains are found, all construction will cease until qualified personnel can identify the remains and mitigate the findings. Impacts are anticipated to be less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2.
c) No formal cemeteries are on or near the Project site. Most Native American human remains are found in association with prehistoric archaeological sites. The Cultural Resources Assessment indicated that no prehistoric resources were found within a mile of the Project’s area. There is low potential for the project to encounter human remains during ground-disturbing activities. However, if during construction, any remains are found, all construction will cease until qualified personnel can identify the remains and mitigate the findings. Impacts are anticipated to be less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2.
Mitigation Measures:
CUL-1 - If previously unidentified cultural resources are unearthed during ground activity, all work shall immediately be suspended within 100 feet of the discovery and the City shall be immediately notified. A qualified archaeologist shall assess the significance of the find and determine if it is a California Register of Historic Resource (CRHR)-eligible archaeological resource and/or cultural resource. Additionally, a tribal cultural specialist from the Kizh Nation or other traditionally and culturally affiliated (TCA) tribe shall assess the significance of any Tribal Cultural Resource under Assembly Bill 52 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
If the qualified archaeologist determines that adverse impacts to significant archaeological resources could occur during the Project, then the resources shall be avoided from direct Project impacts by Project redesign, if feasible. If the resource cannot be avoided, then an archaeological treatment plan shall be developed and implemented with input from a tribal cultural specialist from the Kizh Nation or other TCA tribe. The qualified archaeologist shall remain on-site for the remainder of excavation activities, or until the archaeologist determines that the site will not impact any archaeological or cultural resources.
During daily monitoring activities, the archaeologist shall complete monitoring logs, which will provide descriptions of daily activities, including construction activities, project location, soils, and any cultural materials identified.
If the qualitied archaeologist determines that the discovery is not significant as an archeological resource due to its lack or provenience or otherwise fails to “add to our understanding of the prehistory of the area” and the find is still considered significant as a TCR, then the TCA tribe can determine the best treatment of the find. This could include reburial (curated onsite), curation at the TCA tribe’s museum, or other treatment as deemed appropriate by the TCA tribe.
CUL-2 - In compliance with Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains are encountered, all ground disturbing activities City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 21 -
shall be immediately suspended within 100 feet of the discovery, and the Los Angeles County Coroner shall be notified immediately. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American in origin, they must notify the NAHC within 24 hours of such identification so that the NAHC can contact the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall be provided access to the discovery and will provide recommendations for treatment of the remains within 48 hours of accessing the discovery site.
Disposition of human remains and any associated grave goods, if encountered, shall be treated in accordance with procedures and requirements set forth in Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code; Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 22 -
3.6 Energy
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X
Discussion:
a) The Project would result in consumption of energy resources during construction and operation.
During construction, the Project would use heavy construction equipment and require workers, vendors, and hauling trips to install the proposed underground drainage facilities. The Project would require construction contractors and vehicle operators to comply with applicable state regulations governing heavy duty diesel on- and off-road equipment to minimize transportation fuel consumption, as noted in Section 3.3. During the operation of the Project, it is assumed that there would not be a substantial increase in mobile trips, as the Project would only require periodic inspection and maintenance. The new infrastructure and improved parking lot would not result in a substantial increase in electricity usage and the Project site would be restored to near existing conditions after Project completion. Therefore, the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and would not increase the need for new energy infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant.
b) The Project will be designed in a manner consistent with relevant energy conservation plans, including the City’s General Plan. The City’s General Plan has a section on Conservation of Energy and Water Resources. The goal of the section is to encourage conservation activities and programs throughout the City. The Project would not conflict or obstruct any local or state plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency; therefore, there are no anticipated impacts.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 23 -
3.7 Geology and Soils
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-
site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature? X
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 24 -
Discussion:
a)
i) The Project site is located in Southern California, which is a seismically active area. The Palos Verdes Fault, which is considered to have the most significant potential impact to the site from a design standpoint, has a maximum credible earthquake magnitude of
7.09 and is located approximately 2.6 miles from the site. However, the Project is not located within a known earthquake fault zone delineated on an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. Therefore, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant.
ii) The Project site is located in Southern California, which is a seismically active area.
However, the potential for hazards associated with strong seismic ground shaking, such as ground surface rupture, is considered low. The proposed Project will be designed and constructed in accordance with the federal, state, and municipal building codes relative to seismic criteria, including the 2022 California Building Code, which enacts seismic safety standards for structural construction. Therefore, the impact from strong seismic ground shaking would be considered less than significant.
iii) According to the California Geological Survey, the Project is not located in a Liquefaction Zone. Therefore, impacts from seismic-induced liquefaction or lateral spread are not anticipated.
iv) According to the California Geological Survey, the Project is not located in a Landslide Zone. Therefore, there is no anticipated impact.
b) The Project area is mostly paved with asphalt concrete, or Portland cement concrete. There are very few areas where top soils are exposed. Construction of the Project would result in ground surface disruption during excavation, grading, and trenching activities, which would create the potential for erosion to occur. Wind erosion will be minimized through soil stabilization measures, as required by the SCAQMD’s Rule 403, and will be mitigated via Mitigation Measure AIR-1, as noted in Section
3.3. Potential for water erosion would be minimized by implementation of erosion control measures during the Project’s construction. Construction activities are subject to the requirements of the California State Construction General Permit (CGP), which will require the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP will incorporate BMPs to control erosion and sediment during the construction period. All stormwater and drainage facilities that will be installed underground will have the ground surface elevation restored to near existing conditions post-construction. Therefore, impacts are expected to be less than significant.
c) As noted above in Sections 3.7(a) and (b), according to the California Geological Survey, the project is not in a fault, liquefaction, or landslide zone. Therefore, soil stability hazards from the Project are not anticipated.
d) Based on previous close proximity geotechnical reports for the area, the Project site is predominantly underlain by poorly graded sand. This is not an expansive soil type as defined in the Uniform Building Code. If expansive soils were to be found during Project construction, site-specific design criteria and remedial grading techniques would be identified and implemented by the City, per the California Building Code’s requirements. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 25 -
e) The Project will not require the installation of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems since the Project is not proposing to build any habitable structures or restroom facilities. Therefore, there is no anticipated impact.
f) Construction of the Project would result in ground surface disruption during excavation, grading, and trenching activities, which has the potential to impact scientifically significant paleontological resources. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures PALEO-1 through PALEO-3, impacts by the Project will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
PALEO-1: A paleontologist who meets the qualifications established by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) shall be retained to develop a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall be consistent with the standards of the SVP and include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. The paleontologist will also perform a Construction Worker Paleontological Resources Sensitivity training prior to any ground disturbing activities.
PALEO-2: Excavation and grading activities in deposits with high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., Young Alluvial Fan Deposits below a depth of 10 feet) shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor following a PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in deposits with no paleontological sensitivity (i.e., Artificial Fill). If paleontological resources are encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find. In the event that paleontological resources are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected, and the paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be contacted to assess the find for scientific significance.
If determined to be scientifically significant, the fossil shall be collected from the field.
PALEO-3: Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a museum repository.
At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 26 -
3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment? X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases? X
Discussion:
a) As discussed in the Air Quality impact analysis, the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions generated by the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e (metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions) per year for non-industrial projects. The construction phase’s GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0. Table 3-2 shows the unmitigated, yearly emissions rate in metric tons (MT) for in comparison to the Regional Significance Threshold. Because GHG missions will not exceed the SCAQMD threshold, the project would have a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions.
Table 3-2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Project
Pollutant CO2
Maximum Construction Emissions rate (MT/year) 406.54
Maximum Operations Emissions rate (MT/year) 2.71
SCAQMD Threshold (MT/year) 3,000
Exceed Threshold? No
b) The City of Manhattan Beach does not currently have an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. In 2006, California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), which requires the California Air Resources Board to design and implement emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 1990 levels, representing an approximate 25 percent reduction in total emissions. Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include building and construction emission requirements specified in the California Green Building Standards Code.
The Project will incorporate measures listed by AB 32, such as using construction equipment that minimizes GHG emissions. Because the project does not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of GHG, there would be no anticipated impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 27 -
3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials? X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
or excessive noise for people residing or working in
the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires? X
Discussion:
a) Hazardous materials are substances of chemicals that pose a health hazard, physical hazard, or harm to the environment. Hazardous materials are defined and regulated by federal, state, and local agencies, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), EPA, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Anticipated construction activities may require the transport, storage, use, and disposal of small amounts of hazardous materials that may include gasoline, diesel, hydraulic fluids, oils and lubricants, and other similarly related materials. In City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 28 -
addition, hazardous materials may be needed for fueling and servicing construction equipment on the Project Site. During construction of the Project, material safety data sheets for all applicable materials present at the Project Site would be made readily available to onsite personnel. All transport, handling, use, and disposal of substances such as petroleum products related to construction would comply with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials. Best management practices would be in place to ensure the lawful and proper storage and use of these materials. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
b) As discussed above, construction activities associated with the Project will involve hazardous materials. Construction contractors will be required to use standard controls and safety procedures that would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release of hazardous substances into the environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, state, and federal law. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
c) Grandview Elementary School is within a quarter mile of the Project site. As discussed in the previous sections, handling and disposal of hazardous materials is anticipated to be minimal, and would be conducted in compliance with existing federal, state, and county regulations. There is potential for dust emissions to be noticeable at the school, but with the incorporation of mitigation measures mentioned in Section 3.3, impacts would be considered less than significant.
d) There are no Federal Superfund or other cleanup sites within the vicinity of the proposed project.
According to the California Department of Toxic Substances’ EnviroStor website, the nearest operating Federal Superfund site is the Chevron El Segundo Refinery, which is over 1.5 miles north of the Project. Additionally, the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker website did not identify the site as containing an active leaking underground storage tank. Therefore, there would be no impact.
e) The Project is located more than two miles away from Los Angeles International Airport, and almost 5 miles from the Hawthorne Municipal Airport, and is not in a designated Airport Land Use Area. The Project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or where such a plan has been adopted within two miles of a public airport. In-bound flights from the south or west may fly over Manhattan Beach to allow the aircraft to turn around for landing on the runways at Los Angeles International Airport. Due to the altitude of incoming flights, noise impacts to Manhattan Beach fall below 60 dBA. Therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area, and as a result, there would be no impact.
f) The Project would not impair implementation or physically interfere with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. The City of Manhattan Beach has an emergency response plan called the Manhattan Beach Emergency Operations Plan, which identifies City planning responses to emergency situations, such as fire, earthquake, flooding and more. The emergency response plan also designates evacuation routes for various types of hazards. None of the roads that may be affected by the Project are designated as evacuation routes. The Project will not increase the amount of people in the area or the potential needs for emergency access, therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
g) The City of Manhattan Beach does not contain any lands designated as a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. As such, implementation of the Project is not likely to expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires; therefore, no impacts would occur.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 29 -
3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality? X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site; X
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite; X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff; or
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan? X
Discussion:
a) The goal of the Project is to provide an enhancement to water quality by capturing, treating, and infiltrating. This may, to a small extent, create a local subsurface mound to reduce sea water moving inland and therefore may slightly reduce the amount of water injected at the barrier. During construction, a SWPPP will be prepared and BMPs will be implemented to prevent erosion and City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 30 -
sedimentation. Compliance with the Construction General Permit will ensure that the construction will have no permanent impact to water quality.
The Project will capture urban runoff that would normally flow directly into the Santa Monica Bay.
The Project will include the construction of a subsurface pretreatment and pump that will divert runoff to drywells under the 26th Street Parking Facility. The increased infiltration of stormwater resulting from Project implementation will increase local groundwater recharge and reduce peak storm flows. Therefore, due to the intent of the Project and with incorporation of the standard and required BMPs, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Groundwater supplies will not be affected negatively since the project does not have additional demand for groundwater. The Project intends to pretreat stormwater for groundwater recharge which will have a beneficial impact to the local groundwater supplies. Therefore, there are no anticipated negative impacts to groundwater supplies.
c)
i. The proposed Project will not adversely affect existing drainage patterns or cause siltation or erosion. The Project will incorporate a pre-treatment facility, which will capture any silt or sediment being collected from urban runoff. As a result, erosion or siltation will not be expected to occur outside of the construction phase, and therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
ii. The Project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area resulting in flooding on- or offsite. The Project intends to capture, treat, and route urban runoff by diverting stormwater from an existing storm drain to drywells to reduce polluted stormwater and increase groundwater recharge. Therefore, there are no anticipated impacts.
iii. The Project will not contribute runoff which will exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The Project intends to capture runoff from an existing storm drain and divert flows to a pretreatment system and subsurface drywells, thereby reducing pollutant loads. As such, there would be no anticipated impacts.
iv. The Project intends to capture, treat, and route urban runoff by diverting stormwater from an existing storm drain to drywells to reduce polluted stormwater and increase groundwater recharge. As such, the Project would be intercepting wet-weather runoff into drywells. The redirection of wet-weather runoff will capture up to 70 acre-feet, which will fill dry wells, infiltrating through the soil, improving water quality. Runoff in excess of the designed wet-weather runoff will continue to flow via the existing 28th Street Storm Drain as it did during pre-project conditions. Impacts redirecting wet-weather runoff will be beneficial to the water quality and infiltration locally, therefore impacts are considered less than significant impact.
d) The proposed Project is not within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. The proposed Project is between approximately 35 to 100 feet above sea level and is approximately 50 feet to 700 feet from the coast, but according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Project is located in a Zone X, which is outside the 0.2% annual chance flood area. The pre-existing storm City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 31 -
drains maintained in the Project’s boundaries are also in Zone X. Therefore, there are no anticipated impacts.
e) The Project will not conflict with the Los Angeles Regional Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles, which was designed to protect the beneficial uses of waters within the coastal watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, identifies narrative and numerical water quality objectives for regional attainment, and describes implementation programs and other necessary actions to achieve water quality objects to meet the California State Water Resource Control Board’s Anti-Degradation Policy (Resolution 68-16). Furthermore, the Project will implement a SWPPP and comply with Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. As such, the Proposed project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 32 -
3.11 Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to
a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X
Discussion:
a) The Project is located in the City of Manhattan Beach and is subject to compliance with the City’s adopted plans, policies, and regulations. The Project facilities will not have any permanent above ground features that would physically divide the surrounding established community. As a result, there would be no impact.
b) The Project site’s current land use designation is public facilities, open space, and public right-of-way and once the Project is completed, the subsurface additions and parking facility improvements would not alter the current land use of the project area. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not conflict with an applicable land use plan, goal, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As such, there would be no impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 33 -
3.12 Mineral Resources
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state? X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
X
Discussion:
a) The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) requires classification of land into mineral resource zones (MRZs) according to the known or inferred mineral potential of the area. The MRZ categories are as follows:
MRZ-1: Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. MRZ-3: Areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
MRZ-4: Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ
The Project does not fall within an MRZ-2 area and the Project site and surrounding areas are fully developed and would not be available for mineral resource activities. The City of Manhattan Beach’s General Plan does not recognize any mineral resources within the City. Therefore, there are no anticipated impacts.
b) Although the area is listed for potential of aggregate resources, the Project site and surrounding areas are fully developed and would not be available for mineral resource activities. Manhattan Beach’s General Plan does not recognize the potential for mineral resources within the City, but due to the City being largely inaccessible due to urbanization, impacts on aggregate resources are not considered significant. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 34 -
3.13 Noise
Would the project result in:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a 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?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
X
Discussion:
a) The Project is primarily surrounded by Single-Family Medium and High Density Residential zoned properties, with Open Space and Public Space parcels adjacent to the site. The school most likely to be impacted by construction noise is Grandview Elementary School, 0.20 miles east at 455 24th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. Construction occurring in public right-of-way on 28th Street, Manhattan Avenue, and around the perimeter of the 26th Street Parking Facility will be within 15 feet of Residential dwellings.
Because implementation of the Project may result in the generation of construction noise within the areas surrounding the Project during construction and project operations, a Noise Assessment was performed in July 2022 by Cross-Spectrum Acoustics Inc. (CSA) and updated in April 2024.
Noise in the City of Manhattan Beach is regulated under Chapter 5.48 of the City of Manhattan Beach Municipal Code (MBMC), however Sections 5.48.220 and 5.48.250 exempt public works activities and construction activities from the provisions of Chapter 5.48.
Section 9.44.030 of the MBMC prohibits construction outside the hours of 7:30 AM and 6:00 PM Monday through Friday and 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM Saturdays. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and City-recognized holidays. Since the City of Manhattan Beach does not set explicit limits for construction noise levels, the Los Angeles County Code of Ordinances (LACCO) will be used as allowable limits for construction noise.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 35 -
Chapter 12.08.440 of the LACCO sets limits on the allowable levels of construction noise based on the land use of the nearby buildings. The code defines mobile equipment as “short-term operation (less than 10 days)” and stationary equipment as “long-term operation (periods of 10 days or more).” Most noise-generating construction activities for the project are expected to be 10 days or fewer in duration, with the exception of the drywells installation and repaving of the parking lot. During these phases of the construction, equipment will be moving locations throughout the parking lot area, so equipment will not remain operating in one location for 10 days or more. However, construction of the access shaft at Manhattan Avenue and 28th Street will take more than ten days, making it subject to the Fixed Equipment maximum noise levels during that time period.
Since MBMC set more restrictive hours than the LACCO for when construction can occur, work will only be conducted during the allowable hours under the MBMC. Table 3-3 outlines the allowable maximum noise levels for mobile equipment for the Project.
Table 3-3 Construction Maximum Noise Levels
Construction Activity
Single-Family
Residential
(dBA)
Business
Structures
(dBA)
Weekdays (7:30AM-6:00PM)
Saturdays (9:00AM-6:00PM)1
Mobile
Equipment 75 85
Weekdays (7:30AM-6:00PM)
Saturdays (9:00AM-6:00PM)1
Fixed
Equipment 60 70
Note: Noise limit applies at the façade of the closest noise sensitive building. 1Construction hours as allowed under the MBMC
The Noise Assessment performed by CSA included a noise model to predict noise levels with and without mitigation to the nearby sensitive receivers. Without mitigation, noise levels would exceed limits by up to 18 dBA with the assumption that all equipment is operating concurrently at full power.
Because it is unlikely that all equipment would be running at full power and with mitigation measures outlined by CSA (NOISE-1 and NOISE-2) and due to the fact that noise associated with the project will cease with construction activities, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant.
b) The Project construction will create some ground borne vibrations as part of the construction. It is anticipated that construction of the Project will employ equipment that is typically of concern for producing high vibration levels, such as rotary drills, rollers, compactors, and bulldozers. The Noise and Vibration Assessment performed by CSA found no structures on the National Register of Historic Places located near the project area. The City of Manhattan Beach is developing framework for evaluating historic resources, and there are no historic landmarks listed inside the area of influence for vibrations from construction associated with the project. Most buildings located near the work site appear to be of modern construction and unlikely to require limits for fragile buildings. However, if concerns are raised over the fragility of any particular structures, a pre-construction crack inspection may be warranted, as described in NOISE-3.
Caltrans Guidance Manual outlines the limits for Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) for structures of different conditions and is summarized in
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 36 -
Table 3-4. The Caltrans Guidance Manual suggests a limit for older residential structures at 0.3 PPV for the type of equipment anticipated to be used on this project.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 37 -
Table 3-4 Construction Vibration Damage Risk Limits
Structure and Condition
Peak Particle Velocity (in/sec)
Transient Source Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins,
ancient monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25
Older residential structures 0.5 0.3
Newer residential structures 1.0 0.5
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5
The Noise and Vibration Assessment performed by CSA included vibration model to predict vibration levels experienced by the nearby sensitive receivers. Table 3-5 shows anticipated equipment with associated PPV at 25 feet and minimum distance for no impact to structures.
Table 3-5 Construction Equipment Vibration Reference Levels Equipment Description Reference
Equipment
Ref PPV at 25 ft
(in/sec)
Minimum Distance for
No Impact1 (ft)
Rollers Vibratory Roller 0.210 20
Compactor Heavy Vehicles 0.178 18
Bore/Drill Rigs Cassian Drilling 0.089 11
Excavator Large Bulldozer 0.089 11
Cement and Mortar
Mixers Loaded Trucks 0.076 10
Haul Trucks Loaded Trucks 0.076 10
Backhoes Small Bulldozer 0.003 1
1Shortest distance where the vibrations from the equipment are below the impact threshold of 0.3 in/sec PPV.
There are phases in which groundborne vibration construction will occur within 15 feet of sensitive receptors near the intersection of Manhattan Avenue and 28th Street. This will result in exceedance of the Caltrans of 0.3 PPV during this phase of the construction. With mitigation measures NOISE-3 and NOISE-4 provided by CSA, and due to the fact that groundborne vibrations will cease with construction, impacts from groundborne vibration construction is anticipated to be less than significant.
c) The Project is not located in an area designated as airport land use. The Project is located over two miles from the Los Angeles International Airport, and almost five miles from Hawthorne Municipal Airport. The Project will not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels.
The Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport. As a result, the Project would not have the potential to expose people to significant aircraft-generated noise, and therefore, no impacts would occur.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 38 -
Mitigation Measures:
NOISE-1: CSA outlined specific noise mitigation measures that shall be implemented to avoid significant noise impacts during the construction work.
Contractor shall prepare a noise monitoring plan and collect noise levels at residences nearest the construction site during any phase where noise may exceed the noise limits defined in Table 3-3. The plan shall specify monitoring locations, equipment, procedures, and include a schedule of measurements and reporting methods to be used. Limits hours of construction to hours outlined in Table 3-3, unless work is authorized outside of these hours by the Manhattan Beach Public Works Director or City Council. Before beginning construction, communication shall begin with the local community, via flyers, postings, door knocking, etc. Outreach documents shall include a telephone number where residents can receive information about the project and make inquiries or complaints during the work. Specific outreach shall occur before the loudest events to inform residents of the expected noise and the length of time it is to last, specifically during demolition, drilling, sawing, paving, and roller operations.
Noise barriers shall be installed around the worksite perimeter. Noise from most construction phases can be significantly reduced through the use of temporary noise barriers, noise control curtains, and/or noise enclosures. A properly constructed noise barrier 12 feet tall around the perimeter of the active noise-generating work area removes all significant noise impacts when combined with the equipment scheduling outlined below.
Restrict concurrent operation of loudest equipment to prevent exceedances in noise levels.
NOISE-2: CSA outlined general noise mitigation measures that shall be implemented to avoid significant noise impacts during the construction work.
Install visible “Noise Control Zone” signs, including telephone number where residents can learn information about the project and make complaints.
Use equipment noise-control devices such as mufflers or motor enclosures that meet original specification and performance criteria.
Electrically powered equipment shall be used over gas- or diesel-powered equipment to the extent practical.
Designate haul routes to produce the least overall noise impact, with heavily loaded trucks routed away from residential streets where possible. Identification of haul routes shall consider streets with the fewest noise sensitive receivers where no alternatives are available. Location of staging areas, earth-moving equipment, stationary noise-generating equipment, stockpiles, and other noise-producing operations shall be set up as far as practicable from nearby noise-sensitive receivers.
Limit use of horns, whistles, alarms, and bells. It is recommended that low impact backup alarms be used on heavy equipment.
Phase the noisiest operations including demolition, earth moving, and ground impacting so they do not occur during the same time period.
NOISE-3: A before and after construction survey shall occur and include inspecting building foundations and taking photographs of pre-existing conditions, cracks, or other flaws. Structures nearer to the work than the minimum distances indicated in Table 3-5 of the MND shall be surveyed. If the post- construction survey identifies material damage that is determined to be caused by construction of the City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 39 -
Project, the contractor shall be responsible for repairing any identified damage. This responsibility shall be stipulated in the contract entered into between the City and the selected contractor.
NOISE-4: Vibration monitoring shall be conducted at structures where construction equipment is operating closer than the limits listed on Table 3-5. If measurements show that vibration levels are below the limits at the nearest structures during the highest-vibration activities, no impact has occurred.
If measured vibration levels exceed the limits, construction methods shall be modified, construction equipment shall be immediately reduced to a lower power setting, and/or equipment shall be moved further from the affected structure. An additional survey shall then be conducted to determine whether the structure shows signs of distress that were not previously documented.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 40 -
3.14 Population and Housing
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth
in an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly
(for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? X
Discussion:
a) The Project will be constructed within a government-owned parking facility, a portion of Bruce’s Beach Park, and within City-owned public right-of-way. The Project does not propose the construction of any new homes or businesses. The Project is proposing to construct a subsurface infiltration system, drainage facilities, and enhancements to the parking facility. Because the construction period is expected to be short term, Project construction activities would not induce employees to move towards the Project’s vicinity and would not induct population growth or the need for additional housing. No substantial population growth would result from the Project, and no impacts would be expected to occur.
b) The Project will not displace any existing people or housing, as the Project site is currently developed as an existing parking lot and roadways. No housing units or habitable structures will be built or removed as part of construction. During construction, alternate street routes and access to residential dwellings will be available for those living along 26th Street, 27th Street, 28th Street, and Manhattan Avenue. Therefore, there would be no anticipated impacts.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 41 -
3.15 Public Services
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i. Fire protection? X
ii. Police protection? X
iii. Schools? X
iv. Parks? X
v. Other public facilities? X
Discussion:
a)
i. The nearest fire station is Manhattan Beach Fire Department Station 1, approximately
0.5 mile southeast of the Project at 400 15th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. During construction, the project may have to close portions of 26th Street, 27th Street, 28th Street, Manhattan Avenue, and Ocean Drive, all of which are categorized as local streets.
Construction activities may involve temporary lane closures along residential streets for the construction of the diversion structure, pump system, sedimentation system, and related infrastructure. Construction-related traffic could also result in increased travel time due to flagging or stopping of traffic to accommodate trucks entering and exiting the Project site during construction. As such, construction activities could increase response times for emergency vehicles to local businesses and or residences within the Project’s vicinity.
However, the impacts of construction activity would be temporary and on an intermittent basis. A Construction Management Plan for the Project would be prepared to minimize disruptions to through traffic flow, maintain emergency vehicle access to the Project site and neighboring land uses, and schedule worker and construction equipment delivery to avoid peak traffic hours. Due to the temporary nature of the necessary construction activities, and limited operation activities, the Project is not expected to be beyond the scope of available fire and protection services for the City. Accordingly, the Manhattan Beach Fire Department’s would not require new or expanded fire facilities. However, in any case that roads may be City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 42 -
affected, potentially affecting response times, incorporating PUBLIC-1 and TRAF-1 through TRAF-2 will ensure that impacts are less than significant.
ii. The Manhattan Beach Police Department is located approximately 0.5 mile of the Project site at 420 15th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. During construction, the project may have to close portions of 26th Street, 27th Street, 28th Street, Manhattan Avenue, and Ocean Drive, all of which are categorized as local streets. As noted above in Section 3.15(a)(i), due to the temporary nature of the construction activities, and limited operational maintenance activities, the Project not expected to require police services beyond the scope that is already available. However, in any case that roads may be affected, potentially affecting response times, incorporating PUBLIC-1 and TRAF-1 through TRAF-2 will ensure that impacts are less than significant.
iii. The nearest schools are Grandview Elementary School, 0.20 miles east at 455 24th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266; American Martyrs School, 0.60 miles to the southeast at 1701 Laurel Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266; and Pacific Elementary School, 0.85 miles to the southeast at 1200 Pacific Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. This project does not increase population to the area and would not have impact on service ratios to schools; therefore, there would be no impact.
iv. The Project includes the construction of a subsurface drainage and infiltration system and improving the 26th Street parking facility. A portion of the lower area of Bruce’s Beach Park may be closed during construction of the drywells. During construction, the parking facility that serves the beach and the local park will be fully or partially closed, however construction will be sequenced so that the parking facility is available during peak visiting months. During its closure, there will be signage guiding visitors to available parking locations and temporary parking spaces will be made available on 27th Street between Manhattan Avenue and Highland Avenue and/or along Manhattan Avenue between 26th Street and 27th Street.
Bruce’s Beach is a small park that is mostly accessed on foot, so it is unlikely that partial or full closure of the parking facility would affect use. Since a majority of the park will be accessible during construction and return to existing conditions post-construction, impacts are expected to be less than significant.
v. Manhattan Beach City Hall is 0.50 miles southeast of the Project at 1400 Highland Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266. This project does not increase population to the area and would not have impact on maintaining service ratios for any public facilities. However, in any instances that roads may be affected, incorporating PUBLIC-1 and TRAF-1 through TRAF- 2 will ensure that impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
PUBLIC-1 – In the event that roads are inaccessible due to construction, the contractor will notify public agencies, including but not limited, to fire and police departments, to ensure that the emergency agencies can plan for alternative routes.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 43 -
3.16 Recreation
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
x
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
X
Discussion:
a) The Project would include the construction of a subsurface infiltration system and various drainage facilities and infrastructure, as well as enhancements to an existing parking facility. The Project would not draw a substantial number of new residents and visitors to the area. Therefore, the Project would not increase the use of an existing neighborhood and regional park, or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. During construction the parking facility that services individuals recreating at the beach and surrounding areas will be closed to the public, however construction will be sequenced so that the parking facility is available during peak visiting months. During its closure, there will be signage guiding visitors to available parking locations and temporary parking spaces will be made available on 27th Street between Manhattan Avenue and Highland Avenue and/or along Manhattan Avenue between 26th Street and 27th Street. Once construction is complete, the parking facility will be re- opened to residents and visitors.
b) The Project does not include construction or expansion of any recreational facilities. Therefore, there will be no impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 44 -
3.17 Transportation/Traffic
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with an a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? X b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Discussion:
a) The Project will not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. The Project would generate short-term construction related vehicle trips. These vehicle trips would be temporary due to construction and would not conflict with the City’s General Plan. During construction, portions of 26th Street, 27th Street, 28th Street, Manhattan Avenue, and Ocean Drive may be intermittently closed to traffic.
Access to nearby residences will be maintained throughout the construction phase of the Project.
Using TRAF-1, impacts from road closures would be considered less than significant.
b) CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) gives criteria for analyzing transportation impacts, including land use projects, transportation projects, qualitative analysis, and methodology. According to the guidelines, projects within one-half mile of either an existing transit stop, or transit corridor shall be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. The closest transit is at Highland Avenue and 26th Street, approximately 300 feet from project site. However, no transit lines intersect with the Project site and would be affected by any road closures associated with the construction. Therefore, anticipated impacts are less than significant.
c) The Project does not require street reconfiguring or creating any dangerous road features. The Project will excavate portions of 26th Street, 27th Street, 28th Street, Manhattan Avenue, and Ocean Drive to install new drainage infrastructure. The streets will be restored to existing line and grade once construction is complete. As a result, there would be no impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 45 -
d) The Project does not affect any roads that are designated as evacuation routes in the City of Manhattan Beach’s Emergency Preparedness Plan. However, emergency access will be impacted due to the nature of the Project, which will require construction along residential streets. With the incorporation of Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2, impacts from the Project will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
TRAF-1 - For projects that may impact traffic, contractors are required to prepare a construction traffic control plan. Elements of the plan shall include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
Develop circulation and detour plans to minimize impacts to local street circulation. Use haul routes minimizing truck traffic on local roadways to the extent possible. Develop detailed plans for pedestrian detours during construction that meet or exceed standards required in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and include adequate barriers against motorized traffic.
To the extent feasible, and as needed to avoid adverse impacts on traffic flow, schedule truck trips outside of peak morning and evening commute hours. Install traffic control devices as specified in Caltrans’ Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones where needed to maintain safe driving conditions. Use flaggers and/or signage to safely direct traffic through construction work zones.
TRAF-2 - Transportation of heavy construction equipment and/or materials which require use of oversized-transport vehicles on State highways will need a Caltrans transportation permit. The project specifications will limit construction traffic to off-peak periods to minimize the potential impact on State facilities. If construction traffic is expected to cause delays on any State facilities, a construction traffic control plan detailing these delays shall be submitted for Caltrans’ review.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 46 -
3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a ) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object
with cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
X
Discussion:
a)
i. A Cultural Resource Assessment was conducted for the Project by LSA Associates. The assessment was conducted to identify previously recorded cultural resources (prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, historic buildings, structures, objects, or districts). LSA’s assessment included a California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search at the SCCIC. The assessment’s search included the entire Project area and a 1-mile radius buffer. A Sacred Land Files Search was requested from the NAHC in January 2023 and received confirmation in January 2023 from the NAHC that the Project area does not include any known sacred lands.
ii. The NAHC named nine tribes affiliated with the Project Area and recommended that they be consulted for information on potential tribal cultural resources. On September 23, 2023, the City of Manhattan Beach sent notification letters to the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 47 -
Nation, the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Gabrielino/Tongva Nation, the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1.
During the 30 day period, only Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation requested consultation. The consultation process commenced on December 7, 2023. Over the next four months, consultation continued, with the City making various revisions to the draft mitigation measures to address concerns raised by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation.
Ultimately, the City and the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation were unable to come to a mutual agreement on the exact language for the mitigation measures, with the outstanding issue being whether the City could select another firm to conduct tribal monitoring in the event that the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation was not available to conduct said monitoring or charged fees above the market rate for such work. The mitigation measures TCR-1 through TCR-3 included in the IS/MND provide the City with an alternative option in such a situation and were developed to prevent any potential damage to a resource with significance to a California Native American tribe, and have been incorporated herein.
Mitigation Measures:
TCR-1 - Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities
The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on- site and any off-site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
Should the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation not have sufficient qualified staff, or not provide monitoring services at market rates, after consultation between the tribe and the City’s Community Development Director, the project applicant/lead agency may contract with a different firm to provide a Native American monitor, subject to approval by the City’s Community Development Director.
A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.
The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground- disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon (1) written confirmation to the tribal monitor from a designated point of contact for the project applicant/lead agency that all ground-disturbing City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 48 -
activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification the tribal monitor to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact TCRs.
TCR-2 – Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resource Objects (Non-Funerary/Non-Ceremonial) Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the tribal monitor and a qualified archaeologist. The procedure described in Mitigation Measure CUL-1 will then be followed.
TCR-3 – Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site, then Public Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed.
Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods.
Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 49 -
3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunication facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? X
Discussion:
a) The diversion pipeline will extend from the storm drain on 28th Street along Manhattan Avenue to just north of the parking lot on 26th Street. As a result, the Project will include new storm water drainage facilities. However, the new drainage facilities would not cause significant environmental impacts; the stormwater would be diverted into a pretreatment system, and then a series of drywells to infiltrate the stormwater runoff. The Project will not require or result in construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities. Minor relocations may be necessary and electrical services will be installed to power the new facilities, however, none of which would cause significant environmental effects, therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) The Project would include the construction of underground stormwater and drainage facilities and parking facility enhancements. Construction and operation of the Project would result in minimal City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 50 -
demand for water supplies. Water used during construction activities would be for site preparation, dust and erosion control, and other short-term activities. During Project operation, stormwater would be collected through storm drain diversions or through pervious parking lot with drywells and does not include any permanent fixtures that would require any additional water. Due to the negligible amount of water anticipated to be used by the Project during construction, a less than significant impact is anticipated.
c) The Project does not include any systems that would require wastewater treatment facility.
Stormwater collected from the diversion will be pretreated on site and infiltrated through drywells.
Since it will not contribute a significant amount of wastewater and will not exceed existing wastewater capacities for the area, nor would it be connected to the sanitary sewer system, there are no anticipated impacts.
d) Some debris may be generated with the construction of the Project and demolished concrete and asphalt will be sent to an offsite recycling facility when feasible. However, the amount of waste generated would be minor and would not be expected to be in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure and would not impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Excess waste due to construction would be temporary and would cease once construction is complete. Therefore, impacts to local infrastructure and solid waste reduction goals would be less than significant.
e) Disposal will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations for waste disposal, including the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations and Title 40 of the CFR.
Because the Project will comply with the regulations as noted, there would be no anticipated impacts.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 51 -
3.20 Wildfire
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Discussion:
a) The Project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project proposes to construct on land that has already been developed.
The Project is not anticipated to impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Project will comply with all current local, state, and federal building code requirements related to fire safety. The Project does not interfere with any major evacuation routes as designated by the City of Manhattan Beach. Therefore, there is no impact.
b) As noted above, the Project is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The Project does not include any components that would exacerbate wildfire risks or expose the public to uncontrolled spread. Therefore, there would be no anticipated impact.
c) The Project will not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure, such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate fire risk, and there would be no impact.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 52 -
d) As the Project site is not located in a state responsibility area or a high fire hazard severity zone, there would be no wildfire impact associated with downslope, downstream flooding, or landslides.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 53 -
3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
Discussion:
a) Due to the location in an urbanized environment, the Project is not anticipated to affect the quality of the environment, habitat, fish, wildlife, and plant populations at Project Site during construction or operation. Stormwater and urban runoff will be redirected to a pretreatment area and then to a series of drywells. During dry-weather, flows are anticipated to be minimal and will not have a substantial effect on any downstream waterbody. During wet-weather, flows from the project will not have a significant hydrological impact. Overall, one of the main goals of the Project is to reduce the pollutant load from a 1,518-acre catchment and increase groundwater infiltration to assist the City of Manhattan Beach in meeting water quality objectives in the region as outlined in the Watershed Management Plan prepared by the Beach Cities EWMP Group and submitted to LARWQCB. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact on the degradation of the quality of the environment, will not impact the habitat of fish and wildlife species, and will not threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 54 -
b) The proposed Project would result in significant impacts unless mitigated for the following environmental issues: air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, noise, traffic, and tribal cultural resources. Because the Project impacts are generally construction related, the cumulative study area is generally confined to the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Cumulatively, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts that would substantially combine with impacts of other current or probable future impacts when all other development projects within the city are compliant with the established regulatory framework. As such, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2, BIO-1 through BIO-3, CUL-1 and CUL-2, PALEO-1 through PALEO-3, NOISE-1 through NOISE-3, PUBLIC-1, TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 and TCR-1 through TCR-3, impacts would be less than significant.
c) The project would have potential environmental effects on humans, most of which are construction related. Those impacts would occur specifically in the areas of noise and air quality.
As discussed in Section 3.3 and Section 3.13, either these impacts are less than significant or appropriate mitigation is required to protect nearby sensitive receptors. The Project would comply with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations, and the impacts identified that would be considered potentially significant can be appropriately dealt with through the implementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, potential impacts on human beings would be less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2, and NOISE-1 through NOISE-3.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 55 -
4. References
California Department of Transportation. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm
California Department of Conservation. California Geologic Survey. Regulatory Maps. http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/EL_MONTE_EZRIM.pdf
California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Envirostor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global
CAL FIRE. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. 2007.
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6705/fhszs_map19.pdf
Caltrans. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. April 2020. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm- apr2020-a11y.pdf
City of Manhattan Beach Zoning Designations. Community Development., revised 2014. https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/home/showdocument?id=76&_ga=2.256973827.96321544.16 74085224-1182695501.1655836113
City of Manhattan Beach General Plan. Community Development., revised 2014. https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/departments/community-development/planning- zoning/general-plan/final-general-plan
City of Manhattan Beach. Code of Ordinances.
https://library.municode.com/ca/manhattan_beach/codes/code_of_ordinances
Cross Spectrum Acoustics, May 9, 2024. J2022-1350 – Manhattan Beach Stormwater Infiltration Project – Construction Noise and Vibration Assessment.
https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/54142/638451332743970000
Enhanced Watershed Management Programs Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. Los Angeles County Flood Control District. 2015. https://dpw.lacounty.gov/lacfcd/ewmppeir/
Federal Emergency Management Agency. National Flood Hazard Layer. August 26, 2021. https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/national-flood-hazard-layer
LSA Associates, September 2022. Cultural Resources Assessment for 28th Street Storm Drain Infiltration Project.
https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/54144/638451333169470000
State Water Resources Control Board’s. Geo Tracker. 2023.
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 56 -
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html
City of Manhattan Beach California Environmental Quality Act Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
- 57 -
Appendix A
Comments and Response to Comments
A.1: As these comments do not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND, they are outside the purview of CEQA and no further response within the MND is necessary. However, this comment will be provided to decision-makers for consideration as it relates to the project. 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to Comments 1A.1
A.2: Although this comment pertains to the FAQs page on the website (https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/departments/public-works/engineering-division/subsurface-infiltration-drainage-project#!/), parking is not subject to analysis pursuant to CEQA. It does not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND and no further response is necessary.
A.5: Per the 2021 MS4 Permit adopted by the Los Angeles Region Water Quality Control Board, the City of Manhattan Beach is required to meet certain water quality goals, including but not limited to bacteria. Failure to meet the requirements outlined in the MS4 permit subjects the City to possible fines and penalties. The City implements monitoring at the 28thStreet storm drain outfall several days per week and finds consistent exceedances in bacteria, which is why this Project has been prioritized.Water quality will be improved by diverting stormwater from drainage systems into pretreatment systems then to drywells to infiltrate into the ground water. Pretreatment systems will remove pollutants for up to 70 acre-feet per storm event and is expected to reduce bacteria loads by 163 x 1012MPN/year.
A.3: During construction, mitigation measures listed in each section under Noise (NOISE-1 through NOISE-4) and Air Quality (AIR-1) will be utilized to minimize nuisance odors, dust, and noise. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts from noise and vibration include preparing a noise monitoring plan, notifying residents that may be impacted, using electric equipment versus gas/diesel when feasible, limiting use of horns, utilizing equipment noise-control devices, scheduling to reduce concurrent use of the loudest equipment and installing noise barriers. Before and after construction surveys will be conducted for structures within equipment-specific distance listed on Table 3-5 of the MND. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts to air quality include dust minimizing measures, such as restricting earth moving operations during high winds, watering stockpiles, reducing idling of trucks/equipment, and other construction best management practices.Pursuant to CEQA, the transportation analysis must consider program plans, ordinance or policies addressing the circulation system; identify conflicts with Section 15064.3 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines; identify increases in hazards due to new traffic design features; and determine if a project would result in inadequate emergency access.The MND found traffic to be significantly impacted without the incorporation of mitigation measures due to road closures during construction. However, mitigation measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 would reduce those impacts, which include developing circulation and detour plans and scheduling to reduce impacts during commute hours when feasible would reduce those impacts to a less-than-significant level.A.4: Parking is not subject to analysis pursuant to CEQA. It does not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND and no further response is necessary. However, this comment will be provided to decision-markers for consideration as it relates to the project. 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to Comments 2 A.2A.3A.4A.5
A.6: During construction, mitigation measures listed in each section under Noise (NOISE-1 through NOISE-4) and Air Quality (AIR-1) will be utilized to minimize nuisance odors, dust, and noise. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts from noise and vibration include preparing a noise monitoring plan, notifying residents that may be impacted, using electric equipment versus gas/diesel when feasible, limiting use of horns, utilizing equipment noise-control devices, scheduling to reduce concurrent use of the loudest equipment and installing noise barriers. Before and after construction surveys will be conducted for structures within equipment-specific distance listed on Table 3-5 of the MND. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts to air quality include dust minimizing measures, such as restricting earth moving operations during high winds, watering stockpiles, reducing idling of trucks/equipment, and other construction best management practices.Per NOISE-3 Noise section of the MND, a pre- and post-construction survey will occur. NOISE-3has been updated to include that if the post-construction survey identifies material damage that is determined to be caused by construction of the Project, the contractor will be responsible for repairing said damage, which shall be stipulated in the contract entered into between the City and the contractor.3 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsA.6 B.1: The Noise and Vibration study was updated to reflect the change in location in response to this comment. While the impact receivers have shifted slightly, but level of impact and mitigations identified in the draft MND (NOISE-1 through NOISE-4) remain the same. See response to comment A.3 for further information on said mitigation measures. Additionally, it should be noted that the project description contained in the Draft MND prepared for the project and posted on the City's website (https://www.manhattanbeach.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/54018/638436798223170000), including the project location, accurately describes the project and is consistent with the project design analyzed in the IS/MND.B.4: As these comments do not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND, they are outside the purview of CEQA and no further response within the MND is necessary. However, this comment will be provided to decision-makers for consideration as it relates to the project.B.3: The MND was made publicly available online and in-person for a 31-day review period, which provided agencies and the public with the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft IS/MND during the comment period. The public comment period provides the opportunity for agencies and the public at-large to review and provide comments on technical reports prepared in support of the MND. All comments provided on the DraŌ IS/MND have been reviewed and responded to in the Final IS/MND. B.2: Per NOISE-3 Noise section of the MND, a pre- and post-construction survey will occur. NOISE-3has been updated to include that if the post-construction survey identifies material damage that is determined to be caused by construction of the Project, the contractor will be responsible for repairing said damage, which shall be stipulated in the contract entered into between the City and the contractor.4 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsB.1B.2B.3B.4 C.1: Pursuant to CEQA, the transportation analysis must consider program plans, ordinance or policies addressing the circulation system; identify conflicts with Section 15064.3 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines; identify increases in hazards due to new traffic design features; and determine if a project would result in inadequate emergency access.The MND found traffic to be significantly impacted without the incorporation of mitigation measures due to road closures during construction. However, mitigation measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 would reduce those impacts, which include developing circulation and detour plans and scheduling to reduce impacts during commute hours when feasible, would reduce those impacts to a less-than-significant level. C.2: As these comments do not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND, they are outside the purview of CEQA and no further response within the MND is necessary. However, this comment will be provided to decision-makers for consideration as it relates to the project.5 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsC.1C.2 D.1: Parking is not subject to analysis pursuant to CEQA. It does not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND and no further response is necessary. During construction, mitigation measures listed in each section under Noise (NOISE-1 through NOISE-4) and Air Quality (AIR-1) will be utilized to minimize nuisance odors, dust, and noise. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts from noise and vibration include preparing a noise monitoring plan, notifying residentsthat may be impacted, using electric equipment versus gas/diesel when feasible, limiting use of horns, utilizing equipment noise-control devices, scheduling to reduce concurrent use of the loudest equipment and installing noise barriers. Before and after construction surveys will be conducted for structures within equipment-specific distance listed on Table 3-5 of the MND. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts to air quality include dust minimizing measures, such as restricting earth moving operations during high winds, watering stockpiles, reducing idling of trucks/equipment, and other construction best management practices.Pursuant to CEQA, the transportation analysis must consider program plans, ordinance or policies addressing the circulation system; identify conflicts with Section 15064.3 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines; identify increases in hazards due to new traffic design features; and determine if a project would result in inadequate emergency access.The MND found traffic to be significantly impacted without the incorporation of mitigation measures due to road closures during construction. However, mitigation measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2, which include developing circulation and detour plans and scheduling to reduce impacts during commute hours when feasible, would reduce those impacts to a less-than-significant level.After construction, only one truck/crew will be required to visit the site to maintain the trash capture and sedimentation system once every 3 months or in alignment with storm events, and is not anticipated to significantly impact traffic, or create nuisance odors/dusts.D.2: Parking is not subject to analysis pursuant to CEQA. It does not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND and no further response is necessary. However, this comment will be provided to decision-makers for consideration as it relates to the project.D.3: As these comments do not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND, they are outside the purview of CEQA and no further response within the MND is necessary. However, this comment will be provided to decision-makers for consideration as it relates to the project.6 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsD.1D.2D.3 E.1: This is a letter from the California Department of Transportation acknowledging circulation of the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed 28thStreet Stormwater Infiltration Project. The summary of the project description and the basis of their comments are noted. E.2: Comments were received and filed. No additional response within the MND is necessary. 7 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsE.1E.2 E.3: Comments were received and filed. No additional response within the MND is necessary. 8 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsE.3 F.1: The consultation process commenced on December 7, 2023. Over the next four months, consultation continued, with the City making various revisions to the draft mitigation measures to address concerns raised by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. Ultimately, the City and the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation were unable to come to a mutual agreement on the exact language for the mitigation measures, with the outstanding issue being whether the City could select another firm to conduct tribal monitoring in the event that the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation was not available to conduct said monitoring or charged fees above the market rate for such work.Mitigation Measure TCR-1requires monitoring during ground-disturbing activity associated with this proposed project by a Native American Monitor. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation has been identified as the preferred monitor; but in event that they do not have sufficient qualified staff or provide monitoring services at market rates, the City maintains a fallback provision to contract with another firm to provide a Native American Monitor in order for the project to continue. 9 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsF.1 G.0: This is a letter from the California Coastal Commission staff acknowledging circulation of the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed 28thStreet Stormwater Infiltration Project. The summary of the project description and the basis of their comments are noted.G.1: The City monitors near the shoreline and will continue to monitor during and post-construction of the infiltration systems. G.2: Trash will be removed in pre-treatment, however arsenic, DDT, mercury, and PCBs cannot be removed, but can instead be infiltrated, removing them from flows discharged directly into the ocean. G.3: The zone of infiltration is limited to above the groundwater level. The infiltration system invert elevation is 10 feet above the existing groundwater level plus some additional future sea level rise.10 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsG.0G.1G.2G.3 G.4: The parking lot is being resurfaced with pervious concrete to accommodate infiltration. G.5: As these comments do not specifically relate to the adequacy of the MND, they are outside the purview of CEQA and no further response within the MND is necessary. However, the City is exploring potential solutions to reduce the number of vehicular parking spaces lost in the project vicinity post-construction.11 28thStreet Storm Drain Infiltration Project ISMNDCity of Manhattan BeachResponse to CommentsG.4G.5