Attachment No. 1 - Resolution No. 25-58 — Norwalk City Council, December 2, 2025

ATTACHMENT NO. 1

RESOLUTION NO. 25-58

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORWALK

ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, CERTIFY ING THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR SCH #202 4040140) FOR SPECIFIC PLAN AREA NO. 18, THE “ HEART OF NORWALK
SPECIFIC PLAN,” APPROV ING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND

REPORTING PROGRAM, AND ADOPT ING A STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

WHEREAS, the City has received General Plan Amendment No. 2025-02, General Plan Amendment No. 2025-03, Zone Change No. 2025-02, and Zoning Text Amendment No. 2025-04 to establish Specific Plan Area No. 18, the “Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan,” Under the Specific Plan the following is anticipated: (i) 3,087 residential units and a net increase of 2,285,418 square feet of residential development; (ii) 275,747 square foot reduction in commercial uses; (iii) 18,310 square feet reduction in industrial uses; and 53,011 square feet reduction in institutional uses. The project site consists of approximately 615 acres, roughly bounded by Imperial Highway to the north; I-5 Freeway to the east; Rosecrans Avenue to the south; and Pioneer Boulevard to the west. Regional access to the Specific Plan Area is provided by I-5, I-605, I-105, and U.S. Route 91. Local access is provided by Imperial Highway, Pioneer Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue, and Norwalk Boulevard/ San Antonio Drive; requests from The City of Norwalk (“Applicant”) and

WHEREAS, Specific Plan Area No. 18, the “Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan,” would allow for the redevelopment of the Specific Plan area as vibrant and interactive mixed- use development with open spaces; and

WHEREAS, Specific Plan Area No. 18 is consistent with the 6 th Cycle Housing
Element Program 1.1, which requires the completion of zoning code amendments and rezoning to help the City accomplish its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 5,034 units. The Housing Element accounted for many of the sites within the Heart of Norwalk area as residential inventory sites available for development. Therefore, the Housing Elem ent contains a program that commits to adopting the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan, which would allow residential use at higher density; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to section 21067 of the Public Resource Code, and Section 15367 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, Sections 15000 et seq.), the City of Norwalk is the lead agency for the proposed Project; and

WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study, the City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (“ EIR”) should be prepared because the Project may have a significant effect on the environment; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, on April 3, 2024, the City sent to the Office of Planning and Research and each responsible and trustee agency a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) stating that an EIR (SCH # 2024040140) would be prepared; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.9 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15082(c) and 15083, the City held one duly noticed Scoping Meeting on April 23, 2024, to solicit comments on the scope of the environmental review of the proposed Project; and

WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared, incorporating comments received in response to the NOP; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15085, a Notice of Completion was prepared and filed with the Office of Planning and Research on April 4, 2024; and

WHEREAS, as required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(a), on June 24, 2025, the City provided Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR, which was available for a 45-day public review period beginning on June 24, 2025, through August 8, 2025; and

WHEREAS, during the public comment period, copies of the Draft EIR and technical appendices were available for review and inspection at Norwalk City Hall and Norwalk Library and the City also consulted with and requested comments from al l responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory agencies, and others pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15086; and

WHEREAS, the City received written comment letters on the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, the City has prepared written responses to all comments submitted on the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”), which consists of the Draft EIR and its associated technical appendices, comments to the Draft EIR and its associated technical appendices, and written responses to comments on the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, on November 12, 2025, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Final EIR, and the proposed Project, and to solicit comments on the documents from staff, the public, the applicant and the City’s consultant team; and

WHEREAS, all potentially adverse environmental impacts were sufficiently analyzed in the Final EIR; and

WHEREAS, all of the requirements of the Public Resources Code and State CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied by the City in connection with the preparation of the Final Resolution No. 25-58

Page 2 of 78 ends

EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project have been adequately evaluated; and

WHEREAS, the Final EIR sufficiently analyzes the Project’s potentially significant environmental impacts and a reasonable range of feasible alternatives capable of reducing these effects to less than significant levels to the extent feasible; and

WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by the City Council pursuant to this Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence presented to it as a whole and the entirety of the administrative records of the Project, which are incorporated herein by this reference, and are not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and

WHEREAS, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which sets forth the binding mitigation measures for the Project, is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; and

WHEREAS, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations are attached hereto as Exhibit “B”; and

WHEREAS, the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City and is fully adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project; and

WHEREAS, no comments made or information presented during or after the public review of the Final EIR has produced any significant new information requiring recirculation of the Draft EIR or additional environmental review of the Project under Public Resourced Code Section 210092.1 or State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORWALK HEREBY DETERMINES, FINDS, AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated as substantive findings in this Resolution.

Section 2. The City Council certif ies that (i) the Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, (ii) the Final EIR was presented to the City and the City has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to consideri ng adoption of the Project, and (iii) the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City.

Section 3 . The City Council finds, based on consideration of the whole record before it, including the Final EIR and testimony received at the public hearing, as follows:

A. Review Period: The City provided a 45 -day public review period for the Draft EIR as required under State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15087 and 15105; and Compliance with Law: The Final EIR was prepared, processed, and noticed in accordance with the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 3 of 78 ends

B. Independent Judgment: The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council and is deemed adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project; and

C. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: The Final EIR recommends adoption of mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts of the Project. Therefore, the City Council of City of Norwalk adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is designed to ensure compliance during project implementation and/or mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project and are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6; and

D. Statement of Overriding Considerations: The Final EIR identifies that the Project has potentially significant effects that remain despite the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. Therefore, in order to adopt the Project, the City Council must first adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations that indicate the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable significant environmental effects, which are described in the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, Final EIR, and elsewhere in the administrative records.

Section 4. Location of Documents. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution have been based are located at Norwalk City Hall, 12700 Norwalk Boulevard, Norwalk, California 90650. The custodian for these records is the Director of Community Development. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.

Section 5. The City Council directs staff to file a Notice of Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk within five business days of the final approval.

Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and it shall go into effect immediately upon its adoption.

Section 7. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is hereby authorized to affix his signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Norwalk and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed assistant, is directed to attest thereto

[Signatures on the following page]

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 4 of 78 ends

APP
ROVED AND ADOPTED on this 2nd day of December 2025.
______
__________________________

TONY AYALA
MAYOR
ATTE
ST:
______
_________________________

THERESA DEVOY, CMC

CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 5 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-2 Heart of Norwa lk Spec ific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Table 3.0-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Matrix
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
Impact – Air Quality
MM AQ-1: Dust-Control Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose Ground Disturbance Activities construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department.
b. Standard: Consistent with SCAQMD Rule 403, best available dust control measures shall be implemented during Ground Disturbance Activities and active construction operations capable of generating dust.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM AQ-2: Equipment Maintenance.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department. b. Standard: Maintain construction equipment in good, properly tuned operating condition, as specified by the manufacturer, to minimize exhaust emissions. Documentation demonstrating that the equipment has been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications shall be maintained per the proof of compliance requirements for a minimum of five years after the Certificate of Occupancy is issued.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM AQ-3: Vehicle Idling Limit and Notification Signs.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department. b. Standard: Vehicle idling during construction activities shall be limited to five minutes as set forth in the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Section 2449. Signs shall be posted in areas where they will be seen by vehicle operators stating idling time limits.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM AQ-4: Non-Diesel Fueled Electrical Power.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department. b. Standard: Electricity from power poles rather than temporary gasoline or diesel-powered generators shall be used to the extent available and feasible.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

EXHIBIT A
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 6 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-3 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
MM AQ-5: Emissions Standard for Off-Road Construction Equipment Greater than 50 Horsepower. a. Applicability: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve at least 5,000 cubic yards of on-site cut/fill on any given day. b. Standard: All off-road diesel-powered construction equipment equal to or greater than 50 horsepower shall meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) Tier 4 emission standards during construction. Operators shall maintain records of all off-road equipment associated with Project construction to document that each piece of equipment used meets these emission standards per the proof of compliance requirement for a minimum of five years after the Certificate of Occupancy is issued.

In lieu of compliance with the above requirement, an air quality study prepared in accordance with the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Handbook may be provided by the Applicant or Owner demonstrating that project construction activities would not exceed the SCAQMD’s regional and localized construction thresholds.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM AQ-6: Use of Low Polluting Fuels.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve at least 5,000 cubic yards of on-site cut/fill on any given day. b. Standard: Construction equipment less than 50 horsepower shall use low polluting fuels (i.e., compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas, and unleaded gasoline).

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM AQ-7: Emission Standards for On-Road Haul Trucks.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve more than 90 round-trip haul truck trips on any given day for demolition debris and import/export of soil.
b. Standard: Construction haul truck operators for demolition debris and import/export of soil shall use trucks that meet the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) 2010 engine emissions standards at 0.01 g/bhp-hr. of particulate matter (PM) and 0.20 g/bhp-hr. of nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions. Operators shall maintain records of all trucks associated with Project construction to document that each truck used meets these emission standards per the proof of compliance requirements in Subsection I.D.6.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 7 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-4 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
MM AQ-8: Routes for On-Road Haul Trucks.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from City of Norwalk Community Development Department. b. Standard: Construction contractors shall reroute construction trucks away from congested streets or Sensitive Uses, as feasible. The burden of proving that compliance is infeasible shall be upon the Applicant or Owner. Where avoiding Sensitive Uses and congested streets altogether is infeasible, routing away from Sensitive Uses shall be prioritized over routing away from congested streets.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM AQ-9: During a case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategies to reduce mobile emissions to the maximum extent feasible:
• Provide preferential carpool/vanpool parking spaces for office uses. • Provide for shuttle/mini bus services for hotel uses. • Provide onsite child-care centers.
• Provide transit design features within development.
• Employ a transportation/rideshare coordinator at commercial uses. • Implement a rideshare program.
• Provide incentives for employees to rideshare or take public transportation. • Provide bicycle paths that link to an external network. • Provide pedestrian facilities.
• Integrate affordable and below market rate housing.
• Provide electric vehicle charging.
• Reduce parking supply.
• Implement subsidized or discounted transit program.
• Implement bike-sharing program.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Impact – Cultural Resources
MM CUL-1: Historical Built Environmental Studies.

For projects where demolition of structures greater than 50 years is proposed, prior to the issuance of any demolition permits, the applicant shall prepare an inventory of buildings proposed for demolition located on the project site. The project applicant, under the direction of the City, shall retain a historian or architectural historian who meets or exceeds the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards to document and evaluate the historical significance of the affected buildings or structures in accordance with CEQA. If such documentation and evaluation indicate that the building or structure qualifies as a significant historical resource, the resource shall be avoided, and significant features shall be preserved in place if feasible. If avoidance or preservation is not feasible, a Historical Resources Treatment Plan, or similar proposed plan, shall be prepared and implemented. Further documentation may be required and may include but is not limited to archival quality photographs, measured drawings, oral histories, interpretive signage, and/or other measures including, potentially, alteration of the resource in accordance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards or relocation of the resource.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 8 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-5 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
As defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 4(3) Section 15126.4 (b)(2), in some circumstances, documentation of a historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolitio n of the resource will not mitigate th e effects to point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur. In th ese cases, the Historical Resources Treatment Plan, or comparable plan, shall also evaluate the feasibility of retaining significant buildings or structures in their original locations and rehabilitating them according to the Secr etary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.

MM CUL-2: Archaeological Resource Studies.

Prior to any approval by the City for projects that involve any demolition, grading, trenching, or other ground disturbance, a Phase I Cultural Resources Study conducted by a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior standards in archaeology shall be required. A Phase I study shall include a pedestrian survey of the project site to identify potential surficial archaeological resources and sufficient background archival research and field sampling to determine whether subsurface prehistoric or historic remains may be present. If the project site is completely paved and/or developed, a pedestrian survey may not be required. Archival research should include, at minimum, a records search conducted at the South Central Coast Information Center (SCCIC) and a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search conducted with the NAHC of the project site. If the Phase I does not indicate any archeological resources, no further study is required.

If the Phase I Report indicates potential for important archeological resources that may be eligible for CRHR, a Phase 2 report may be required if the identified resources cannot be avoided and preserved in place. Where preservation is not feasible, a Phase 2 evaluation for significance and eligibility for listing in the CRHR may be required. The Phase 2 evaluation shall include any necessary archival research to identify significant historical associations as well as mapping of surface artifacts, collection of functionally or temporally diagnostic tools and debris, and excavation of a sample of the cultural deposit to characterize the nature of the sites, define the artifact and feature contents, determine horizontal boundaries and depth below surface, and retrieve representative samples of artifacts and other remains.

Cultural materials collected from the sites shall be processed and analyzed in the laboratory according to standard archaeological procedures. The age of archaeological resources shall be determined using radiocarbon dating or other appropriate procedures; lithic artifacts, faunal remains, and other cultural materials shall be identified and analyzed according to current professional standards. The significance of the sites shall be evaluated according to the criteria of the CRHR. The results of the investigations shall be presented in a technical report following the standards of the California Office of Historic Preservation publication “Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Content and Format (1990 or latest edition)”. Upon completion of the work, all artifacts, other cultural remains, records, photographs, and other documentation shall be curated at an appropriate curation facility. All fieldwork, analysis, report production, and curation shall be fully funded by the applicant.

If any of the resources meet CRHR significance standards, the City shall ensure that all feasible recommendations for mitigation of impacts are incorporated into the final design and any permits issued for development. Any necessary archaeological data recovery excavation shall be carried out by a Registered Professional Archaeologist Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 9 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-6 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
according to a research design reviewed and approved by the City prepared in advance of fieldwork and using appropriate archaeological field and laboratory methods consistent with the California Office of Historic Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991), Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design, or the latest edition thereof.

As applicable, the final Phase 1 Inventory, Phase 2 Testing and Evaluation, Phase 3 Data Recovery reports shall be submitted to the City prior to final inspection of a construction permit.

Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities including, at minimum, requirements to follow for unanticipated archaeological discoveries during construction.

MM CUL-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains.

Consistent with the regulatory provisions to address the handling of human remains in California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, PRC § 5097.98, and CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(e), in the event that human remains are discovered, it requires that disturbance of the site shall be suspended, encountered during site disturbance, grading, or other construction activities on the project site, the construction contractor shall halt work within 25 feet of the discovery. The Project Applicant shall immediately notify the City of Norwalk and the Los Angeles County Coroner. The coroner shall conduct an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in § 5097.98 of the PRC. The coroner is required to make a determination within two working days of notification of the discovery of the human remains. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains to be those of a Native American, he or she shall consult with the NAHC by telephone within 24 hours, to designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) who shall recommend appropriate measures to the landowner regarding the treatment of the remains. If the owner does not accept the MLD’s recommendations, the owner or the MLD may request mediation by the NAHC.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM CUL-4: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources.

In the event that a cultural resource of Native American origin is identified in the Plan Area during the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM CUL-2 or during any project-related ground disturbance, the City of Norwalk, as Lead Agency, shall consult with local Native American tribes who have requested notification of projects under AB 52. If the City, in consultation with the local Native American tribe(s), determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with representatives of the Native American tribe(s). The mitigation plan may include but would not be limited to avoidance, capping in place, excavation and removal of the resource, interpretive displays, sensitive area signage, or other mutually agreed upon measures.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 10 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-7 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
Impact – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
MM HAZ-1: For discretionary projects within the Plan Area, prior to construction activities onsite, a Phase I investigation shall be conducted to assess if there are any reasons to suspect that hazardous materials could be present. If current or past use of contaminants of potential concern are discovered through the Phase I investigation, or if the property has ever contained a gas station, dry cleaners or hazardous chemical storage tanks, a Phase II would be required. The Phase II investigation shall be conducted in accordance with guidelines developed by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for site assessments.

The Phase II investigation shall estimate the potential threat to public health and the environment if concentrations of pesticides are encountered using methods outlined in DTSC’s Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual and DTSC’s Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment guidance for implementing screening level risk analysis. The Phase II investigation shall be submitted to the City of Norwalk for review and approval by an independent third-party reviewer. If the Phase II testin g reveals concentrations of contaminants above health- based screening levels for residential exposure, remediation of the site sh all be required to address residual contamination above health-based level of concern. Remediation may include excavation and disposal of impacted soil or capping elevated areas beneath paved area s. The Construction Co ntractor shall imple ment the recommendations outlined in the Phase II.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Impact – Noise
MM NOI-1: During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategies to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible:
x Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. During construction, all equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. x Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities.
x Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment shall be staged as far away from the adjacent sensitive receptors as feasible.
x Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use.
x Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at sensitive receptors near construction activity.
x Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 11 of 78 ends

3.0 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-8 Heart of Norwa lk S pecific Plan Final PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Responsible Monitoring Entity
x Disturbance Coordinator. Project applicants shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and identify remedies to correct the problem. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site.

MM NOI-2: During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategy to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible:
x Temporary Sound Barriers. For construction activities located directly adjacent to sensitive receivers (e.g., residences, schools), temporary sound barriers shall be installed and maintained by the construction contractor between the construction site and adjacent receivers during the demolition, site preparation, grading phases, and building phases of construction. Temporary sound barriers shall consist of either sound blankets or other sound barriers/techniques such as acoustic padding or acoustic walls placed near adjacent residential buildings that have been field-tested to reduce noise.

Barriers shall be placed such that the line-of-sight between noise-generating construction equipment and adjacent sensitive land uses is blocked and shall be placed as close to the source equipment as feasible. As an alternative, applicants may prepare a Noise Study that demonstrates construction noise would not exceed noise standards at nearby sensitive resources. The Noise Study shall incorporate best management practices and other noise reduction measures to reduce noise levels.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

MM NOI-3: Prior to any grading or construction activity within 25 feet of an extremely fragile building (as defined in Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020) or any construction activity associated with the rehabilitation of an extremely fragile building, applicants shall prepare a Vibration Control Plan. The Vibration Control Plan shall be prepared by a qualified structural engineer and shall include methods to minimize vibration, including but not limited to:
x Use of drilled piles or the use of a sonic vibratory pile driver rather than impact pile driving. x Use of rubber-tired equipment rather than metal-tracked equipment. x Avoiding the use of vibrating equipment when allowed by best engineering practices.

The Vibration Control Plan shall include a pre-construction survey letter establishing baseline conditions at potentially affected buildings. The survey letter shall provide a shoring design to protect the buildings from potential damage. The structural engineer may recommend alternative procedures that produce lower vibration levels, such as sonic pile driving or caisson drilling instead of impact pile driving. Development projects shall implement the structural engineer’s recommendations.

A Statement of Compliance signed by the Applicant and Owner is required to be submitted to Building and Safety at plan check and prior to the issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan, prepared as outlined above, shall be documented by a qualified structural engineer, and shall be provided to the City upon request.

Ongoing as
projects are
proposed
City of Norwalk Department of Public
Services, City of Norwalk Community
Development Building and Safety Division.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 12 of 78 ends

Certification of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
Adoption of
California Environmental Quality Act Findings,
Mitigation Measures, Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations
October 2025

EXHIBIT B
Draft Findings of Fact and Statement of
Overriding Consideration
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 13 of 78 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. i Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
A. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 B. Project Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 1 B.1 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan .................................................................................................... 2 B.2 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 3 C. Environmental Review and Public Participation Process ....................................................................... 3 C.1 Incorporation of Final EIR by Reference ..................................................................................... 4 D. Findings Regarding the Environmental Review Process and the Content of the Final EIR. ............. 5 D.1 Finding Regarding Location and Custodian of the Record ...................................................... 6 D.2 Absence of Significant New Information .................................................................................... 8 E. Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 9 E.1 Differences of Opinion Regarding the Impacts of the Project ................................................ 10 E.2 Findings Regarding Impacts Identified in the EIR to be Less Than Significant or No Impact and Requiring No Mitigation ................................................................................. 11 E.3 Findings Regarding Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant but Mitigated to Less than Significant ................................................................... 30 E.4 Findings Regarding Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable ...................................................................................................... 41 E.5 Other CEQA Required Analysis in the EIR .............................................................................. 50 F. Alternatives to The Project ........................................................................................................................ 58 F.1 Project Objectives and Legal Requirements ............................................................................. 59 F.2 Findings Regarding Alternatives Considered in the EIR ....................................................... 60 G Statement of Overriding Considerations ................................................................................................ 63 G.1 Benefits of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan ........................................................................ 63 H. Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the CEQA Mitigation Measures ....................... 64

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 14 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 1 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
A. INTRODUCTION
The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Draft PEIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2024040140) has been prepared by the City of Norwalk (City) to evaluate the environmental effects of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan. The Project is described in Section B, below.

The City is the lead agency as defined in Section 15051(b) of the guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

B. PROJECT SUMMARY
The City is proposing to adopt and implement the Proposed Plan. The purpose of the Proposed Plan is to revitalize the underutilized corridors within the center of the City and spur development of new commercial and residential uses, while balancing placemaking and open spaces. Some of the key themes of the Proposed Plan revolve around: making places, connecting with corridors, and supporting the social element. These environments would incorporate a variety of urban residential uses, places to walk and spend time, nightlife , and spaces that can encourage and celebrate local culture, such as performing arts spaces. In general, the Proposed Plan:
• Identifies three new framework districts that preserve the City of Norwalk’s visual and cultural character, including a Front Street Historic District, Town Square District, and Triangle District. • Reconfigures Front Street as one -way to prioritize pedestrian safety and divert traffic to Firestone Boulevard.
• Reconfigures San Antonio Drive (San Antonio Corridor) to create a linear park with neighborhood - serving amenities to provide an ideal walking, biking, and driving connection between Norwalk Town Square, Front Street, and the Civic Center.
• Redevelops Firestone Boulevard (Firestone Corridor) into a green urban boulevard that supports new residential and commercial development.
• Establishes the Norwalk Railway Corridor pedestrian/bicycle trail, which provides a greenway parallel to the existing railroad to provide a landscaped trail with planted walkways, artwork, and cultural exhibitions to provide an inviting and safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists. • Implements a new pedestrian and bicycle path running adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right- of-way and provides a connection to the regional recreational Rail Trail.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 15 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
B.1 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan
The Project includes the adoption and implementation of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan (Proposed Plan). The Proposed Plan establishes new zoning regulations and development standards within the Plan area. The Proposed Plan regulations will supersede base regulations within the City’s zoning code. Where the specific plan is silent on an issue, municipal code regulations will apply.

The Plan is organized around three community values: Pride in People, Health and Wellness, and Supportive Community.

The Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan establishes land use regulations that encourage development to provide public benefits through the allocation of additional density and other development standard concessions. The Development Opportunity Reserve (DOR) program is a specialized land use tool that can be utilized in concert with the Specific Plan to assign density or other incentives where the objective is to reward a developer/investor for providing community benefits. Projects that meet City and communi ty objectives may receive DOR incentives in exchange for implementing identified priority public improvements, such as infrastructure, parks, or public facilities.

The system of proposed districts in the Proposed Plan divides the 615 -acre Heart of Norwalk area into walkable areas, no further than a ten-minute walk across, defined by unifying elements of use, public realm design, and architectural character. Each of them constitutes a “place;” for this reason, the districts themselves may take on a larger significance for the public than the overall Heart of Norwalk area.

The Proposed Plan identifies the following three districts and three corridors: Front Street Historic District, Town Square District, Triangle District, Firestone Boulevard Corridor, Railway Trail Corridor, and San Antonio Drive Corridor. The new zoning and land use within each district is the result of a combination of four pieces: permitted uses, density, height, and frontage/setback requirements. These four components are provided in the Proposed Plan for each parcel and dictate allowabl e uses in the same way traditional zoning works.

For the purpose of analysis in this EIR, the total development potential resulting from implementation of the zone changes is analyzed. While the Proposed Plan has a plan year of 2055, for the purpose of the analysis contained within this EIR, buildout of the Proposed Plan is anticipated to occur over the next 16 years, through 2040. The net development by 2055 is anticipated to be:
• 3,087 residential units and a net increase of 2,285,418 square feet of residential development; • 275,747-square-foot reduction in commercial uses;
• 18,310-square-foot reduction in industrial uses; and
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 16 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
• 53,011 square feet of reduction in institutional uses.

It should be noted that although overall there will be a decrease in non-residential square footage, the Plan does assume 173,250 square feet of new commercial development will be constructed over the course of the planning horizon. This could be in the form of mixed-use development in one of the residential districts or new commercial development in the Front Street Historic District or other commercial corridors.

However, overall, there would be a net reduction in non -residential square footage as the exi sting commercial, industrial, and institutional uses are replaced with new uses.

B.2 Project Objectives
In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b), the specific project objectives identified below support the underlying purpose of the Proposed Plan, assist the City as Lead Agency in developing a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in this EIR, and will ultimately aid the dec ision maker in preparing findings and overriding considerations, if necessary.

The Proposed Plan includes the following objectives:

Objective 1: Create unique places that preserve and represent Norwalk’s history, express Norwalk’s culture, and foment the growth of higher -quality and local businesses that serve the community.

Objective 2: Improve community health and wellness by designing streets, paths , and public spaces to prioritize walking, biking, and other active modes of transportation.

Objective 3: Support the strengthening of communal bonds by creating open spaces for gathering and improving access to community facilities and affordable housing.

Objective 4: Increase the availability of a variety of housing types to meet the existing and future needs of Norwalk residents.

Objective 5: Transform the built environment of the Heart of Norwalk into a sustainable, livable, and people-centered area.

C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS On April 3, 2024 , the City published the Notice of Preparation (NOP) to the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Planning and Research (SCH No. 2024040140); the NOP was published and distributed to the State Resolution No. 25-58

Page 17 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Clearinghouse, trustee agencies, responsible agencies, and other interested parties for a 30 -day public review period from April 3, 2024, to May 2, 2024. A scoping meeting was held on April 23, 2024.

The City prepared and circulated the Draft PEIR for a period of 4 5 days, beginning June 23 , 2025, and ending on August 7, 2025 . The Draft PEIR was available for review at Norwalk City Hall as well as the Norwalk Library; an electronic copy of the Draft PEIR was posted to the Project’s website as well as the City’s website . A Notice of Availability of the Draft PEIR was transmitted to responsible and trustee agencies, regulatory agencies, and others to request comments on the Draft PEIR, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15086. Comments on the Draft PEIR were received during the comment period, and those comments are responded to in the Final PEIR.

The Final PEIR is comprised of the Draft PEIR and the comments on the Draft PEIR submitted by interested public agencies, organizations, and members of the public; written responses to the environmental issues raised in those comments; revisions to the text of the Draft PEIR reflecting changes made in response to comments and other information; and other minor changes to the text of the Draft PEIR. The Final PEIR is hereby incorporated in this document by reference.

The Final EIR was distributed on October 31, 2025, and concluded on November 14, 2025. The Planning Commission met on November 12, 2025 , and recommended approval of the Projec t, advising the City Council to approve the Project at the December 2, 2025, public hearing.

C.1 Incorporation of Final EIR by Reference
The DEIR evaluated the Project, as well as alternati ves to the Project. For purposes of these findings, the Project is defined to mean the project studied in the Draft PEIR.

The Final PEIR consists of: (1) the Draft PEIR, (2) all appendices to the Draft PEIR (Appendices 1.0 through 3.11); (3) Chapter 1, “ Introduction”; (4) Chapter 2, “ Comment Letters and Responses”; and (5) Chapter 3, “Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.” The Final PEIR Chapter 2 specifically includes the City’s written responses to comments; a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft PEIR; the City’s written responses to specific comments on significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and copies of comments, as required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132. The Final PEIR, consisting of the aforementioned components , is hereby incorporated by reference into these findings.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 18 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 5 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
D. FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
AND THE CONTENT OF THE FINAL EIR.

The City Council certifies that it has been presented with the Final PEIR and that it has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final PEIR prior to making the following certifications and these findings.

Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15090) the Council certifies that the Final PEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The Council certifies the Final PEIR for the actions described in these findings and in the Final PEIR, for the Project as described above. The Council further certifies that the Final PEIR reflects its independent judgment and analysis.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant imp act:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts as identified in the Final EIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.

The City has made one or more of these specific written findings regarding each signific ant impact associated with the Project. Those findings are presented below, along with a presentation of facts in support of the findings. The City certifies these findings are based on a full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these findings, concerning the environmental issues identified and discussed.

The Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan EIR has been prepared as a Program EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. The degree of specificity in the Program EIR corresponds to the specificity of the Project. The Program EIR included an appropriate analysis of impacts in twelve (12) environmental topics, analyzing the Project and alternatives, including a No Project Alternative. The Draft PEIR disclosed the Resolution No. 25-58

Page 19 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 6 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
environmental impacts expected to result from the implementation and development of the Project.

Feasible mitigation measures were identified to avoid or minimize significant environmental effects.

The mitigation measures adopted as part of the Project are feasible, as appropriate for a Program EIR, and the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR mitigates the environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible, as discussed in the findings below. The Findings in Section E, below, indicate where mitigation measures are not capable of reducing impacts to levels of less than significant.

It is the finding of the City Council that the proposed Final PEIR fulfills environmental review requirements for the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan and that the document constitutes a complete, accurate, adequate, and good faith effort at full disclosure under CEQA, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council.

In response to comments received, the Final PEIR includes corrections and additions that correct minor errors and amplify and/or clarify information in the Draft PEIR. All such changes made to the Draft PEIR are shown in the Final PEIR (Chapter 2.0, Comment Letters and Responses).

It is the finding of the City Council that such clarifying changes and the corrections and additions as described in the Final PEIR have not presented any new, significant information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting P lan (MMRP) for the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan has been adopted pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 to ensure implementation of the adopted mitigation measures to reduce significant effects on the environment and is included in the Final PEIR document dated October 2025. The City is the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of the proceedings upon which certification of the PEIR for the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan is based, as described below in Section D.1, Finding Regarding Location and Custodian of the Record.

D.1 Finding Regarding Location and Custodian of the Record The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedin gs on which the City’s Findings of Fact are based are located at 12700 Norwalk Boulevard, Norwalk, CA 90650.

The custodian of these documents is Glen W. C. Kau , Public Services Director/City Engineer for the City .

This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and 14 Cal.

Code Regs. Section 15091(e).

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 20 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 7 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
For purposes of CEQA, the Record of Proceedings for the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR consists of the following documents, at a minimum:
• The Notice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Heart of Norwalk PEIR.
• The Draft and Final PEIRs, including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in the Draft and Final PEIRs.
• All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the 4 5-day public comment period on the Draft PEIR.
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. • All Findings and resolutions adopted by the City Council in connection with the Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein.
• All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR prepared by Impact Sciences, Inc., consultant to the City. • All documents and information submitted to the City by responsible, trustee, or other public agencies, or by individuals or organizations, in connection with the reuse of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR, up through the date the City Council approved the Project. • Minutes and/or summary transcripts of all public meetings and public hearings held by the City, in connection with the Heart of Norwalk PEIR.
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such public meetings and public hearings. • Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to , federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
• Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above. • Any other materials required to be in the Record of Proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 21 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 8 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
D.2 Absence of Significant New Information
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR for further review and comment when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the Draft EIR but before certification of the Final EIR. Ne w information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the project proponent declines to implement. The Guidelines provide examples of significant new information under this standard, as follows:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it.
(4) The D raft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies , amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR.

The Council recognizes that the Final PEIR incorporates information obtained by the City since the Draft EIR was completed, and contains additions, clarifications, modifications, and other changes. With respect to this information, the Council finds as follows:

Various minor changes and edits have been made to the text of the Draft PEIR. These changes are generally of an administrative nature, such as correcting typographical errors, making minor adjustments to the data, and adding or changing certain phrases to improve readability and enhance clarity. The City Council finds that these changes are of a minor, non-substantive nature and do not require recirculation of the Draft PEIR.

In addition to the changes and corrections described above, the Final PEIR provides additional information in response to comments and questions from the public. The City Council finds that this additional information does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation, but rather that the Resolution No. 25-58

Page 22 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 9 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
additional information clarifies or amplifies an adequate PEIR. Specifically, the City Council finds that the additional information, including the changes described above, does not show that:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it.
(4) The Draft PEIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

E. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The City staff report, the PEIR, written comments, any written and oral testimony at public hearings, and these Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and other information in the administrative record serve as the basis for the City’s environmental determ ination. The Final PEIR includes revisions to the Draft PEIR, public comments, and City responses. The detailed analyses of potential environmental impacts and proposed mitiga tion measures for the Project are presented in the Draft PEIR. Writt en comments and City responses, as well as some minor revisions to the impact and mitigation discussions, are provided in the Final PEIR.

Presented below are the environmental findings made by this City Council after its review of the documents referenced above. Factual discussion in this document summarizes the information contained in the PEIR and the administrative record upon which this Council bases its decision to certify the PEIR and approve the Project.

Impacts found to be significant and unavoidable are the Project and cumulative impacts to Air Quality from exceedance of criteria air pollutant emission standards including potential future construction, operation-related reactive organic compounds, nitrogen monoxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), sensitive receptors from localized construction related emissions ; and noise impacts for temporary construction -related noise and construction -related vibration impacts .

Impacts found to be potentially significant but able to be reduced to less than significant levels with the imposition of proposed mitigation include impacts from ground -disturbing activities to historical Resolution No. 25-58

Page 23 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 10 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
properties and archaeological, tribal, and paleontological resources, hazardous contamination or materials resulting from contaminated soil s, and building damage from construction vibration . To the extent these impacts remain significant and unavoidable, such impacts are acceptable when weighed against the overriding social, economic, legal, technical, and other considerations set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The signif icant and unavoidable impacts identified in the Draft PEIR are discussed below, along with the appropriate findings per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. The City Council concurs with the conclusions in the Draft PEIR that the issues and sub-issues discussed below can be mitigated below a significant impact threshold. For those issues that cannot be mitigated below a level that is less than significant, overriding considerations exist that make those impacts acceptable.

E.1 Differences of Opinion Regarding the Impacts of the Project In making its determination to certify the Final PEIR and to approve the Project, the City Council recognizes that the Project involves a number of controversial environmental issues and that a range of technical and scientific opinions exists with respect to those issues. The City Council has acquired an understanding of the range of this technical and scientific opinion by its review of the Draft PEIR, the comments received on the Draft PEIR, and the responses to those comments in the Final PEIR, as well as testimony, letters, and reports regarding the Final PEIR and its own experience and expertise in assessing environmental impacts.

The City Council has reviewed and considered, as a whole, the evidence and analysis presented in the Draft PEIR, the evidence and analysis presented in the comments of the Draft PEIR, the evidence and analysis presented in the Final PEIR, the information submitted on the Final PEIR, and the reports prepared by the experts who prepared the PEIR, consultants, and by staff, addressing those comments. The City Council has gained a comprehensive and well -rounded understanding of the environ mental issues presented by the Project. In turn, this understanding has enabled the City Council to make its decisions after weighing and considering the various viewpoints on these important issues. The City Council accordingly certifies that its findings are based on a full appraisal of all of the evidence contained in the Final PEIR, as well as the evidence and other information in the record addressing the Final PEIR.

In making these findings, the City Council has considered the opinions of other agencies and members of the public, including opinions that disagree with some of the analysis and significance thresholds used in the PEIR. City Council finds that the determination of significance thresholds is a judgment within the discretion of the City Council; the significance thresholds used in the PEIR are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the expert opinion of the PEIR preparers and staff; and t he significance thresholds used in the PEIR provide reasonable and appropriate means of assessing the significance of the adverse environmental effects of the Project.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 24 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 11 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
E.2 Findings Regarding Impacts Identified in the EIR to be Less Than Significant or No Impact and Requiring No Mitigation
The following issues were identified during the scoping process as having the potential to cause significant impact and were therefore included in the PEIR. With further review, these issues were found in the PEIR as either having no potential to cause significant impact or were determined to have less than significant impacts and therefore require no project-specific mitigation.

Aesthetics
Threshold AES-1 There are no scenic vistas within the Plan Area, and no impact would occur. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.1-15 to 3.1.16) Threshold AES-2 The Plan Area is not within or visible from any existing or eligible scenic highways, no impact would occur. No mitigation is required . (Final PEIR pp. 3.1- 16)
Threshold AES-3 Reasonably anticipated development from the Proposed Plan, as directed by the proposed land uses and development standards, would increase the height and scale of buildings and other structures in the Plan Area. Such changes would represent a change in the visual character. However, future development would likely benefit and improve the visual character and quality in some of these areas, as new development would be designed with contextual form and development standards to be compatible wi th existing visual character. While the proposed residential uses within the Plan Area would result in increases in density in some locations, some of these residential uses would be permitted by the City and State through density bonuses. Additionally, these areas are where City is encouraging growth and where such development is desirable, such as where the potential future transit stop may be located. While these changes would change the visual character of these areas, such changes are consistent with t he overall urban character of the City; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.1-16 to 3.1-20) Threshold AES-4 The Proposed Plan contains provisions to reduce the impact of new sources of light. New lighting (site, parking lot, and building security lighting) would prevent direct glare on onto neighboring properties or skyward. Lighting fixtures will be shielded to confine light spread. Pedestrian lighting along sidewalks would be spaced by 120 feet to reduce the lighting intensity. Additionally, all Resolution No. 25-58

Page 25 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 12 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
pedestrian lighting would be LED and follow the Southern California Edison (SCE) standards for maintenance. In mixed -use and commercial projects, all lighting should be adequately shielded from adversely impacting residential sections, and lighting on walkways and driveways should be one foot candle minimum. Furthermore, new development projects associated with implementation of the Proposed Plan would be required to comply with sign design standards as detailed in Chapter 17.03 of the Municipal Code , all Municipal Code requirements for outdoor lighting. Thus, implementation of the Proposed Plans would result in a less than significant impact with respect to light and glare. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.1-20 to 3.1-21) Air Quality
Threshold AQ-1 Area air quality planning, including the AQMP, assumes that there will be emissions from new growth, but that such emissions may not impede the attainment and may actually contribute to the attainment of applicable air quality standards within the SCAB. Construction-related emissions from potential future projects under the Proposed Plan would be temporary in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction period, and would not have a long -term impact on the region’s ability to meet state and federal air quality standards. Furthermore, potential future projects resulting from implementation of the Proposed Plan will be required to comply with applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations for new or modified sources. Future development project construction activities will be consistent with the goals and objectives of the AQMP to improve air quality in the SCAB. The Project’s growth projections would not be considered substantial, and the objectives of the Project would help the State, SCAG region , and City achieve its goals of increasing housing, and in particular, locating growth within transit - oriented districts and near employment centers. The Project would not have the potential to conflict with regional growth projections identified in SCA G’s RTP/SCS used in the formulation of the AQMP. As the Project is consistent with Criterion Nos. 1 and 2, it would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air quality plan, and this impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.2-21 to 3.2-23) Threshold AQ-4 Construction activities associated with the Project may generate detectable odors from heavy -duty equipment exhaust and architectural coatings. However, construction-related odors would be short-term in nature and cease upon buildout Resolution No. 25-58

Page 26 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 13 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
of the Project . In addition, individual development projects under the Project would be required to comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes. This would reduce the detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust. The Project would also be required to comply with the SCAQMD Rule 1113 – Architectural Coating, which would minimize odor impacts from ROG emissions during architectural coating. Any odor impacts to existing adjacent land uses would be short -term and not substantial. As such, the Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people, and this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.2-27 to 3.2-28) Cultural Resources, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Paleontological Resources Threshold CUL-3 In the unlikely event that human remains are uncovered during ground - disturbing activities, there are regulatory provisions to address the handling of human remains in California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, PRC § 5097.98, and State CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(e). Pursuant to these codes, in the event that human remains are discovered, it requires that disturbance of the site shall be suspended, and the City of Vernon and the Los Angeles County Coroner would be immediately notified. Compli ance with these protocols would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.3-15 to

3.3-16)
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold GHG-1 With the use of CalEEMod, GHG emissions associated with construction activities would occur from off -road equipment usage, hauling vehicles, delivery, and worker trips to and from sites within the Plan Area. GHG emissions would be generated by construction of each individual projec t; such emissions are temporary on each site—lasting only for the duration of construction activities on each site. Annual GHG emissions for scenario construction projects would range from approximately 6.67 to 44.5 metric tons pe r year of CO 2e (MT CO 2e) (see Appendix 3.2 to the Draft PEIR). Construction-related GHG emissions represent a fraction of total regional emissions when considering the emissions generated from mobile sources (on-road motor vehicles), area sources, energy sources, water, Resolution No. 25-58

Page 27 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 14 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
and generation of solid waste and wastewater. Presently, the existing annual emissions for the Plan Area are 78,243 MT CO2e. GHG emissions of the Proposed Plan in 2040 would total 70,643 CO2e metric tons per year (MTY). This would be a reduction of approximately 7,600 CO2e MTY compared to existing conditions. The future without the Proposed Plan scenario would have operational emissions of 65,917CO2e MTY. Therefore, under the Proposed Plan, there would be an increase of approximately 4,726 CO 2e MTY compared to future without Proposed Plan conditions. While accommodating an increase in overall square footage to the Plan Area, the Proposed Plan would improve per capita GHG emissions compared to the future no project scenario . The Project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, and this impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.4-19 to 3.4-22)
Threshold GHG-2 As stated previously, the Project would have a significant GHG emissions impact if it would conflict with the state’s laws and programs to address climate change (i.e., AB 32, SB 32, AB 1279 and SB 375); regional plans to address climate change consistent with state laws and plans (i.e., 2024 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS); and local plans and policies to address climate change (i.e., City of Norwalk Energy Action Plan). As discussed in Impact GHG-2 of the PEIR, the Project would be consistent with AB 32, SB 32, SB 375, the RTP/SCS, and the City’s Energy Action Plan . As such, the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions , and this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.4-22 to

3.5-28)
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold HAZ-3 Compliance with existing regulations would minimize the risks associated with the exposure of sensitive receptors, including schools, to hazardous materials to a less than significant level. Therefore, future development under the Project would result in a less than significant impact related to the emissions or handling of hazardous materials within the vicinity of schools. Impacts would be less than significant. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5-27 to 3.5-28)
Threshold HAZ-5 The nearest boundary of the Plan Area is approximately 5 miles northwest of the Fullerton Municipal Airport . The Project Area would not be located within an Resolution No. 25-58

Page 28 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 15 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
airport’s noise contours. As such, the Plan would not expose people residing or working in the Plan area to excessive airport -related noise levels. As such, no impacts would occur. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5-30 to 3.5-31) Threshold HAZ-6 Construction associated with implementation of the Proposed Plan would occur over a period of 20 years on specific sites in various locations within the Plan Area.

Although temporary lane and sidewalk closures immediately adjacent to site - specific developm ent projects may be necessary for short durations, adequate emergency vehicle access throughout the Plan Area would be maintained at all times as required. Future development associated with implementation of the Proposed Plan would not inc lude the development of structures that could potentially impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Primary evacuation routes within the Plan Area, as identified by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, include the Santa Ana Freeway, Imperial Highway, and San Antonio Drive. During construction, temporary road closures may be necessary; however, alternative evacuation routes along San Antonio Drive would be available. The City and the Los Angeles County Fire Department would review potential road closures associated with the Proposed Plan to ensure proper emergency access is established during construction of future development projects. Once operational, these primary e vacuation routes could still be utilized in the event of an emergency ; however, due to the reduction in capacity on San Antonio Drive, it may be appropriate to utilize Pioneer Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue for evacuation purposes. Overall, the Proposed Pl an would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5-31 to 3.5-32)
Threshold HAZ-7 The Plan Area is located within an entirely built -out urban community that is characterized (and surrounded) by a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial areas, and does not interface with any wildlands or an area classified as a Fire Hazard zone as identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 1 Therefore, impacts related to exposure of people to wildland fires would not occur. As such, the Proposed Plan would not expose

1 California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CAL FIRE), “Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer.” Available online at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/, accessed December 5, 2023.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 29 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 16 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5-32 to

3.5-33)
Hydrology
Threshold HYD-1 Implementation of the Proposed Plan may include infill development involving demolition of some existing structures, site preparation, construction of new buildings, and infrastructure improvements. Demolition of existing structures, removal of existing pa vement and concrete replacement, grading, stockpiling of materials, excavation , and the import/export of soil and building materials, construction of new structures, and landscaping activities would expose and loosen sediment and building m aterials, which have the potential to mix with stormwater and urban runoff and degrade surface and receiving water quality.

Each future site-specific development project occurring under the Proposed Plan would require compliance with applicable regulations to obtain demolition, excavation, grading, or construction permits from the City. The permitting process would ensure each development project would be implemented in compliance with applicable NPDES requirements. In order to control the impact of erosion , sedimentation, and other pollutants on receiving waters, the SWRCB Construction General Permit (that would be implemented through the City’s permitting process), requires the implementation of BMPs to eliminate or reduce the discharge of pollutants in st ormwater discharges, and prohibits the discharge of non-storm water from construction sites as these non -storm water discharges are likely to carry pollutants to receiving waters. Compliance with NPDES General Permit and specific BMPs that are required for each construction project, construction impacts related to water quality standards , or waste discharge requirements from implementation of the Proposed Plan would be less than significant. Development projects are required through implementation of a project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to retain and treat the storm water quality volume generated by the project to reduce pollutant loading in runoff. Multi-family residential development would be required to comply with the City’s zoning cod e and designate 20 percent of the land area for permeable surfaces with natural planting. Furthermore, the City is a member of the Southeast Water Coalition, which encourages best practices to reduce contaminated groundwater. With implementation of these Regional Water Quality Control Resolution No. 25-58

Page 30 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 17 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Board, County, and City requirements, the development projects that would be implemented pursuant to the Proposed Plan would not result in adverse impacts to water quality through violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than significant. (Final PEIR pp. 3.6-23 to

3.6-26)
Threshold HYD-2 Infill and redevelopment that would occur with implementation of the Project would result in population growth, thereby increasing demand on water supplies.

The Central Basin underlies the Project Area; however, the majority of the Project Area is developed and impervious, and thus does not have much groundwater recharge potential . Development under the Project would not substantially increase the amount of impervious surfaces in the Project Area. Development would not result in a net defici t in aquifer volume or a lowering of the groundwater table. While the allotted pumping rights within the Central Basin may exceed the natural groundwater replenishment rate, water could be purchased where necessary to fully replenish the quantity of groundwater that could not be restored through natural processes. Thus, the Proposed Plan would not reduce the groundwater recharge potential of the Plan Area. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.6-26 to 3.6-28)
Threshold HYD-3 Project implementation is not anticipated to substantially change the drainage patterns within the Project Area. Future projects would be developed on existing lots and would include buildings, landscaped areas, roads, and other hardscape improvements; no bare areas of soil would be left vulnerable to erosion. While erosion and siltation impacts could occur during co nstruction of individual development projects, existing state regulations would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Project development could increase the rate and/or amount of stormwater runoff in comparison to existing conditions, which in turn could result in flooding issues on or off site. Growth and urbanization in the Plan Area would place increased pressure on ex isting storm drain capacities. Storm water runoff is influenced by rainfall intensity, ground surface permeability, watershed size and shape, and physical barriers. The introduction of impermeable surfaces greatly reduces natural infiltration, allowing f or a greater volume of runoff. In addition, paved surfaces and drainage conduits can accelerate the velocity of runoff, concentrating peak flows in downstream areas faster than under natural conditions. Significant increases in runoff and peak flow could overwhelm Resolution No. 25-58

Page 31 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 18 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
drainage systems and alter flood elevations in downstream locations. Increased runoff velocity can promote scouring of existing drainage facilities, reducing system reliability and safety. Future development under the Proposed Plan would be required to und ergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-level impacts to the City’s stormwater drainage system and facilities.

Therefore, impacts to the existing stormwater drainage system would be less than significant. Under the Proposed Plan, the majority of the Plan Area would remain impervious (although, as discussed above, expected to decrease slightly due to sustainable infrastructure) due to the presence of parking areas, walkways, hardscape, and building roofs and roadways. Future develop ment may include landscaped areas, introducing opportunities for infiltration of stormwater runoff and roof discharges, thereby minimizing potential impacts associated with stormwater runoff exiting the area, and potentially improving conditions associated with current conditions. For these reasons, potential impacts to drainage pattern alterations, including how drainage pattern alterations could affect surface water runoff, erosion/siltation, flooding, and stormwater conveyance facilities, would be less t han significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.6-28 to 3.6-31)
Threshold HYD-4 The Plan Area is located approximately 22.90 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. Due to the distance and elevations, the potential for a tsunami affecting the Plan Area is unlikely. Therefore, development that could be facilitated by the Project would not be located in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones that could risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation. There would be no impact associated with the Project. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.6-32) Threshold HYD-5 Future development would be required to implement site -specific source control and treatment control BMPs in accordance with the County’s SUSMP standards.

These BMPs would adhere to the Basin Plan’s requirements for BMPs. As such, future development under the Plan would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan, and no impacts would occur . No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.6-33)
Land Use and Planning
Threshold LAN-1 The Proposed Plan would not directly result in the construction of any development or infrastructure that could physically divide a community , such as Resolution No. 25-58

Page 32 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 19 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
major roadways, utility transmission lines, or storm channels. Development under the Proposed Plan would involve an increase in infill development, over time, utilizing the established roadway network. The increase in development capacity that would occur through implementation of the Proposed Plan is intended to allow for intensified development and a mix of land uses. The propose d zoning changes would enhance connectivity of land uses through implementation of mixed uses, resulting in a more physically connected community.

Overall, implementation of the Proposed Plan would increase the density and intensity of development throughout the Plan Area. The existing medium-to-high density residential developments within the Plan Area are nominal and are scattered predominantly into areas that contain currently underutilized or vacant commercial and light industrial properties. The Proposed Plan would provide for additional residential and related commercial and retail development and improved connectivity within the existing community and would not result in the division of an established community. Conversely, the Proposed Plan would establish a more integrated network of community land uses and mobility. Thus, impacts related to the physical division of an established community would be beneficial. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.7-15 to 3.7-16) Threshold LAN-2 Table 3.7-1, Project Consistency with SCAG’s Connect SoCal Land Use Policies, demonstrates the Project’s consistency with relevant Connect SoCal’s goals and policies, whereas Table 3. 7-2, Project Consistency with the City of Norwalk General Plan, discusses the P roject’s consistency with relevant policies from the City of Norwalk General Plan’s Land Use Element and Housing Element.

Development under the Project would be consistent with the City of Norwalk’s General Plan and Connect SoCal’s goals and policies. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.7-17 to 3.7-22) Noise
Threshold NOI-1 Operational Noise . Future noise levels associated with implementation of the Project would increase local traffic noise levels by a maximum of 1.5 dBA CNEL along Woods Avenue, north of Firestone Boulevard , compared to future without Plan conditions. Operational noise level increases would be significant if ambient noise levels increase by 3 dBA CNEL to or within the “normally incompatible” or “clearly incompatible” categories or any 5 dBA CNEL or more increase. No Resolution No. 25-58

Page 33 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 20 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
roadway segments would experience noise level increases that exceed either the 3 dBA CNEL threshold or 5 dBA CNEL threshold. It should be noted that the Proposed Plan would increase landscaping within the major corridors, such as Firestone Boulevard, San A ntonio Drive, and Front Street. New landscape greening and tree planting , and new median landscape would serve as a natural barrier between traffic and nearby sensitive uses and could potentially decrease traffic-related noise levels at receptors along the se major corridors. Therefore, traffic noise levels would not exceed the applicable thresholds of significance, and this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.8-20 to 3.8-29)
Threshold NOI-3 The Plan Area is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip or airport land use plan.

The nearest boundary of the Plan Area is approximately 5 miles northwest of the Fullerton Municipal Airport. As such, the Proposed Plan would not expose people residing or working in the Plan Area to excessive airport -related noise levels, and there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.8-32) Population and Housing
Threshold POP-1 While the Proposed Plan would create population growth, the Proposed Plan would be consistent with the applicable goals and polices of the General Plan , which encourage a variety of housing types to meet the existing and future needs of City residents, and the Housing Element, which has a goal to increase affordable housing opportunities and a goal to create safe and integrated neighborhoods. Key elements of the Plan, with its focus on healthy communities and linking districts to cr eate a more cohesive , integrated community, would further these goals .

Implementation of the Project would help the State, the SCAG region, and the City achieve its goals relating to growth, housing, and employment as the Project would encourage sustainable development and transit -oriented planning. For these reasons, impacts on population, housing, and employment growth would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.9-14 to 3.9-19) Threshold POP-2 A primary objective of the Proposed Plan is to facilitate the addition of residential development in a predominantly underutilized commercial area. As part of the Plan, an existing trailer park would be rezoned to allow new non-mobile home uses on the site. The result of this rezoning could be the loss of up to three affordable housing units. However, the mobile home park is not identified as an Resolution No. 25-58

Page 34 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 21 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
opportunity site, meaning there are no immediate plans for the redevelopment of the site. The loss of affordable housing would necessitate replacement housing.

However, the Proposed Plan would permit up to 3,087 units of new residential development. Additionally, the Proposed Plan includes provisions to increase affordable housing through incentives; as such, many of the units to be built would be affordable units , allowing for sufficient replacement housing within the Plan Area. Outside of the mobile home park the Plan includes land use and zone changes specifically within predominantly commercial and light industrial areas along major corridors and would preserve the existing low-density neighborhoods and their character, and no changes are proposed for t he single-family residential areas or multi -family residential areas east of Firestone Boulevard from Sproul Street and Funston Avenue and west of Pioneer Boulevard between Angell Street and Brimley Street. This impact is less than significant. No mitigati on is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.9-19)
Public Services and Recreation
Threshold PS-1 Development associated with the Project would increase the City’s population and, therefore, increase demand for fire protection services. The ability of emergency medical service (EMS) and fire protection services to respond to calls in a timely manner depends primarily on the distance of the station to the incident and the speed at which the emergency vehicles are able to navigate intervening roadways. While anticipated growth through the implementation of the Project would result in higher overall traffi c volumes in the Project Area, this would not impede emergency response, since California State law requires that drivers yield the right-of-way to emergency vehicles and remain stopped until the emergency vehicles have passed.

For CEQA purposes, the determination of impacts is not based on response times themselves, but response times can be one indication of a need for new facilities that should be considered by the City. If new facilities are needed, the primary concern is if the construction of those facilities would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on the urban location and the relatively small size of typical facilities, the construction of a new fire facility or expansion of an existing facility would likely qualify for an infill exemption or result in less than significant impacts with standard compliance measures and design features. To the extent that any significant impacts could result from the unique characteristics of a Resolution No. 25-58

Page 35 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 22 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
specific site, those impacts would be speculative at this time. Therefore, impacts related to the need for new or expanded fire facilities would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.10-7 to 3.10-11) Threshold PS-2 The City does not acknowledge a need for additional police facilities, and there are no planned police facilities to be constructed in the Plan Area at this time. The City’s Safety Element recommends a consultation with the Sheriff’s Department during revi ew of development projects or land use entitlement applications; however, there is no indication that the City is lacking police protection facilities.2 However, the potential for construction or expansion of police facilities over the Proposed Plan horizon may be possible. Such facilities would more likely be small neighborhood facilities and could be accommodated in existing buildings or small new struc tures. New facilities would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and policies discussed in this EIR, such as NPDES permit requirements, the City’s Noise Ordinance, and the California Building Code, including CALGreen requirements. Construction of such development would likely not result in new significant impacts and would likely qualify for infill exemptions. To the extent there are site-specific conditions that would result in impacts, such impacts would be speculati ve at this time. To the extent construction would result in any impacts, those would not be different from other infill development analyzed throughout the EIR. Therefore, impacts related to the need for new or expanded police protection facilities would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.10-19 to 3.11-21) Threshold PS-3 It is reasonable to assume that a portion of the 10,959 potential new residents would include school -aged children. The student generation factor identifies the number of students per housing unit and provides a link between residential construction projects and projections of enrollment. Student generation factors for the addition of 3,087 residential units would result in an additional 743 elementary school students at 0.2407 student s per household, 384 middle school students at

0.1245 students per household, and 509 high school students at 0.1648 students per

2 City of Norwalk, City of Norwalk General Plan, Safety Element, 1996. Available online at:
https://www.norwalk.org/home/showpublisheddocument/20045/636561304616800000, accessed August 21, 2024.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 36 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 23 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
household, a total of 1,636 students. 3 According to the NLMUSD’s Development School Fee Justification Study, the School District’s facilities capacity exceeds student enrollment at the elementary and high school levels , while school enrollment exceeds facilities capacity at the middle school level in the school year 2020/2021. Future development associated with the Proposed Plan would occur over a 16 -year period; thus, the projected student growth would be gradual.

Further, as demonstrated in Table 3.10 -1 of the PEIR, enrollments are declining overall at NLMUSD schools. As students may attend any NLMUSD school with available capacity, the projected number of students would not result in NLMUSD schools operating above design capacity, and thus, Plan-related impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.10-23 to 3.10-25) Threshold PS-4 The need for public library services is generally calculated based on permanent population in a given area. As previously discussed, the City of Norwalk is served by the Norwalk Library, the Alonda Library, and the Whittier Library, in addition to the Little Free Library program. The Proposed Plan is anticipated to result in an increase of approximately 10,959 people through 2040; this growth from the Proposed Plan could cause an increase in demand for library services. Under CEQA, an increase in population or a reduction in service levels does not necessarily indicate a significant environmental effect. While an increase in demand may occur, there are no current plans to construct a new library or expand an existing library in the Plan Area. LACPL does not have plans to construct a library in the Plan Area, and local population is just one factor in the determination of where the LACPL locates new facilities. Other factors include availability of land, funding, spacing requirements, and commun ity need. Furth er, if a library were to be constructed in or near the Plan Area, it would likely be of a similar size to modern libraries in urban areas , which are generally on small urban infill lots and of a size that would likely qualify for an exemption from CEQA. Further, any of the environmental effects of construction of a new library facility would likely be similar to those disclosed within this E IR (i.e., construction noise and air quality). At this point, it would be speculative to assume that a new or expanded facility will be necessary at this time, in the event it is determined that a new or

3 Norwalk La Mirada Unified School District, Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development School Fee Justification Study, April 2021. Available online at: https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1713570595/nlmusdorg/i v8xzrg0q6wyk1vkgfwm/210407-CooperativeStrategies-
ResidentialCommericalIndustrialDevelopmentSchoolFeeJustificationStudy.pdf, accessed on July 18, 2024.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 37 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 24 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
expanded library is necessary to serve the Plan Area, construction of any such facility would occur in an urban center and would be limited in number (possibly one or two new facilities) and size. Based on the urban location and size, the construction of new libraries or expansion of an existing library would likely result in less than significant impacts and would likely qualify for an infill exemption.

No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.10-29 to 3.10-30) Threshold REC-1 According to the City’s park standard, the Proposed Plan’s projected population growth would not exceed this standard even if no new recreational space were provided; however, according to Quimby Act standards, the City is not providing enough parkland to accommodate its population. Under the Quimby Act, the City’s population, including the expected growth from the Proposed Plan, the City should be providing 328 acres of parkland.

With implementation of the Proposed Plan, development standards would require common open space in residential developments that would offset the impacts to existing park facilities. Additionally, implementation of the Proposed Plan includes plans for open space within the proposed corridors through plazas, parks (such as the linear park on San Antonio Drive), streetscapes, and a regional trail with bike lanes to connect the different districts and corridors. Under the Proposed Plan, open space will be added as projects are constructed, increasing the amount of open space available and decreasing demand for off-site open space. Private open space can be used to satisfy a portion of the common open space requirement.

Therefore, the future development projects would not create capacity or service level problems or result in substantial physical impacts associated with t he provision of new or altered park facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.10-36 to 3.10-38) Threshold REC-2 Construction and operation of additional park and recreation facilities could impact aesthetics (including night lighting), air quality, cultural resources, geology, land use, noise, transportation, utilities, and other environmental issues.

As previously discussed, the Proposed Plan includes plans for open space within the proposed corridors and districts. The environmental effects that could result from the construction of the proposed recreational facilities (including impacts to adjacent properties and exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations) would be reduced to less than significant levels through construction-related mitigation measures identified throughout the PEIR in Resolution No. 25-58

Page 38 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 25 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Section 3.2, Air Quality, and Section 3.8, Noise, and measures identified in the Proposed Plan. Therefore, the Proposed Plan would not result in adverse physical effects on the environment from construction or expansion of additional recreational facilitie s. Impacts would be less than significant . No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.10-38)
Transportation
Threshold TRA-1 As described in Section 2.0, Project Description, the Project would implement zone changes and general plan amendments that would allow for future mixed -use development to occur within the Plan Area through the implementation of planned districts and corridors. Future development associated with the Proposed Plan would not conflict with or interfere with any adopted policies, plans or programs related to public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Furthermore, the Proposed Plan would support future multimo dal opportunities within the City. Future development associated with the Proposed Plan would not conflict with or interfere with any adopted policies, plans or programs related to public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.11-14 to 3.11-16) Threshold TRA-2 As shown in Table 3.11 -2 of the PEIR , the existing plus project VMT per service population for the Plan Area is forecast to be 13.7, while the existing Countywide VMT per service population is currently 17.2. As such, 16.8 percent below the existing countywide VMT per service population is 14.3. Therefore, the existing plus project Plan Area VMT per service population (13.7) is not forecast to exceed the described CEQA threshold. Thus, this impact is considered less than significant. As shown in Table 3.11 -3 of the PEIR, and similar to the existing plus Plan scenario above, the 2040 Plan Area VMT per service population (12.1) is also forecast to be more than 16.8% below the regional average VMT per service population. These reductions are due to the increase in the forecas ted population and employment in the Plan Area, which is located within proximity to transit, increasing the potential for transit ridership, as well as an increase in active modes of transportation , such as walking and bikin g. In addition, future year VMT reductions would be due to future planned development and transportation improvements that would change travel patterns to reduce vehicle travel distance and use of non-vehicle modes throughout the southern California region. Impacts Resolution No. 25-58

Page 39 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 26 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.11-17 to 3.11-19)
Threshold TRA-3 The proposed roadway improvements included in the Proposed Plan will be designed to City and State engineering design standards to meet sight distance requirements, including visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists. The Proposed Plan does not propose any incompatible uses that would increase hazards. As a result, the Proposed Plan will have a beneficial impact on geometric design features and incompatible uses. In addition, future development projects associated with implementation of the Proposed Plan are not anticipated to result in inadequate design features or incompatible uses. Through the City’s development review process, future development projects would be evaluated to determine the appropriate land use permit for authorizing their use and the cond itions for their establishment and operation. Future development projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure that adequate access and circulation to and within the Plan Area would be provided. Access to development sites would be required to comply with all applicable Municipal Code and City design standards, which may be reviewed by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) to ensure that inadequate design features or incompatible uses do not occur. The development review by the City and LACFD would also ensure that structures are designed to meet the current local and regional standards and that adequate emergency access is provided. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Plan would not substantially increase hazards due to a geom etric design feature or incompatible uses; and impacts would be less than significant . No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.11-20)
Threshold TRA-4 During construction, temporary road closures may be necessary; however, alternative evacuation routes along San Antonio Drive would be available. The City and the Los Angeles County Fire Department would review potential road closures associated with the P roposed Plan to ensure proper emergency access is established during construction of future development projects. Once operational, these primary evacuation routes could still be utilized in the event of an emergency, however due to the reduction in capacity on San Antonio Drive, it may be appropriate to utilize Pioneer Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue for evacuation purposes. The City and the LACFD would review potential road closures associated with the Proposed Plan to ensure proper emergen cy access is Resolution No. 25-58

Page 40 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 27 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
established during construction of future development projects. Further, development projects would also be required to comply with all applicable state building codes outlined by the California Building Code for construction and access to the site during both construction and operational phases. Once operational, these primary evacuation routes would still be utilized in the event of an emergency , and overall, the Proposed Plan would not result in inadequate emergency access. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.11-20 to 3.11-22) Utilities and Service Systems and Energy
Threshold USS-1 While the implementation of the Proposed Plan would result in an increase in water demand that exceeds the City’s yearly allocation of groundwater, the City’s UWMP shows that water supplies are projected to be 3,694 AFY with the inclusion of purchased or imported water from the CBMWD. Projected City water supplies demonstrate that the City would be able to accommodate the Proposed Plan’s increase in water demand. Additionally, the City’s UWMP concluded that there would be sufficient water supplies during th e “worst-case” effects of a multiple dry year drought. Further, utilities such as water, wastewater and power are generally population driven . Although the Proposed Plan would increase the population in the Plan Area by 10,949 residents, implementation of the Proposed Plan will occur over time, allowing the City time to adjust for anticipated increases in water demand and establish policies regar ding water conservation and reuse.

As such, the Proposed Plan would not require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

Regarding wastewater, although the new residential uses would result in new wastewater generation, the reduction of wastewater from commercial, industrial, and institutional uses would offset some of the increases in wastewater. When compared to the existing Plan Area wastewate r generation of 664,715 GPD, implementation of the Proposed Plan would result in a wastewater generation rate of 1,045,084 GPD, a net increase of 380,369 GPD. As previously mentioned, the Los Coyotes WRP processes an average of 23.1 MGD of wastewater. Give n the 37.5 MGD capacity of the Los Coyotes WRP, the existing wastewater treatment capacity is anticipated to be sufficient to accommodate projected development.

Additionally, buildout will occur over time, spanning across 20 years or more.

Further, with ad herence to applicable regulations and General Plan policies, Resolution No. 25-58

Page 41 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 28 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
implementation of the Proposed Plan would have adequate wastewater conveyance systems and impacts related to wastewater conveyance would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.

The Project Area is well served by electric, natural gas and telecommunications facilities. All of which have sufficient capacity to serve the Plan Area . Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.12-19 to 3.12-25)
Threshold USS-2 The Project would have sufficient water supplies available. As shown under Table

3.12-1 of the PEIR, during a single dry year under the worst-case scenario, the City projects sufficient water supply available during all scenarios to meet future demands with a surplus of over 1,400 AFY. However, the City will acquire only as much additional supply as needed to meet demand during those years when potable water demand exceeds groundwater rights. Furthermore, the UWMP outlines a Water Shortage Contingency Plan which would reduce demand and prevent the need for the use of additional surplus. Similar measures would also be taken during the event of a worst -case multiple dry year scenario. As such, the City’s UWMP concludes that there would be sufficient water supplies during the “worst-case” effects of a single and multipl e dry year drought. The remaining capacity of the water supplies would be sufficient for implementation of the Proposed Plan and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.12-25)
Threshold USS-3 The JWPCP provides both primary and secondary treatment for approximately 260 million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD) and has a total permitted capacity of 400 MGD. Although the new residential uses would generate 462,600 GPD of wastewater, since the Proposed Plan is also reducing commercial, industrial, and institutional uses, the estimated wastewater generated at full buildout of the Proposed Plan would result in a w astewater generation rate of 1,045,084 GPD, a net increase of 380,369 GPD. As demonstrated above, existing providers have sufficient capacity to serve the increase in demand. With adherence to applicable regulations, General Plan policies, and the Municipal Code, implementation of the Proposed Plan would have adequate wastewater Resolution No. 25-58

Page 42 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 29 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
conveyance systems , and impacts would be less than significant . No mitigation measures are required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.12-26)
Threshold USS-4 Implementation of the Project is estimated to generate 50,840 pounds of solid waste per day, or 25.42 tons of solid waste per day. When compared to the existing Plan Area solid waste generation of 42,996 pounds per day, implementation of the Proposed Plan would result in a net increase of 7,844 pounds per day. As shown in Table 3.12 -4, Landfills Serving Norwalk, the addition of 7,844 pounds of solid waste compared to the remaining capacity of the four landfills that serve the City is negligible. Further, buildout will occur over 20 years or more, allowing the City time to adjust for anticipated increases i n solid waste generation. Therefore, solid waste generated under the Proposed Plan would not exceed available capacity.

Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp.

3.12-27 to 3.12-28)
Threshold USS-5 The City is required by AB 939 to divert 75 percent of solid waste from landfills.

Future development under the Proposed Plan would be required to demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations, including AB 939, such as Chapter 8.48 of the City’s Municipal Code. The Proposed Plan would not interfere with any federal, State, or local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.12-28 to 3.12-29)
Threshold EN-1 Construction equipment would be maintained to applicable standards, and construction activity and associated fuel consumption and energy use would be temporary and typical of construction sites. It is also reasonable to assume contractors would avoid waste ful, inefficient, and unnecessary fuel consumption during construction to reduce construction costs. Therefore, the Project would not involve the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary use of energy during construction, and the construction -phase impact related to energy consumption would be less than significant.

Future development under the Project would increase the use of energy in the Project Area due to the intensification of land use. Operation of the anticipated development would increase the use of energy in the Plan Area due to the intensification of land uses. However, the increase would be in conformance with the latest version of California’s Green Building Standards Code and Building Resolution No. 25-58

Page 43 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 30 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, SCE and SoCalGas have sufficient supplies to serve the development forecasted under the Proposed Plan. Therefore, the Proposed Plan would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption. No mitigation measures are required. (Final PEIR pp. 3.12-29 to 3.12- 31)
Threshold EN-2 The City of Norwalk adopted an Energy Action Plan (EAP) as a strategic plan to establish a 2010 baseline, to address California’s energy reduction goals by setting overall net energy consumption reduction targets (for years 2015, 2020, and 2025), and to id entify programs/projects to achieve the targets over time. Additionally, as demonstrated under Impact GHG -2, the Proposed Plan would be consistent with existing local policies intended to promote energy efficiency through renewable energy use and energy conservation measures and future development constructed under the Proposed Plan would be subject to more stringent energy efficiency standards pursuant to updated CALGreen requirements. Therefore, the Proposed Plan would not conflict with or obstruct a state plan or policies contained in the City’s General Plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency; impacts would be less than significan t. No mitigation is required. (Final PEIR pp.

3.12-31)
E.3 Findings Regarding Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant but Mitigated to Less than Significant
This section includes findings for project impacts that are potentially significant, but which are mitigated to a less than significant level with the imposition of mitigation measures. The City Council finds that all potentially significant impacts of this project listed below can and will be substantially lessened or avoided by imposition of mitigation measures. Specific findings of the City Council for each impact are set forth below in this section.

The City hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts can and will be mitigated to below a level of significance, with implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the PEIR.

Cultural, Tribal Cultural and Paleontological Resources Threshold CUL-1 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Resolution No. 25-58

Page 44 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 31 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-1 Historical Built Environment Studies
For projects where demolition of structures greater than 50 years is proposed, prior to the issuance of any demolition permits, the applicant shall prepare an inventory of buildings proposed for demolition located on the project site. The project applicant , under the direction of the City, shall retain a historian or architectural historian who meets or exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards to document and evaluate the historical significance of the affected buildings or structures in accordance with CEQA. If such documentation and evaluation indicate that the building or structure qualifies as a significant historical resource, the resource shall be avoided, and significant features shall be preserved in place if feas ible. If avoidance or preservation is not feasible, a Historical Resources Treatment Plan, or similar proposed plan, shall be prepared and implemented. Further documentation may be required and may include, but is not limited to, archival quality photographs, measured drawings, oral histories, interpretive signage, and/or other measures , including potential alteration of the resource in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards or relocation of the resource.

As defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 4(3) Section 15126.4 (b)(2), in some circumstances, documentation of a historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of d emolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur. In these cases, the Historical Resources Treatment Plan, or comparable plan, shall also evaluate the feasibility of retaini ng significant buildings or structures in their original locations and rehabilitating them according to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings .

Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into , the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation : Future development projects resulting from the implementation of the Project may involve demolition or alteration of an identified resource, which could result in a change to that resource’s defining features, thereby resulting in a significant impact. Thus, significant historical resources could be adversely impacted by future development projects that require demolition or significant Resolution No. 25-58

Page 45 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 32 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
alteration of historic -age buildings and structures; impacts to historical resources under the Project therefore have the potential to be significant.

To ensure that development within the Project Area does not have a detrimental effect on historical resources if demolition or significant alteration is required, each project would be assessed as it is proposed, to determine the age of the properties prop osed to be impacted by project implementation. Mitigation Measure MM CUL-1 would reduce impacts on historical resources to the extent feasible, because historical resources would be evaluated under each project application. (Final PEIR pp. 3.3-15 to 3.3-17) Threshold CUL-2 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-2 Archaeological Resource Studies
Prior to any approval by the City for projects that involve any demolition, grading, trenching, or other ground disturbance, a Phase 1 Cultural Resources Study conducted by a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior standards in archaeology shall be required. A Phase 1 study shall include a pedestrian survey of the project site to identify poten tial surficial archaeological resources and sufficient background archival research and field sampling to determine whether subsurface prehistoric or historic remains may be present. If the project site is completely paved and/or developed, a pedestrian survey may not be required. Archival research should include, at a minimum, a records search conducted at the South Central Coast Information Center (SCCIC) and a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search conducted with the NAHC of the project site. If the Phase I does not indicate any archeological resources, no further study is required.

If the Phase I Report indicates potential for important archeological resources that may be eligible for CRHR, a Phase 2 report may be required if the identified resources cannot be avoided and preserved in place. Where preservation is not feasible, a Phas e 2 evaluation for significance and eligibility for listing in the CRHR may be required. The Phase 2 evaluation shall include any necessary archival research to identify significant historical associations as well as mapping of surface artifacts, collection of functionally or temporally diagnostic tools and debris, and excavation of a sample of the cultural deposit to characterize the nature of the sites, define the artifact and feature contents, determine Resolution No. 25-58

Page 46 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 33 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
horizontal boundaries and depth below surface, and retrieve representative samples of artifacts and other remains.

Cultural materials collected from the sites shall be processed and analyzed in the laboratory according to standard archaeological procedures. The age of archaeological resources shall be determined using radiocarbon dating or other appropriate procedures; lithic artifacts, faunal remains, and other cultural materials shall be identified and analyzed according to current professional standards. The significance of the sites shall be evaluated according to the criteria of the CRHR. The results of the investi gations shall be presented in a technical report following the standards of the California Office of Historic Preservation publication “Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Content and Format (1990 or latest edition)”. Upon completion of the work, all artifacts, other cultural remains, records, photographs, and other documentation shall be curated at an appropriate curation facility. All fieldwork, analysis, report production, and curation shall be fully funded by the applicant.

If any of the resources meet CRHR significance standards, the City shall ensure that all feasible recommendations for mitigation of impacts are incorporated into the final design and any permits issued for development. Any necessary archaeological data rec overy excavation shall be carried out by a Registered Professional Archaeologist according to a research design reviewed and approved by the City , prepared in advance of fieldwork , and using appropriate archaeological field and laboratory methods consisten t with the California Office of Historic Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991), Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design, or the latest edition thereof.

As applicable, the final Phase 1 Inventory, Phase 2 Testing and Evaluation, and Phase 3 Data Recovery reports shall be submitted to the City prior to final inspection of a construction permit.

Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities, including, at a minimum, requirements to follow for unanticipated archaeological discoveries during construction.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 47 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 34 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Supporting Explanation : Effects on archaeological resources are only known once a specific project has been proposed because they are highly dependent on both the individual project site conditions and the characteristics of the proposed ground -disturbing activity. Ground -disturbing activities in those portions of the Project Area that have not been subject to an archaeological investigation or where excavation depths exceed those previously attained have the potential to damage or destroy previously unknown prehistoric or historic period ar chaeological resources. Consequently, damage to or destruction of previously unknown archaeological resources could occur as a result of development under the Project.

The Project does not include any implementation programs or policies designed to reduce impacts to archaeological resources. In order to ensure that development in the Project Area does not have a detrimental effect on archaeological resources, each indivi dual development project would need to be assessed as it is proposed. Without mitigation, impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure MM CUL-2 requires an archaeological resources study and the identification of project -specific mitigation measures for future projects facilitated by the Project. Mitigation Measure MM CUL -2 would reduce impacts to archaeological resources on a project-by-project basis by requiring the identification and treatment of archaeological resources. (Final PEIR pp. 3.3-17 to 3.3-20) Threshold CUL-3 Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains
Consistent with the regulatory provisions to address the handling of human remains in California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, PRC § 5097.98, and State CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(e), in the event that human remains are discovered, it requires that disturbance of the site shall be suspended, encountered during site disturbance, grading, or other construction activities on the project site, the construction contractor shall halt work within 25 feet of the discovery. The Project Applicant shall immediately notify the City of Norwalk and the Los Angeles County Coroner. The coroner shall conduct an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in § 5097.98 of the PRC. The coroner is required to make a determination within two working days of notification of the discovery of the human remains. If the coroner determines that Resolution No. 25-58

Page 48 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 35 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains to be those of a Native American, he or she shall consult with the NAHC by telephone within 24 hours, to designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) who shall recommend appropriate measures to the landowner regarding the treatment of the remains. If the owner does not accept the MLD’s recommendations, the owner or the MLD may request mediation by the NA HC.

Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation: The Plan Area does not include any locations identified as a formal cemetery and is not known to have been used for disposal of historic or prehistoric human remains, and human remains are not expected to be encountered during construction of the future de velopment Projects. Without mitigation, impacts would be potentially significant. Mitigation MM CUL -3 would provide specific procedural and stop-work requirements for future development projects in the unlikely event that human remains are uncovered during ground-disturbing activities. The implementation of Mitigation MM CUL- 3 would reduce impacts to human remains on a project-by-project basis by requiring the identification and handling of any discovered human remains.

Threshold CUL-4 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 the local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or
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 subdivisi on (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, Resolution No. 25-58

Page 49 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 36 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-4 Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources In the event that a cultural resource of Native American origin is identified in the Plan Area during the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM CUL-2 or during any project- related ground disturbance, the City of Norwalk, as Lead Agency, shall consult with local Native American tribes who have requested notification of projects under AB 52. If the City, in consultation with the local Native American tri be(s), determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a miti gation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with representatives of the Native American tribe(s). The mitigation plan may include , but would not be limited to , avoidance, capping in place, excavation and removal of the resource, interpretive displays, sensitive area signage, or other mutually agreed upon measures.

Supporting Explanation: The City sent Senate Bill 18 ( SB 18) and Assembly Bill ( AB 52) notice letters on August 28, 2024 , to the following Native American groups: Gabrieliño Band of Mission Indians –Kizh Nation, the Gabrieliño/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Gabrieliño/Tongva Nation, Gabrieliño Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, the Gabrieliño-Tongva Tribe, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation – Belardes, the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation 84A, the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the Soboba Band of Lusseno Indians. Under AB 52, tribes have 30 days to respond, and under SB 18, tribes have 90 days. To date, two responses have been received.

Development accommodated under the Project may involve ground disturbance , which has the potential to impact previously unidentified tribal cultural resources (TCRs).

As of the date of this draft, AB 52 consultation has not identified any specific TCRs in the Project Area.

However, new TCRs may be identified or established over the course of the Project.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 50 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 37 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
If unknown TCRs are encountered during construction activities, there is a potential to result in the destruction, damage, or loss of the TCRs. The ground-disturbing construction activities that could result in such adverse impacts include demolition, grading, excavation, drilling, or any other activity that disturbs surface or subsurface deposits associated with TCRs. Given the potential to damage these unknown tribal cultural resources, impacts are considered significant without mitigation. (Final EIR pp. 3.3-21 to 3.3-22) Threshold CUL-5 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-5 Unanticipated Discovery of Paleontological Resources In the event that paleontological resources are unearthed during ground -disturbing activities, the City of Norwalk Planning Division will be notified immediately, and all work will cease in the area of the find until a qualified paleontologist evaluates th e find.

Construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The paleontologist shall determine the location, the time frame, and the extent to which any monitoring of earthmoving activities shall be required. The found depos its would be treated in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines, including those set forth in California PRC § 21083.2.

Supporting Explanation: The Plan Area is a highly urbanized area, which has been previously disturbed by past development activities and contains existing buildings, roadways, associated parking and other infrastructure. However, buildout of the Project could involve grading and excavation to greater depths than previously undertaken. These activities could disturb unknown paleontological resources buried in site soils. In the event of an unexpected disturbance of such resources, significant impacts to paleontological resources could occur. In the event of an unexpected discovery, significant impacts to paleontological resources could occur. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM CUL -5 would mitigate any potential significant impacts. (Final EIR pp. 3.3-23)
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 51 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 38 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1 Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM HAZ-1 For discretionary projects within the Plan Area, prior to construction activities onsite, a Phase I investigation shall be conducted to assess if there are any reasons to suspect that hazardous materials could be present. If current or past use of contaminants of potential concern is discovered through the Phase I investigation, or if the property has ever contained a gas station, dry cleaners , or hazardous chemical storage tanks, a Phase II would be required. The Phase II investigation shall be c onducted in accordance with guidelines developed by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for site assessments. The Phase II investigation shall estimate the potential threat to public health and the en vironment if concentrations of pesticides are encountered using methods outlined in DTSC’s Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual and DTSC’s Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment guidance for implementing screening level risk analysis. The Phase II investigation shall be submitted to the City of Norwalk for review and approval by an independent third -party reviewer. If the Phase II testing reveals concentrations of contaminants above health-based screening levels for residential exposure, remediation of the site shall be required to address residual cont amination above the health-based level of concern. Remediation may include excavation and disposal of impacted soil or capping elevated areas beneath paved areas. The Construction Contract or shall implement the recommendations outlined in the Phase II.

Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation: Construction and demolition activities associated with future development under the Project may encounter asbestos, lead, PCBs, or other hazardous materials. Given the high level of contamination in the Plan Area, implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ -1 would be required to Resolution No. 25-58

Page 52 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 39 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
reduce potential for the release of contamination to a less than significant level. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5 -22 to

3.5-24)
Impact HAZ-2 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.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant for construction, less than significant for operation.

Mitigation Measure
MM HAZ-1 For discretionary projects within the Plan Area, prior to construction activities onsite, a Phase I investigation shall be conducted to assess if there are any reasons to suspect that hazardous materials could be present. If current or past use of contaminants of potential concern is discovered through the Phase I investigation, or if the property has ever contained a gas station, dry cleaners , or hazardous chemical storage tanks, a Phase II would be required. The Phase II investigation shall be c onducted in accordance with guidelines developed by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for site assessments. The Phase II investigation shall estimate the potential threat to public health and the en vironment if concentrations of pesticides are encountered using methods outlined in DTSC’s Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual and DTSC’s Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment guidance for implementing screening level risk analysis. The Phase II investigation shall be submitted to the City of Norwalk for review and approval by an independent third -party reviewer. If the Phase II testing reveals concentrations of contaminants above health-based screening levels for residential exposure, remediation of the site shall be required to address residual cont amination above health -based level of concern. Remediation may include excavation and disposal of impacted soil or capping elevated areas beneath paved areas. The Construction Contractor s hall implement the recommendations outlined in the Phase II.

Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Page 53 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 40 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure HAZ -1 requires a Phase I, and if necessary, a Phase II investigation prior to construction activities to determine any potential contaminations due to previous uses. As a result, potential impacts related to the reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant with Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 incorporated. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5-24 to 3.5-27)
Impact HAZ-4 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, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant for construction, less than significant for operation.

Mitigation Measure
MM HAZ-1 For discretionary projects within the Plan Area, prior to construction activities onsite, a Phase I investigation shall be conducted to assess if there are any reasons to suspect that hazardous materials could be present. If current or past use of contaminants of potential concern is discovered through the Phase I investigation, or if the property has ever contained a gas station, dry cleaners or hazardous chemical storage tanks, a Phase II would be required. The Phase II investigation shall be co nducted in accordance with guidelines developed by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for site assessments. The Phase II investigation shall estimate the potential threat to public health and the env ironment if concentrations of pesticides are encountered using methods outlined in DTSC’s Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual and DTSC’s Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment guidance for implementing screening level risk analysis. T he Phase II investigation shall be submitted to the City of Norwalk for review and approval by an independent third -party reviewer. If the Phase II testing reveals concentrations of contaminants above health-based screening levels for residential exposure, remediation of the site shall be required to address residual contamination above the health-based level of concern. Remediation may include excavation and disposal of impacted soil or capping elevated areas beneath paved areas. The Construction Contractor shall implement the recommendations outlined in the Phase II.

Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 54 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 41 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Supporting Explanation: The Plan Area contains sites that have been identified on various regulatory databases as being contaminated from the release of hazardous substances in the soil or groundwater.

While none of the identified contaminated sites are proposed for development, unknown contamination may exist, and construction activity that disturbs soil or groundwater could have the potential to result in the release of hazardous materials, which could adversely affect construction workers and/or neighbor ing properties and occupants. Further, redevelopment could occur on any site within the Plan Area, including those not specifically designated for new uses. To address concerns around development on toxic sites, it is common for a Phase I ESA to be conducted prior to excavation and construction activity . Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 requires a Phase I, and if necessary, a Phase II investigation prior to construction activities to determine any potential contaminations due to previous uses. Potential impacts related to a project being located on a list of hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment would be less than significant with Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 incorporated. (Final PEIR pp. 3.5-28 to 3.5-30) E.4 Findings Regarding Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable
This section includes findings for Project impacts, which are determined to be significant even with the imposition of mitigation measures. These impacts cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level and therefore remain unavoidable. Although the City Council finds that all significant impacts of th is project listed below cannot be substantially lessened or avoided by the imposition of mitigation measures or alternatives, the mitigation measures found in the EIR and listed below will be implemented t o lessen the Project’s impact. Specific findings of this City Council for each impact are set forth below in this section.

Air Quality
Threshold AQ-2 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.

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant Mitigation Measure
MM AQ-1: Dust Control Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 55 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 42 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose Ground Disturbance Activities construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department. b. Standard: Consistent with SCAQMD Rule 403, best available dust control measures shall be implemented during Ground Disturbance Activities and active construction operations capable of generating dust.

MM AQ-2: Equipment Maintenance.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department.
b. Standard: Maintain construction equipment in good, properly tuned operating condition, as specified by the manufacturer, to minimize exhaust emissions.

Documentation demonstrating that the equipment has been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications shall be maintained per the proof of compliance requirements for a minimum of five years after the Certificate of Occupancy is issued.

All construction equipment shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Tier 4 Interim diesel emission control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations.

MM AQ-3: Vehicle Idling Limit and Notification Signs.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department.
b. Standard: Vehicle idling during construction activities shall be limited to five minutes as set forth in the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Section 2449. Signs shall be posted in areas where they will be seen by vehicle operators stating idling time limits.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 56 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 43 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
b. Standard: Electricity from power poles rather than temporary gasoline or diesel - powered generators shall be used to the extent available and feasible.

MM AQ-5: Emissions Standards for Off -Road Construction Equipment Greater than 50 Horsepower.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve at least 5,000 cubic yards of on -site cut/fill on any given day.
b. Standard: All off-road diesel-powered construction equipment equal to or greater than 50 horsepower shall meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) Tier 4 emission standards during construction. Operators shall maintain records of all off - road equipment associated with Project construction to document that each piece of equipment used meets these emission standards per the proof of compliance requirement for a minimum of five years after the Certificate of Occupancy is issued.

MM AQ-6: Use of Low Polluting Fuels.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve at least 5,000 cubic yards of on -site cut/fill on any given day.
b. Standard: Construction equipment less than 50 horsepower shall use low-polluting fuels (i.e., compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas, and unleaded gasoline).

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 57 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 44 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
MM AQ-7: Emission Standards for On-Road Haul Trucks.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve more than 90 round -trip haul truck trips on any given day for demolition debris and import/export of soil. b. Standard: Construction haul truck operators for demolition debris and import/export of soil shall use trucks that meet the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) 2010 engine emissions standards at 0.01 g/bhp -hr. of particulate matter (PM) and 0.20 g/bhp-hr. of nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions. Operators shall maintain records of all trucks associated with Project construction to document that each truck used meets these emission standards per the proof of compliance requirements in Subsection I.D.6.

MM AQ-8: Routes for On-Road Haul Trucks.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department.
b. Standard: Construction contractors shall reroute construction trucks away from congested streets or Sensitive Uses, as feasible. The burden of proving that compliance is infeasible shall be upon the Applicant or Owner. Where avoiding Sensitive Uses and congested streets altogether is infeasible, routing away from Sensitive Uses shall be prioritized over routing away from congested streets.

MM AQ-9 During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategies to reduce mobile emissions to the maximum extent feasible:
• Provide preferential carpool/vanpool parking spaces for office uses. • Provide for shuttle/mini bus services for hotel uses. • Provide on-site child-care centers.
• Provide transit design features within development.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 58 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 45 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
• Develop park-and-ride lots.
• Employ a transportation/rideshare coordinator at commercial uses. • Implement a rideshare program.
• Provide incentives for employees to ride-share or take public transportation. • Provide bicycle paths that link to an external network. • Provide pedestrian facilities.
• Integrate affordable and below-market-rate housing.
• Provide electric vehicle charging.
• Reduce parking supply.
• Implement subsidized or discounted transit program.
• Implement bike-sharing program.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Supporting Explanation: Predicted maximum daily construction -generated emissions for projects that would occur under the Project are summarized in Table 3.2-8, Construction-Related Criteria Pollutant and Precursor Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day . As shown in Table 3.2 -8, the peak daily emissions generated under example construction scenarios anticipated for the construction of the Project would not exceed any of the regional emission thresholds recommended by the SCAQMD. However, it is unknown the number and location of in dividual construction projects that could occur under the P lan. Since details regarding individual projects under the Project are not available, it is reasonable to assume that multiple projects under the Project could occur simultaneously. Therefore, whil e none of the example construction scenarios analyzed below would exceed any regional thresholds on their own, when multiple projects are constructed simultaneously, impacts from Project construction could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria air pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment. As such, construction impacts are conservatively considered potentially significant, and mitigation is required (see Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ-9). While Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ-9 would reduce construction and operational-related emissions from projects under the Project, it is still possible that multiple construction projects could occur simultaneously. Therefore, without knowing the number of Resolution No. 25-58

Page 59 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 46 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
construction projects that could occur simultaneously, impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable. (Final PEIR pp. 3.2-23 to 3.2-33)
Threshold AQ-3 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Significance Before Mitigation: Impacts with respect to localized construction emissions would be potentially significant, and impacts with respect to localized operational emissions, CO Hotspots, and TAC emissions would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
See Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-8, above.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation: Because off-road equipment and heavy -duty truck use during construction generate diesel exhaust—which constitutes approximately 70 percent of the total ambient cancer risk from air pollution in the greater Los Angeles region —nearby sensitive receptors could be affected by criteria pollutants and TAC emissions during construction of individual projects. Although localized emissions of NOX and particulate matter during construction would be controlled through regulatory compliance, impacts related to localized crite ria pollutant emissions would be potentially significant and unavoidable even with mitigation implemented sin ce it is possible that multiple construction projects could occur simultaneously, possibly in proximity to each other and sensitive receptors.

Noise
Threshold NOI-1 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 .

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant (Construction Noise) Resolution No. 25-58

Page 60 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 47 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measure
MM NOI-1 During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategies to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible:
• Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained , and all internal combustion engine -driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.

During construction, all equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards.
• Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities.
• Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment shall be staged as far away from the adjacent sensitive receptors as feasible.
• Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use.
• Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at sensitive receptors near construction activity. • Smart Back -up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back -up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction.
• Disturbance Coordinator. Project applicants shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too ea rly, bad muffler, etc.) and identify remedies to correct the problem. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 61 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 48 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
NOI-2: During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategy to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible:
• Temporary Sound Barriers. For construction activities located directly adjacent to sensitive receivers (e.g., residences, schools), temporary sound barriers shall be installed and maintained by the construction contractor between the construction site and adjacent receivers during the demolition, site preparation, grading phases, and building phases of construction. Temporary sound barriers shall consist of either sound blankets or other sound barriers/techniques such as acoustic padding or acoustic walls placed near adjacent residential buildings that have been field-tested to reduce noise. Barriers shall be placed such that the line -of-sight between noise - generating construction equipment and adjacent sensitive land uses is blocked and shall be placed as c lose to the source equipment as feasible. As an alternative, applicants may prepare a Noise Study that demonstrates construction noise would not exceed ambient noise levels at nearby sensitive resources. The Noise Study shall incorporate best management practices and other noise reduction measures to reduce noise levels.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation : As shown in Table 3.8 -10, Estimated Construction Noise Levels by Phase , construction activity would generate noise levels up to an estimated 8 7.1 dBA Leq for sensitive receptors located 50 feet from construction activities . As such, temporary construction noise would exceed existing ambient noise levels measured throughout the Project Area, which were measured between 48.8 dBA Leq to 58.5 dBA Leq (see Table 3.8-3, Existing Noise Levels in the Plan Area). The construction noise levels identified in Table 3.8-10 would also have the potential to conflict with the noise standards identified in NMC Section 9.04.150. However, it should be noted that thes e estimates are conservative because they assume no attenuation of noise by intervening structures and assume construction activity would occur as close as 50 feet to sensitive receptors. As individual project applications are processed under the Project, Resolution No. 25-58

Page 62 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 49 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
project-specific design features and mitigation measures would be considered on a case -by-case basis to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible (see Mitigation Measures NOI -1 and NOI-2). Nevertheless, as temporary construction noise would exceed existing ambient noise levels and have the potential to conflict with the noise standards identified in NMC Section 9.04.150, this impact is considered potentially significant. While Mitigation Measures NOI -1 and NOI-2 would reduce construction noise impacts associated with the Project, subsequent development projects would still have the potential to exceed ambient noise levels and conflict with noise standards identified in NMC S Section

9.04.150. Impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable. (Final EIR pp. 3.8-20 to 3.8-29) Threshold NOI-2 Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant Mitigation Measure
See Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 above.

NOI-3 Prior to any grading or construction activity within 25 feet of an extremely fragile building (as defined in Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020) or any construction activity associated with the rehabilitation of an extremely fragile building, applicants shall prepare a Vibration Control Plan. The Vibration Control Plan shall be prepared by a qualified structural engineer and shall include methods to minimize vibration, including but not limited to:
• Use of drilled piles or the use of a sonic vibratory pile driver rather than impact pile driving;
• Use of rubber-tired equipment rather than metal-tracked equipment; and • Avoiding the use of vibrating equipment when allowed by best engineering practices.

The Vibration Control Plan shall include a pre -construction survey letter establishing baseline conditions at potentially affected buildings. The survey letter shall provide a shoring design to protect the buildings from potential damage. The structural en gineer may recommend alternative procedures that produce lower vibration levels, such as sonic pile driving or caisson drilling instead of impact pile driving. Development projects shall implement the structural engineer’s recommendations.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 63 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 50 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
A Statement of Compliance signed by the Applicant and Owner is required to be submitted to Building and Safety at plan check and prior to the issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan, prepared as outlined above, shall be documented by a qualified structural engineer and shall be provided to the City upon request.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation : Based on Table 3.8 -13, Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment , construction equipment would reach a maximum of 0.0 89 PPV (in/sec) at 25 feet. These vibration levels would exceed the most conservative 0.08 inch/sec PPV threshold for extremely fragile historic buildings.

Since the exact location of future development projects, distances to nearby buildings, and the architectural integrities of nearby buildings are all unknown at this time, it is possible for individual dev elopment projects to generate construction vibration levels that could result in damage to extremely fragile buildings located on site or within 25 feet of potential construction activities. Thus, this impact is considered potentially significant, and impl ementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -3 is required. While Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 would reduce potential vibration impacts associated with human annoyance, the 72 VdB residential annoyance threshold and 75 VdB institutional annoyance threshold could be exceeded during a worst -case construction activity , and this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -3 will ensure construction vibration impacts with respect to building damage would be less than significant. (Final EIR pp. 3.8-29 to 3.8-32) E.5 Other CEQA Required Analysis in the EIR
Cumulative Impact Analysis
Cumulative impacts are defined in State CEQA Guidelines §15355(b) as:
“The change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant proje cts taking place over a period of time.”
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 64 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 51 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Air Quality
Threshold AQ-2 Criteria Pollutant Emissions for which the Region is Non -Attainment (Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5).

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant Mitigation Measure
MM AQ-1: Dust Control Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403. c. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose Ground Disturbance Activities construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department. d. Standard: Consistent with SCAQMD Rule 403, best available dust control measures shall be implemented during Ground Disturbance Activities and active construction operations capable of generating dust.

MM AQ-2: Equipment Maintenance.
c. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department.
d. Standard: Maintain construction equipment in good, properly tuned operating condition, as specified by the manufacturer, to minimize exhaust emissions.

MM AQ-3: Vehicle Idling Limit and Notification Signs.
c. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 65 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 52 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
d. Standard: Vehicle idling during construction activities shall be limited to five minutes as set forth in the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Section 2449. Signs shall be posted in areas where they will be seen by vehicle operators stating idling time limits.

MM AQ-4: Non-Diesel Fueled Electrical Power.
c. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment and require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department.
d. Standard: Electricity from power poles rather than temporary gasoline or diesel - powered generators shall be used to the extent available and feasible.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 66 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 53 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
b. Standard: Construction equipment less than 50 horsepower shall use low-polluting fuels (i.e., compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas, and unleaded gasoline).

MM AQ-7: Emission Standards for On-Road Haul Trucks.
a. Applicability Threshold: Any project whose construction activities involve the use of construction equipment, require a permit from the City of Norwalk Community Development Department, and involve more than 90 round -trip haul truck trips on any given day for demolition debris and import/export of soil. b. Standard: Construction haul truck operators for demolition debris and import/export of soil shall use trucks that meet the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) 2010 engine emissions standards at 0.01 g/bhp -hr. of particulate matter (PM) and 0.20 g/bhp-hr. of nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions. Operators shall maintain records of all trucks associated with Project construction to document that each truck used meets these emission standards per the proof of compliance requirements in Subsection I.D.6.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 67 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 54 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
MM AQ-9 During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategies to reduce mobile emissions to the maximum extent feasible:
• Provide preferential carpool/vanpool parking spaces for office uses. • Provide for shuttle/mini bus services for hotel uses. • Provide on-site child-care centers.
• Provide transit design features within development.
• Develop park-and-ride lots.
• Employ a transportation/rideshare coordinator at commercial uses. • Implement a rideshare program.
• Provide incentives for employees to ride-share or take public transportation. • Provide bicycle paths that link to an external network. • Provide pedestrian facilities.
• Integrate affordable and below-market-rate housing.
• Provide electric vehicle charging.
• Reduce parking supply.
• Implement subsidized or discounted transit program.
• Implement bike-sharing program.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation: In order to assess cumulative impacts of emissions, the SCAQMD recommends that projects be evaluated to determine whether they would be consistent with AQMP performance standards and project-specific emissions thresholds. In the case of the Project, air pollutant emissions would be considered to be cumulatively considerable if the new sources of emissions exceed SCAQMD project - specific emissions thresholds. As discussed under Impact AQ-2, construction activities under the Project could result in multiple construction projects simultaneously. Mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-8 would reduce construction-related emissions to the extent feasible. However, without knowing the number of construction projects that could occur simultaneously , impacts would be significant and unavoidable and would be cumulatively considerable. (Final PEIR pp. 3.2-38 to 3.2-39) Resolution No. 25-58

Page 68 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 55 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Threshold AQ-3 Criteria Pollutant Emissions for which the Region is Non -Attainment (Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5).

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant Mitigation Measure
See Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-8, above.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation: As discussed under Impact AQ-3, impacts related to localized criteria pollutant emissions during construction would be significant and unavoidable , as it is possible that multiple construction projects could occur simultaneously, possibly in proximity to each other and sensitive receptors. For these reasons, localized construction impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. Since the operation al component of the Proposed Plan would consist of an increase in residential land uses and associated mobile sources, localized operatio nal impacts would be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. (Final EIR pp. 3.2-40) Noise
Threshold NOI-1 and Threshold NOI-2
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 .

Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels .

Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant Resolution No. 25-58

Page 69 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 56 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-1 During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategies to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible:
• Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained , and all internal combustion engine -driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 70 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 57 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
MM NOI-2: During case-by-case review of individual projects, the City shall consider the application of the following strategy to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible:
• Temporary Sound Barriers. For construction activities located directly adjacent to sensitive receivers (e.g., residences, schools), temporary sound barriers shall be installed and maintained by the construction contractor between the construction site and adjacent receivers during the demolition, site preparation, grading phases, and building phases of construction. Temporary sound barriers shall consist of either sound blankets or other sound barriers/techniques such as acoustic padding or acoustic walls placed near adjacent residential buildings that have been field-tested to reduce noise. Barriers shall be placed such that the line -of-sight between noise - generating construction equipment and adjacent sensitive land uses is blocked and shall be placed as c lose to the source equipment as feasible. As an alternative, applicants may prepare a Noise Study that demonstrates construction noise would not exceed ambient noise levels at nearby sensitive resources. The Noise Study shall incorporate best management practices and other noise reduction measures to reduce noise levels.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final PEIR.

Supporting Explanation: Development under the Proposed Plan would implement project-specific design features and mitigation measures on a case -by-case basis to reduce construction noise levels to the maximum extent feasible. However, projects could still result in significant short -term increases in noise levels. Multiple projects, both within and outside of the Plan Area, could combine together, to substantially increase noise levels at specific land uses. Therefore, the sign ificant and unavoidable constru ction noise impacts identified for the Proposed Plan could add to construction noise impacts associated with cumulative development. The impact of the Proposed Plan is considered significant and unavoidable and therefore the incremental effect of the Proposed Plan related to construction noise would be cumulatively considerable.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 71 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 58 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
For a combined vibration impact from simultaneous construction projects to reach cumulatively significant levels, intense construction from these projects would have to occur simultaneously in close proximity to a sensitive receptor. Project construction -related vibration would not result in additive vibration in combination with cumu lative development in most areas of the City. However, individual development projects near the periphery of the Plan Area could potentially be constructed concurrently with other development adjacent to, but outside the Plan Area, such that intense constr uction from two or more projects would simultaneously occur in close proximity to existing sensitive receptors. While possible, this would be unlikely. Nevertheless, the significant and unavoidable construction vibration impacts from the Proposed Plan could add to vibration impacts associated with cumulative development on the periphery of the Plan Area. The impact of the Proposed Plan is considered significant and unavoidable, and therefore, the incremental effect of the Proposed Plan on temporary annoyanc e-related vibration levels would be cumulatively considerable. (Final PEIR pp. 3.8-32 to 3.8-33) F. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a) requires an evaluation of “a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” The objectives of the Project are identified in Section 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, and in Section B of these Findings. Alternatives are used to determine whether or not a variation of the Project would reduce or eliminate significant project impacts within the basic framework of the objectives.

State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e) requires that, among other alternatives, a “no project” alternative be evaluated in comparison to the Project. State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(2) requires that the “no project” analysis “discuss the existing conditions … as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with availabl e infrastructure and community services.”
The project alternatives evaluated in detail in the EIR were the following:
• No Project (Alternative 1)
• Reduced Capacity Alternative (Alternative 2)
• Increased Commercial Alternative (Alternative 3)
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 72 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 59 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
F.1 Project Objectives and Legal Requirements
At the time of project approval, the lead agency’s decision -making body must determine whether the alternatives are feasible or not. The lead agency must consider whether specific “economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations ...make infeasible mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.” (Pub. Res. Code, § 21081(a)(3); State CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3)).

Importantly, CEQA gives lead agencies the authority to approve a project notwithstanding its significant environmental impacts, if the agency determines it is not “feasible” to lessen or avoid the significant effects. (Pub. Res. Code, § 21002). If the specifically identified benefits of the project outweigh the significant unavoidable environmental impacts, the adverse impacts may be considered “acceptable,” thereby allowing for lead agency approval of the project, notwithstanding such adverse impacts, provided the agency adopts a statement of overriding considerations. (Pub. Res. Code, § 21081.1(b); State CEQA Guidelines § 15093).

As called for by the State CEQA Guidelines, the achievement of project objectives must be balanced by the ability of an alternative to reduce the significant impacts of the project. The objectives of the Heart of Norwalk are as follows:

Objective 1: Create unique places that preserve and represent Norwalk’s history, express Norwalk’s culture, and foment the growth of higher -quality and local businesses that serve the community.

Objective 2: Improve community health and wellness by designing streets, paths , and public spaces to prioritize walking, biking, and other active modes of transportation.

Objective 3: Support the strengthening of communal bonds by creating open spaces for gathering and improving access to community facilities and affordable housing.

Objective 4: Increase the availability of a variety of housing types to meet the existing and future needs of Norwalk residents.

Objective 5: Transform the built environment of the Heart of Norwalk into a sustainable, livable, and people-centered area.

CEQA does not require adoption of an alternative that does not adequately meet most of the basic project objectives as determined by the lead agency decision makers.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 73 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 60 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
F.2 Findings Regarding Alternatives Considered in the EIR Alternative 1 - No Project
The No Project Alternative is required by Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines and assumes that the Project would not be implemented. The No Project Alternative allows decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the Project with the impacts of not approving the Project. However, “no project” does not necessarily mean that development will be prohibited. The No Project Alternative includes “what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.” 4 For purposes of this PEIR, the No Project Alternative assumes buildout within the Project Area would occur in accordance with the land uses included in the City of Norwalk 1996 General Plan (General Plan) and implemented by the City’s Zoning Code. The Zoning Code carries out the General Plan policies by regulating development and land uses within the City, consistent with the General Plan.

Consideration of No Project Alternative
Under this alternative , the increased housing density opportunities and reduction of commercial , industrial, and institutional uses proposed in the Project would not be achieved. Thus, the No Project Alternative assumes that without the Project in place to change the underlying land uses, the land uses reflected in the General Plan would be develope d. As demonstrated in Table 4.0 -1, the No Project Alternative Relationship to the Project Goals (Final EIR pp. 4.0-14), the No Project Alternative would not achieve a majority of the project objectives. In addition, while a limited number of project objectives would be realized under the No Project Alternative, it would be to a lesser ext ent than the Project , as future development would coincide with the General Plan land uses and zoning.

Findings
The Council finds that while the No Project Alternative results in less significant impacts associated with population increases, such as fire protection, police protection, education, wastewater, and solid waste, it would incrementally increase aesthetic, greenhouse gas, and hazardous materials impacts compared to the Project. Further, the No Project Alternative would not fulfill the Project’s Objectives. Therefore, Alternative 1 is environmentally and socially undesirable, and is therefore rejected.

4 CEQA § 15126.6[e][2]
Resolution No. 25-58

Page 74 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 61 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Alternative 2 – Reduced Capacity Alternative
The Reduced Capacity Alternative (Alternative 2) would propose that the Proposed Plan would be implemented with a reduced future buildout of the Plan Area . This alternative assumes a 50 percent reduction in development during the life of the Proposed Plan. Alternative 2 would include the following buildout:
• 1,542 housing units
• Net reduction of 173,534 square feet of non-residential uses Implementation of the Reduced Capacity Alternative would result in a reduced buildout within all three districts and corridors proposed under the Proposed Plan. The future buildout of the proposed Firestone Boulevard corridor would be reduced in residential development compared to the Proposed Plan.

Additionally, the future buildout of the proposed San Antonio Boulevard corridor would be reduced in residential and mixed-uses compared to the Proposed Plan.

Consideration of Reduced Capacity Alternative
As shown in Table 4.0-2, Alternative 2 Relationship to the Proposed Plan Objectives (Final EIR pp. 4.0-24), Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts associated with air quality, hydrology and water quality, land use, and construction noise. It would not eliminate the significant impacts associated with the Project (construction air quality emissions and construction noise and vibration) due to the similar increase in new construction in condensed areas , but could result in potentially significant and greater impacts to transportation than the Proposed Plan . Impact areas determined to be less than significa nt that are incrementally reduced under Alternative 2 include operational aesthetics, cultural and tribal resources, greenhouse gas emissions , hazards and hazardous materials , operational noise, population, housing, employment, public services (fire protection, education, library system), recreation, and utility impacts (water supply, wastewater, solid waste, electricity, natural gases).

Findings
The City Council finds that while the Reduced Capacity Alternative results in incrementally less significant impacts to operational aesthetics, cultural and tribal resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, operational noise, population, housing, employment, public services (fire protection, education, library system), recreation, and utility impacts compared to the P roposed Plan and is the environmentally superior alternative , the reduction in proposed housing and reduction of reduced commercial uses are economically and politically undesirable at this time, therefore t his alternative is rejected.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 75 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 62 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
Alternative 3 – Increased Commercial Alternative
Under this alternative, the Proposed Plan would increase residential and commercial development within the Plan Area. Currently, the Proposed Plan increases residential development and reduces overall nonresidential square footage, including commercial, industrial, and civic. In this alternative, the Plan Area would maintain the proposed residential development and would increase commercial development anticipated under the Plan. Industrial and institutional uses would retain their reduction from the Proposed Plan. Alternative 3 would include the following buildout:
• 3,087 housing units
• 173,250 square feet of new commercial development
• No loss of commercial development
• Maintained a decrease in industrial and institutional uses Implementation of the Increased Commercial Alternative would result in the same residential development and the same corridors plan, but would increase the amount of commercial development.

Consideration of Reduced Capacity Alternative
As shown in Table 4.0-3, Alternative 3 Relationship to the Heart of Norwalk Objectives (Final EIR pp. 4.0- 33), Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts associated with air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, population, housing, and employment, public services (fire protection, education, library system), and noise. Alternative 3 would result in similar but potentially greater impacts associated with aesthetics, cultural resources (including tribal cultural resources), and utilities (water supply, wastewater, solid waste, electricity, natural gases). It would not eliminate the significant impacts associated with the Project (construction air quality emissions and construction noise and vibration) due to the similar increase in new construction in condensed areas, but could result in potentially significant impact s associated with transportation, unlike the Proposed Plan.

The impact area determined to be less than significant , which is incrementally reduced under Alternati ve 3, includes land use.

Findings
The City Council finds that the Increased Commercial Development Alternative would achieve all of the Specific Plan objectives. Although Alternative 3 achieves these objectives, Alternative 3 places greater demand on some resources than those in the Proposed Plan . Alternative 3 results in incrementally less significant impacts to land use, but the potentially greater impacts to aesthetics, cultural resources Resolution No. 25-58

Page 76 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 63 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025
(including tribal cultural resources), and a potentially significant impact on transportation are economically and politically undesirable at this time; therefore, this alternative is rejected.

G STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Norwalk City Council hereby adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations concerning the unavoidable significant impacts of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR to explain why the benefits of the Project outweigh and override its unavoidable impacts.

The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan identifies and discusses significant environmental impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the Project.

The City Council made specific Findings pursuant to CEQA, on each of the significant environmental impacts of the Project and on mitigation measures and alternatives. Nevertheless, even with implementation of feasible mitigation measures, certain significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality and noise still remain.

In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines , the City Council hereby finds that the following economic, legal, social, environmental, and other benefits of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan outweigh its unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts discussed in the Findings, based on the considerations set forth herein:

G.1 Benefits of the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan

1. The Project will provide a total of 3,087 dwelling units, which will assist the City i n meeting its share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for new residential units and increase the residential population.

2. The Project would accommodate 3,087 units of high-density, infill, mixed-use developments to address the statewide housing crisis.

3. The Project would provide regulatory guidance and standards for future development in the Project Area in furtherance of the objectives articulated in the General Plan by creating cohesive and compatible uses.

4. The Project would improve community health and wellness by designing streets, paths , and public spaces to prioritize walking, biking, and other active modes of transportation, reducing VMT per Service Population and resulting in improved air quality in the City and the region.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 77 of 78 ends

Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan Final PEIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc. 64 Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan PEIR 1335.007 October 2025

5. The Project would facilitate economic development through the provision of desirable commercial uses in the Plan Area.

6. The Project will accommodate present and future residents in the City with a variety of housing types and open spaces, creating a more diversified residential population and transforming the built environment into a livable and people-centered area.

For the above-mentioned reasons, the City Council hereby finds that the benefits of the Project outweigh and override any adverse environmental impacts associated with the Heart of Norwalk Specific Plan.

H. ADOPTION OF A MITIGATION MONITORING P ROGRAM FOR THE

CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires this City Council to adopt a monitoring or reporting program regarding the changes in the Project and mitigation measures imposed to lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ( MMRP), included as Chapter 3.0 in the Final EIR, is hereby adopted.

Resolution No. 25-58

Page 78 of 78 ends

Norwalk City CouncilDecember 2, 2025

Norwalk City Council
December 2, 2025