DRAFT
March 21, 2023
Georgia Sheridan
Project Manager
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop: 99-22-3
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Email: [email protected]
RE: Metro C Line Extension to Torrance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report Comments
Dear Ms. Sheridan:
On behalf of the City of Redondo Beach, California, please accept this letter as the City’s official comment letter regarding the Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The City respectfully submits these comments to you, as the Metro representative accepting the DEIR comments for the project, for consideration as Metro prepares the Final EIR for this project and considers alternative alignments.
As noted in the City’s May 17, 2022 letter to LA County Supervisors Mitchell and Hahn, a copy of which was sent to the LA County Metro Board, the City Council expresses unified support of an elevated Hawthorne Boulevard alignment (Hawthorne Elevated Option) for the Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project, which would run along the historic Red Car route. The City of Redondo Beach continues to urge the LA County Metro Board not to gravitate to the Metro ROW alignment options. As we detail below, the Hawthorne Elevated Option is the most equitable, environmentally sound and the only option that promises to connect residents of Central Los Angeles County with the economic powerhouse coming to Redondo Beach along Hawthorne Blvd.
I. Hawthorne Elevated Option is superior to the ROW Options (At-Grade and Trenched) in all regards except cost, which should not drive monumental generational investments.
As part of its decision-making process, Metro studied through the DEIR three potential alignments–the Metro railroad right-of-way (ROW) At-Grade Option, the Metro ROW Trenched, and the Hawthorne Elevated Option.
City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 2 of 9 As a preliminary matter, we want you to know that L Catterton (the real-estate arm of LVMH) is in the process of investing nearly half a billion dollars in a mixed retail, 300- unit inclusionary apartment units, office space, and a 150-room hotel at the same intersection that would serve as the Redondo Beach stop for the Hawthorne Elevated Option. Between the mall and other uses, L Catterton projects about 750 new, permanent jobs to come to the site. Only the Hawthorne Elevated Option would deliver residents from the Willowbrook/Rosa Park station to all of the economic, family and medical centers along Hawthorne Blvd. by delivering them to its intersection with Artesia Blvd. The two ROW Options would deliver these residents to a residential neighborhood. If Metro does not seize this monumental, once-in-a-generation opportunity to send the C Line down the most utile path, the C Line could be destined to demise for nonuse.
If located along the Hawthorne Elevated Option, the C Line would also deliver residents from Redondo Beach, Lawndale, Torrance and Hawthorne conveniently to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Project. If, however, the C Line is extended into our residential neighborhood along the ROW, the C Line would not serve as a central hub to move the masses efficiently to LAX. It would be a pity for government to have spent hundreds of millions of dollars improving LAX and installing a people mover, only to build a C Line extension that does not maximize ridership.
The City of Redondo Beach is united behind Hawthorne Elevated Option since it addresses many of our residents’ concerns regarding noise, vibration, resident/child safety, and other factors, as well as having an expeditious, speedy route to the Torrance Transit center which would likely bolster its usership at a time of Metro ridership decline. The Hawthorne Elevated Option along Hawthorne Boulevard would also revitalize local businesses through higher visibility and the creation of a vibrant destination for riders.
II. The City is united behind the Hawthorne Elevated Option and against the ROW Options.
We are very concerned for our mixed-income senior residents at the Breakwater Village. Breakwater Village was built along the Metro ROW in the early 2000’s. It boasts 191 units covenanted for seniors. It includes 20 affordable units, including Section 8 housing. The same is true for the mixed-income residents of the Ruxton Place and Ruxton Ridge, that are home to 27 and 28 units, respectively.
Shell’s drilling on the Metro ROW created a sinkhole in close proximity to these sites, and even caused a sinkhole on the Ruxton property. For over a year that sinkhole was fenced off; where residents of the affordable units there did not have regular access to their front doors because the conditions. The land subsidence that occurred at the Ruxton Place is merely symptomatic of the potential, serious hazards that could arise from heavy machinery and construction on the ROW so close to pre-existing, heavy residential developments. To date, Metro has not articulated confidence that the City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 3 of 9 geology on the ROW would permit the C Line to be extended with no damaging effect on the dense residential developments adjacent to the ROW.
The DEIR has concluded that the ROW options will have significant unavoidable noise impacts for the ongoing operations at those alignments. As well, construction of either ROW Options will have significant unavoidable impacts on residents related to both noise and vibration. Based on the multi-year timeline needed to build the light rail within feet of where many of these neighboring residents sleep nightly, the negative impact that this will have on so many lives, including our seniors’, simply cannot be understated.
Below are the comments specific to the DEIR studies. With the concerns to the impacts to the quality of life and safety/security of more than 1000 residential households along the ROW Options, the City implores that Metro not move forward with either of the ROW Options.
III. Additional DEIR Comments.
Attached are comments from the Redondo Beach Planning Commission, the Redondo Beach Public Works & Sustainability Commission, and the public received by City Council in discussing the DEIR. The Redondo Beach City Council requests that Metro accept these as official comments to be addressed in the DEIR process. Below are additional official comments of the City of Redondo Beach.
Emergency Response Services:
• Metro should not consider the ROW At-Grade option. Life threatening delays could occur at the at-grade crossing at 182nd Street due to frequency of the light rail service stopping traffic and emergency response capabilities. In addition to police and fire, McCormick private ambulance service is located on and travels along 182nd Street regularly—this is a major corridor. The ROW At-Grade Option traffic stoppage will cause delays. The ability to get across tracks in a timely manner is critical for these life safety services.
• Regarding public services and emergency responders, the DEIR does not go deep enough to address deployment practices and the impacts of these delays.
Geology/Soils:
• The Draft EIR identifies less than significant issues with subsidence and settlement that may be in conflict with other known reports. As noted above, Shell’s drilling on the Metro ROW created a sinkhole in close proximity to these sites, and even caused a sinkhole on the Ruxton property. As well, there was a prior undocumented ROW sinkhole near 190th Street.
The DEIR Section 3.8-2.1 notes that the DEIR reviewed published maps, professional publications, and technical reports pertaining to the geology, soils, and seismicity of the RSA. Significant impact would include exposing people or City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 4 of 9 structures to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death, as well as when a geological unit or soil would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on or off-site subsidence or collapse. The DEIR needs to review the studies of soils in the immediate area, including the sinkhole in the vicinity of the Ruxton housing development, to ensure that the conditions and potential mitigation is adequate. This includes the study conducted by Ninyo & Moore on behalf of the Shell Pipeline Co. and the Galleria DEIR. • There is a concern with safety with 3 sets of tracks over pipelines where there are unstable soils (including clay soils) along the ROW alignments. There are seemingly unrepairable unstable soils evidenced by a sinkhole in the area, including adjacent to the alignment and spread onto property of Ruxton Place.
Evaluation needs to be done to determine where the pipelines are located throughout the corridor.
• The Hawthorne Elevated Option has the opportunity for engineering over more stable soils where Red Car had been routed for several decades. This is the preferred option to address geology and soils impacts.
At-Grade Crossing:
• Page 3.1-23 of the DEIR did not include the impacts to 182nd Street traffic. 182nd Street should be considered a major arterial since there are approvals for improvements to Galleria site and the new Transit Center has just been completed in the vicinity. The DEIR should include evaluating impacts of the additional possible high-density residential development per the Redondo Beach Housing Element sites inventory and the cumulative impacts of the ROW alignments with the increased traffic from these developments. • Page 3.1-45 of the DEIR regarding roadways relies on the municipalities to implement measures to deter cut through traffic when 182nd Street is experiencing traffic stoppage due to the ROW at Grade option. The DEIR is undercounting cut through traffic impacts on arterials. This needs to be addressed.
• The DEIR claims no impact on bicycle safety, yet riding bicycles across rail tracks is a hazard due to tire size and uneven surfaces. At this point there is only one set of tracks to cross at 182nd Street, but the proposed ROW at-grade option would have two additional sets of tracks, compounding the safety hazard. This safety hazard needs to be addressed.
• Was there sufficient analysis of transportation impacts on Inglewood and 182nd Street as a result of the frequency of trains and resulting restriction of traffic in ROW At-Grade Option?
Noise and Vibration
City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 5 of 9 • On Table 3.6-11 no ambient noise measurement was taken south of Artesia Boulevard on Ruxton Avenue and other adjacent residential roadways or south of 182nd Street on Firmona Avenue, Fisk Lane, Fisk Court, or Spreckles Court.
There are numerous residential properties in these areas. Ambient noise measurements need to be taken to accurately reflect the impacts. • The significant unavoidable impacts of the ROW Options regarding noise will be in perpetuity for operations. Metro should not move forward with those Options.
And even the Trench Option would only be LTSM if other agencies take action for Quiet Zone, relying on other agencies to do the mitigation. This doesn’t guarantee that there will not be continued noise just because the Quiet Zone designation is made. The City does not believe the benefits of these ROW Options outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts.
• Noise and vibration metrics make no reference to the noise standards in residential districts per the Redondo Beach Municipal Code. The DEIR needs to respect the local municipalities’ regulations.
o For the Proposed Project (ROW At-Grade) and the Trench Option, the projected noise levels are in excess of City’s noise ordinance during construction and during operation (RBMC 4-24.301)
o For the Proposed Project (ROW At-Grade) and the Trench Option, the projected noise levels during operation occur prior to 7 AM and after 10 PM and so are in violation of City’s noise ordinance (RBMC 4-24.301, 4-
24.503)
o For the Proposed Project (ROW At-Grade) and the Trench Option, the projected vibration levels listed to have significant impact violates City ordinance (RBMC 4-24.504)
• Considering there are already vibration impacts as a result of the existing freight operations, are the proposed mitigation measures for ROW options proven sufficient for the lifetime of the project?
Air Quality
• For the Trench Option, air quality risk is listed as significant and unavoidable.
Safety
• For the Proposed Project (ROW At-Grade) and the Trench Option, the City did not observe adequate discussion of safety issues related to brittle buried pipelines in the right of way.
• The City did not observe adequate discussion of safety issues related to derailment. Information needs to be provided to address the hazardous materials carried on the freight rail, if there are any issues with moving that closer to residences than it currently is, and impacts if a derailment were to occur.
City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 6 of 9 • Pipeline locations are not shown on the cross section drawings or in the materials. Impacts should be considered for both construction and operation if there are issues with the pipelines (i.e., leaks, repairs, etc.).
Biological
• The DEIR notes no wildlife impact, yet there have been observed owls and hawks in the El Nido Park and cemetery vicinity.
• For the ROW At-Grade Option and the Trench Option, significant substantial adverse effects are projected either directly or through habitat modifications on local wildlife. Metro should provide better mitigation requirements to protect local wildlife.
Transportation
• Metro should provide First / Last Mile improvements to the scope of the project. • Metro should elaborate on bus connectivity from the proposed Hawthorne Light Rail Station to the new Redondo Beach Transit Center. Explore partnership with South Bay Social District (SBSD - formerly South Bay Galleria) to make connection.
• Provide some discussion of dedicated connectivity from the proposed C Line extension to the Del Amo Mall.
• Discuss parking options for Hawthorne Light Rail Station and explore partnership with SBSD.
Other Issues
• Concerns have been raised by residents regarding incorrect figures and diagrams. Any information needing correction needs to be reviewed to see if those corrections show additional impacts.
• The “No Project Alternative” shows significant unavoidable impacts in many categories. Where is the significant data to support this? • The Hawthorne Elevated Option is most environmentally sound option and should be the option pursued if Metro is going to build the project. The Hawthorne Elevated Option is the option that does not directly impact adjacent residential uses.
• There is no level of service data or analysis. The DEIR mentions in the Land Use section that this is consistent with the local General Plans. However, the Redondo Beach Circulation Element requires this level of service analysis.
City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 7 of 9 • The ridership study should be included as a part of the DEIR since “improving mobility within the South Bay and encourage mode shift” is objective of project. • In the absence of selection of a light rail option, or if the no build option is selected, discuss how funds will remain invested into South Bay transit needs. • If the ROW Options are not selected, has there been any analysis of how this area could be utilized for alternative forms of transportation, such as bike lanes and for pedestrians.
• How much money is BNSF investing annually to maintaining the train tracks on the ROW? (Norfolk Southern)
• What will be done to protect residents in the South Bay from second hand smoke from Fentanyl, meth, etc consumption on the Metro, irrespective of the path it goes?
• What is metro doing to prevent and reduce the crimes, including violent and sexual crimes, that it exports to communities on its mass transit? https://www.dailynews.com/2023/02/24/crime-skyrockets-on-la-metro-systemincluding-a-jump-in-drug-deaths/ • Why doesn't moving the freight rail closer to Redondo Beach residents, without slowing down the speed of the train to 5mph or below, violate section 10.10 of our General Plan?
• How does the operation of a metro light rail for 20 hours (verify # of hours) in a day comply with Redondo Beach General Plan Policy 10.10.1, regarding the City’s operational restrictions during the early morning and late evening hours to reduce adverse noise impacts in residential areas and other noise sensitive areas?
• What will Metro be doing to protect people's indoor / outdoor cats from being struck by the Metro light rails on the ROW?
• How does the movement of the heavy freight rail closer to the high-density residential, without reducing its speed to 5 mph in Redondo Beach, comply with RBMC Section 4-24.504, which precludes the operation of any device which creates vibration which is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property, or at 150 feet (forty-six (46) meters) from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way?
• Lighting impacts studied were primarily focused on construction lighting impacts.
However, the study doesn’t address the lighting on the trains themselves, along City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 8 of 9 the tracks, at intersections/crossings, etc. related to the operations of the light rail. This needs to be evaluated to ensure that proper mitigation is in place.
IV. Consideration of Other Alternatives Studied in the DEIR – High Frequency Bus Alternative.
If Metro is considering pursuing one of the other Alternatives (other than the three Options), the City of Redondo Beach recommends consideration of the High Frequency Bus (HFB) Alternative. The DEIR acknowledges the HFB Alternative as the environmentally superior alternative, as it would avoid or reduce all impacts to a less than significant level. Although this alternative would not necessarily realize the same level of benefits or fully meet the objectives of the options, it would provide a mass transit service similar to light rail at what is expected to be a fraction of the cost.
The review of the HFB Alternative should be comparable in service to the options. The DEIR noted that the HFB Alternative would take 25 minutes to traverse the same 4.5- mile corridor, compared to 7 minutes for the light rail options; however, the HFB Alternative added several additional stops. To accurately compare the alternatives, the HFB Alternative should have the same bus stop frequency—only adding two stops total in Redondo Beach at the Galleria and in Torrance at the Torrance Transit Center Station.
If Metro decides to pursue one of the less costly Alternatives rather than the light rail Options, the funding that had been set aside that would no longer be used for this particular project needs to be redirected to improve transit in the South Bay area.
These comments have been reviewed and approved by the Redondo Beach City Council at their March 21, 2023 public meeting. If Metro has any questions regarding this comment letter, please contact Brandy Forbes, Community Development Director for the City of Redondo Beach at 310-318-0637 x2200 or [email protected].
Thank you for your consideration of our comments.
Sincerely,
Mayor William Brand
Joined by:
Nils Nehrenheim
Council Member, District 1
Todd Loewenstein
Council Member, District 2
Christian Horvath
Council Member, District 3
Zein E. Obagi, Jr.
Council Member, District 4
Laura Emdee
City of Redondo Beach March 21, 2023
Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project DEIR Comments Page 9 of 9 Council Member, District 5
CC: L.A. County Metro Board
Mike Witzansky, City Manager
Luke Smude, Assistant to the City Manager
Brandy Forbes, Community Development Director
L.A. County Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell
L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn
Attachments:
• Redondo Beach Planning Commission Recommended Comments February 16, 2023
• Redondo Beach Public Works Commission Recommended Comments February 27, 2023
• Public Comments received by City Council in discussion of the DEIR • City of Redondo Beach Comments and Request Letter on Metro C Line Extension to Torrance Project May 17, 2022
• City of Redondo Beach Letter Submitting Comments on Revised and Recirculated Notice of Preparation Dated March 16, 2021 • City of Redondo Beach Support Letter Green Line Alternative 3 Signed July 18, 2018
City of Redondo Beach
Planning Commission
Recommendations to City Council for Comments
Metro C Line Extension Draft Environmental Impact Report February 16, 2023
EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES
1. Metro should not consider the ROW at-grade option. Life threatening delays could occur at the at-grade crossing at 182nd Street due to frequency of the light rail service stopping traffic and emergency response capabilities. In addition to police and fire, McCormick private ambulance service is located on and travels along 182nd Street regularly—this is a major corridor.
ROW at-grade traffic stoppage will cause delays. The ability to get across tracks in a timely manner is critical for these life safety services.
2. Regarding public services and emergency responders, the DEIR does not go deep enough to address deployment
practices and the impacts of these delays.
3. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council has for review fire and police data and ambulance frequency to see how much these services use the crossing intersections (182nd Street) by their March 21, 2023 meeting.
SOILS
4. There is a concern with safety with 3 sets of tracks over pipelines where there are unstable soils (including clay soils) along the ROW alignments. There are seemingly unrepairable unstable soils evidenced by a sinkhole in the area, including adjacent to the alignment and spread onto property of Ruxton Place.
5. The raised elevation route down Hawthorne has the opportunity for engineering over more stable soils where Red Car had been routed for several decades.
AT GRADE CROSSING
6. Page 3.1-23 of the DEIR did not include in the materials the impacts to 182nd Street traffic. 182nd Street should be considered a major arterial since there are approvals for improvements to Galleria site and the new Transit Center has just been completed in the vicinity. The DEIR should include evaluating impacts of the additional possible high-density residential development per the Redondo Beach Housing
Element sites inventory and the cumulative impacts of the ROW alignments with the increased traffic from these developments.
7. Page 3.1-45 of the DEIR regarding roadways relies on the municipalities to implement measures to deter cut through traffic when 182nd Street is experiencing traffic stoppage due to the ROW at Grade option. The DEIR is undercounting cut
through traffic impacts on arterials.
8. The DEIR claims no impact on bicycle safety, yet riding bicycles across rail tracks is a hazard due to tire size and uneven surfaces. At this point there is only one set of tracks to cross at 182nd Street, but the proposed ROW at-grade option would have two additional sets of tracks, compounding the safety hazard.
9. Was there sufficient analysis of transportation impacts on Inglewood and 182nd Street as a result of the frequency of trains and resulting restriction of traffic in ROW at-grade option?
NOISE AND VIBRATION
10. The significant unavoidable impacts of ROW options regarding noise will be in perpetuity for operations. Metro should not move forward with those options. And even the Trench Option would only be LTSM if other agencies take action for Quiet Zone, relying on other agencies to do the mitigation. The Planning Commission does not believe the benefits of these ROW project options outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts.
11. Noise and vibration metrics make no reference to the noise standards in residential districts per the Redondo Beach Municipal Code. The DEIR needs to respect the local
municipalities’ regulations.
12. Considering there are already vibration impacts as a result of the existing freight operations, are the proposed mitigation measures for ROW options proven sufficient for the lifetime of the project?
OTHER COMMENTS
13. There is a concern about impacts to quality of life and safety/security of more than 1000 residential households along the ROW alignment options (see all categories above).
14. The “No Project Alternative” shows significant unavoidable impacts in many categories. Where is the significant data to support this?
15. The Hawthorne Option is most environmentally sound option and should be the option pursued if Metro is going to build the project. The Hawthorne Option is the option that does not directly impact adjacent residential uses.
16. There is no level of service data or analysis. The DEIR mentions in the Land Use section that this is consistent with the local General Plans. However, the Redondo Beach Circulation Element requires this level of service analysis.
17. The Planning Commission recommends that City Council look at what the mitigation measures are that are necessary to bring to LTSM to see if those measures are sufficient.
18. The ridership study should be included as a part of the DEIR since “improving mobility within the South Bay and encourage mode shift” is objective of project.
19. The DEIR notes no wildlife impact, yet there have been observed owls and hawks in the El Nido Park and cemetery vicinity.
TRANSMITTAL MEMO
DATE: March 3, 2023
FROM: Lauren Sablan, Public Works & Sustainability Commission Liaison TO: Brandy Forbes, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMMENTS ON METRO C LINE
EXTENSION DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Per the request of City Council, the Public Works & Sustainability Commission reviewed the Metro C Line Extension Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and provided input on the DEIR during the February 27, 2023 Public Works & Sustainability Commission Meeting. Attached are the recommendations as approved by the Public Works & Sustainability Commission.
ATTACHMENT:
• Recommendations to City Council for Comments Metro C Line Extension Draft Environmental Impact Report February 27, 2023
Public Works Department
Engineering Services Division
415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, California 90277
www.redondo.org
tel: 310 318-0661
fax: 310 374-4828
City of Redondo Beach
Public Works & Sustainability Commission
Recommendations to City Council for Comments
Metro C Line Extension Draft Environmental Impact Report February 27, 2023
1. The PWC prefers the Hawthorne option for the following reasons:
A. Noise and Vibrations
• For the Proposed Project (right of way at grade) and the Trench Option, the projected noise levels are in excess of City’s noise ordinance during construction and during operation (RBMC 4-
24.301)
• For the Proposed Project (right of way at grade) and the Trench Option, the projected noise levels during operation occur prior to 7 AM and after 10 PM and so are in violation of City’s noise ordinance (RBMC 4-24.301, 4-24.503)
• For the Proposed Project (right of way at grade) and the Trench Option, the projected vibration levels listed to have significant impact violates City ordinance (RBMC 4-24.504)
B. Geology
• DEIR 3.8-3.12 Subsidence and settlement - The Draft EIR identifies less than significant issues with subsidence that may be in conflict with other known reports.
C. Air quality
• For the Trench Option, air quality risk is listed as significant and unavoidable.
D. Safety
• For the Proposed Project (right of way at grade) and the Trench Option, Commission did not observe adequate discussion of safety issues related to brittle buried pipelines in the right of way. • Commission did not observe adequate discussion of safety issues related to derailment.
E. Biological
• For the Hawthorne Option and the Trench Option, significant substantial adverse effects are projected either directly or through habitat modifications on local wildlife. Metro should provide better mitigation requirements to protect local wildlife.
F. Transportation
• Metro should provide First / Last Mile improvements to the scope of the project.
• Metro should elaborate on bus connectivity from the proposed Hawthorne Light Rail Station to the to the new Redondo Beach Transit Center. Explore partnership with SBSD to make
connection.
• Provide some discussion of dedicated connectivity from the proposed C Line extension to the Del Amo Mall.
• Discuss parking options for Hawthorne Light Rail Station and explore partnership with SBSD.
2. In the absence of selection of a light rail option, or if the no build option is selected, discuss how funds will remain invested into South Bay transit needs.
[COMMENTS PROVIDED BY HOLLY OSBORNE MARCH 14, 2023]
Series of Drawings for Proposed Project
Start here. This is Lawndale, this is the start of the proposed project. 1)The maintenance access is to get at the petroleum pipelines underneath. 2) The furthest pipe is about 12 feet; you need about a foot more than that, so you need about 13 ft; so 18‐20 is good,
3) The ROW is supposed to be 100 ft; here they have 20+31+25+20 = 96 ft. So they are missing 4 ft. Not sure where it went.
3) The freight train was at the center (which would have been at 50 ft; it is now at 20+12.5=32.5 feet from west edge.
And 51+12.5=63.5 ft from the east.
It has been shifted to the right 13.5.5 ft according to looking from the east edge; and 17.5 ft according to the west. (Hey, what is 4 ft between friends?) 4) the 20 ft path is a joke. (Our bicycle path in North Redondo is 16 ft wide. Could it support a big tree like that, and a bunch of cyclists, and some pedestrians? ON TO THE NEXT FIGURE. ASSUME IT IS RIGHT AT 170th. We have been told the shift it now only 3 ft to the west.
Some how, the Maintenance access is now only 8 ft. I have measured the distance. The furthest pipes are now 12 ft. SO, are they going to stack the pipes on top of each other, or what? THAT IS A QUESTION. Or are they going to take someone’s property? (This is the diagram that appeared as 81 ft wide with a 14 ft access in the August Diagrams. ) Taking this diagram at face value, the center track of freight train is 25‐3 = 22 ft from edge w
22 ft
I am repeating the diagram, but this time the freight train HAS NO SHIFT IT HAS TO LINE UP
WITH THE BRIDGE,
SO this diagram is now JUST BEFORE ARTESIA BOULEVARD. That means it is 25 ft from Western wall. IF THE FREIGHT TRAIN IS BACK TO WHERE IT WAS ORIGNALLY, that means it is now closer to the light rail. Don’t know what the requirements are.
25 ft
50 ft
THIS IS THE DIAGRAM JUST AFTER THE BRIDGE. THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED IS HOW LOW THE HOUSES ARE TO THE WEST.
This is RIGHT AFTER THE BRIDGE. Before you get to Breakwater. The ROW is still only 75 ft wide. And it is flat to about only 34 ft from the center of the track to the west..
The train will be floating on air, unless you provide dirt to fill in the embankment.
Was that mentioned in DEIR?
Here is where I stopped. MAGICALLY, the configuration of the at grade rail changed.
Don’t now how.
But here is what you should notice:
This is at Breakwater, somewhere.
But look at the backyard notice on the East side.. It says EASEMENT. Who owns that property? Metro, or the homeowners?
And one of the LRT’s is sitting on fill dirt. (It would be air, otherwise.)
Strip Mall
GREAT
ROOM CAFE 25 ft
Right after
BLUE FOLDER ITEM
Blue folder items are additional back up material to administrative reports and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 14, 2023
• Email Communications
N.1. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE SUBMITTAL OF OFFICIAL
COMMENTS TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (METRO) REGARDING THE METRO C
(GREEN) LINE EXTENSION TO TORRANCE PROJECT DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
CONTACT: BRANDY FORBES, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Vickie Kroneberger
To: Lina Carrillo; Latrice Williams
Cc: Brandy Forbes
Subject: FW: Comments re: Metro Green Line Extension in Redondo Beach [N.1?] Date: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 12:36:20 PM
Is this responsive to Agenda Item N1 for this evening? Can you prepare Blue Folder for Public Communications for this item with the email below, and add any others you may have received? Need by 3p please.
From: Nancy Skiba <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 1:12 PM
To: CityClerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Comments re: Metro Green Line Extension in Redondo Beach CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Beach Cities Health District in Redondo Beach has spent millions of dollars supporting and promoting Blue Zones. Blue Zones has made numerous findings that chronic stress is the silent killer and causes intergenerational health damage. There are many studies linking excessive intermittent noise, such as the proposed Metro line through Redondo Beach to chronic stress and its many health damages, including early death.
The DEIR is defective and fails to consider the negative health impacts found by BCHD's Blue Zones program. The DEIR must be halted and amended to include that specific health damages found by BCHD's Blue Zones program. As a proposed new health damaging project, any route causing additional 24/7/365 damaging intermittent noise and vibration cannot be pursued without intergeneration health damages.
This stress can be chronic, due to a specific situation … exposure to stress in early life can alter the normal development … resulting in increased sensitivity to stress and lifelong health risks in offspring.Although people often underestimate the influence of the mind on the body, a growing catalog of research shows that high levels of stress over an extended time can drastically alter physical function and affect nearly every organ system. How living near a railroad can harm your health: From chronic stress to an increased risk of cancer, scientists say that constant exposure to trains takes a toll on the human body. Effects of Exposure to Road, Railway, Airport and Recreational Noise on Blood Pressure and Hypertension: transportation noise can induce annoyance, sleep disturbance with awakening, cognitive impairment, physiological stress reactions, endocrine imbalance and cardiovascular disorders. Transportation noise exposure is believed to be detrimental to human health through stress reactions with activation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis, followed by increased levels of stress hormones. In addition, nighttime noise exposure can impact sleep quality and duration, which are crucial for physiological and mental restoration. The references above are demonstrative and not fully inclusive of the Metroignored Blue Zones impacts to health caused by the proposed Metro Green Line extension through Redondo Beach Neighborhoods.
Therefore, please do not build a Metro Green Line Extension near homes in Redondo Beach ! Please build the Green Line Extension on Hawthorne Boulevard to protect families and their homes/neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Nancy Skiba
From: Vickie Kroneberger
To: Latrice Williams
Subject: FW: Item N.1 Blue Folder Items
Date: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 3:00:03 PM
Attachments: RuxtonGeo draftEval.png
DEIR CityCouncil 31423.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
Importance: High
Can you include this email and attachments to N.1 and re-send to me? I’m working on all the other Blue Folders that came in just under the wire.
Thanks in advance!
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 2:48 PM
To: CityClerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Item N.1 Blue Folder Items
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Hi,
Please use this email instead, I forgot to attach another image for my Biology Resource comments Subject: Item N.1 Blue Folder Items
Hello City Clerk,
For Item N.1 Blue Folder I'm attaching a PDF document titled Ruxton Geo draftEval, and the following link to the 2017 Galleria Draft EIR goes with it. Please ensure all members have this, and I've included screenshots below: https://www.redondo.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=34511 Also attached are my oral comments in written form with proposed edits to the DEIR letter being discussed. Please distribute to all members plus the mayor accordingly.
Please let me know if it's better to print hard copies for them and if so, how many would I need to bring? I know cm Obagi will be remote and Mayor Brand may or may not be present.
Thank you!
Niki Negrete-Mitchell, D3
310.387.4875
Screenshots from Ruxton Geo Eval:
2 &1/2 foot tall Great Horned Owl perched on a low wire above my back wall on ROW.
Niki Negrete-Mitchell, D3
Geology/soils
I’ve sent the PDF file of the Ruxton sinkhole performed by Ninyo & Moore, on behalf of Shell Pipeline Co. plus a link to the Galleria DEIR for comparison to Metro DEIR to the Blue Folder.
Also there was an undocumented old ROW sinkhole near 190th, and 20 years ago a condemned house near Man Bch Bl due to clay soils foundational damage 20 yrs ago. Old owner says he doesn’t have the documentation.
After 2.5 years private home spaces finally repaired, but we don’t know if it’s done thoroughly, letter needs to be udated to reflect that.
Noise and Vibration
“Quiet zone” only establishes no bells at grade crossing, does not quiet down moving trains passing every 6 - 12 minutes 20 hrs day 4am-past midnight - that needs to be clear in the DEIR. Vague reference to “safety measures” in presentation.
On table 3.6-11 no ambient noise measurement was taken South of Artesia Bl on Ruxton Ave, or south of 182nd St on Firmona Ave, Fisk Ln and Ct or Spreckles Ct.
Torrance addresses on 186th St are labeled as Redondo Beach. Inaccurate study not sufficient
Biological: (There is a lot of concern from residents on this, I’m adding clarified language) The DEIR notes no wildlife impact, yet there have been observed Nesting Great Horned Owl and Red Tail Hawk families in the El Nido Park and cemetery vicinity.
For both the Proposed Project and Trench ROW Options (Hawthorne is far enough from the tree canopy in El Nido), significant substantial adverse effects are projected either directly or through habitat modifications on local wildlife. Metro should provide better mitigation requirements to protect local wildlife. Nesting owls and hawks which feed on invasive rodents (gophers, rats and mice) would be forced to leave their homes and food source on both ROW options
Transportation:
• (This is to clear all of the confusion on connectivity from Hawthorne Bl without appearing confused ourselves) DEIR should clarify for the Hawthorne Bl station there is an ample opportunity for riders to connect to any further destination via the sheer abdundance of buses that stop and pick up at Artesia.
• In the rare case that riders need to go to the RB Transit Center, the DEIR should clarify every bus stops at Artesia before looping over to there and riders can easily shuttle over.
• The DEIR should clarify Hawthorne Bl station will be designed once decision is made boasting enhancements for accessible and safe pedestrian usage with city’s input.
Re: Del Amo - Torrance already has a shuttle to Del Amo from the Torrance TC. Statement above that connection to Del Amo can easily be made by boarding one of the many southbound buses.
Wln"'f"5,-
redondo BEACH
Bill Erand
Mayor
lel ll0 372-1171
exl.2260
fax ll0 374-2039
March 16, 2021
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) One Gateway Plaza
Los Angeles, CA 90012
ATTN: Dolores Roybal Saltarelli, Project Manager, Mail Stop 99-224 RE: Revised and Recirculated Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental lmpact Report for the project entitled "Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project" Dear Ms. Roybal Saltarelli
On behalf of the City of Redondo Beach, California, please accept this letter as the City's official written support of an elevated Hawthorne Boulevard alignment and comments in response to the Revised and Recirculated Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project. The City respectfully submits these comments to Metro, as the Lead Agency for the project, for consideration in the scope and content of the environmental analysis to be included in the Draft Environmental lmpact Report (DEIR).
Metro has proposed the C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project, which would create a light rail transit option along a four-mile segment of the Harbor Subdivision Corridor (a freight rail line) from the existing Metro Redondo Beach Station to the underconstruction Torranc,e Transit Park and Ride Regional Terminal (Torrance Transit Center) in Torrance, also encompassing the under-construction Redondo Beach Transit Center through two potential alignments (i.e. rail right-of-way alignment and Hawthorne Blvd. alignment). The extension will be served by the Metro C Line (Green) and future crenshaMLAX Transit Project. Metro's planning documents argue that this extension will provide alternatives to congestion along the l-405 corridor and will provide more transit options in the region by connecting the existing Metro Rail A (Blue) and E (Expo) Lines. Metro has proposed two alternative routes under consideration. The current alternatives are entitled Alternative 1: Metro Railroad Right-of-Way and Alternative 2:
Hawthorne Boulevard.
Alternative 2: Hawthorne Boulevard
During the Alternatives Analysis study phase, the City submitted its comment letter dated July't8, 2018, to Phillip Washington, Metro's Chief Executive Officer, see attached, identifying alignment and grade preferences. ln that lefter, the Redondo 415 Diamond Slreet, P.0. BoX 270
Redondo Beach, Californ ia 9027 7 -027 0
www.redondo.org
Beach City Council urged the Metro Board to proceed with a full EIR to study an elevated route along Hawthorne Blvd. This was a modified profile to Metro's initial Alternative 3, which was a largely at-grade route along Hawthorne Boulevard. The elevated alignment addressed many of the Redondo Beach residents' concerns regarding noise, vibration, safety, and other factors, as well as having a speedier route to the Torrance Transit center than Metro's at-grade alternative.
The Redondo Beach City Council re-affirms its recommendation of an elevated alternative along Hawthorne Blvd. Metro has now called Hawthorne Blvd Alternative 2, but the alignment is at grade. We would like to introduce the desig nation Alternative 2E Hawthorne Boulevard Elevated, with the "E" signifying the revised elevated profile to be evaluated in the ElR.
Alternative 1: Metro Railroad Riqht-of-Wav
Please be advised that the City of Redondo Beach is opposed to Alternative 1, Metro Railroad Right-of-Way at grade option, due to its devastating impacts on the 200+ Redondo Beach private homeowners whose homes are positioned directly adjacent to the ROW and will be directly impacted by the drastic changes to many environmental factors that will affect their quality of life and the value of their property.
The City's July 18, 2018 letter stated that should Metro choose to study the existing rail right-of-way, the City urged that the EIR address trenching in Redondo Beach, south of Grant Avenue, through the future Redondo Beach Transit Center, under 182nd Street until it needs to ascend back up to the elevated hack crossing at Hawthorne/190th. The City continues to request that this option be considered for the Metro Railroad Right-ofWay alternative.
Environmental lmpacts
Metro has identified potentially significant impacts which will be addressed in the DEIR, including Aesthetics, Agriculture/Forestry Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. When evaluating these environmental impacts, the City requests that Metro further consider the following implications of the proposed project:
Hazards and Hazardous Materials - The right-of-way corridor currently contains multiple Liquid Petroleum pipelines that span the entire proposed passage, particularly the Shell Pipeline. These are marked throughout this right-of-way by hundreds of warning designations that read 'WARNING PETROLEUM PIPELINE" with designations of no digging, excavation, and most important'HIGH PRESSURL PIPELINE'. Wikipedia identifies this substance as such; "Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG or LP gas), is a flammable mixture of hydrocarbon gases used as fuel in heating appliances, cooking equipment, and vehicles. lt is a mixture of 48% propane, 50o/o butane, and 2o/o pentane." These are highly flammable substances.
The addition of added "light-rail" train lines that run frequently and utilize a highvoltage open connection for propulsion must be studied and certified as safe by all parties. Failure on this single issue can reap destruction far beyond the city's residents. Furthermore, currently there is a train that runs through this right-of-way corridor which primarily transports liquid petroleum. With the added pounding and vibration and the addition of high-voltage tresses to support train power coupled with the exposure to high-risk flammable materials both below ground and above ground, there is no room for inaccuracy or even understatement in the DEIR report.
Noise and Vibration - Noise and vibration, both during construction and operations, on the adjacent 200+ privately owned residential properties will be a significant issue to homeowners and residents throughout this corridor. The current train runs twice daily, with very few numbers of rail cars. Though loud for a minute, the daily round trip does not impact property values or quality of life. Alternative 1: Metro Railroad Rightof-Way would introduce a frequency to the corridor that would greatly impact both.
The proposed line in Alternative 1: Metro Railroad Right-of-Way would shift the current rail lines closer to residential properties in order to create space for both the light-rail and freight rail lines within the same right-of-way. Residential neighborhoods will be besieged by additional bells, dings, and loud noises from the operations of both freight and light rail through multiple crossings where there exist private residential properties. The frequency of trains has been estimated to be every 7-10 minutes.
The City of Redondo Beach requests that Metro fully evaluate the noise and vibration impacts of the project on all adjacent land uses, both during construction and in perpetuity through operations. ln addition to the noise and vibration levels, the EIR should also evaluate the impact of the increase in frequency from the current baseline situation in the Metro Railroad Right-of-Way alternative. City of Redondo Beach noise ordinances should be considered as part ofthe EIR (see attached).
Land Use and Planning - Parking availability is a significant concern throughout Redondo Beach and the alternative locations for the light rail station to be located in the City are no exception. The City requests that Metro include evaluation of parking demand impacts to public parking near the proposed stations. The City also requests that Metro maintain all parking at the existing Redondo Green Line transit station on Marine, both during construction and afier completion of the extension project.
Additionally, related to land use and planning, although safety/security was not listed as being studied for potentially significant impacts, the City requests that Metro include an evaluation of safety and security impacts to neighboring property owners along the line and near the proposed stations. This safety and security evaluation should also evaluate the impacts on additional police and fire resources necessary to address safety issues.
Public Services - The City is currently constructing a bus transit center on Kingsdale Avenue to replace the existing facility that is about one quarter mile to the north. The under-construction Redondo Beach Transit Center will serve passengers from at least four municipal bus operators. Alternative 2: Hawthorne Boulevard, a light rail station placed on the Hawthorne alignment alternative will be some distance away from the u nder-construction Redondo Beach Transit Center. Alternative 1 :
Metro Railroad Right-of-Way alignment adjacent to the under-construction Redondo Beach Transit Center would seem to address pedestrian connectivity between the two modes of travel, yet needs to address the City concerns with vertical alignment as outlined in our July 1 8, 201 8 letter.
The City requests that Metro include evaluation of pedestrian and other forms of active transportation connectivity between the under-construction Redondo Beach Transit Center and each of the alternative station locations- These evaluations should address how the distance between the new facilities may impact ridership, the impacts on riders making transfers, and the impacts of vehicle solutions (e.9. shuttles) to area congestion. Due to its proximity, the evaluation should also consider accessibility to The Galleria for elderly and disabled riders. The City has a safety concern that project-driven by new congestion on Kingsdale and 't82nd will impact the safety of the elderly and disabled trying to access shopping and dining.
The City has a similar safety concern for children traveling to and from school in the project's vicinity.
Transportation - The City is an active supporter of alternative modes of transportation, including pedestrian, cycling and other forms of active transportation and is studying development of a slow vehicle network. The City requests that Metro include evaluation of opportunities to integrate and address impacts to these alternate modes of transportation along the line and near the proposed stations.
However, the City is concerned parts of the ROW have insufficient width, especially when considering the utility lines (gas and petroleum) and the privacy for the many residential homeowners lining the ROW. As the City does support alternative modes of transportation, there is a significant amount of pedestrian and bicycle traffic from nearby neighborhoods to the local schools. Metro should evaluate any impediments or safety impacts that the alignments would have on these safe routes to schools.
The DEIR should also considerthe construction vehicle impacts on road conditions for all types of private vehicle use.
Other lssues to Address
In addition to the environmental issues listed above, the City requests that Metro consider the following aesthetic and land use/planning comments related to the project.
As noted in the NOP, Metro is evaluating land use and planning impacts. Please consider the Redondo Beach public art requirements and land use regulations that may be required for the alternatives being considered. The City of Redondo Beach does have a public art requirement (1% of project cost) for projects of a certain size. Metro should evaluate these requirements and address in the project planning as necessary.
As for land use, please review the attached zoning and other regulations that may pertain to the proposed alternatives for any necessary inclusion in the DEIR.
These comments have been reviewed and approved by the Redondo Beach City Council at their March 16,2021 public meeting. lf Metro has any questions regarding this comment letter, please contact Community Development Director Brandy Forbes at (310) 318-0637 x2200 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for the consideration of our comments.
Sincerely, a?c
Mayor William Brand
CC: City Council Members, City of Redondo Beach
Joe Hoefgen, City Manager
Brandy Forbes, Community Development Director
Attachments:
. City of Redondo Beach Support Letter Green Line Alternative 3 Signed July 18, 2018
o City of Redondo Beach Land Use and Noise Regulations Pertaining to Proposed Alternatives
,, I
redondo aa^(x
I'll 8r.nd
Qtt
rl5 O..r.rdrrl..r. P0 tol2r0
tirorno 8..fi. (.tlon, 90r r7.0r70
July 18, 2018
Mr. Phillip A. WashinSton
Chiel Executive Officer
Los An8eles County Metropolitan Tiansponalion Authority One Gateway Plaza
Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952
Dear Mr. WashrnSton
The Green Line extension to Torrance will bring much needed trantportatron infrastructure to our reSion. Each day thousands of commuters leave the Soulh Bay and travel North tor work or lersure, creatinS the congestion that consequently affects qualaty of life for all resrding rn the treater los Anteles area.
On July 17, 2018, th€ Redondo Beach City Council received a reporl and voted unanimouily supporlinS lhe submittal of this letter lo your offices.
On behalf of the Redondo Beach City Council, we urge you and lhe Metro Board to proceed with a full project Environmental lmpact Report (ElR) studyint Alternative 3 in an elevaled position. This would address many of our residents' concerns and allow the line to traver!e a popular commercial corridor.
ln the event the Metro Board chooses to study Alternelives I or 2, we would funhermore urSe that the EIR address trenching in Redondo Beach, south of Grant Avenue, through the ,uture RB transit center, under l82nd Slreet and alont th€ exisling Right of way until it needs to ascend back up to the elevated Irack crossinB Hawthorne/l90th Slreet. While this is not the preferred route for our residents, we believe these sutfested mitiSationt would be most beneficial lo their qualily of life and future traffic patterns along lE2nd Street. tastly, th€ City Council opposed and did not support tunher consideration ol Alternative 4.
I would be happy lo discuss the concerns and suttestrons with you, 5taf, and the 8oa,d Members. Thank you for your consideration.
5rncerely,
wrlham C. Brand
ATTACHMENT: City of Redondo Beach Land Use and Noise Regulations Pertaini ng to Proposed Alternatives
The following discussion outlines some of the City of Redondo Beach's zoning regulations for the project alignment alternatives, as well as a discussion of the entitlement criteria for Planning Commission Design Review. To the extent that the DEIR does not address some of the Design Review criteria, Metro should be prepared to provide additional evidence as part of the project's entitlement process/applications.
Metro may also need to submit a Landscape and lrrigation Plan (RBMC 10-2.1900), as well as an application for Sign Review (RBMC S 10- 2.1800 et seq), and permits related to the Building Division and Engineering Division. Additionally, if there are improvements required in a municipality's right of way, permits may be required for that work from the Engineering Department of the respective municipality or Caltrans.
While vehicular Level of Service (LOS) was phased out from CEOA pursuant to Senate Bill 743, the City requests that Metro consider the project's effects on vehicular circulation and level of service (LOS) for any signalized intersection from at least a planning perspective to comply with the City of Redondo Beach's General Plan Circulation Element Goals and Policies. Metro should also ensure that it is able to demonstrate compliance with the City's parking standards discussed under RBMC $ 10-
2.1700 et seq., including providing adequate parking during all phases of the project, particularly during construction.
The City also requests that Metro condition the project approval upon preparation and implementation of a Construction Management Plan (CMP). The City of Redondo Beach traditionally requires a CMP as a standard condition of approval for larger projects similar to the Metro project. lf Metro would like a sample CMP to see the various components, please reach out to the City's contact listed at the end of the letter. 10-2.'1111 Additional land use regulations, P public and institutional zongs.
(a) Recreation and Parks Commission Review, P-PRO zone. ln the P-PRO parks, recreation, and open spaoe zone, all applications for uses and development shall be referred to the Recreation and Parks Commission for its study and recommendations before submission to the appropriate decision-making body.
Applicable Zoninq Criteria of P-ROW Zone (riqht-of-wav) and l-lB (industrial) The Metro project alternative alignments appear to be located largely upon a property zoned P-ROW (right-of-way). Metro should be aware of the specific purposes of this zone listed in the Redondo Beach Municipal Code (RBMC) S 10-2.1 100, and the Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project should comply with the RBMC S 10-
2.111'1 'Specificpurposes, Ppublicand institutional zones"and RBMCS 10-2.1115 "Development standards: P-ROW right-of-way zone" as noted below:
(b) Recreational uses, P-ROW zone. ln the P-ROW right-of-way zone, recreational uses shall be limited to only passive type uses. (c) Accessory uses and structures. (1) Development standards. Permitted accessory uses and structures, including, but not limited to, storage sheds, maintenance buildings, lighting fixtures, view decks, rest rooms, flag poles, and concession stands, shall be subject to the height, setback, and floor area ratio standards of the zone in which it is located, except that height and setback standards may be modified subject to Planning Commission Design Review. ln zones where no height standard is specified, permitted accessory uses and structures exceeding a height of thirty (30) feet shall be subject to Planning Commission Design Review, except that flag poles, lighting fixtures, and similar structures which do not contain floor area and which exceed a height of thirg (30) feet may be approved by the Community Development Director. ln zones where no maximum floor area ratio is specified, any building exceeding 1,000 square feet shall be subject to Planning Commission Design Review.
10-2.111 5 Development standards: P-ROW right-of-way zone. (a) Floor area ratio. The floor area ratio (F.A.R.) of all buildings on a lot shall not exceed 0.1 (see definition of floor area ratio in Section 10-
2.402).
(b) Building height. No building or structure shall exceed a height of fifteen (15) feet (see definition of building height in Section 10-2.402). (c) Stories. No building shall exceed one story (see definition of story in Section 1O-2.4O2).
(d) Setbacks. (1) There shall be a minimum setback of twenty (20) feet from any property line abutting a street. (2) There shall be a minimum setback of five (5) feet from any property line not abutting a street.
(e) General regulations. See Article 3 of this chapter. (0 Parking regulations. See Article 5 of this chapter. (g) Sign regulations. See Article 6 of this chapter.
(h) Landscaping regulations. See Article 7 of this chapter. (i) Procedures. See Article 12 of this chapter.
Additionally, the Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance Project current Alternative 2: Hawthorne Boulevard may have parcels located in the l-18 zone. For that portion of the project site located on the l-1B zoned property, Metro should be aware that railroad uses are not an allowed/permitted use in this zone.
Entitlement Criteria at Planninq Commission
Redondo Beach Municipal Code S 10-2.2502 includes the requirements for review and criteria for Planning Commission Design Review, as follows:
'l 0-2.2502 Plannin g Commission Design Review.
(a) Purpose. Planning Commission Design Review is established to ensure compatibility, originality, variety, and innovation in the architecture, design, landscaping, and site planning of developments in the community.
The provisions of this section will serve to protect property values, prevent the blight and deterioration of neighborhoods, promote sound land use, encourage design excellence, and protect the overall health, safety, and welfare of the City. The Planning Commission shall review: (1) New construction, in all zones except for the W Waterfront and CC Catalina Corridor zones.
a. Any new commercial, industrial, mixed use or public
development of any size on a vacant site involving more than 10,000 square feet of land;
(b) Criteria. The following criteria shall be used in determining a project's consistency with the intent and purpose of this section: (1) User impact and needs. The design of the project shall consider the impact and the needs of the user in respect to circulation, parking, kaffic, utilities, public services, noise and odor, privacy, private and common open spaces, trash collection, security and crime deterrence, energy consumption, physical barriers, and other design concerns.(2) Relationship to physical features. The location of buildings and structures shall respect the natural tenain of the site and shall be functionally integrated with any natural features of the landscape to include the preservation of existing trees, where feasible. (3) Gonsistency of architectural style. The building or structure shall be harmonious and consistent within the proposed architectural style regarding roofing, materials, windows, doors, openings, textures, colors, and exterior treatment. (4) Balance and integration with the neighborhood. The overall design shall be integrated and compatible with the neighborhood and shall strive to be in harmony with the scale and bulk of surrounding properties.
(5) Building design. The design of buildings and
structures shall strive to provide innovation, variety, and creativity in the proposed design solution. All architectural elevations shall be designed to eliminate the appearance of flat fagades or boxlike construction:
a. The front fagade shall have vertical and horizontal
offsets to add architectural interest to the exterior of the building and where possible, bay windows and similar architectural projections shall be used. b. The roof planes of the building, as well as the building shape, shall be varied where feasible, and a visible and significant roof llne shall be used to soften the vertical mass.
c. Harmonious variations in the treatment or use of wall materials shall be integrated into the architectural design. (6) Signs, Signs and sign programs shall meet the criteria established in Sign Regulation Criteria, Section 10-2.1802. (7) Consistency with residential design guidelines. The project shall be consistent with the intent of residential design guidelines adopted by resolution of the City Council. (8) Conditions of approval. The conditions stated in the resolution or design considerations integrated into the project shall be deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Such conditions may include, but shall not be limited to:
Changes to the design of buildings and structures;
Additional setbacks, open spaces, and buffers;
Provision of fences and walls;
Street dedications and improvements, including service
roads and eys
The control of vehicular ingress, egress, and
circulation;f. Sign requirements or a sign program, consistent with the Sign Regulations Criteria in Section 10-2.1802;
g Provision of landscaping and the maintenance thereof; h. The regulation of noise, vibration, odor and the like; i. Requirements for off-street loading facilities; j. Removal of existing billboards on the site, subject to the findlngs required by Section 10-2.2006(bX7); k. Such other conditions as will make possible the development of the City in an orderly and efficient manner and in conformity with the intent and purposes set forth in this chapter and the General Plan.
4-24.301 Maximum permissable sound levels by land use categories.
The noise standards for the various categories of land use districts identified shall be the higher of either the presumed or actual measured ambient and shall apply to all such property within a designated category as follows:
Receiving
Land Use
District
Category
Time
Period
Presumed
Ambient
Level
(dBA)
10:00
p.m. to
7:00 a.m.
45 Residential
R-l-A, R-1,
R-2, P-D-R,
7:00 a.m
to'10:00
p.m.
50 a.
b
c.
d.
al
e.
Low Density
Receiving
Land Use
District
Category
Time
Period
Presumed
Ambient
Level
(dBA)
P-U-D
Overlay
Medium
Density
10:00
p.m. to
7:00 a.m
50 Residential
R-3, R4, P-DR, P-U.D
Overlay
7:00 a.m
to 10:00
p.m.
High Density 10:00
p.m. to
7:00 a.m.
55 Residential
R-5, R-6, PD-R, P-U-D
Overlay, C-l
7:00 a.m.
to 10:00
p.m.
60 Commercial
NSC,
10:00
p.m. to
7:00 a.m.
60 CSC, GC, PD-C7:00 a.m
to 10:00
p.m.
65 lndustrial PD-l10:00
p.m. to
7:00 a.m.
7:00 a.m.
to 10:00
p.m.
60 65
lndustrial P-l 10:00
p.m. to
7:00 a.m
7:00 a.m
to 10:00
p.m.
70 70
As indicated above, the presumed ambient levels in the Planned Development Residential (P-D-R) and the Planned Unit Development (P-U-D) Overlay land use districts are categorized so as to be consistent with the actual density of the development. The presumed ambient levels for the Planned Development (P-D) and the Civic Center (C-C) land use districts shall be consistent with those established for the lowest adjacent land use district.
55 (a) Correction for time characteristics. No person shall operate, or cause to be operated, any source of sound at any location within the City or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the noise level when measured on any other property to exceed:
(1) The noise standard of the receiving land use district for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour; or
(2) The noise standard of the receiving land use district plus five (5) dB for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour; or (3) The noise standard of the receiving land use district plus ten (10) dB for a cumulative period of more than five (5) minutes in any hour; or (4) The noise standard of the receiving land use district plus fifteen (15) dB for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or (5) The noise standard of the receiving land use district plus twenty (20) dB for any period of time.
(b) Levels exceeding the noise limit categories. lf the measured ambient level exceeds that permissible as set forth in subsections (1), (2), (3), and (4) of subsection (a) of this section, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be increased in five (5) dB increments as appropriate to encompass or reflect such ambient noise level. ln the event the ambient noise level exceeds the noise level set forth in subsection (5) of subsection (a) of this section, the maximum allowable noise level shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level.
(c) Correction for location of noise source. lf the measurement location is on a boundary between two (2) different land use district categories, the noise level limit applicable to the lower land use district category, plus five (5) dB shall apply. (d) Correction for ambient noise levels when alleged offending sources cannot be shut down. lf possible, the ambient noise shall be measured at the same location along the property line utilized in subsection (a) of this section with the alleged offending noise source inoperative. lf for any reason the alleged offending noise source cannot be shut down, then the ambient noise shall be estimated by performing a measurement in the same general area of the source, but at a sufficient distance such that the offending noise from the source is inaudible. lf the difference between the noise levels with the noise source operating and not operating, with the utilization of either of the abovedescribed methods of measurement, is six (6) dB or greater, then the noise measurement of the alleged source can be considered valid. (e) Correction for character of sound. ln the event the alleged offensive noise contains a steady audible tone, such as a whine, screech, or hum, or is a repetitive noise, such as hammering or riveting, the standard limits set forth in this section shall be reduced by five (5) dB. (S 1, Ord. 2183 c.s., eff. August 11, 1976) M"'t'l;Sr*
redondo BEACH
Bill Brand
Mayor
415 Diamond Street, P.0. BOX 270
Redondo Beach, California 9027 7 -027 0
www.redondo.org
tel 310 372-1171
ext.2260
fax 310 374-2039
Mr. Phillip A. Washington
Chief Executive Officer
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza
Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952
Dear Mr. Washington:
The Green Line extension to Torrance will bring much needed transportation infrastructure to our region. Each day thousands of commuters leave the South Bay and travel North for work or leisure, creating the congestion that consequently affects quality of life for all residing in the greater Los Angeles area.
On July 17,20L8, the Redondo Beach City Council received a report and voted unanimously supporting the submittal of this letter to your offices.
On behalf of the Redondo Beach City Council, we urge you and the Metro Board to proceed with a full project Environmental lmpact Report (ElR) studying Alternative 3 in an elevated position. This would address many of our residents' concerns and allow the line to traverse a popular commercial corridor.
ln the event the Metro Board chooses to study Alternatives L or 2, we would furthermore urge that the EIR address trenching in Redondo Beach, south of Grant Avenue, through the future RB transit center, under 182nd Street and along the existing Right of Way until it needs to ascend back up to the elevated track crossing Hawthorne/l90th Street. While this is not the preferred route for our residents, we believe these suggested mitigations would be most beneficial to their quality of life and future traffic patterns along 182nd Street. Lastly, the City Council opposed and did not support further consideration of Alternative 4.
I would be happy to discuss the concerns and suggestions with you, staff and the Board Members. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Qt"t
William C. Brand
July 18, 2018