Agenda packet, first session — Seal Beach City Council, October 27, 2025 (part 5 of 11)

As identified above, to reduce impacts to special-status wildlife and plant species, the City would be required to implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO-3. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 would protect special-status species and ensure that project design or avoidance mitigation would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would require preconstruction surveys to evaluate potential nesting bird habitat onsite for future development projects, which would protect protected birds and reduce impacts to less than significant.

Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce impacts to special-status species to a less than significant level.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the Project included a 10 mile search radius of the City which includes the ORCC Specific Plan Project site.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-48
Freshwater ponds are identified to be located within the ORCC Specific Plan Project site due to its existing uses as a golf course. Plant species documented or determined to have the potential to occur within the ORCC Specific Plan Project site include Horn’s milk vetch. Wildlife specifies documented or determined to have the potential to occur within the ORCC Specific Plan Project site include the American bumble bee, ferruginous hawk, and western tidal-flat tiger beetle. Additionally, as the area is developed with existing golf course uses, the trees located within the ORCC Specific Plan Project site could provide suitable habitat for bird species. As the search radius for the Biological Resources Assessment included a 10 mile radius of the City, the ORCC Specific Plan Project site was included within the search radius for special-status plant and wildlife species. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM BIO-1: Documentation of Plant and Wildlife Species. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, all projects must provide documentation that the site does not include specialstatus or protected plant and wildlife species. If the species are found on the site, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to any ground disturbance activities. The documentation shall ensure that botanical surveys are conducted during the appropriate blooming period and any nesting bird surveys are conducted during the appropriate avian nesting season.

If no special-status species are found on the project site, no additional action is necessary and the project can continue. If special-status species are found, no ground disturbance can occur and the project must either avoid the special-status species, or develop a mitigation plan approved by the City in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. If offsite replacement is the only mitigation option available, the performance criteria shall be at a ratio specified by the resource agency such as the Army Corps of Engineers or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

MM BIO-2: Mitigation Plan. Prior to the issuance of the first action and/or permit which would allow for site disturbance (e.g., grading permit), a detailed mitigation plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist for approval by the City, the USFWS, and CDFW which shall include:
(1) the responsibilities and qualifications of personnel to implement and supervise the plan; (2) site selection; (3) site preparation and planting implementation; (4) a schedule; (5) maintenance plan/guidelines; (6) a monitoring plan; and (7) long-term preservation requirements.

MM BIO-3: Preconstruction Surveys. Prior to the issuance of the first action and/or permit which would allow for site disturbance (e.g., grading permit) for future development projects facilitated by the Project, project applicants shall complete a preconstruction survey (or possibly multiple surveys) by a qualified biologist prior to construction activities to identify any active nesting locations within the project site. If the biologist does not find any active nests within the project site, the construction work shall be allowed to proceed. If the II

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-49
biologist finds an active nest within the project site and determines that the nest may be impacted, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest, and the size of the buffer zone shall depend on the affected species and the type of construction activity. Any active nests observed during the survey shall be mapped on an aerial photograph. Only construction activities (if any) that have been approved by a biological monitor shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. The biologist shall serve as a construction monitor when construction activities take place near active areas to ensure no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. Results of the preconstruction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the City.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

Riparian Habitat or Natural Communities
Impact BIO-2 The Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Impact Analysis
Sensitive natural communities are defined by CDFW (2018) as, “...communities that are of limited distribution statewide or within a county or region and are often vulnerable to environmental effects of projects.” All vegetation is ranked with an “S” state rarity rank; however, only those that are of special concern (S1-S3 rank) are evaluated under CEQA. Based on database and aerial photography review the Project area does not contain any sensitive natural communities.

The CNDDB records search indicated that there are four sensitive vegetation communities within a 10- mile radius of the Project area: Southern Coastal Salt Marsh, Southern Dune Scrub, Southern Foredunes, and Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest. The Southern Dune Scrub has a state rank of S1/Critically imperiled, at very high risk of extirpation in the jurisdiction due to very restricted range, very few populations or occurrences, very steep declines, severe threats, or other factors. The Southern Coastal Salt Marsh and Southern Foredunes has a state rank of S2/Imperiled, at high risk of extirpation in the jurisdiction due to restricted range, few populations or occurrences, steep declines, severe threats, or other factors. The Southern Cottonwood Riparian Forest has a state rank of S3/Vulnerable, at moderate risk of extirpation in the jurisdiction due to a fairly restricted range, relatively few populations or occurrences, recent and widespread declines, threats, or other factors.

As identified in Figures 4-1 and 4-2 of the Biological Resources Technical Report, though sensitive communities are identified within a 10-mile radius of the Project area, there are no sensitive natural communities located within any of the Housing Opportunity Sites or within the Main Street Program area.

Additionally, as identified in the Biological Resources Technical Report, the entirety of Housing Opportunity Sites 1-7 and the Main Street Program area are developed. Housing Opportunity Site 8 is the only identified site that has undeveloped areas and the primary land cover at the Housing Opportunity II

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-50
Site 8 is ruderal herbaceous with interspersed trees and disturbed/developed including a paved parking area and handball court. Though Housing Opportunity Site 8 provides some undeveloped areas, the site does not include any sensitive natural communities. Additionally, though all Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program area contain trees that could be used as potential nesting habitat by bird species protected under the MBTA, the potential nesting habitat for birds do not constitute a sensitive natural community. Therefore, future development projects located within the any Housing Opportunity Sites or within the Main Street Program area are not anticipated to result in impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. Therefore, there would be no impact.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
No Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
No Impact.

Protected Wetlands
Impact BIO-3 The Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

Impact Analysis
A formal delineation of jurisdictional wetlands, other “waters of the U.S.,” Waters of the State, and CDFW jurisdictional waters was not conducted. However, the NWI has mapped a variety of wetland and water resources within and adjacent to the Project area (refer to the BRTR in Appendix C for a map of these resources). These features include Estuarine and Marine Deepwater, Estuarine and Marine Wetland, Freshwater Emergent Wetland, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland, Freshwater Pond, and Riverine (USFWS 2024b).

The San Gabriel River flows west of the Project area and the Pacific Ocean is south of the Project area.

The Los Alamitos Channel, a concrete lined riverine feature, flows directly to the west of Housing II

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-51
Opportunity Site 2 - Leisure World. The remaining wetlands and waters features are more than 100 feet from each Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program area. The Los Alamitos Channel is a known WOTUS because it is a tributary to the San Gabriel River. The San Gabriel River is also a known WOTUS. Additionally, these areas would qualify as Waters of the State and CDFW jurisdictional waters.

As the Los Alamitos Channel is located offsite of Housing Opportunity Site 2 and is separated from the site by a paved EVA access lane, future development of Housing Opportunity Site 2 is not anticipated to result in impacts to the Los Alamitos Channel. Additionally, the propensity of the Los Alamitos Channel to support special-status species and include wildlife habitat is limited as the Los Alamitos Channel is a concrete lined channel. As identified in the Biological Resources Technical Report, none of the Housing Opportunity Sites or the Main Street Program area contain any wetlands. Therefore, future development projects located within the Housing Opportunity Sites or the Main Street Program area would not result in adverse effects to protected wetlands and impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
No Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
No Impact.

Migratory Wildlife Corridors
Impact BIO-4 The Project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

Impact Analysis
Wildlife Movement and Migratory Corridors
Studies suggest that habitat fragmentation and isolation of natural areas ultimately results in the loss of native species within those communities (Soulé et al., 1988). The ability for wildlife to move freely among populations is important to long-term genetic variation and demography. Fragmentation and isolation of natural habitat may cause loss of native species diversity in fragmented habitats. In the short term, wildlife II

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-52
movement may also be important to an animal’s ability to occupy home ranges, if a species range extends across a potential movement barrier. These considerations are especially important for rare, threatened, or endangered species, and wide-ranging species such as large mammals, which exist in low population densities.

As identified in the Biological Resources Technical Report, the Project area includes disturbed/developed and ruderal herbaceous landcover types. These are comprised of shopping centers and paved parking lots, fenced parks, and disturbed open space. The surrounding area is characterized by development, roadways, undeveloped/disturbed open space, agriculture, and the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge to the southeast of the Project area. Most of the landcover types pose significant barriers to terrestrial wildlife movement including buildings, fences, and multi-lane roadways. Within the Project area, the level of urban development and the presence of physical barriers surrounding the Project area would significantly constrain the passage of most large terrestrial wildlife known to occur in the region. Based on the location of the sites, the sites do not function as a wildlife movement corridor. Therefore, the Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program area do not occur within any known wildlife movement corridor or habitat linkage.

There are no known bird or bat migratory corridors that would be directly impeded by the Project. Large concentrations of migrants are not known to utilize any specific portion of the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program area and Project activities are not expected to preclude use of the area. Migrating birds would have access to native habitat communities within adjacent areas.

Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to interfere with the movement of wildlife species or with a migratory wildlife corridor and would not impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites and there would be no impact.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
No Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation would be required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
No Impact.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-53
Habitat Conservation Plan
Impact BIO-5 The Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Impact Analysis
The Orange County General Plan, City of Seal Beach General Plan, and OCTA/California Department of Transportation NCCP/HCP were all reviewed and the Project would not conflict with any of these plans or other City of Seal Beach ordinances, therefore there would be no impact.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
No Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
No Impact.

3.3.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative biological resources impacts includes the immediate project vicinity and the region. This geographic scope is appropriate for biological resources because it encompasses the mosaic of representative land cover and habitat types (and associated biological resources) affected by the Project.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-54
Table 3.3-5: Cumulative Projects Related to Biological Resources # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
Preparation of
EIR 167
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

Pacific Coast
Hwy, City of
Long Beach
(7242011013)
Two, 5-story
buildings with a
total of 563,529
square feet
containing 600
residential units
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
600
II

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-55
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
and 4,000
square-feet of
ground-level
restaurant space
6 Carmel Partners
6615 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7237020050)
Construction of
a six-story
mixed-use
project
consisting of
390 residential
dwelling units
and 5,351
square feet of
commercial/retai
l space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
380
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
8 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
6695 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020040);
6411 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020051);
No address
(7237020904)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
940
9 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
1000 N
Studebaker Rd
(7238015021)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
115
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
II

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-56
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
future residential
development
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of
Westminster)
122
Future developments facilitated by the Project in conjunction with cumulative development in the City and nearby areas, would increase development in ruderal and developed/disturbed areas and could result in impacts to biological resources. The Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program area provide limited value as wildlife corridors due to their proximity to previous developments; however, some sites are in close proximity to natural areas, which could function as a wildlife corridor and could be impacted by future development. Therefore, potential biological impacts would require evaluation on a case-by-case basis at the project level when future development is proposed. Though the City and majority of the surrounding areas are highly urbanized and disturbed, some cumulative developments identified in the table above may be located on sites that are less disturbed and could have the potential to provide habitat for wildlife. Unless exempt, each cumulative project would require separate discretionary permit approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential biological resource impacts and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate.

Consequently, the Project would not result in significant environmental impacts from the violation of biological resource requirements, the taking of special-status plants or wildlife, or degradation of wildlife corridors. Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation and compliance with regulatory requirements, the Project’s contribution to cumulatively considerable impacts on biological resources would be less than significant.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-57

3.3.5 References
Aubry, K. B., L. L. C. Jones, and P. A. Hall. 1988. Use of woody debris by plethodontid salamanders in Douglas-fir in Washington. Pages 32-37 in R. C. Szabo, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, technical coordinators. Management of amphibians, reptiles and small mammals in North America. General technical report RM-166. U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Audubon. 2020. The Pacific Flyaway. http://www.audubon.org/pacific-flyway. Accessed January 2024.

Beier, P. 1993. Determining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for cougars. Conservation Biology, 7: 94-108.

Beier, P. and S. Loe. 1992. A checklist for evaluating impacts to wildlife movement corridors. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20: 434-440.

Bulger, J., N. Scott, and R. Seymour. 2002. Terrestrial activity and conservation of adult California redlegged frogs (Rana aurora draytonii) in coastal forests and grasslands. Biol. Conservation 15:
234-245.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2024a. RAREFIND database. January 2024 Electronic database managed by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Plants and Animals, Species of Special Concern, Rare Plants, Sensitive Natural Communities. Wildlife Data and Habitat Analysis Branch, California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA. _____. 2018. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. August. _____. 2009. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. Sacramento, California.

City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed January 2024.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024. Inventory of rare and endangered plants (online). California Native Plant Society. Sacramento. http://www.cnps.org/inventory. Accessed January 2024.

County of Orange. 2005. County of Orange General Plan.
https://www.ocgov.com/gov/pw/cd/planning/generalplan2005.asp. Accessed January 2024.

Cowardin, L. M., Carter, V., Golet, F., LaRoe, E. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Hunt, L.E. 1993. Relocation and movements of southwestern pond turtles (Clemmys marmorata pallida), upper Santa Ynez River, Santa Barbara County, California. Prep. for the City of Santa Barbara and U.S. Forest Service. 135 pp.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-58
Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority (LCWA). 2021. The Los Cerritos Wetlands Habitat Restoration Plan, May 26, 2021. https://intoloscerritoswetlands.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/LCW-Restoration-PlanFinal-5_26_21.pdf. Accessed March 2025.

Maser, C. and J.M. Trappe, tech eds. 1984. The seen and unseen world of the fallen tree. Gen. Tech.

Rep. PNW-164. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 56 p.

Meffe, G.K. and C.R. Carroll. 1997. Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates, New York, NY.

Newmark, W. 1995. Extinction of mammal populations in western North American national parks.

Conservation Biology, 9: 512-526.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2024. Green Turtle. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/green-turtle. Accessed January 2024.

Noss, R., P. Beier, and W. Shaw. n.d. Evaluation of the Coal Canyon biological corridor, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, California. Unpub. ms. 19 pp Noss, R., H.

Quigley, M. Hornocker, T. Merrill, and P. Paquet. 1996. Conservation biology and carnivore conservation in the Rocky Mountains. Conservation Biology 10:949-963.

Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 2009. Orange County Transportation Authority/ California Department of Transportation Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP).
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=16025&inline. Accessed January 2024.

Okin et al., 2001. Distribution of vegetation in wind-dominated landscapes: Implications for wind erosion modeling and landscape processes.

Ramirez, R. 2003a. Arroyo toad (Bufo californicus) radio telemetry study, San Juan Creek, Orange County, California. Prep. for Rancho Mission Viejo LLC, San Juan Capistrano, CA. October. 64 pp.
_____. 2003b. Arroyo toad (Bufo californicus) hydrogeomorphic habitat baseline analysis/radio telemetry study, Rancho Las Flores, San Bernardino County, CA. November. 110 pp. _____. 2002. Arroyo toad (Bufo californicus) radio telemetry and pitfall trapping studies, Little Horsethief Canyon, Summit Valley Ranch, San Bernardino County, California. Prep. for CALTRANS, Dept. of Transportation, San Bernardino, CA. April. 92 pp.

Rathbun, G.N. Siepel, and D. Holland. 1992. Nesting behavior and movements of western pond turtles (Clemmys marmorata). Southwestern Naturalist 37(3):319-324.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf and J.M. Evens. 2009. Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition.

California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Biological Resources

3.3-59
Sharifi et al., 1997. Surface Dust Impacts on Gas Exchange in Mojave Desert Shrubs. Journal of Applied Ecology 34(4): 837-846.

Simberloff, D., J.A. Farr, J. Cox and D.W. Mehlman. 1992. Movement corridors: Conservation bargains or poor investments? Conservation Biology 6(4): 493-504.

Soulé et al., 1988. Reconstructed Dynamics of Rapid Extinctions of Chaparral-Requiring Birds in Urban Habitat Islands. Conservation Biology 2(1).

Trenham, P. 2002. Herpetologist, USGS. Conversation regarding dispersal movements of radio-tagged California newts (Taricha torosa) in Monterey County, California. June.

United States Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game (USACE and CDFG). 2010. Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan and Spineflower Conservation Plan Joint Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000011025.

USACE and USEPA. 2008. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. USACE and USEPA Memorandum. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-
02/documents/cwa_jurisdiction_following_rapanos120208.pdf. Accessed October 2024.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024a. Information for Planning and Consulting (IPaC). IPaC:

Home. https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2024b. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) GIS data. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/datadownload.html. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2024c. Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. https://www.fws.gov/refuge/seal-beach. Accessed January 2024.

3.4-1

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
This section describes impacts on cultural resources that would result from implementation of the Project.

Included is a summary of applicable policies and regulations related to cultural resources and review of existing conditions. It also describes impacts on cultural resources that would result from implementation of the Project, based on the Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by Stantec Consulting Services in April 2025 (Appendix D).

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as identified in Section 15064.5; however, with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, impacts would be less than significant.

The Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5; however, with implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL2 and CUL-3, impacts would be less than significant.

The ORCC Specific Plan area is located directly north of the Naval Weapons Station across I-405 (a historic resource) and directly south of the Los Alamitos JFTB (a potential historic resource).

The development of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would change the visual character of the area adjacent to the Naval Weapons Station and Los Alamitos JFTB.

Additionally, development of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan would require excavation and earthmoving activities during construction which could have the potential to unearth buried archaeological deposits during development. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

3.4.1 Environmental Setting
Precontact Archaeology
Researchers divided the regional precontact chronology into four-stages describing changing artifact assemblages and evolving ecological adaptations. The principal regional chronology divides the precontact era by major cultural changes within general time periods. Wallace defined four cultural horizons, or periods, for Southern California. These include the Early Period, the Millingstone Period, the Intermediate Period, and the Late Prehistoric Period (Stantec 2024). These periods are summarized below.

The Early Period covers the period between approximately 10,000 and approximately 5500 BC, although recent data from the Farpoint Site (CA-LAN-451) in Malibu indicates “Clovis Culture” occupation dating well before 10,000 years ago. Artifacts and cultural activities from Clovis and Early Period sites represent a predominantly hunting culture. Although Clovis and Early Period sites in Southern California are rare, several traits are characteristic of sites occupied during this period. This list includes locations on the IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-2
shorelines of ancient lakes and marshes. In coastal areas, such sites are located along stream channels or near estuaries. Although the bow and arrow do not exist, the atlatl and dart have been identified in assemblages from this period. An array of specialized cobble, core, flake, and blade implements are also known. In certain areas, the presence of extremely large, often fluted bifaces marks the Clovis and Early Period.

The Early Period is followed in time by the Millingstone Period. Sites from the Millingstone Period (post5500 BC) typically contain ground stone artifacts such as manos, metates, and cogged stones, as well as soapstone objects. Wallace suggests that Millingstone Period cultures were generally hunter-gatherers who spent much time collecting and processing plants. When bifaces are found on Millingstone Period sites, they are commonly large and associated with the use of the atlatl.

Drover et al. (1983) suggest that early Millingstone Period sites represent refuse from mobile hunters and gatherers who used coastal resources during the winter and inland resources throughout the remainder of the year (Stantec 2024). Subsistence strategies included intensive hunting of small and large land mammals, sea mammals, and birds, as well as near-shore fishing and shellfish collecting. Elsewhere, small mammals were hunted and seeds were collected, as documented by the many millingstones found at Millingstone Period sites throughout the Southern California region.

By 3000 BC, coastal populations began greater reliance on marine resources. The remains of near-shore and deep-sea fish appear more often as refuse in middens. Much further inland, populations centered around pluvial lakes created by runoff from melting glaciers. In coastal areas, there was an increased use of the mortar and pestle, which marked a technological change in the manner seeds were processed.

Instead of using just mano and metate, smaller seeds could be better contained in the basket-like mortar or hopper mortar (a basket affixed with asphaltum to a mortar base), and it is possible that the mortar and pestle indicate a diversification in seed collecting strategy. The use of the mortar and pestle marks Wallace’s Intermediate Period. Additional artifacts found predominantly within the Intermediate Period include discoidals and crescentics (crescentically shaped flaked-stone artifacts).

The Late Prehistoric Period begins at approximately AD 500. During this period, artifact changes and new cultural practices occur. Smaller projectile points, representing bow-and-arrow hunting, appear on Late Period sites. This period is also marked by steatite effigies and by cremation as an interment practice.

These artifacts and practices have been linked to a proposed Shoshonean (Takic) immigration from the Great Basin that ended at the coast, although there is a difference of opinion among experts regarding the timing of this proposed Takic migration. By AD 1000, smoking pipes and ceramic pottery occur, although ceramic smoking pipes may occur somewhat earlier, within the later portion of the Intermediate Period. Dating of sites to the Late Period also depends on the occurrence of other items such as Salton Sea (Obsidian Buttes) obsidian. Sites within the region occasionally contain the vitreous lithic (glassy stone) called Grimes Canyon fused shale, which originates from Ventura County (Stantec 2024).

History of Seal Beach
The coastal area that officially became Seal Beach in 1915 was known as Anaheim Landing during the mid- to late-nineteenth century. After the gold rush, the Anaheim Landing Company established Anaheim Landing in 1857 in a small bay at the mouth of Anaheim Creek. The landing served as a port for the IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-3
Santa Ana Valley. Anaheim Landing’s decline began in 1875 when the railroad arrived in Anaheim and provided a more efficient means to ship goods from the coast to inland settlements. Around this time, the beaches around Anaheim Landing became a popular destination for tourists seeking respite from hot summer days in the valley, and tent city, with 25 square foot lots, grew near the former Anaheim Landing site. In 1904, J.C. Ord, a Civil War veteran, hired a 30–mule team to bring his small general store building from Los Alamitos to Bay City, where he set it down at the southwest corner of what is now known as Main Street and Electric Avenue.

In 1903, after successfully developing Huntington Beach, Phillip A. Stanton used his capital to form the Bayside Land Company, and with J.C. Ord and Isaac Lothian, developed Bay City just north of the former Anaheim Landing site. Stanton was the City’s major champion and heavily promoted Bay City.

Bay City was officially incorporated on October 25, 1915, with the new name of Seal Beach. This name was derived from the many seals that lazed on the City’s beach, and the name change was necessary as there was already an incorporated community named Bay City. J.C. Ord was one of five trustees voted into office in October 1915, the second Mayor, Postmaster, and the first Judge. His store on Main Street was the Post Office and Court House, and the Jail House when it was necessary. Seal Beach also became home to the Joy Zone at the base of the pier, with a dance hall, cafe, bath house, and large wooden roller coaster, attracting a large volume of tourists and becoming known for being a little on the wild side.

Seal Beach grew as a residential community during the 1920s. Between 1920 and 1930, the City’s population swelled from 669 to 1,156, and by 1931, various businesses lined Main Street, and scattered dwellings dotted the remaining streets. Businesses on Main Street included restaurants, a billiard hall, beauty shops, a tailor, the City post office, grocers, drug stores, a hotel, and an automotive repair store.

During the 1930s, the development of Seal Beach stalled. The Great Depression and closure of the Joy Zone slowed all activity, and the 1933 Long Beach earthquake also impacted the community. The 6.4 magnitude quake, the largest known earthquake to occur in the Los Angeles region at that time, struck on the evening of March 10th and damaged or destroyed many of the buildings in Seal Beach. Collectively, the Depression, the 1933 earthquake, and the closure of offshore gambling establishments held the City’s development at bay, though it retained its sin city characterization for a while longer.

World War II began a period of significant physical and social change in Seal Beach. In 1944, the Navy purchased most of the land around Anaheim Landing to construct the United States Navy's Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach for loading, unloading, and storing of ammunition for the Pacific Fleet.

Today, Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach is the Navy’s primary West Coast ordnance storage, loading, and maintenance installation. Located entirely within Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach is the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge, which was established in 1972 and protects habitat for threatened and endangered species.

The influx of new residents during the war, chiefly from the Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach workforce, and a series of residential and commercial developments in the post-World War II period, began the transformation of Seal Beach into a middle-class seaside community, with a 129 percent IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-4
increase in Seal Beach’s population between 1940 and 1950. This growing population sought to dispel the City’s long-held ill reputation and create a more family-oriented community.

A series of residential and commercial developments in the post-World War II period began the transformation of Seal Beach from a city known as “wild” to a middle-class seaside community. During the 1960s and 1970s, the City expanded from Old Town historic core to include Leisure World Seal Beach and the Marina Hill (also known as the Hill), College Park West, and College Park East subdivisions.

Ross Cortese, a successful developer in Downey and Anaheim, established Leisure World Seal Beach, which would come to represent a third of Seal Beach’s population. In 1962, the first residents of Leisure World Seal Beach moved in, and by 1964, all original 6,608 planned units had been purchased (Stantec 2024).

During the 1960s and 1970s, as the previously undeveloped portions of Seal Beach were platted and neighborhoods emerged, Old Town remained static in comparison. Storefronts were often boarded, and divey bars were still clustered near the pier. The western portion of Old Town, adjacent to the San Gabriel River, was mostly industrial in the 1960s and included a sewage disposal plant and oil separating facility.

However, Old Town and its immediately adjacent neighborhood, the Hill, were not void of development. In 1966, the Seal Beach Shopping Center was constructed across the Pacific Coast Highway from Main Street in the Hill neighborhood.

As Seal Beach approached the twenty-first century, the City had become a densely developed suburban community, outside of Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach, which continued to occupy the majority of the City, and provided a natural isolation from neighboring Huntington Beach and Westminster. Main Street outlived its racy reputation, and came to represent itself as the charming hub of an historic beach community, still with a hardware store, nursery, and post office, along with local restaurants, service businesses, and shops, while major property owner, The Bixby Ranch Company, sold its large landholdings in the northern end of town for development.

3.4.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, authorized the creation of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The NRHP is "an authoritative guide to be used by federal, state, and local governments, private groups, and citizens to identify the nation's cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment (Title 36 CFR Part

60.2).” For a property to be considered eligible for the NRHP, it must typically be at least 50 years old and meet one or more of four criteria for evaluation set forth in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60.4:

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and:

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-5
A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master or that possess high artistic values or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (Title 36 CFR Part 60.4).

A property must also be significant within a historic context under one or more of the criteria listed above. “National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation” states that the significance of a historic property can be judged only when it is evaluated within its historic context.

Historic contexts are “those patterns, themes, or trends in history by which a specific...property or site is understood and its meaning...is made clear (Title 36 CFR Part 60.4).” A historic property must therefore represent an important aspect of history or prehistory.

In addition to possessing significance, a property must possess integrity, defined by seven aspects:

Location: the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event took place.

Design: the composition of elements that constitute the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.

Setting: the physical environment of a historic property that illustrates the character of the place.

Materials: the physical elements combined in a particular pattern or configuration.

Workmanship: the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period of history.

Feeling: the quality that a historic property has in evoking the aesthetic or historic sense of a past period of time.

Association: the direct link between a property and the event or person for which the property is significant (Andrus and Shrimpton undated).

State
California Environmental Quality Act
The state CEQA Guidelines set the standard for determining whether a proposed project will result in a “substantial adverse change” in the significance of historical resources in Title 14 CCR Section 15064.5(b), which states:

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-6
“A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment (Title 14 CCR Section 15064.5[b]).”
Title 14 CCR Section 15064.5(b)(1) further clarifies “substantial adverse change” as:
“Substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired (Title 14 CCR Section 15064.5[b][1]).”
Title 14 CCR Section 15064.5(b)(2) in turn explains that a historical resource is “materially impaired” when a project:
“Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA (Title 14 CCR Section 15064.5[b][2]).”
As a result, the test for determining if a proposed project will have a significant impact on an identified historical resource is whether the project will alter the physical integrity of the historical resource in an adverse manner such that it would no longer be eligible for the NRHP, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or other landmark programs.

If an impact on a historical or archaeological resource is significant, CEQA requires feasible measures to minimize the impact (14 CCR Section 15126.4 (a)(1)). Mitigation of significant impacts must lessen or eliminate the physical impact that the project would have on the resource. CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation be undertaken even if it does not mitigate impacts to less-than-significant levels (14 CCR Section 15126.4(a)(1)).

California Register of Historical Resources
The CRHR was established in 1992 by Assembly Bill 2881. It is an authoritative guide used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse impacts (Andrus and Shrimpton undated). The criteria for eligibility of listing in the CRHR are based upon the NRHP criteria, and are identified as 1‒4 instead of A‒D. To be eligible for the CRHR, a property generally must be at least 50 years of age and must possess significance at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of these four criteria:

1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or

2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-7

3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important in the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

Like the NRHP, properties eligible for the CRHR may include buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts. The enabling legislation for the CRHR is less rigorous than the NRHP with regard to the issue of integrity, yet the expectation is that eligible properties should retain enough of their historic-period character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance (California OHP undated).

Evaluations for the CRHR are based upon the evaluation instructions and classification system prescribed by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) in its “Instructions for Recording Historical Resources,” which include Status Codes to classify potential historical resources. These Status Codes are used statewide in the preparation of historical resource surveys and evaluation reports.

The CRHR may include properties identified during historic resource surveys. However, properties included must be based on surveys that meet these criteria:

1. The survey has been or will be included in the State Historic Resources Inventory;

2. The survey and the survey documentation were prepared in accordance with office (OHP) procedures and requirements;

3. The resource is evaluated and determined by the office (OHP) to have a significance rating of Category 1 to 5 on a DPR Form 523; and

4. If the survey is five or more years old at the time of its nomination for inclusion in the CRHR, the survey is updated to identify historical resources that have become eligible or ineligible due to changed circumstances or further documentation and those that have been demolished or altered in a manner that substantially diminishes the significance of the resource (PRC Section 5024.1).

California Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code (HSC) states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroner’s authority. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours of this identification.

Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code states that the NAHC, upon notification of the discovery of Native American human remains pursuant to HSC Section 7050.5, shall immediately notify those persons (i.e., the Most Likely Descendent or “MLD”) it believes to be descended from the IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-8
deceased. With permission of the landowner or a designated representative, the MLD may inspect the remains and any associated cultural materials and make recommendations for treatment or disposition of the remains and associated grave goods. The MLD shall provide recommendations or preferences for treatment of the remains and associated cultural materials within 48 hours of being granted access to the site.

Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Seal Beach. The General Plan contains the current Housing Element Update, which was adopted in 2022 and revised in 2024. The various elements within the General Plan include goals and policies for the physical development of the City. The City’s General Plan goals and policies applicable to cultural resources are presented below:

Cultural Resources Element
Goal 1: Preserve and protect historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources. • Policy 1: Balance the benefits of development with the project’s potential impacts to existing cultural resources.
• Policy 2: Identify, designate, and protect sites and buildings of historical importance. • Policy 5: Assess development proposals for potential impacts to significant archaeological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Require a study conducted by a professional archaeologist for all development proposals located in areas known to be sensitive for cultural resources.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
The City’s Residential Conservation Overlay District Ordinance (Ordinance No. 1598) defines locally significant historic structures as “those residential structures constructed prior to 1925” (Title 11 Part III Chapter 11.3.05.005). The Ordinance states:
“These locally-significant historic structures represent the city’s unique historical, social and cultural foundations and should be preserved as living parts of community life and development in order to build a greater understanding of the city’s past and give future generations the opportunity to appreciate, understand and enjoy the city’s remaining historic heritage (Title 11 Part III Chapter 11.3.05.005).”
Unlike the NRHP and CRHR, the City’s Residential Conservation Overlay District Ordinance has no criteria for designating properties as locally-significant historic structures and makes no mention of concepts such as physical integrity or period of significance.

3.4-9

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources
The Seal Beach Historic Resources Foundation currently acts as a hub and repository for historic photographs and stories to preserve and celebrate the history of Seal Beach.

3.4.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant cultural resources impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The following impact analysis is based on the Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the Project by Stantec in April 2025 (Appendix D). The Cultural Resources Assessment included a records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), literature review, and review of California Building Environment Resource Directory (BERD). The records search was completed in accordance with the CEQA guidelines.

Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions were analyzed and evaluated to determine whether the Project’s cultural resources impacts are significant.

Would the Project:
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:
• Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-10
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Historical Resources
Impact CUL-1 The Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as identified in Section 15064.5.

Impact Analysis
The threshold for determining significant impacts to historical resources in the CEQA Guidelines is whether the Project would cause a substantial adverse change, which is defined as demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate vicinity such that the historical resource is materially impaired. A historical resource would be materially impaired if a Project alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that convey its significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, and/or local register (14 CCR Section 15064.5[b][2]).

CEQA defines historical resources as (1) resources eligible for or listed in the CRHR and/or NRHP; (2) resources listed in a local register; or (3) resources identified as historically significant in a historic resources survey. Historical resources are also typically at least 50 years old because of NPS and OHP minimum-age requirements for NRHP and CRHR eligibility. Therefore, buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that meet this age threshold and have not been previously evaluated generally have the potential to be identified as historical resources unless a detailed evaluation is prepared demonstrating that it is not eligible for national, state, and/or local listing. For the purpose of evaluating a resource’s eligibility as a historical resource, a minimum-age threshold of 45 years is commonly recommended to account for the delay between resource identification and a CEQA lead agency’s approval of a project.

Stantec consulted the BERD to determine if the Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program contains any resources listed in or determined eligible for the NRHP or CRHR, designated as California Registered Historical Landmarks or California Points of Historical Interest, or evaluated in historic resource surveys and other planning activities. One resource listed in the BERD is within the Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program and two resources are immediately adjacent. Of the three resources previously recorded in BERD, the Naval Weapons Station was previously determined eligible for the NRHP and is a historical resource as defined by CEQA.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-11
Table 3.4-1: Previously Recorded BERD Resources
Name Address OHP Status Code(s)
Within Housing
Opportunity Site/Main
Street Program?
Seal Beach Red Car Electric Avenue 7P No—adjacent
Naval Weapons Station 800 Seal Beach Blvd 2S2 No—adjacent Seal Beach Plaza 13962 Seal Beach Blvd 6Y Yes
Notes:
2S2 – Individually determined eligible for the NRHP by consensus throughout Section 106 process. Listed in the CRHR. 5S1 – Individually listed or designated locally.
6Y – Determined ineligible for the NRHP by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CRHR or local listing.

Appears individually eligible for the NRHP through survey evaluation. 7P – State Point of Historical Interest that does not meet the CRHR criteria.

The City does not have an identified Historic District or an inventory of historical resources or landmarks located within the City. However, the City has identified a few resources within the City that are considered by the City to be locally historic resources or community landmarks. Stantec consulted with the City of Seal Beach to determine if the Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program contain any locally designated resources. One resource within the Main Street Program is designated as a City historic resource, the Bay Theater, under Resolution No. 6685. The Bay Theater is a historical resource as defined by CEQA and has an OHP status code of 5S1 which is defined above in Table 3.4-1. This is a City identified landmark that has not met the qualifications for listing in federal, state, or local historic resources inventories. One historical resource listed in the CRHR, the Naval Weapons Station, is located adjacent to Housing Opportunity Sites 1, 3, and 6. In addition, previously unidentified resources 45 years old or older have the potential to be historical resources as defined by CEQA due to their age. Sixteen structures are potentially 45 years old or older on Housing Opportunity Sites 1–2, 4, and 6–8. An unknown number of structures within the Main Street Program area are 45 years old or older.

Additionally, though not listed in or eligible to be listed in any historical resources inventory, Los Alamitos JFTB is an area that provides historical significance to the City and may be determined to be a historical resource or landmark of importance by the City. Housing Opportunity Sites 4 and 5 are located within close proximity to Los Alamitos JFTB.

The Project would have no direct impact on historical resources. The Project involves the establishment of a new zoning designation and rezoning of sites within the eight Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program area to plan for potential future housing developments within the City. The Project’s actions would not directly cause a substantial adverse change to historical resources due to demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration resulting in a loss of integrity.

The Project would potentially have indirect impacts on historical resources as it may facilitate future development activities that would directly or indirectly cause a substantial adverse change to historical resources. Two identified historical resources are within or adjacent to the Project area, as well as an unknown number of previously unevaluated resources 45 years old or older that have the potential to be historical resources. It is possible that future development activities may demolish or significantly alter IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-12
these known and unknown historical resources or introduce a new visual element that alters a resource’s setting. As such, indirect impacts to historical resources would be potentially significant.

The implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 discussed below would reduce impacts to historical resources. This would be accomplished by requiring a process for the identification of historical resources and the analysis of potential impacts on historical resources resulting from future development activities.

Therefore, with the incorporation of the mitigation measure, the Project impacts would be less than significant.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The ORCC Specific Plan Project area is located directly south of the Los Alamitos JFTB and directly north of the Naval Weapons Station across I-405. The Naval Weapons Station is a historical resource as defined by CEQA; however, the Los Alamitos JFTB is not listed in or eligible to be listed in any historical resources inventory. As Los Alamitos JFTB is an area that provides historical significance to the City, it may be determined to be a historical resource or landmark of importance by the City. The development of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would change the visual character of the area adjacent to the Naval Weapons Station and Los Alamitos JFTB. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1: Development Review Process for Historical Resources. Prior to approval of discretionary projects at any of the eight Housing Opportunity Sites or within the Main Street Program area, City staff shall determine whether the project applicant should conduct further study to assess the project’s potential impacts on historical resources.

Further study is required if the project is located on the same parcel or within 100 feet of a known historical resource. Further study is also required if the project is located on the same parcel as a building, structure, or object 45 years old or older from the date the discretionary permit application was filed. If further study is necessary, the City shall require the project applicant to retain a qualified architectural historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in architectural history.

The qualified consultant shall prepare a Historical Resource Evaluation Report (HRER).

The HRER should involve a California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) and California Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) records search and preparation of a historic context. If a building, structure, or object on the parcel is 45 years old or older and has not been previously identified as a historical resource, the consultant should prepare an evaluation for NRHP, CRHR, and local landmark eligibility per NPS, OHP, and City guidelines. All evaluated resources should be documented on Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 Forms. The qualified consultant should IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-13
analyze potential project impacts and provide recommendations for avoiding or otherwise mitigating potentially significant impacts to historical resources, which shall be enforced as conditions of approval for the project.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

Archaeological Resources
Impact CUL-2 The Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.

Impact Analysis
CEQA requires a lead agency to determine if an archaeological cultural resource meets the definition of a historical resource, a unique archaeological resource, or neither (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)).

Prior to considering potential impacts, the lead agency must determine whether an archaeological cultural resource meets the definition of a historical resource in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(1). If the archaeological cultural resource meets the definition of a historical resource, then it is treated like any other type of historical resource in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. If the archaeological cultural resource does not meet the definition of a historical resource, then the lead agency determines if it meets the definition of a unique archaeological resource as defined at CEQA Section 21083.2(g). In practice, however, most archaeological sites that meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource will also meet the definition of a historical resource. Should the archaeological cultural resource meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource, then it must be treated in accordance with CEQA Section 21083.2. If the archaeological cultural resource does not meet the definition of a historical resource or an archaeological resource, then effects to the resource are not considered significant effects on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(4)).

As identified in the Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the Project, three archaeological cultural resources have been identified at, or in the vicinity of, one of the Housing Opportunity Sites: P-30- 000143, P-30-000264, and P-30-001546. The status of these three archaeological cultural resources is unknown at this time, including their integrity (i.e., whether these sites contain intact subsurface archaeological deposits) and their eligibility for listing in either the CRHR or NRHP. At least two of these sites have reported Native American human remains, and regardless of these sites’ status as historical resources or archaeological resources under CEQA, the presence of such remains triggers protections under sections of the California PRC and HSC, as described in Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the Project. Additionally, other precontact and historic-period archaeological cultural resources have been identified in Seal Beach, and the potential to unearth buried archaeological deposits during development cannot be ruled out and should be assessed on a project and site-specific basis.

The Project, therefore, may have direct impacts on known archaeological cultural resources (including those that qualify as “historical resources” and “archaeological resources” under CEQA) as well as previously unrecorded cultural resources that could be unearthed during ground disturbance. Future developments facilitated by the Project could cause a substantial adverse change to archaeological IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-14
cultural resources due to their demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration resulting in a loss of integrity. As such, impacts to archaeological cultural resources would be potentially significant.

To mitigate significant impacts to archaeological cultural resources, Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL3 would be required. Mitigation Measure CUL-2 outlines the required development review process for archaeological resources for future development projects and Mitigation Measure CUL-2 outlines requirements to be followed if human remains are found during construction activities. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL-3, potential impacts related to archaeological resources would be reduced and the Project would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-2: Development Review Process for Archaeological Resources. Prior to approval of discretionary projects that include ground-disturbing activities, City staff shall conduct a records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center to review the current data on file for the project location. If it is determined that known archaeological cultural resources are within a 0.25-mile of the project site, the City shall require the project applicant to retain a qualified archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in archaeology to assess the project’s potential impacts to archaeological cultural resources. Further study may include a survey of the project location; controlled excavation to determine the presence of subsurface archaeological deposits; a review of relevant literature, including historical maps and published archaeological and ethnographic sources; and consultation with local Native American tribes. The qualified archaeologist shall provide recommendations for avoiding or otherwise mitigating potentially significant impacts to archaeological cultural resources and human remains, which shall be enforced as conditions of approval for the project.

MM CUL-3: Human Remains. The City shall use the development review process to identify human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, and follow the appropriate IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-15
procedures outlined under Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. Should human remains be found on a project site, no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall be disturbed until the Orange County Coroner is contacted and determines that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If an investigation is required, and the coroner determines the remains to be Native American then: (1) the coroner would contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours; (2) the NAHC would identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased native American; (3) the most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in PRC Section 5097.98.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

3.4.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)).

As discussed in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 requires cumulative impact analysis in EIRs to consider a list of planned and pending projects that may contribute to the cumulative impacts of a project. Section 3.0, Table 3.0-3 identifies all past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding areas that may impact the Project. As identified in Table 3.0-2 in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, the geographic scope of impacts for cultural resources is limited to the specific project site. The potential for impacts to occur to known and unknown cultural resources is site-specific and cannot combine with cumulative projects to produce a larger impact and therefore, cultural resources does not contribute to cumulative impacts. As such, a table of related projects that contribute to cumulative tribal cultural resources impacts is not included within this section.

However, indirect cumulative impacts could occur if the Project and related projects cumulatively effect historical resources. Because the specific direct and indirect impacts of the Project and future cumulative projects are unknown, it is possible that the incremental effects on historical resources could be cumulatively considerable. Potential cumulative impacts include contributing to impacts to historical resources in the immediate vicinity; contribute to changes to the same historical resource; or involve resources that are examples of the same property type as those within the Project area. The Project, in conjunction with other cumulative development identified in Table 3.0-3 has the potential to cumulatively impact historical resources. However, as identified above, proposed mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level related to historical resources. Unless exempt, each cumulative project would require separate discretionary approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential historical and archaeological impacts and identify necessary mitigation IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Cultural Resources

3.4-16
measures, where appropriate. Each cumulative project would be anticipated to require implementation of similar mitigation measures as those identified for the Project to reduce potential project specific impacts to cultural resources. Therefore, with implementation of mitigation measures and compliance with regulatory requirements, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to historical or archaeological cultural resources.

3.4.5 References
Stantec. 2024. Cultural Resources Assessment Report, October 2024. PDF.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-1

3.5 ENERGY
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting energy resources. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts relative to energy resources that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and the impact is less than significant.

The Project would not result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operation and the impact is less than significant.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the energy demand calculations and consistency analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

3.5.1 Environmental Setting
Within Orange County, energy is provided in the form of petroleum fuel (gasoline and diesel), electricity, and natural gas. In 2022, approximately 13.6 billion gallons of gasoline and approximately 3.1 billion gallons of diesel fuel for motor vehicles were purchased within California (CDTFA 2024).

Southern California Edison (SCE) is the utility company that provides electricity to the City of Seal Beach.

In 2022, for their standard power mix, approximately 33.2 percent of SCE’s electricity came from renewable resources including solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and small hydroelectric sources.

Additionally, approximately 45 percent of SCE's total electric power mix is from GHG-free sources, which includes nuclear and large hydroelectric sources of energy (SCE 2024). In 2022, Orange County consumed approximately 20,244 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity, 39 percent of which is attributed to residential land uses (CEC 2016a).

Natural gas is used for cooking, space heating, generating electricity, and as an alternative transportation fuel. Natural gas service is provided to the City by the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). In 2022, Orange County consumed approximately 572 million therms of natural gas, 61 percent of which is attributed to residential land uses (CEC 2016b).

3.5.2 Regulatory Setting
The following includes the key federal, state, and local regulations related to energy resources that are applicable to the Project.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-2
Federal
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is an independent agency that regulates the interstate transmission of electricity, natural gas, and oil. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission also reviews proposals to build liquefied natural gas terminals and interstate natural gas pipelines as well as licensing hydropower projects. Licensing of hydroelectric facilities under the authority of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission includes input from state and federal energy and power generation, environmental protection, fish and wildlife, and water quality agencies.

National Energy Conservation Policy Act
The National Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S. Code [USC] Section 8201 et seq.) serves as the underlying authority for federal energy management goals and requirements and is the foundation of most federal energy requirements. The National Energy Conservation Policy Act also established fuel economy standards for on-road motor vehicles in the United States. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards and for revising existing standards. NHTSA and USEPA are taking coordinated steps to enable the production of clean energy vehicles with improved fuel efficiency. NHTSA sets the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) levels, which are rapidly increasing over the next several years to improve energy security and reduce fuel consumption. In March 2022, the NHTSA finalized CAFE standards for model years 2024 to 2026.

The standards require an industry-wide fleet average of approximately 49 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks by model year 2026. The NHTSA projects that the foregoing standards will avoid consumption of approximately 234 billion gallons of gasoline between model years 2030 to 2050 (NHTSA 2022).

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) aimed to increase U.S. energy security, increased CAFE standards for motor vehicles, and included provisions related to energy efficiency, such as renewable fuel standards (RFS), appliance and lighting efficiency standards; and building energy efficiency standards. The EISA required increasing levels of renewable fuels to replace petroleum. The USEPA is responsible for developing and implementing regulations to ensure transportation fuel sold into the U.S. contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel.

The RFS programs regulations were developed in collaboration with refiners, renewable fuel products, and other stakeholders and were created under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The RFS program established the first renewable fuel volume mandate in the U.S. As required under the EISA, the original RFS program required 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be blended into gasoline by 2012. The RFS program was expanded in several ways that laid the foundation for achieving significant reductions of GHG emissions through the use of renewable fuels, for reducing imported petroleum, and for encouraging the development and expansion of the nation’s renewable fuels sector. The updated program is referred to as RFS2, and includes the following:
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-3
EISA expanded the RFS program to include diesel, in addition to gasoline; EISA increased the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022; EISA established new categories of renewable fuel and set separate volume requirements for each one; and
EISA required by USEPA to apply lifecycle GHG performance threshold standards to ensure that each category of renewable fuel emits fewer GHGs than the petroleum fuel it replaces.

Additional provisions of the EISA address energy savings in government and public institutions, promoting research for alternate energy, additional research in carbon capture, international energy programs, and the creation of “green jobs.”
Federal Vehicle Standards
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA) mandated that the NHTSA establish and implement a regulatory program for motor vehicle fuel economy, known as the CAFE program, to reduce national energy consumption. As codified in Chapter 329 of Title 49 of the USC, as amended by the EISA, EPCA sets forth specific requirements concerning the establishment of average fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks. The EISA, discussed above, amended the EPCA CAFE program requirements by providing the Department of Transportation additional rulemaking authority and responsibilities.

Consistent with its statutory authority in rulemaking to establish CAFE standards for model year 2017 and beyond, NHTSA developed two phases of standards. The first phase included final standards for model years 2017–2021. The second phase, covering model years 2022–2025, included standards that were not final, due to the statutory requirement that NHTSA set average fuel economy standards not more than five model years at a time. Rather, NHTSA wrote that those standards were augural, meaning that they represented its best estimate, based on the information available at that time, of what levels of stringency might be maximum feasible in those model years. In 2012, the agencies jointly adopted more stringent Phase 2 standards for light duty cars and trucks, which would cover model years 2017 through 2025. In August of 2016, the agencies adopted more stringent Phase 2 standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, which would cover model years 2018 through 2027 for certain trailers and model years 2021 through 2027 for semi-trucks, large pickup trucks, vans, and all types and sizes of buses and work trucks.

On March 31, 2020, NHTSA and the USEPA released a new rule, the final Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule, setting CAFE and carbon dioxide emissions standards for model years 2021 through 2026 passenger cars and light trucks. The rule rolls back the 2012 standards for model years 2021 through 2026 for passenger cars and light trucks, which had required an average fleetwide fuel economy equivalent of 54.5 miles per gallon in model year 2025 with a 5 percent annual increase to an average fuel economy of about 40 miles per gallon in model year 2025 with annual increases of 1.5 percent starting in 2021. As a part of issuing the new SAFE rule, NHTSA issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement which found that the relaxed standards would result in increased petroleum •
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-4
consumption which in turn would result in increases to GHG and criteria pollutant emissions known to contribute to adverse health impacts (NHTSA 2020). The estimated increases from the roll back of the 2012 standards are expected to result in more than a billion metric tons additional climate pollution through 2040 as determined by calculating the difference from the reduction of 2 billion metric tons the 2012 rule was expected to accomplish compared to the standards of the 2020 rule (NHTSA 2020). On January 20, 2021, an EO was issued on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis, which includes review of the Part One Rule by April 2021 and review of the Part Two Rule by July 2021. In response to the Part One Rule, in December 2021, the Department of Transportation withdrew its portions of the SAFE rule. As a result, states are now allowed to issue their own GHG emissions standards and zero-emissions vehicle mandates. In addition, the Part Two Rule was adopted to revise the existing national GHG emission standards for passenger cars and light trucks through model year 2026. These standards are the strongest vehicle emissions standards ever established for the light-duty vehicle sector and will result in avoiding more than three billion tons of GHG emissions through 2050.

Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 is considered the most ambitious climate law in U.S. history, and is intended to reduce GHG emissions, help build a clean economy, reduce energy costs for Americans, and advance environmental justice. With funding from the IRA, the USEPA has launched a network of clean energy financing and provided grant funding for climate pollution reduction programs (USEPA 2024).

State
California Public Utilities Commission
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is a state agency created by a constitutional amendment to regulate privately-owned utilities providing telecommunications, electric, natural gas, water, railroad, rail transit, and passenger transportation services and in-state moving companies. The CPUC is responsible for ensuring that California utility customers have safe, reliable utility services at reasonable rates, while protecting utility customers from fraud. The CPUC regulates the planning and approval for the physical construction of electric generation, transmission, or distribution facilities, and local distribution pipelines of natural gas.

California Energy Code
Compliance with the California Energy Code (CCR Title 24, Part 6, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards) and Title 20, Public Utilities and Energy, standards must occur for all new buildings constructed in California. These efficiency standards apply to new construction of both residential and nonresidential (i.e., maintenance buildings and pump station buildings associated with the Program) buildings, and they regulate energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting.

The building efficiency standards are enforced through the local building permit processes, and local government agencies may adopt and enforce energy standards for new buildings provided that these standards meet or exceed those provided in the Title 24 guidelines. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-5
Warren-Alquist Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act Initially passed in 1974 and amended since, the Warren-Alquist Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act (Warren-Alquist Act) created the California Energy Commission (CEC), California’s primary energy and planning agency. The seven responsibilities of the CEC are forecasting future energy needs, promoting energy efficiency and conservation through setting standards, supporting energyrelated research, developing renewable energy resources, advancing alternative and renewable transportation fuels and technologies, certifying thermal power plants 50 megawatts or larger, and planning for and directing state response to energy emergencies. The CEC regulates energy resources by encouraging and coordinating research into energy supply and demand problems to reduce the rate of growth of energy consumption. Additionally, the Warren-Alquist Act acknowledges the need for renewable energy resources and encourages the CEC to explore renewable energy options that would be in line with environmental and public safety goals (Warren-Alquist Act PRC section 25000 et seq.) California Integrated Energy Policy
SB 1389 requires the CEC to "conduct assessments and forecasts of all aspects of energy industry supply, production, transportation, delivery and distribution, demand, and prices. The Energy Commission shall use these assessments and forecasts to develop energy policies that conserve resources, protect the environment, ensure energy reliability, enhance the state's economy, and protect public health and safety." (PRC Section 25301(a)). The CEC adopts an Integrated Energy Policy Report every two years and an update every other year. The most recent version is the 2022 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update (CEC 2022).

California Renewables Portfolio Standard
California’s RPS was initially established in 2002 by SB 1078, with the initial requirement that 20 percent of electricity retail sales be served by renewable resources by 2017. The program was accelerated in 2006 under SB 107, which required that the 20 percent mandate be met by 2010. In April 2011, SB 2 was signed into law, requiring electricity retailers in the state to procure 33 percent of their energy sources from renewable energy sources by the end of 2020 (CPUC 2021). In addition, SB 350, passed in 2015, directs California utilities to further increase the amount of renewable energy delivered to customers to 50 percent by 2030.

CPUC implements and administers RPS compliance rules for California’s retail sellers of electricity, which include large and small investor-owned utilities, publicly owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators. The CEC is responsible for the certification of electrical generation facilities as eligible renewable energy resources and adopting regulations for the enforcement of RPS procurement requirements of public owned utilities.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-6
Update, which was adopted in 2022 and revised in 2024. The City’s Housing Element Update includes the following goal and policies to promote energy efficiency:

Housing Element Update
Goal 6: Encourage more efficient energy use in residential developments.

Policy 6a: Promote energy conservation through “green building” techniques that reduce water consumption, improve energy efficiency and lessen a building’s overall environmental impact.

Policy 6b: Promote “smart growth” principles by encouraging compact development in locations that provide opportunities for reduced vehicle trips.

City of Seal Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code includes various regulations related to energy. Municipal Code Section

10.15.015, Energy Conservation, requires for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities to the extent feasible. Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.045, Solar Energy Systems, outlines installation standards for solar energy systems.

3.5.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant energy impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
Project energy demand during construction and operations was determined based on the modeling that was conducted for the Project using CalEEMod and using vehicle and equipment emission factors from the CARB’s EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) and EMFAC OFFROAD2021 (v1.0.5).

Construction energy use was calculated for the most energy-intensive future development under the Project, which is expected to be buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4 as this site could accommodate the most housing units. At maximum buildout, Housing Opportunity Site 4 can accommodate 552 highdensity dwelling units at a density of 46 dwelling units per acre. For operation, energy-use was calculated for 1,773 dwelling units.

The energy calculations are included as Appendix B.

Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with the current CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions were analyzed and evaluated to determine whether energy impacts are significant. •
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-7
Would the Project:

Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Wasteful, Inefficient, or Unnecessary Use of Energy
Impact EN-1 The Project would not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.

Impact Analysis
The energy requirements for buildout of the up to 1,773 dwelling units as analyzed in this Draft EIR were determined using the construction and operational estimates generated from the calculation worksheets for energy consumption (Appendix B). This impact addresses the energy consumption from both construction of an individual project and operational activities from the Project and the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project, discussed separately below.

Construction Energy Demand
During construction activities for development of future projects under the Project, energy resources would be consumed in the form of diesel and gasoline fuel from the use of off-road equipment (i.e., tractors, excavators, cranes) and on-road vehicles (i.e., construction employee commutes, haul trucks).

Construction is not anticipated to require natural gas. Temporary electricity may be required to provide as-necessary lighting and electric equipment; such electricity demand would be met by portable generator sets and, possibly, local distribution. Fuel demand associated with portable generators is incorporated in the off-road equipment estimate provided below. The amount of electricity used during construction would be minimal.

Specific buildout details of each future development facilitated by the Project are not available at this time; accordingly, this analysis presents estimated construction energy demand associated with buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4, which would accommodate up to 552 multi-family units. All other Housing Opportunity Sites, the Main Street Program, and the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are planned to involve development of fewer units and less ground disturbance and, thus, would likely result in less energy consumption during construction. Therefore, the development of Housing Opportunity Site 4 is anticipated to be the most energy-intensive future development due to the size of the site.

Off-Road Equipment
Construction activities associated with buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4, including site preparation, grading, paving, building construction, and architectural coating, were estimated to consume 46,170 •
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-8
gallons of diesel fuel from the use of off-road equipment. For comparison, in 2022, approximately 3.1 billion gallons of diesel fuel was purchased within California (CDTFA 2024). Thus, the diesel fuel required to power the off-road equipment during construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 would represent approximately 0.002 percent of the state’s annual diesel demand.

If the construction fuel demand for off-road equipment is scaled up to 1,773 units, then cumulative buildout of all developments facilitated by the Project would utilize approximately 0.005 percent of the state’s annual diesel demand.

On-Road Vehicles
On-road vehicles for construction workers, vendors, and haulers would require fuel for travel to and from the site during construction. Table 3.51 provides an estimate of the total on-road vehicle fuel usage during construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4.

Table 3.5-1: Construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 – On-Road Vehicle Fuel Consumption
Project
Component VMT
Gasoline
Consumptions
(gallons)
Diesel
Consumption
(gallons)
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh)
Worker Trips 1,885,331 65,515 258 34,352
Vendor Trips 150,472 4,436 7,819 977
Haul Trips 7,000 1 1,146 82
Totals 2,042,804 69,952 9,224 35,411
Notes:

Calculations use unrounded numbers; totals may not appear to sum exactly due to rounding.

VMT = vehicle miles traveled
Source: Appendix B.

As shown above, construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 was estimated to consume 69,952 gallons of gasoline, 9,224 gallons of diesel, and 35,411 kWh of electricity associated with the use of on-road vehicles. For comparison, in 2022, approximately 13.6 billion gallons of gasoline and approximately 3.1 billion gallons of diesel fuel for motor vehicles was purchased within California (CDTFA 2024). Thus, the fuel required to power the on-road motor vehicles during construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 would represent approximately 0.0005 percent and 0.0003 percent of the state’s annual gasoline and diesel demand, respectively.

If the construction fuel demand for on-road vehicles is scaled up to 1,773 units, then cumulative buildout of all developments facilitated by the Project would utilize approximately 0.0016 percent and 0.001 percent of the state’s annual gasoline and diesel demand, respectively.

Construction Conclusion
Overall, construction activities associated with each Housing Opportunity Site and within the Main Street Program area facilitated by the Project would result in the consumption of petroleum-based fuels and I
I
I
I
I 7
-
I I
I I -
-
I ~
I -
I I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-9
electricity from electric vehicles. However, there are no unusual Project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment or vehicles that would be less energy efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the state. Therefore, it is expected that construction fuel consumption associated with each future development facilitated by the Project and the Project as a whole would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than at other construction sites in the region.

Operational Energy Demand
Implementation of the Project as analyzed in this Draft EIR would result in future development of up to 1,773 new dwelling units. During operations of the Project, energy would be required to power the residential buildings and to fuel the vehicles travelling to and from the sites.

Building Energy
The 1,733 new dwelling units would require energy for normal operations, such as lighting and temperature controls. Building energy usage was estimated for cumulative Project buildout. Over the course of a year, operational building energy consumption for all dwelling units accommodated by the Project would total approximately 6,642,169 kWh of electricity and 24,075,048 kBTU of natural gas.1 It is
noted that all future buildings would be constructed in compliance with the energy efficiency standards set forth in the California Building Standards Code that is applicable at the time of construction. As the California Building Standards Code will likely require more efficient design measures in the future, this represents a conservative estimate of the total electricity and natural gas Project buildout may require.

Therefore, the Project’s total energy consumption would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy.

Transportation Energy
Future users of the 1,773 new dwelling units would travel to and from their residences during normal operations. Transportation energy usage was estimated for cumulative Project buildout and consistent with the VMT assessment prepared for the Project. These estimates were derived using the same assumptions used in the operational air quality and GHG analysis for the Project. Table 3.5-2 provides an estimate of the annual fuel consumed by vehicles traveling to and from the Project sites. As shown in the table, annual vehicular fuel consumption is estimated to be 1,137,357 gallons of gasoline, 133,422 gallons of diesel, and 895,624 kWh of electricity. In 2022, approximately 13.6 billion gallons of gasoline and approximately 3.1 billion gallons of diesel fuel for motor vehicles were purchased within California (CDTFA 2024). Therefore, full buildout of the Project would result in transportation fuel consumption that represents approximately 0.008 percent and 0.004 percent of the state’s annual demand for gasoline and diesel, respectively. The Project would not result in vehicle use that is any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other vehicle uses in the region. 1 These estimates do not account for the implementation of any mitigation. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-10
Table 3.5-2: Project Operations – On-Road Vehicle Fuel Consumption Vehicle Type Proportion
of Fleet
Gasoline
Consumptions
(gallons/yr)
Diesel
Consumption
(gallons/yr)
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh/yr)
Passenger Cars
(LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV) 0.9236 1,069,206 3,881 786,447
Trucks
(HHDT, MHDT, LHDT1, LHDT2) 0.0701 61,979 125,861 106,883 Motorcycles, Motor Homes, and Buses
(MCY, MH, OBUS, SBUS, UBUS) 0.0063 6,171 3,679 2,294
Totals 1.00 1,137,357 133,422 895,624
Notes:

Calculations use unrounded numbers; totals may not appear to sum exactly due to rounding.

VMT = vehicle miles traveled
Source: Appendix B.

Conclusion
Based on the analysis above, both construction and operations of future developments facilitated by the Project and the Project as a whole would not result in a potential significant environmental impact due to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources; therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.
- I I I I 1~
~
i---
~
r--
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-11
Conflict with Renewable Energy/Energy Efficiency Plan
Impact EN-2 The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Impact Analysis
All developments facilitated by the Project would comply with federal, state, and local regulations aimed at reducing energy consumption. Local regulations have been developed in accordance with federal and state energy regulations, such as the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (CCR Title 24, Part 6), the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) (CCR Title 24, Part 11), and SB 743, which are also aimed at reducing energy consumption.

Conclusion
The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency; therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

3.5.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065[a][3]). The geographic scope for cumulative energy impacts is regional.

3.5-12

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy
identifies the cumulative past, present, and probable future projects from Table 3.0-3 that may drive a potential cumulative impact related to energy and therefore were analyzed in this cumulative discussion.

Table 3.5-3: Cumulative Projects Related to Energy
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
Preparation of
EIR 167
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
I
I
I I I 7 t--- -
-
I
t---
L ---'
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-13
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

Pacific Coast
Hwy, City of
Long Beach
(7242011013)
Two, 5-story
buildings with a
total of 563,529
square feet
containing 600
residential units
and 4,000
square-feet of
ground-level
restaurant space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
600
6 Carmel Partners
6615 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7237020050)
Construction of
a six-story
mixed-use
project
consisting of
390 residential
dwelling units
and 5,351
square feet of
commercial/retai
l space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
380
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
8 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
6695 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020040);
6411 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020051);
No address
(7237020904)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
940
9 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
1000 N
Studebaker Rd
(7238015021)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
115
I 1 I I I 7
~ -
,__
-
-
!.... I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-14
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of
Westminster)
122
Development under the Project in combination with cumulative development identified in Table 3.5-3 could increase regional energy demands.

Implementation of the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development in the City, would result in increased energy consumption within the City. Potential impacts related to energy resources from future developments that is facilitated by the Project would be site-specific and would require applications for development permits that would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Unless exempt, each cumulative discretionary project would require separate approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential energy consumption impacts and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate.

Additionally, any future developments facilitated by the Project would be subject to compliance with all federal, state, and local requirements for energy efficiency, including the California Energy Code Building Energy Efficiency Standards (CCR Title 24, Part 6), the CALGreen Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11), and SB 743. Consequently, any future developments facilitated by the Project would not result in significant environmental impacts from the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operation; and would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, the Project would not cause a cumulatively considerable impact related to energy resources and no mitigation is required.

I 1 I I I 7
~ -
-

I I I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Energy

3.5-15

3.5.5 References
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA). 2024. Fuel Taxes Statistics & Reports. https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/spftrpts.htm. Accessed January 2024.

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2016a. Electricity Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2016b. Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx. Accessed January 2024.
_____. 2022. 2022 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update. https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2022-integrated-energy-policy-report-update.

Accessed January 2024.

City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed January 2024.

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). 2021. 60% RPS Procurement Rules. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/electric-powerprocurement/rps/rps-compliance-rules-and-process/60-percent-rps-procurement-rules. Accessed January 2024.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 2020. Final Environmental Impact Statement for The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Year 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/safe_vehicles_rule_feis.pdf. Accessed January 2024.
_____. 2022. Corporate Average Fuel Economy. https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporateaverage-fuel-economy#40466. Accessed January 2024.

Southern California Edison (SCE). 2024. 2022 Power Content Label – Southern California Edison. https://www.sce.com/sites/default/files/customfiles/PDF_Files/SCE_2022_Power_Content_Label_B%26W.pdf. Accessed January 2024.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2024. Inflation Reduction Act. https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act. Accessed January 2024. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-1

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for geology and soils. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to geology and soils that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature; however, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, impacts would be less than significant.

Development of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project could result in discovery of undiscovered paleontological resources at depths greater than an estimated 5 feet due to the geologic units underlying the site. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

3.6.1 Environmental Setting
Paleontological Resources
Fossils are evidence of ancient life, defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) (2010) as being over 5,000 years in age, or middle Holocene. While CEQA does not define a significance threshold for paleontological resources, the standards of the SVP (2010) are often used in the absence of a legal definition. The SVP defines scientifically important fossils as:
identifiable vertebrate fossils, large or small, uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils, and other data that provide taphonomic, taxonomic, phylogenetic, paleoecologic, stratigraphic, and/or biochronologic information. Paleontological resources are considered to be older than recorded human history and/or older than middle Holocene (i.e., older than about 5,000 radiocarbon years). [SVP 2010: 11].

Using this definition, the concept of scientific importance is included in the definition of paleontological resources; thus, not all fossils are considered to be paleontological resources. The threshold for scientific importance varies with factors such as geologic unit, geographic area, the current state of scientific research, and may also vary between different agencies (Murphey et al. 2019). Paleontological studies have developed criteria for the assessment of scientific importance of fossil discoveries (e.g., Murphey et al. 2019, Scott and Springer 2003). In general, these studies assess fossils as scientifically important if one or more of the following criteria apply:

The fossils provide information on the evolutionary relationships and developmental trends among organisms, living or extinct.
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-2
The fossils provide data useful in determining the age(s) of the rock unit or sedimentary stratum, including data important in determining the depositional history of the region and the timing of geologic events, through biochronology or biostratigraphy and the correlation with isotopic dating.

The fossils provide ecological data, such as the development of biological communities, the interaction between paleobotanical and paleozoological biotas, or the biogeography of lineages.

The fossils demonstrate unusual or spectacular circumstances in the history of life.

The fossils provide information on the preservational pathways of paleontological resources, including taphonomy, diagenesis, or preservational biases in the fossil record.

The fossils are in short supply and/or in danger of being depleted or destroyed by the elements, vandalism, or commercial exploitation, and are not found in other geographic locations.

The fossils inform our understanding of anthropogenic affects to global environments or climate.

A review of geologic mapping, the scientific literature, online collections data from the University of California Museum of Paleontology, and a records search from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County was conducted to identify the geologic units likely present at the surface or in the subsurface of the Project site and assess their potential for preserving paleontological resources (Appendix E).

This study indicates four geologic units are mapped at the surface of the Project site: beach and paralic estuarine deposits, which are assessed as having low paleontological potential; unit 2 of young alluvium which is assessed as having low-to-high paleontological potential, increasing with depth, and old shallow marine deposits on a wave-cut surface, which are assessed as having high paleontological potential.

Additionally, older Pleistocene-aged marine formations with high paleontological potential such as the San Pedro Formation, Palos Verdes Sand, the Lomita Marl, and the Timms Point Silt may be present in the subsurface, underlying the other units.

3.6.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Paleontological Resources Preservation Act
The federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act of 2002 limits the collection of vertebrate fossils and other rare and scientifically significant fossils to qualified researchers who have obtained a permit from the appropriate state or federal agency. Additionally, it specifies these researchers must agree to donate any materials recovered to recognized public institutions, where they will remain accessible to the public and to other researchers. This Act incorporates key findings of a report, Fossils on Federal Land and Indian Lands, issued by the Secretary of Interior in 2000, which establishes that most vertebrate fossils and some invertebrate and plant fossils are considered rare resources (DOI 2000). •
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-3
State
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA (PRC Sections 21000 et seq) requires that before approving most discretionary projects, the Lead Agency must identify and examine any significant adverse environmental effects that may result from activities associated with such projects. As updated in 2016, CEQA separates the consideration of paleontological resources from cultural resources (PRC Section 21083.09). The Appendix G checklist (Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, California Code of Regulations 15000 et seq.) requires an answer to the question, “Will the proposed project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?” Under these requirements, Stantec has conducted a paleontological resources assessment to determine impacts of the proposed project on paleontological resources within the Project area.

California Public Resources Code Section 5097
PRC Section 5097.5 prohibits the destruction or removal of any paleontological site or feature from public lands without the permission of the jurisdictional agency.

California Penal Code Section 622.5
The California Penal Code (PC) Section 622.5 details the penalties for damage or removal of paleontological resources, whether from private or public lands.

California Coastal Act
The California Coastal Act (PRC Division 20) requires reasonable mitigation measures where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources that have been designated by the State Historic Preservation Officer (Section 30244).

Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Seal Beach (City of Seal Beach 2003). The General Plan contains the current Housing Element Update, which was adopted in 2022. The various elements within the General Plan include goals and policies for the physical development of the City. The City’s General Plan goals and policies applicable to paleontological resources are presented below:

Cultural Resources Element
The City’s Cultural Resources Element contains the following goals and policies related to cultural resources, specifically paleontological resources, that apply to the Project:

Goal 1: Preserve and protect historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-4
Protect Significant Paleontological Resources
Assess development proposals for potential impacts to significant paleontological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act. If the project involves earthwork, require a study conducted by a professional paleontologist to determine if palaeontologic assets are present and if the project will significantly impact the resources. If significant impacts are identified, either require the project to be modified to avoid impacting the palaeontologic materials or require measures to mitigate the impacts.

Development Services is the primary City department responsible for ongoing implementation, and funding is anticipated to be provided by development fees.

3.6.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant geology and soils impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The following analysis is based on a review of documents pertaining to the Project site, including the General Plan and the Paleontological Resources Technical Report prepared by Stantec Consulting Services for the Project (Appendix E). The following impact discussions consider the effects of the Project related to geology and soils, specifically paleontological resources, in the City.

Would the Project:

Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:

Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
o Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-5
o Strong seismic ground shaking?
o Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? o Landslides?
o Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Paleontological Resource or Geologic Feature
Impact GEO-1 The Project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

Impact Analysis
As the Project does not include proposal of any specific developments or ground disturbing activities at this time, there are no direct adverse impacts to paleontological resources. However, future developments conducted as a result of the Project can be reasonably expected to include ground disturbance activities. New ground disturbance that occurs in geologic units with high paleontological potential may encounter paleontological resources. Should discovery of undiscovered paleontological resources occur during one of the resulting future development projects resulting from the Project, the damage or destruction of the resources would constitute an indirect adverse impact of this Project. Within the Project area, this could occur at any depth in the Housing Opportunity Sites 1, 3, 7, or Main Street Program area, and at depths greater than an estimated 5 feet at the Housing Opportunity Sites 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8. The differences in depths that discovery of undiscovered paleontological resources could occur at is based on the geologic units underlying the sites. Young alluvium is mapped throughout the northeastern portion of the Project area where Housing Opportunity Sites 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8 are located.

Younger surficial sediments (alluvium, lacustrine, eolian, etc.) have low potential to preserve paleontological resources due to their age; yet sediments increase in age with depth and so these surficial deposits often overlay older units that have high paleontological potential. Therefore, the potential for undiscovered paleontological resources to occur within the geologic unit underlying Housing Opportunity Sites 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8 increases with depth.

Potential future developments would be required to comply with the federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act that limits the collection of vertebrate fossils and other rare and scientifically significant •
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-6
fossils to qualified researchers who have obtained a permit from the appropriate state or federal agency and PRC Section 5097 that prohibits the removal of any paleontological site or feature from public lands without the permission of the jurisdictional agency. Ground-disturbing construction activities (e.g., grading and excavation) associated with potential future developments in the Project area could uncover fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments that have not been recorded.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 which requires preparation of a paleontological monitoring program for each future development would ensure that potential impacts to undiscovered paleontological resources are reduced. As such, compliance with federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to paleontological resources, in addition to Mitigation Measure GEO-1, would ensure that potential future developments that results from implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects to paleontological resources and impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM GEO-1: Paleontological Monitoring Program. Prior to the issuance of the first action and/or permit which would allow for site disturbance (e.g., grading permit), a paleontologist meeting professional standards as defined by Murphey et al. (2019) as a Principal Investigator shall be retained as the designated Project Paleontologist for each development, to review project-specific construction plans and develop a project-specific paleontological mitigation program. The mitigation program should be outlined in a Paleontological Monitoring and Mitigation Plan tailored to specific construction plans and geotechnical studies, should these be available, that identifies when or under what conditions paleontological monitoring should be implemented. The plan should include:

A Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program training developed by the Project Paleontologist that communicates requirements and procedures for the inadvertent discovery of paleontological resources during construction to be delivered by the paleontologist or their designated representative to the construction crew prior to the onset of ground disturbance.
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-7
Fulltime paleontological monitoring when work occurs in the geologic units assessed as having high paleontological potential, which is expected to occur when work exceeds 5 foot in depth in unit 2 of the young alluvium, or when work occurs at any depth in old shallow marine deposits on a wave-cut surface, the San Pedro Formation, the Paleo Verdes Sand, the Lomita Marl, and the Timms Point Silt. Work into previously disturbed sediments, beach deposits, paralic estuarine deposits, or the upper 5 feet of unit 2 of the young alluvium does not require monitoring. After the initiation of the monitoring work, the Project Paleontologist may reduce the frequency or depths of monitoring should low paleontological potential sediments be identified in the monitoring area.

Procedures to follow in the event that paleontological resources are encountered during construction activities, including work stoppage in a safe radius of the finds, usually 50 feet, assessment by the Project Paleontologist, and, should the fossils be of scientific importance, collection and curation in an accredited repository along with associated data such as photographs, GPS coordinates, lithological descriptions, and depth data, as well as curation fees.

A Paleontological Monitoring Report documenting the results of the mitigation program.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

3.6.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)).

As discussed in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 requires cumulative impact analysis in EIRs to consider a list of planned and pending projects that may contribute to the cumulative impacts of a project. Section 3.0, Table 3.0-3 identifies all past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding areas that may impact the Project. As identified in Table 3.0-2 in Section 3.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, cumulative context for geology and soils impacts is the immediate project vicinity. However, the cumulative context for paleontological resources analyzed in this section is limited to the specific project site. The potential for impacts to occur to known and unknown paleontological resources is site-specific and cannot combine with cumulative projects to produce a larger impact and therefore, impacts related to paleontological resources does not contribute to cumulative impacts.

Potential impacts would be site-specific and would require evaluation on a case-by-case basis at the project level when future development is proposed. Unless exempt, each cumulative project would require separate discretionary approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential •
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Geology and Soils

3.6-8
impacts concerning geology, soils, and paleontological resources and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate.

As identified above, the Project would not result in significant impacts to paleontological resources with the incorporation of the identified mitigation measure. Any future developments facilitated by the Project would be required to comply with this mitigation measure and cumulative developments would be anticipated to require implementation of similar mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts.

Therefore, the Project’s contribution to potentially cumulatively considerable impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures identified in this section and compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations.

3.6.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan Cultural Resources Element https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Cultural%20Resources.pdf. Accessed October 2024.

Murphey, P., G. Knauss, L. Fisk, T. Demere, and R. Reynolds. 2019. Best practices in mitigation paleontology. Proceedings of the San Diego Society of Natural History 47: 43 pp.

Scott, E., and K. Springer. 2003. CEQA and fossil preservation in southern California. The Environmental Monitor 4-10.

Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the assessment and Mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. https://vertpaleo.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines.pdf. Accessed October 2024.

U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). 2000. Fossils on Federal & Indian Lands, Report of the Secretary of the Interior.
https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/programs_paleontology_quick%20links_Assessment%20 of%20Fossil%20Management%20on%20Federal%20%26%20Indian%20Lands%2C%20May%2 02000.pdf. Accessed November 2024.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-1

3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
This section describes the impacts related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would result from implementation of the Project. Included is a review of existing conditions, a summary of applicable policies and regulations related to GHG emissions, and analysis of environmental impacts of the Project.

Where applicable, mitigation measures are included for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would exceed SCAQMD’s draft interim thresholds and, therefore, the Project would generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1, the Project would be considered significant and unavoidable.

The Project could conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for reducing GHG emissions. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, AQ-3, and GHG-1, the impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the emissions calculations and consistency analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

3.7.1 Environmental Setting
To fully understand global climate change, it is important to recognize the naturally occurring “greenhouse effect” and to define the GHGs that contribute to this phenomenon. Various gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as atmospheric GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space and a portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface. The earth emits this radiation back toward space, but the properties of the radiation change from high-frequency solar radiation to lower-frequency infrared radiation. GHGs, which are transparent to solar radiation, are effective in absorbing infrared radiation. As a result, this radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is now retained, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect.

Greenhouse Gases
Among the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Primary GHGs attributed to global climate change are discussed in the following subsections.

Carbon Dioxide. CO2 is a colorless, odorless gas. CO2 is emitted in a number of ways, both naturally and through human activities. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, industrial facilities, and other sources. A number m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-2
of specialized industrial production processes and product uses such as mineral production, metal production, and the use of petroleum-based products can also lead to CO2 emissions. The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is so readily exchanged in the atmosphere (USEPA 2023a).

Methane. CH4 is a colorless, odorless gas, and is the major component of natural gas, about 87 percent by volume. It is also formed and released to the atmosphere by biological processes occurring in anaerobic environments. CH4 is emitted from a variety of both human-related and natural sources.

Human-related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry (enteric fermentation in livestock and manure management), rice cultivation, biomass burning, and waste management. These activities release significant quantities of methane to the atmosphere. Natural sources of methane include wetlands, gas hydrates, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, non-wetland soils, and other sources such as wildfires. The atmospheric lifetime of CH4 is about 12 years (USEPA 2023a).

Nitrous Oxide. N2O is a clear, colorless gas with a slightly sweet odor. N2O is produced by both natural and human-related sources. Primary human-related sources of N2O are agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuels, adipic acid production, and nitric acid production. N2O is also produced naturally from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120 years (USEPA 2023a).

Hydrofluorocarbons. HFCs are man-made chemicals, many of which have been developed as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances for industrial, commercial, and consumer products. The only significant emissions of HFCs before 1990 were of the chemical HFC-23, which is generated as a byproduct of the production of HCFC-22 (or Freon 22, used in air conditioning applications). The atmospheric lifetime for HFCs varies from just over a year for HFC-152a to 260 years for HFC-23. Most of the commercially used HFCs have atmospheric lifetimes of less than 15 years (e.g., HFC-134a, which is used in automobile air conditioning and refrigeration, has an atmospheric life of 14 years) (USEPA 2023a).

Perfluorocarbons. PFCs are colorless, highly dense, chemically inert, and nontoxic. There are seven PFC gases: perfluoromethane (CF4), perfluoroethane (C2F6), perfluoropropane (C3F8), perfluorobutane (C4F10), perfluorocyclobutane (C4F8), perfluoropentane (C5F12), and perfluorohexane (C6F14). Natural geological emissions have been responsible for the PFCs that have accumulated in the atmosphere in the past; however, the largest current source is aluminum production, which releases CF4 and C2F6 as byproducts. The estimated atmospheric lifetimes for CF4 and C2F6 are 50,000 and 10,000 years, respectively (USEPA 2023a).

Nitrogen Trifluoride. NF3 is an inorganic, colorless, odorless, toxic, nonflammable gas used as an etchant in microelectronics. NF3 is predominantly employed in the cleaning of the plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition chambers in the production of liquid crystal displays and silicon-based thin film solar cells. In 2009, NF3 was listed by California as a potential GHG to be listed and regulated under AB 32 (Section 38505 HSC).

Sulfur Hexafluoride. SF6 is an inorganic compound that is colorless, odorless, nontoxic, and generally nonflammable. SF6 is primarily used as an electrical insulator in high voltage equipment. The electric m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-3
power industry uses roughly 80percent of all SF6 produced worldwide. Leaks of SF6 occur from aging equipment and during equipment maintenance and servicing. SF6 has an atmospheric life of 3,200 years (USEPA 2023b).

Black Carbon. Black carbon is the most strongly light-absorbing component of PM emitted from burning fuels such as coal, diesel, and biomass. Black carbon contributes to climate change both directly by absorbing sunlight and indirectly by depositing on snow and by interacting with clouds and affecting cloud formation. Black carbon is considered a short-lived species, which can vary spatially and, consequently, it is very difficult to quantify associated global-warming potentials. The main sources of black carbon in California are wildfires, off-road vehicles (locomotives, marine vessels, tractors, excavators, dozers, etc.), on-road vehicles (cars, trucks, and buses), fireplaces, agricultural waste burning, and prescribed burning (planned burns of forest or wildlands). California has been an international leader in reducing emissions of black carbon, including programs that target reducing PM from diesel engines and burning activities (CARB 2013).

Global Warming Potential
Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which weigh each gas by its global warming potential (GWP).

Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted. Based on a 100-year time horizon, Methane traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO2, and N2O absorbs roughly 298 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Additional GHGs with high GWP include NF3, SF6, PFCs, and black carbon.

Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
On a global scale, GHG emissions are predominantly associated with activities related to energy production; changes in land use, such as deforestation and land clearing; industrial sources; agricultural activities; transportation; waste and wastewater generation; and commercial and residential land uses.

World-wide, energy production including the burning of coal, natural gas, and oil for electricity and heat is the largest single source of global GHG emissions.

United States of America
In 2022, net GHG emissions in the United States totaled 5,489 MMTCO2e, an increase of one percent when compared to 2021 emissions. Within the United States, the largest contributor to GHG emissions is the transportation sector (28 percent). The next largest contributors are from electricity production (25 percent) and industry (23 percent), followed by the commercial and residential sector (13 percent) and the agricultural sector (10 percent). Transportation emissions primarily come from burning fossil fuels for cars, trucks, ships, trains, and planes. Over 90 percent of the fuel used for transportation is petroleum-based, which includes primarily gasoline and diesel. The bulk of emissions generated from energy production come from burning fossil fuels, mostly coal and natural gas. Industry emissions are also primarily m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-4
generated from fossil fuels burned for heat, the use of certain products that contain GHGs, and the handling of waste. Similar to industry sector emissions, commercial and residential uses arise primarily from fossil fuels for heat, the use of certain products that contain GHGs, and the handling of waste.

Agricultural emissions come from livestock such as cows, agricultural soil, and rice production. The land use and forestry sector within the U.S. serves as a carbon sink. Carbon sinks absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. Land areas across the U.S. absorbed approximately 12 percent of the 2021 GHG emissions (USEPA 2024).

California
In 2022, GHG emissions within California totaled 371.1 MMTCO2e. Similar to national emissions, in California, the transportation sector is the largest contributor. Transportation emissions account for approximately 39 percent of the total statewide GHG emissions. The majority of transportation emissions are derived from passenger vehicles and heavy-duty trucks. Emissions associated with industrial uses are the second largest contributor, totaling roughly 23 percent. Industrial emissions are driven by fuel combustion from sources that include refineries, oil and gas extraction, cement plants, and the portion of cogeneration emissions attribution to thermal energy output. Electricity generation (in-state and imports) totaled roughly 16 percent. Other GHG sources include agriculture (8 percent), residential (8 percent), and commercial (6 percent) (CARB 2024c).

Effects of Global Climate Change
There are uncertainties as to exactly what the climate changes will be in various local areas of the earth.

There are also uncertainties associated with the magnitude and timing of other consequences of a warmer planet: sea level rise, spread of certain diseases out of their usual geographic range, the effect on agricultural production, water supply, sustainability of ecosystems, increased strength and frequency of storms, extreme heat events, increased air pollution episodes, and the consequence of these effects on the economy.

Within California, climate changes would likely alter the ecological characteristics of many ecosystems throughout the state. Such alterations would likely include increases in surface temperatures and changes in the form, timing, and intensity of precipitation. For instance, historical records are depicting an increasing trend toward earlier snowmelt in the Sierra Nevada. This snowpack is a principal supply of water for the state, providing roughly 50 percent of state’s annual runoff. If this trend continues, some areas of the state may experience an increased danger of floods during the winter months and possible exhaustion of the snowpack during spring and summer months. An earlier snowmelt would also impact the state’s energy resources. An early exhaustion of the Sierra snowpack may force electricity producers to switch to more costly or non-renewable forms of electricity generation during spring and summer months. A changing climate may also impact agricultural crop yields, coastal structures, and biodiversity.

As a result, resultant changes in climate will likely have detrimental effects on some of California’s largest industries, including agriculture, wine, tourism, skiing, recreational and commercial fishing, and forestry. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-5

3.7.2 Regulatory Setting
There are considerable regulatory actions regarding GHGs and climate change at the state and local level. The following includes the key state and regional regulations applicable to the Project.

State
Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 32
AB 32 (2006) requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020.

GHGs, as defined under AB 32, include CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. Since AB 32 was enacted, a seventh chemical, NF3, has also been added to the list of GHGs. CARB is the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of GHGs. AB 32 states the following:

Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems.

CARB approved the 1990 GHG emissions level of 427 MMTCO2e on December 6, 2007. Therefore, to meet the state’s target, emissions generated in California in 2020 are required to be equal to or less than 427 MMTCO2e. In order to set a framework for the state to meet this target, CARB was tasked with creating a Scoping Plan (as described below). California announced in July 2018 that the state emitted 427 MMTCO2e in 2016 and achieved AB 32 goals (CARB 2018).

SB 32 was signed into law on September 8, 2016. SB 32 states that “In adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emissions reductions authorized by this division, the state [air resources] board shall ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide GHG emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.” Assembly Bill 1279: The California Climate Crisis
AB 1279 was signed into law in 2022 and establishes the policy of the state to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter. AB 1279 would also ensure that by 2045 the statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions are reduced by at least 85 percent below 1990 levels. The bill requires CARB to ensure that an updated Scoping Plan identifies and recommends measures to achieve carbon neutrality, and to identify and implement policies and strategies that enable carbon dioxide removal and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies to complement AB 1279’s emissions reduction requirements. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-6
2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan
The 2022 Scoping Plan was approved in December 2022 and assesses progress toward achieving the SB 32 2030 target and laying out a path to achieve carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the state’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities (CARB 2022).

Cap-and-Trade Program
CARB administers the state’s cap-and-trade program, which covers GHG sources that emit more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2e/year), such as refineries, power plants, and industrial facilities. This market-based approach to reducing GHG emissions provides economic incentives for achieving GHG emission reductions.

Senate Bill 375: The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 SB 375 was signed into law on September 30, 2008. According to SB 375, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions, which emits more than 40 percent of the total GHG emissions in California. SB 375 states, “Without improved land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375 does the following: (1) requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions, (2) aligns planning for transportation and housing, and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.

CARB has prepared a Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets in 2018 which set updated GHG reduction targets for metropolitan planning organizations for 2020 and 2035. Pursuant to SB 375, the SCAG reduction targets for per capita vehicular emissions were 8 percent by 2020 and are 13 to 19 percent by 2035 (CARB 2024a).

Assembly Bill 1493: Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations and fuel efficiency standards that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by USEPA’s denial of an implementation waiver. USEPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the by the U.S.

District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011.

The standards were phased in during the 2009 through 2016 model years. When fully phased in, the near-term (2009–2012) standards resulted in an approximately 22 percent reduction compared with the 2002 fleet, and the mid-term (2013–2016) standards resulted in about a 30 percent reduction. Several technologies stand out as providing significant reductions in emissions at favorable costs. These include discrete variable valve lift or camless valve actuation to optimize valve operation, rather than relying on fixed valve timing and lift as has historically been done; turbocharging to boost power and allow for m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-7
engine downsizing; improved multi-speed transmissions; and improved air conditioning systems that operate optimally, leak less, and/or use an alternative refrigerant.

The second phase of the implementation for AB 1493 was incorporated into Amendments to the Low- Emission Vehicle Program, referred to as LEV III or the Advanced Clean Cars program. The Advanced Clean Cars program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025. The regulation would reduce GHGs from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025. The rules would reduce pollutants from gasoline and diesel-powered cars and would deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The regulations would also provide adequate fueling infrastructure for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.

Senate Bill 1368: Emission Performance Standards
Enacted in 2006, SB 1368 directs the CPUC to adopt a performance standard for GHG emissions for the future power purchases of California utilities. SB 1368 seeks to limit carbon emissions associated with electrical energy consumed in California by forbidding procurement arrangements for energy longer than five years from resources that exceed the emissions of a relatively clean, combined cycle natural gas power plant.

Because of the carbon content of its fuel source, a coal-fired plant cannot meet this standard because such plants emit roughly twice as much carbon as natural gas, combined cycle plants. Accordingly, the law effectively prevents California’s utilities from investing in, otherwise financially supporting, or purchasing power from new coal plants located in or out of the state. The CPUC adopted the regulations required by SB 1368 on August 29, 2007. The regulations implementing SB 1368 establish a standard for baseload generation owned by, or under long-term contract to publicly owned utilities, of 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour.

Senate Bill 1078: Renewable Electricity Standards
SB 1078 (September 12, 2002) required California to generate 20 percent of its electricity from renewable energy by 2017. SB 107 changed the due date to 2010 instead of 2017. On November 17, 2008, the governor signed Executive Order (EO) S-14-08, which established the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) target for California requiring that all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. EO S-21-09 directed CARB to adopt a regulation by July 31, 2010, requiring the state’s load serving entities to meet a 33 percent renewable energy target by 2020. CARB approved the Renewable Electricity Standard on September 23, 2010, by Resolution 10-23. In 2011, the state legislature adopted this higher standard in SB X1-2. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas.

Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 SB 350 (October 7, 2015) reaffirms California’s commitment to reducing its GHG emissions and addressing climate change. Key provisions include an increase in the RPS, higher energy efficiency m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-8
requirements for buildings, initial strategies toward a regional electricity grid, and improved infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations.

Senate Bill 100: California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program SB 100 (September 10, 2018) revised the RPS goals to achieve the 50 percent renewable resources target by December 31, 2026, and to achieve a 60 percent target by December 31, 2030. The bill requires that retail sellers and local publicly owned electric utilities procure a minimum quantity of electricity products from eligible renewable energy resources so that the total kilowatt hours of those products sold to their retail end-use customers achieve 44 percent of retail sales by December 31, 2024; 52 percent by December 31, 2027; and 60 percent by December 31, 2030. The bill also establishes a state policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045. Under the bill, the state cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid or allow resource shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon-free electricity target.

Executive Order S-01-07: Low Carbon Fuel Standard
EO S-01-07 was signed on January 18, 2007. The EO mandates that a statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. In particular, the EO established a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and directed the Secretary for Environmental Protection to coordinate the actions of the California Energy Commission, CARB, the University of California, and other agencies to develop and propose protocols for measuring the “life-cycle carbon intensity” of transportation fuels. This analysis supporting development of the protocols was included in an implementation plan for the State Alternative Fuels Plan adopted by California Energy Commission on December 24, 2007, and was submitted to CARB for consideration as an “early action” item under AB 32. CARB adopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009.

The LCFS was subject to legal challenge in 2011. Ultimately, CARB was required to bring a new LCFS regulation for consideration in February 2015. The proposed LCFS regulation was required to contain revisions to the 2010 LCFS and new provisions designed to foster investments in the production of the low-carbon fuels, offer additional flexibility to regulated parties, update critical technical information, simplify and streamline program operations, and enhance enforcement. The Office of Administrative Law approved the regulation on November 16, 2015. The regulation was last amended in 2019, and approved on May 27, 2020 and became effective on July 1, 2020. The 2019 amendments provide clarification related to the Clean Fuel Reward program costs, credit transactions, fuels transactions and compliance reporting. Additional amendments have been proposed and are going to approval hearings in March 2024 (CARB 2024b).

Executive Order S-13-08: Climate Adaptation Strategy
EO S-13-08, which was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in November 2008, states that “climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of its population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in this EO, m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-9
the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy was adopted, which is the “… first statewide, multi- sector, region-specific, and information-based climate change adaptation strategy in the United States.” Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.

Executive Order B-48-18: Zero-Emission Vehicles
In January 2018, Governor Brown signed EO B-48-18 requiring all state entities to work with the private sector to have at least 5 million zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) on the road by 2030, as well as install 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 electric vehicle charging stations by 2025. It specifies that 10,000 of the electric vehicle charging stations should be direct current fast chargers. This order also requires all state entities to continue to partner with local and regional governments to streamline the installation of ZEV infrastructure. The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development is required to publish a Plug-in Charging Station Design Guidebook and update the 2015 Hydrogen Station Permitting Guidebook to aid in these efforts. All state entities are required to participate in updating the 2016 ZeroEmissions Vehicle Action Plan to help expand private investment in ZEV infrastructure with a focus on serving low-income and disadvantaged communities. Additionally, all state entities are to support and recommend policies and actions to expand ZEV infrastructure at residential land uses, through the LCFS Program and recommend how to ensure affordability and accessibility for all drivers.

Executive Order N-79-20
In September 2020, Governor Newsom signed EO N-79-20, which sets the following goals for the state:
100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks shall be zero-emission by 2035; 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the state shall be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks; and 100 percent of off-road vehicles and equipment in the state shall be zero-emission by 2035, where feasible.

Regional
SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The SCAG is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization for the following six counties: Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. The SCAG develops long-range regional transportation plans, including sustainable communities strategies pursuant to SB 375, growth forecast components, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations, and a portion of the SCAQMD air quality plans (SCAG 2023).

In April 2024, the SCAG Regional Council approved the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, which is entitled Connect SoCal 2024. Connect SoCal 2024 is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern (SCAG 2024). The 2024 RTP/SCS supersedes the previous RTP/SCS that was adopted in 2020. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-10
Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Seal Beach (City of Seal Beach 2003). The General Plan contains the current Housing Element Update, which was adopted in 2022 and revised in 2024. The City’s Housing Element Update includes the following goal and policies to promote energy efficiency which would in turn reduce GHG emissions:

Housing Element Update
Goal 6: Encourage more efficient energy use in residential developments.

Policy 6a: Promote energy conservation through “green building” techniques that reduce water consumption, improve energy efficiency and lessen a building’s overall environmental impact.

Policy 6b: Promote “smart growth” principles by encouraging compact development in locations that provide opportunities for reduced vehicle trips.

3.7.3 Environmental Impacts
This section discusses how GHG thresholds were determined and the thresholds of significance that were used for this analysis. Additionally, this section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant GHG impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.28 was used to estimate construction and operational GHG emissions from the Project. Construction emissions were estimated for the most emissions-intensive future development project under the Project, which is expected to be buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4 as this site could accommodate the most dwelling units. Operational modeling assumed full Project buildout.

Detailed model assumptions and inputs for all emissions calculations can be found in Appendix B.

Thresholds of Significance
After the adoption of AB 32, the SCAQMD established a GHG working group to develop thresholds of significance for the analysis of GHG emissions. In December 2008, the SCAQMD Board adopted the Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas Significance Threshold, which established a screening threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e/year for industrial projects and 3,000 MTCO2e/year for residential and commercial projects (SCAQMD 2008). Additionally, the SCAQMD working group recommended that instead of an individual construction GHG threshold, construction emissions should be amortized over the life of the project (30 years) and evaluated with a project’s annual, operational GHG emissions. •
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-11
CEQA Guidelines
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions were analyzed and evaluated to determine whether GHG emission impacts are significant.

Would the Project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases?
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Generation of Greenhouse Gases
Impact GHG-1 The Project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Impact Analysis
The Project does not propose any individual development projects at this time but, rather, would facilitate future developments in the City. For the purposes of the analysis contained in this Draft EIR, implementation of the Project would result in future development of up to 1,733 new dwelling units as outlined in Section 2.0, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. Buildout of the future developments facilitated by the Project would generate GHG emissions during construction and operations, as discussed in further detail below.

Construction Emission Inventory
GHG emissions would be generated during construction from off-road equipment and on-road vehicle exhaust from worker vehicle trips and hauling truck trips. Table 3.7-1, below, presents a summary of the estimated GHG emissions that would result from construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4, which is expected to be the most emissions-intensive future development project under the Project. The table also includes an estimate of the total GHG emissions associated with cumulative buildout of the entire Project, assuming that construction of every Project unit released the same volume of GHG. To be consistent with SCAQMD’s GHG emissions policy, the table also presents construction emissions amortized over a 30- year Project lifetime.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-12
Table 3.7-1: Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions Construction Year Emissions
(MTCO2e per year)
2025 863.92
2026 405.74
Total for Housing Opportunity Site 4 1,269.70
Total for Full Project Buildout1 4,078
Amortized Construction Emissions from Full Project Buildout 135.94 1 To estimate GHG emissions from Full Project Buildout, the emissions from construction of 552 units at Housing Opportunity Site 4 were scaled up on a unit-wise basis to 1,773 units for the purposes of the analysis contained in this Draft EIR.

Source: Appendix A.

The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual operational emissions and compared to the SCAQMD threshold of significance below.

Operational Emission Inventory
Operational, or long-term, emissions occur over the life of the Project. Operational activities of the future developments facilitated by the Project would generate GHG emissions primarily from mobile sources.

Operational GHG emissions from cumulative Project buildout, as well as amortized construction emissions, are shown in Table 3.7-2.

Table 3.7-2: Project Operations – Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Unmitigated) Source Emissions (MTCO2e per year)
Mobile 11,722
Area 30.6
Energy 2,890
Water 583
Waste 309
Refrigerants 2.12
Operation Subtotal 15,637
Amortized Construction Emissions from Full Project Buildout 136 Project Total 15,773
SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? Yes
Source: Appendix A.
1~ -
r----
i----
t---
t--- -
~
L
-
I
-
I
I -
I
I
I -
~ -
I t--
I r--
I t--
-
- I ~
L J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-13
As shown in the table, full buildout of the dwelling units facilitated by the Project would result in GHG emissions that exceed the SCAQMD threshold of significance. Therefore, Mitigation Measure GHG-1, which provides a menu of GHG reduction measures, is required. Table 3.7-3 presents the Project’s GHG emissions with application of the following GHG reduction measures:

Provide electric vehicle charging infrastructure;
Provide bicycle parking;
Provide traffic-calming measures;
Exceed Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards by 10 percent; Require energy efficient appliances;
Establish onsite solar energy systems sufficient to meet 50 percent of each structure’s electricity demand;
Install alternative water heater in place of gas storage tank water heater; Install electric space heater in place of natural gas heaters; Install electric ranges in place of gas ranges
Require low-flow water fixtures;
Replace gas-powered landscape equipment with zero-emission landscape equipment; and Prohibit the installation of fireplaces.

Table 3.7-3: Project Operations – Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Mitigated) Source Emissions (MTCO2e per year)
Mobile 11,722
Area - Energy 1,922
Water 554
Waste 409
Refrigerants 2.12
Operation Subtotal 14,609
Amortized Construction Emissions from Full Project Buildout 136 •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
I
7 I
I f----
~
I - -
~
I
I r--
I ,--
- -
'-- I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-14
Source Emissions (MTCO2e per year)
Project Total 14,745
SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? Yes
Source: Appendix A.

As presented above, while implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would reduce GHG emissions, the level of emissions would not be reduced to below the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The impacts from construction of a larger residential development were evaluated within Table 3.7-1. Additionally, operational impacts from the total 1,773 units were evaluated within Tables 3.7-2 and 3.7-3. Emissions were found to exceed GHG draft interim thresholds and therefore, the 167 dwelling units proposed under the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Conclusion
As demonstrated above, the Project could generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. While implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would reduce GHG impacts, the Project would still result in emissions that exceed the applicable threshold of significance. Future developments evaluated as part of the Project may be subject to discretionary permits and future CEQA review on a project-by-project basis. Regardless, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM GHG-1: Implement GHG Reduction Measures. In accordance with provisions of sections 15091(a)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Such measures may include the following or other comparable measures identified by the City:
a) Integrate green building measures consistent with CALGreen (California Building Code Title 24), local building codes and other applicable laws, into project design including:
o Use energy efficient materials in building design, construction, rehabilitation, and retrofit.
r--
m
I
I
I
I
7 CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-15
o Install energy-efficient lighting, heating, and cooling systems (cogeneration); water heaters; appliances; equipment; and control systems. o Reduce lighting, heating, and cooling needs by taking advantage of light-colored roofs, trees for shade, and sunlight.
o Incorporate passive environmental control systems that account for the characteristics of the natural environment.
o Use high-efficiency lighting and cooking devices.
o Incorporate passive solar design.
o Use high-reflectivity building materials and multiple glazing. o Prohibit gas-powered landscape maintenance equipment. o Install electric vehicle charging stations.
o Reduce wood burning stoves or fireplaces.
o Provide bike lanes accessibility and parking at residential developments. b) Include offsite measures to mitigate a project’s emissions. c) Measures that consider incorporation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) during design, construction, and operation of projects to minimize GHG emissions, including but not limited to:
o Use energy and fuel-efficient vehicles and equipment; o Deployment of zero- and/or near zero emission technologies; o Use lighting systems that are energy efficient, such as LED technology; o Use the minimum feasible amount of GHG-emitting construction materials; o Use cement blended with the maximum feasible amount of flash or other materials that reduce GHG emissions from cement production; o Incorporate design measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse; o Incorporate design measures to reduce energy consumption and increase use of renewable energy;
o Incorporate design measures to reduce water consumption; o Use lighter-colored pavement where feasible;
o Recycle construction debris to maximum extent feasible; o Plant shade trees in or near construction projects where feasible; and o Solicit bids that include concepts listed above.
d) Measures that encourage transit use, carpooling, bike-share and car-share programs, active transportation, and parking strategies, including, but not limited to the following:
o Promote transit-active transportation coordinated strategies; o Increase bicycle carrying capacity on transit and rail vehicles; o Improve or increase access to transit;
o Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and day care;
o Incorporate the neighborhood electric vehicle network; o Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; o Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service; m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-16
o Provide traffic calming measures;
o Provide bicycle parking;
o Limit or eliminate park supply;
o Unbundle parking costs;
o Provide parking cash-out programs;
o Implement or provide access to commute reduction program; d) Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities into project designs, maintaining these facilities, and providing amenities incentivizing their use; and planning for and building local bicycle projects that connect with the regional network; e) Improving transit access to rail and bus routes by incentives for construction of transit facilities within developments, and/or providing dedicated shuttle service to transit stations; and
f) Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for those vehicles;
g) Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
o Retaining onsite mature trees and vegetation, and planting new canopy trees; o Measures that increase vehicle efficiency, encourage use of zero and low emissions vehicles, or reduce the carbon content of fuels, including constructing or encouraging construction of electric vehicle charging stations or neighborhood electric vehicle networks, or charging for electric bicycles; and o Measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

Conflict with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Regulation Impact GHG-2 The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Impact Analysis
A project would have a significant impact with respect to GHG emissions and global climate change if it would substantially conflict with the provisions of Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant GHG impact is identified if the project could conflict with applicable GHG reduction plans, policies, or regulations. The Project would be subject to complying with SB 32 and AB 1279. For this analysis, the applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions are the CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan and the SCAG RTP/SCS. Project consistency with the foregoing plans is evaluated below.

Consistency with the CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan
The 2022 Scoping Plan, approved in December 2022, builds upon previous iterations of state scoping plans to achieve carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions below 85 percent below m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-17
1990 no later than 2045, as directed by AB 1279 (CARB 2022). Table 3.7-4 identifies the Scoping Plan policies that may be applicable to the developments facilitated by the Project.

Table 3.7-4: Project Consistency with 2022 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies
Measure Consistency Determination
Deploy ZEVs and reduce driving
demand
Consistent. While the Project would not deploy ZEVs, consistent with the 2022 California Building Standards Code, or applicable code at the time of construction, all residential buildings facilitated by the Project would include EV-capable infrastructure to accommodate future installation of a Level 2 EV charger.

Coordinate supply of liquid fossil
fuels with declining CA fuel demand
Not Applicable. This measure is aimed at petroleum refineries and fossil fuel extraction operations. The Project would not interfere with this goal.

Generate clean electricity Consistent. Development facilitated by the Project would comply with all relevant provisions included in the California Building Standards Code applicable at the time of construction. Pursuant to the 2022 California Building Standards Code, new residential structures shall include rooftop solar panels to generate clean electricity.

Decarbonize Buildings Consistent. Development facilitated by the Project would comply with all applicable provisions included in the California Building Standards Code applicable at the time of construction, which would help reduce GHG emissions associated with building operations. Further, implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would ensure that each future development facilitated by the Project would reduce GHG emissions.

Decarbonize Industrial Energy
Supply
Not Applicable. The Project would facilitate development of residential land uses and would not affect the industrial sector.

Reduce non-combustion emissions
(Methane)
Consistent. The Project would facilitate development of residential land uses and would not include any land uses that generate significant levels of methane, such as landfills or dairy farms.

Reduce non-combustion emissions
(Hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs])
Consistent. Development facilitated under the Project would comply with all state regulations governing SLCPs, including HFCs.

Compensate for remaining
emissions
Not Applicable. This measure is aimed at the state government to reduce statewide emissions to meet AB 1279 goals.

Source: CARB 2022.

This analysis finds that, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, the Project would be consistent with the applicable strategies recommended in the 2022 Scoping Plan.

Consistency with the SCAG’s Connect SoCal 2024
In April 2024, the SCAG Regional Council approved the 2024-2050 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS. The primary goal of Connect SoCal 2024 is to achieve sustainable regional growth while reducing GHG emissions through transportation and land use planning. Project consistency with the specific goals of Connect SoCal 2024 which are applicable to the Project are evaluated in Table 3.7-5. ,--
--+-----
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-18
Table 3.7-5: Project Consistency with Connect SoCal 2024 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies
Goal Consistency Determination
Goal 36: Encourage housing
development in transit-supportive
and walkable areas to create more
interconnected and resilient
communities
Consistent. Implementation of the Project would inherently support this goal. For the purposes of the analysis contained in this Draft EIR, the Project would facilitate the development of up to 1,773 dwelling units throughout the City. The housing types consist of multi-family residences designated for varying income levels, including low-income and moderateincome units. Additionally, Orange County Transportation Authority and Long Beach Transit both provide public transit services throughout the City. Thus, future residents of future developments facilitated by the Project would have access to public transportation options.

Goal 37: Support local, regional,
state and federal efforts to produce
and preserve affordable housing
while meeting additional housing
needs across the region.

Consistent. See discussion above. Additionally, by implementing the Housing Element Update and demonstrating the City’s ability to achieve provide housing at varying income levels, the Project would help encourage a diverse housing stock and contribute to more equitable communities.

Goal 51: Reduce hazardous air
pollutants and greenhouse gas
emissions and improve air quality
throughout the region through
planning and implementation efforts.

Consistent. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, AQ-3, and GHG-1 would ensure that the Project reduces air and GHG emissions.

Source: SCAG 2024a.

The RTP/SCS generally encourages residential growth within identified priority growth areas, transit priority areas, and high-quality transit areas in order to facilitate the use of public transit and reduce per capita VMT. The City of Seal Beach does not include any priority growth areas, transit priority areas, and high-quality transit areas. However, multi-family housing is known to have a lower trip generation rate as compared to single-family residential units (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2021). Furthermore, infill development and densification also support a reduced rate of single-passenger vehicle trips (Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation 2024).

Based on the above, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, AQ-3, and GHG-1, the Project is considered consistent with the overarching goals of Connect SoCal 2024.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. Consistency with CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan and SCAQG’s Connect SoCal 2024 were evaluated for the buildout of 1,773 dwelling units and therefore, the 167 dwelling units proposed under the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone project-specific EIR.

Conclusion
The Project could conflict with an applicable plan adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions; therefore, impacts could be considered significant. However, with the implementation of mitigation, the -
r----
-
- -
I -
m

3.7-19

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Project would comply with all applicable measures in the 2022 Scoping Plan and the RTP/SCS, and the impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, AQ-3, and GHG-1 are required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

3.7.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative GHG impacts is the state as California has GHG reduction rules that all projects and jurisdictions within the state would be subject to.

Table 3.7-6: Cumulative Projects Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
Preparation of
EIR 167
-
I
L -
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-20
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
specialty
restaurant
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-21
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
8 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
6695 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020040);
6411 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020051);
No address
(7237020904)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
940
9 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
1000 N
Studebaker Rd
(7238015021)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
115
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
122
I 1 I I I 7
~ -
,--
-
-
-

I ----'
~
-
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-22
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
(By City of
Westminster)
Development under the Project in combination with cumulative development identified in Table 3.7-6 could increase GHG emissions.

Global GHG emissions are inherently a cumulative issue that is understood for CEQA purposes to be an existing significant and adverse condition. GHG emissions from one project cannot, on their own, result in changes in climatic conditions; therefore, the emissions from any project must be considered in the context of their contribution to cumulative global emissions, which is the basis for determining a significant cumulative impact. This is determined through the project’s consistency with applicable GHG emission thresholds and applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Although the geographic scope of cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions is global, this analysis focuses on the Project’s direct and/or indirect generation of GHG emissions on the region and the state. As discussed in this analysis, implementation of the Project, would result in a significant impact related to GHG emissions. Therefore, the Project’s incremental contribution to the existing significant impact is cumulatively considerable.

3.7.5 References
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013. GHG Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Inventory. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-slcp-inventory. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2018. Climate Pollutants Fall Below 1990 Levels for the First Time. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/climate-pollutants-fall-below-1990-levels-first-time. Accessed January 2024.
_____. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp_1.pdf.

Accessed January 2024.
_____. 2024a. SB 375 Regional Plan Climate Targets. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/sustainable-communities-program/regional-plan-targets. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2024b. LCFS Regulation. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/low-carbon-fuelstandard/lcfs-regulation. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2024c. Current California GHG Emission Inventory Data. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventorydata. Accessed October 2024.

I 1 I I I 7
~ -
I_ I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7-23
City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed January 2024.

Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. 2024. SB 743 Frequently Asked Questions. https://lci.ca.gov/ceqa/sb-743/faq.html#housing-projects. Accessed October 2024.

Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2021. Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008. Draft Guidance Document, Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significancethresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed January 2024.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2023. About Us. https://scag.ca.gov/about-us.

Accessed January 2024.
_____. 2024. Connect SoCal 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/23-2987-connect-socal-2024-finalcomplete-040424.pdf?1714175547. Accessed October 2024.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2023a. Overview of Greenhouse Gases. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2023b. Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) Basics. https://www.epa.gov/eps-partnership/sulfurhexafluoride-sf6-basics. Accessed January 2024. _____. 2024. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks. Accessed October 2024.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-1

3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for hazards and hazardous materials. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area due to the proximity of the Los Alamitos JFTB and the impact would be less than significant.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project is within the airport planning area for the Los Alamitos JFTB. The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would be subject to review by the ALUC for consistency with the Los Alamitos JFTB Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). The consistency review and ALUC determination is being evaluated separately in a standalone EIR.

3.8.1 Environmental Setting
Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, and any material that a business or implementing agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be injurious to public health and safety or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. Hazardous materials are manufactured, transported, stored, used, and disposed of on a regular basis. Although hazardous materials incidents can happen anywhere, certain areas are at higher risk.

Within the state, the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) regulates the use and handling of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. The DTSC is a division of Cal EPA and works in conjunction with the USEPA to enforce and implement hazardous materials laws and regulations. The primary transportation routes of hazardous materials in Orange County near the City are the I-405 and I605 freeways. Some transportation of hazardous materials occurs on Pacific Coast highway and Seal Beach Boulevard within the City (City of Seal Beach 2003). Additionally, there are several hazardous materials cleanup sites within the City that are listed on several databases, including the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Geotracker website (SWRCB 2024). Most of the sites considered for future development under the Project, as well as the ORCC Specific Plan Project site are not listed as active hazardous materials cleanup sites. However, Housing Opportunity Site 7 is identified as having an active cleanup program by SWRCB due to a former dry-cleaning facility that was located within the Seal Beach Shopping Center. As identified in the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database, the site is currently being remediated and has an open remediation status as of 2017.

Additionally, two active leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanup sites are located within the Main Street Program area. These two active LUST cleanup sites are former Chevron and Shell Oil gas station sites. The former Shell Oil site located at 347 Main Street has a status of open – remediation as of m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-2
2002 and the former Chevron site located at 350 Main Street has a status of open – remediation as of 2022. Both sites are listed due to gasoline contamination in the groundwater; however, the two sites have undergone remediation activities and are listed due to required groundwater monitoring requirements as part of the remediation process. The two former gas station uses have since been closed and the sites have been redeveloped with commercial uses. Individual development that occurs on the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites that may be located on or next to a hazardous materials site would be required to complete an environmental site assessment (ESA) by a qualified professional to ensure that the future development projects would not disturb hazardous materials sites and that any proposed development would not create a substantial hazard to the public or the environment.

Airport Hazards
The nearest airport is the Los Alamitos JFTB, which abuts the northernmost portion of Seal Beach. The Los Alamitos JFTB conducts military aviation operations. Most of Seal Beach is within the airport planning area for the Los Alamitos JFTB, except for the portion of the City located south of Electric Avenue.

The Los Alamitos JFTB is within the oversight of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), which is required to prepare and adopt an airport land use plan for each of the airports within its jurisdiction. The AELUP for the Los Alamitos JFTB was issued by the ALUC in 2002 and last amended in 2017. The Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP is a land-use compatibility plan that is intended to protect the public from adverse effects of aircraft noise, to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable space. The Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP identifies standards for development in the airport’s planning area based on noise contours, accident-potential zones, and building heights.

The Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP divides the airport planning area into three specific zones: Noise Impact Zone 1 – High Impact Zone (65 decibel [dB] Community Noise Equivalent Level [CNEL] and above), Noise Impact Zone 2 – Moderate Noise Impact (60 dB CNEL or greater, less than 65 dB CNEL), and Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone (Extreme Crash Hazard).

The Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP also defines building height restrictions within the airport planning area based on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Part 77 Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR). In accordance with FAR Part 77, any proposed structure that is more than 200 feet tall is required to notify FAA and is subject to review by the ALUC.

3.8.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
United States Environmental Protection Agency
The USEPA was established in 1970 to consolidate in one agency a variety of federal research, monitoring, standard-setting, and enforcement activities to ensure environmental protection. The USEPA’s mission is to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment—air, water, and land—upon which life depends. The USEPA works to develop and enforce regulations and implement m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-3
environmental laws enacted by Congress, is responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental programs, and delegates to states and tribes the responsibility for using permits and for monitoring and enforcing compliance. Where national standards are not met, the USEPA can issue sanctions and take other steps to assist the states and tribes to reach the desired levels of environmental quality. Laws and regulations established by the USEPA are enforced in Orange County by the Cal EPA.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) set up the federal regulatory program for hazardous substances and gives the USEPA the authority to regulate the generation, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous substances in a “cradle to grave” system. Under RCRA, the USEPA regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances. This regulatory system includes tracking all generators of hazardous waste. 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendment Act
RCRA was amended by the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendment Act, which prohibited the use of certain techniques for the disposal of certain hazardous wastes. The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 imposes safety requirements to protect local communities in the event of accidental release of hazardous substances. The requirements provide measures so that the risks from interaction with hazardous materials, such as handling, storage, and disposal, are mitigated or prevented. This law protects human health and the environment if the unintended release of hazardous materials was to occur. The USEPA has delegated fulfillment of many of RCRA’s requirements to DTSC.

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The U.S. Department of Transportation regulates hazardous materials transportation under CFR Title 49.

State agencies with primary responsibility for enforcing federal and state regulations and responding to hazardous materials transportation emergencies are the California Highway Patrol and Caltrans. These agencies also govern permitting for hazardous materials transportation.

Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77
The FAA is charged with the review of construction activities that occur in the vicinity of airports. Their role in reviewing these activities is to ensure that new structures do not result in a hazard to navigation. The regulations contained in FAR Part 77 are designed to ensure that no hazards are allowed to exist that would endanger the public. The FAA, through FAR Part 77, established a method of identifying surfaces that should be free from obstructions to maintain sufficient airspace around airports. FAR Part 77, in effect, identifies the maximum height at which a structure would be considered an obstacle at any given point around an airport. In addition, Part 77 establishes standards for determining whether objects constructed near airports would be considered obstructions in navigable airspace, sets forth notice requirements of certain types of proposed construction or alterations, and provides for aeronautical studies to determine the potential impacts of a structure on the flight of aircraft through navigable airspace.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-4
State
Hazardous Waste Control Act
The Hazardous Waste Control Act created the state hazardous waste management program. It is similar to, but more stringent than, the federal RCRA program. The act is implemented by regulations contained in CCR Title 26, which describes the following required aspects for the proper management of hazardous waste: identification and classification; generation and transportation; design and permitting of recycling treatment, storage and disposal facilities; operation of facilities and staff training; and closure of facilities and liability requirements.

These regulations list more than 800 materials that may be hazardous, and establish criteria for identifying, packaging, and disposing of such waste. Under the Hazardous Waste Control Act and Title 26, the generator of hazardous waste must complete a manifest that accompanies the waste from generator to transporter to the ultimate disposal location. Copies of the manifest must be filed with DTSC.

California Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Toxic Substances Control
Cal EPA is responsible for creating and enforcing environmental regulations within California. Within Cal EPA is DTSC, which was formed under the Hazardous Waste Control Act. DTSC is responsible for regulating hazardous waste, remediating existing contamination, and identifying ways to reduce production of hazardous wastes. DTSC can delegate enforcement responsibilities to local jurisdictions.

Unified Program
The unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management regulatory program (Unified Program) is a unified hazardous materials management program that was established by California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection following Senate Bill 1082 (1993). The Unified Program consolidates, coordinates, and makes consistent the administrative requirements, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities of the following programs:

Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories California Accidental Release Prevention Program
Underground Storage Tank Program
Above Ground Petroleum Storage Act Program
Hazardous Waste Generator and On-site Hazardous Waste Treatment Programs California Uniform Fire Code: Hazardous Material Management Plans and Hazardous Material Inventory Statements
These six environmental programs are implemented at the local government level by Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs). CUPAs provide a central permitting and regulatory agency for permits, •
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-5
reporting, and compliance enforcement. PRC Section 21151.4 sets special requirements for EIRs and negative declarations for projects that involve the construction or alteration of a facility within 0.25 mile of a school that creates the following conditions:

The project might reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous air emissions; The project would handle an extremely hazardous substance or a mixture containing extremely hazardous substances in a quantity equal to or greater than the state threshold quantity specified in Section 25532(j) of the HSC; or
The project may pose a health or safety hazard to persons who would attend or would be employed at the school.

As part of the CEQA process, the lead agency preparing the EIR must consult with the appropriate school district regarding the potential impact of the project on the school, and the school district must be notified about the project in writing at least 30 days before the proposed certification of the EIR (PRC Section 21151.4; 14 CCR Section 15186[b]).

Cortese List Government Code Section 65962
Government Code Section 65962 was enacted in 1985 and was amended in 1992. It is used as a planning tool to comply with CEQA and requires information about locations of hazardous materials release sites. It states that through the combined efforts of DTSC, the Department of Health Services, the SWRCB, and local enforcement agencies, a list of potentially hazardous areas and sites will be compiled and remain up to date (at a minimum, updated annually). The list is consolidated by the Secretary for Environmental Protection and is distributed to each city and county in which sites on the list are located.

The list can be found on DTSC’s EnviroStor database, which includes information from SWRCB’s GeoTracker database.

California Department of Transportation
Caltrans manages interregional transportation, including the management and construction of the California highway system. In addition, Caltrans is responsible for the permitting and regulation of state roadways and requires that permits be obtained for transportation of oversized loads and transportation of certain materials, such as hazardous materials, and for construction-related traffic disturbance.

California Public Resources Code
PRC Section 21151.4 is another key state law pertaining to hazardous materials, and is presented verbatim below:
a) An environmental impact report shall not be certified or a negative declaration shall not be approved for any project involving the construction or alteration of a facility within one-fourth of a mile of a school that might reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous air emissions, or that would handle an extremely hazardous substance or a mixture containing extremely hazardous substances in a quantity equal to or greater than the state threshold quantity specified pursuant to subdivision (j) of Section 25532 of the Health and Safety Code, that may pose a health or safety •
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-6
hazard to persons who would attend or would be employed at the school, unless both of the following occur:
1) The lead agency preparing the environmental impact report or negative declaration has consulted with the school district having jurisdiction regarding the potential impact of the Project on the school.
2) The school district has been given written notification of the Project not less than 30 days prior to the proposed certification of the environmental impact report or approval of the negative declaration.
b) As used in this section, the following definitions apply:
1) “Extremely hazardous substance” means an extremely hazardous substance as defined pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 25532 of the Health and Safety Code. 2) “Hazardous air emissions” means emissions into the ambient air of air contaminants that have been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the State Air Resources Board or by the air pollution control officer for the jurisdiction in which the Project is located. As determined by the air pollution control officer, hazardous air emissions also mean emissions into the ambient air of a substance identified in subdivisions (a) to (f), inclusive, of Section 44321 of the Health and Safety Code. [Amended by Stats. 2008, Ch. 148, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2009]
Division of Occupational Safety and Health
The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) is responsible for enforcing workplace safety regulations and requirements in California, including hazardous materials requirements recorded under CCR Title 8. These regulations include requirements for safety training, availability of safety equipment, accident and illness prevention programs, warnings about hazardous substance exposure (such as asbestos), and preparation of emergency action and fire prevention plans.

CalOSHA also enforces hazard-communication program regulations that contain training and information requirements. Such requirements include procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, communicating information about hazardous substances and their handling, and preparing health and safety plans to protect workers and employees at hazardous waste sites. Under the hazardcommunication program, employers must make Safety Data Sheets available to employees and document employee information and training programs.

California Emergency Services Act
The California Emergency Services Act provides the basic authority for conducting emergency operations following a proclamation of emergency by the governor and/or appropriate local authorities. Local government and district emergency plans are considered to be extensions of the California Emergency Plan, established in accordance with the Emergency Services Act. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-7
The California Emergency Management Agency (CAL EMA) is the state agency responsible for establishing emergency response and spill notification plans related to hazardous materials accidents.

CAL EMA regulates businesses by requiring specific businesses to prepare an inventory of hazardous materials (CCR Title 19). CAL EMA is also the lead state agency for emergency management and is responsible for coordinating the state-level response to emergencies and disasters.

State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code Section 21670, et seq.) The Public Utilities Code establishes the requirement for the creation of ALUCs for every county in which there is an airport that is served by a scheduled airline. Additionally, these sections of the Public Utilities Code mandate the preparation of Comprehensive Land Use Plans to provide for the orderly growth of each public airport and the area surrounding the airport. The purpose of Comprehensive Land Use Plans includes the protection of the general welfare of inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and the general public.

Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Seal Beach. The General Plan contains the current Housing Element Update, which was adopted in 2022, and revised in 2024. The various elements within the General Plan include goals and policies for the physical development of the City. The City’s General Plan goals and policies applicable to hazards and hazardous materials are presented below:

Safety Element
Policy 2A: Coordinate with federal, state, and county hazardous waste management plans to protect the health and welfare of the public, the environment, and the economy of the City of Seal Beach through comprehensive programs that ensure safe and responsible management of hazardous waste and materials.

Policy 2B: Implement the measures outline in the City’s Household Hazardous Waste Plan, Orange County’s Hazardous Waste Management Plan, and Hazardous Materials Area Plan, and the County’s Operational Area Marine Oil Spill Contingency Plan to ensure the effective management, transportation, and disposal of hazardous waste on a City-wide level.

Policy 2C: Support enforcement of state “right to know” laws, which outline the public’s right to information about local toxic producers.

Policy 2F: Facilitate coordinated effective response to hazardous materials emergencies in the City to minimize health and environmental risks.

Policy 2G: Promote public awareness in hazardous materials emergency response preparedness by any effective informational media, such as Emergency Preparedness •
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-8
Newsletter, neighborhood posters, and at least annual presentations at neighborhood association meetings.

Policy 2H: Support the combination of the OCFA’s hazardous materials disclosure program.

Ensure annual inspections of businesses that generate or use hazardous materials, and identify and monitor any historical hazardous materials sites within the City for public health and safety issues.

Policy 2I: Promote public participation and education in the implementation of the programs identified in the County’s Hazardous Materials Management Program.

Policy 2J: Encourage OCFA to monitor the flow of hazardous materials through the City to ensure public safety.

Policy 2K: Encourage coordination between the OCFA and the Seal Beach Police Department in the designation of routes and enforcement of hazardous materials, routing ordinances, and laws with the I-405 freeway as the primary designated route.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
The Seal Beach Municipal Code refers to Section 11.4.60, Hazardous Waste Facilities, which is not applicable to the Project as it does not include hazardous materials related codes that would be applicable to the Project.

Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base Airport Environs Land Use Plan The ALUC for Orange County is an agency, established in late 1969, authorized under state law to assist local agencies in ensuring compatible land uses in the vicinity of airports. Primary areas of concern for ALUCs are noise, safety hazards, and airport operational integrity. Land uses within the airport planning area boundaries are required to conform to safety, height, and noise restrictions established in the Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP. The AELUP for the Los Alamitos JFTB was most recently amended in 2017.

3.8.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant hazards and hazardous materials impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The following analysis is based on a review of documents pertaining to the project site, including the General Plan, Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP, and online regulatory compliance databases. •
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-9
Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions were analyzed and evaluated to determine whether the Project’s hazards and hazardous materials impacts are significant.

Would the Project:

For a Project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people rising or working in the project area? The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:

Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
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? Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-10
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Nearby Airport Hazard
Impact HAZ-1 The Project would not, for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area.

Impact Analysis
A portion of Seal Beach is within the airport planning area of the Los Alamitos JFTB. As such, land uses within the airport planning area boundaries are required to conform to the noise, safety, and height restrictions established in the AELUP for the JFTB. The City is required to have any proposed General Plan amendments, Specific Plans and Specific Plan amendments, and zoning code amendments submitted to the ALUC for a consistency determination. However, the ALUC’s findings may be overruled by the City Council.

Based on a review of the Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP, most of the Project, except for Housing Opportunity Site 8 and the portion of the Main Street Specific Plan area located south of Electric Avenue, are located within the airport planning area for the Los Alamitos JFTB. Additionally, the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project is within the airport planning area for the Los Alamitos JFTB.

While the Project does not propose any specific development at this time, ALUC review is required for adoptions of or amendments to a General Plan or Specific Plan; zoning ordinance; master plan for public use airports; and heliports within the airport influence area (Public Utilities Code Sections 21676(b), 21676(c), 21664.5, and 21661.5). The ALUC may find a General Plan, Specific Plan, or zoning code amendment to be inconsistent; however, the City has the authority to overrule that finding. The requirement for ALUC review of proposed development projects is contingent on the ALUC finding that the General Plan, Specific Plan, or zoning code amendment is not consistent, or a finding that the City has not taken necessary steps to make them consistent (Public Utilities Code Section 21676.5).

Future developments proposed under the Project that are located within the airport planning area for the Los Alamitos JFTB that require any amendment to a General Plan or Specific Plan and any proposed changes to a zoning ordinance or building regulation would be subject to review by the ALUC. Should a future development project require review by the ALUC, noise, safety, and height of the structures are expected to be the key issues the ALUC would consider. These topics are further discussed in the following subsections.

Aircraft Noise Hazards
None of the Housing Opportunity Sites, including the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project, are within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 1 – High Noise Impact) for the Los Alamitos JFTB. However, Housing Opportunity Site 5 and the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are located within the 60 to 65 dB CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact 2 – Moderate Noise Impact).
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-11
According to the Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP, residential uses are considered “conditionally consistent” within the 60 to 65 dB CNEL noise contour and it is recommended that residential units be limited or excluded from this area unless sufficiently sound attenuated (AEULP 2017). The Los Alamitos JFTB AELUP identifies that the residential use interior sound attenuation requirement shall be a CNEL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dB, which is consistent with the City’s General Plan and the California Building Code requirements. As discussed in Section 3.11, Noise, future developments proposed under the Project that are exposed to existing or projected noise, including aircraft noise, that exceeds noise standards identified in Figure N-3 of the General Plan would be required to prepare a project-specific acoustical study and identify mitigation measures to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA. Following the noise level standards set in the City’s Noise Element and preparing an acoustical study would minimize potential impacts and ensure that future developments within the 60 to 65 dB CNEL noise contour would be compatible with the AELUP noise policies.

Similar to the Project, the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would be subject to the noise level standards and actions in the City’s Noise Element, which include the preparation of an acoustical study or implementation of project-specific mitigation measures to ensure interior noise levels would not exceed 45 dBA. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Aircraft Safety Hazards
The AELUP has established Clear Zones, also referred as Runway Protection Zones, located at each end of the runway that are designated as having the potential for extreme crash hazard. The severe potential for loss of life and property due to accidents prohibits most land uses in these areas. No buildings intended for human habitation are permitted in the Clear Zones/ Runway Protection Zones (AELUP 2017).

Based on a review of the AELUP, none of the Housing Opportunity Sites, including the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project, are located within the Clear Zones/ Runway Protection Zones for the Los Alamitos JFTB. As such, the Project would not present a safety hazard for persons in relation to airport-related accidents.

Height Restrictions
Most of the Project, except for Housing Opportunity Site 8 and the portion of the Main Street Specific Plan area located south of Electric Avenue, are located within the notification area and height restriction zone for the Los Alamitos JFTB. Generally, projects within the notification area and height restriction zone for the Los Alamitos JFTB that include the construction or alteration of structures more than 200 feet above mean sea level require filing with the FAA and review by the ALUC.

Based on the proposed zoning districts for the Project (eight Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program), building heights are anticipated to range from two to five stories and therefore filing with the FAA regarding aircraft-related safety hazards is not anticipated. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-12
For any construction or alteration of structures more than 200 feet above mean sea level, filing with the FAA and review by the ALUC, including filing of a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (FAA Form 7460-1) would be required. Any development project that would penetrate the FAR Part 77 Notification Surface for the JFTB (notification area) would also be required to file FAA Form 7460-1.

Structures that are more than 200 feet tall would be reviewed by the ALUC on a case-by-case basis to ensure development does not result in a safety hazard.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project is within the notification area and height restriction zone for the Los Alamitos JFTB. The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would be subject to the maximum height requirements established in the applicable zoning district. Any structures that are more than 200 feet tall or would penetrate the FAR Part 77 Notification Surface for the JFTB would be required to be reviewed by the ALUC. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the Project and future developments under the Project would comply with the noise, safety, and height standards established in the AELUP for the Los Alamitos JFTB. The Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area and the impact would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

3.8.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)).

As discussed in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 requires cumulative impact analysis in EIRs to consider a list of planned and pending projects that may contribute to the cumulative impacts of a project. Section 3.0, Table 3.0-3 identifies all past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding areas that may impact the Project. As identified in Table 3.0-2 in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, the geographic scope of impacts for hazards is limited to the specific project site. Hazards and hazardous materials impacts tend to be site specific and are assessed on a site-by-site basis and therefore, hazards do not contribute to cumulative impacts. There is m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8-13
no specific cumulative development listed in Table 3.0-3 that are driving cumulative impacts related to hazards.

However, indirect cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials could occur where regional development patterns place structures and/or people in proximity to significant sources of safety hazards or hazardous materials emissions, or where regional patterns develop new cumulatively hazardous sources near sensitive receptors. As stated in Table 3.0-3 of Section 3.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, all cumulative developments identified and listed in Table 3.0-3 are residential projects and therefore, would not develop new hazardous sources near sensitive receptors. Hazardous materials utilized during operation of the cumulative developments would be anticipated to be limited to those typical to residential uses and would not be anticipated to require the use of large quantities of hazardous materials. Additionally, all cumulative developments are located within urbanized areas and would not be located on sites that are in proximity to significant sources of safety hazards or hazardous materials emissions.

Anticipated impacts concerning hazards and hazardous materials from future developments facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development within and within proximity of the City, may include future development in areas that are at risk of hazards such as from the nearby airport. Similar to future developments under the Project, cumulative developments would be required to comply with the noise, safety, and height standards established in the AELUP for the Los Alamitos JFTB. Unless exempt, each cumulative discretionary project would require separate approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential adverse site-specific impacts and require mitigation measures as necessary in compliance with federal, state, and local requirements. All potential impacts from future developments facilitated by the Project concerning hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant in consideration of compliance with existing laws, ordinances, regulations and standards. As a result, cumulative impacts related to consistency with policies and regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing impacts from hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant, as the Project would be consistent with applicable plans and policies. Therefore, with the implementation of applicable regulatory requirements and existing plans and policies, the Project’s contribution to a cumulatively considerable impact related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.

3.8.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan, December 2003. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed September 2024.

Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). 2017. Orange County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos, Amended August 17, 2017. https://files.ocair.com/media/2021-02/JFTB,LosAlamitos-AELUP2017.pdf. Accessed September 2024.

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2024. GeoTracker database. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=Search+GeoTracker.

Accessed September 2024.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-1

3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for hydrology and water quality. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. The impacts are considered less than significant.

The Project could alter the existing drainage pattern of the sites by substantially increasing the rate or amount of runoff, create or contribute to runoff water, or impede or redirect flood flow. The Project would implement Mitigation Measure HYD-1 which includes site specific analysis and potential improvements which would reduce impacts to less than significant.

The Project would not result in the release of pollutants from a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. The impacts are considered less than significant.

The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The impacts are considered less than significant.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project was considered within the review of potential groundwater, stormwater, and runoff impacts of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

3.9.1 Environmental Setting
Watershed and Regional Drainage
A watershed is the geographic area draining into a river system, ocean, or other body of water through a single outlet and includes the receiving waters. The City is located within the Santa Ana River Watershed, which is the most extensive watershed in Orange County, running through a three-county area from its headwaters in the San Bernadino Mountains to its outlet in the Pacific Ocean (Orange County 2015). The Santa Ana River Watershed encompasses approximately 2,700 square miles.

The City is located near multiple hydrologic features which include rivers, the Pacific Ocean, and wetlands, which are subject to various sources of pollution within the community. The mouth of the San Gabriel River lies within City limits and drains an area of approximately 700 square miles within Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The San Gabriel River is located along the western boundary of the City.

The San Gabriel River originates in Los Angeles County but empties into the ocean at Seal Beach.

Additionally, the river provides an outlet for flood control basins and channels within the City. The river is IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-2
a major source of ocean contamination after storm events due to the washing of upstream pollutants and trash into the ocean (City of Seal Beach 2003).

Groundwater
The City is located within the Orange County Groundwater Basin which is located within an area designated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as Basin 8-1. The basin stores an estimated 66 million acre-feet of water, although only a fraction of this can be sustainably pumped without causing physical damage such as seawater intrusion or potential land subsidence.

The DWR has designated the Orange County Groundwater Basin as a medium-priority basin, primarily due to heavy reliance on the Basin’s groundwater as a source of water supply. Sources of groundwater recharge for the Basin include Santa Ana River base flow, storm flow, imported water, recycled water, incidental recharge, and in-lieu programs (OCWD 2015).

Water Quality
The mouth of the San Gabriel River is located within the City limits, which drains an area of approximately 700 square miles within Los Angeles and Orange Counties, the Pacific oceanfront, and various wetlands areas that are subject to various sources of pollution within the community (City of Seal Beach 2003).

Within the City, the Bolsa Chica Channel also drains into Anaheim Bay, which is in the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station between the Coastal District and Surfside Colony. It links the salt marshlands with the ocean and serves as a major drainage channel (City of Seal Beach 2003).

Pollutants could be present in stormwater runoff, including sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, pathogenic bacteria, and viruses. Stormwater runoff is the principal source of pollution entering surface and ground water in the region. Typical pollutants include oil, grease, or antifreeze releases from cars or trucks; paint or paint products; leaves or yard waste; pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers from yards and gardens; solvents and household chemicals; animal wastes, litter, or sewer leakage; and construction debris such as fresh concrete, mortar, or cement.

Flooding
Seal Beach lies along the Pacific Ocean and can be subject to coastal flooding, which occurs when water levels rise high enough to inundate areas that are normally dry. This typically occurs during a storm or during high tides (City of Seal Beach 2018).

Flood hazard zones are identified on official Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The City has designated various flood hazard zones ranging from areas of reduced flood risk due to levees to areas with high-risk flood hazards. Specifically, the City includes FEMA Zone VE, Zone AE, Zone D, and Zone X (FEMA 2019). Zones VE and AE are special flood hazard areas that are high risks with a 25 percent chance of flooding during a 30-year period. Zone IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-3
D are areas where flooding is possible, but the flood hazard is either undetermined or unstudied. Zone X are areas with moderate to low risks of floods (FEMA 2023).

The areas most vulnerable to 100-year floods are located adjacent to the San Gabriel River and the flood control channels, the main beach, the southeastern end of Electric Avenue, and parts of the Old Ranch Golf Course. The College Park East neighborhood is also susceptible to flooding during winter storms.

The College Park East neighborhood drains to the Old Ranch Country Club Golf Course. The Seal Beach 2018 Evacuation Plan identified the following areas in the City as potential flooding areas (City of Seal Beach 2018):
• Parts of downtown/Old Town Seal Beach, including the Pacific Coast Highway near Seal Beach Blvd, the Pacific Coast Highway near 5th Street, 1st Street, Ocean Avenue, Seal Way, Main Street, and Marina Drive;
• The area around Leisure World, including Westminster Avenue and Seal Beach Blvd; • The Pacific Coast Highway near the San Gabriel River; • The College Park East neighborhood in northern Seal Beach, adjacent to the Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, and including I-405 and the northern parts of Seal Beach Blvd; • The College Park West neighborhood near the San Gabriel River and I-405; and • The Bridgeport area.

While not identified in the Seal Beach 2018 Evacuation Plan as a potential flooding area, the Surfside Neighborhood has experienced flooding in recent years during high tide and strong ocean swells.

Surfside is located along the Pacific Ocean and Pacific Coast Highway, immediately south of Anaheim Bay.

Seiches and Tsunamis
Tsunamis are seismic sea waves generated by large submarine earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or large submarine landslides. Seiches are stationary oscillations of enclosed or partly enclosed bodies of water caused by landslides, sudden changes in atmospheric and wind pressure or earthquakes. According to the City’s General Plan, seismically induced seiches are not considered a potential hazard. The tsunami hazard is considered to be low for the elevations above the principal sea bluff in the City. Areas on the beach or below the sea bluff are considered to have moderate tsunami hazard, depending on tidal conditions and their elevation with respect to sea level (City of Seal Beach 2003).

The Army Corps of Engineers has estimated a seven-to-eight-foot potential run-up for the coastal area.

Assuming a coincidental highest tide, areas below the 16-to-17-foot contour level could be inundated by a tsunami. The chance of this occurring appears to be low based on existing data; but if an earthquake happened along the Newport-Inglewood fault, a tsunami of a much higher inundation level could be expected (City of Seal Beach 2003).

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-4
Sea Level Rise
The City is located along the shoreline and is susceptible to the effects of sea level rise (SLR). The coastal reach between the San Gabriel River and Anaheim Bay jetties encompasses West Beach, the Seal Beach Municipal Pier and East Beach. This is the center of beach-related activity in Seal Beach due to the accessibility and proximity to Main Street, residential development and visitor serving amenities.

According to the Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment prepared by the City, this area is currently exposed to coastal erosion, wave run-up and flooding during extreme events. SLR has the potential to increase these hazards impacting the recreational beach areas, amenities and residential development.

The Surfside Community, south of Anaheim Bay, is also exposed to the open coast and associated process of coastal erosion, wave run-up and flooding during extreme events. Located downcoast of a complete littoral barrier formed by the Anaheim Bay jetties, this segment of shoreline is particularly vulnerable to erosion and dependent on regular nourishment from the USACE to maintain a sandy beach in front of residential development. Inland low-lying areas of Seal Beach are also susceptible to potential flooding from SLR in combination with high tides and fluvial events from sources such as the San Gabriel River, Los Cerritos Wetlands and Anaheim Bay (City of Seal Beach 2019).

According to the Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment, for the 2050 time horizon the “likely range” of SLR is between 0.5 to 1.0 feet with an estimated 66 percent probability that SLR will fall within this “likely range”. The likely range of SLR at the 2100 time horizon is 1.3 to 3.2 feet for a high emissions scenario (City of Seal Beach 2019).

3.9.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal Clean Water Act
The federal CWA (33 USC Section 1251 et seq.), formerly the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, was enacted with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality through the regulation of point source and certain non-point source discharges to surface water. Those discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process (CWA Section 402). Section 401 of the CWA regulates surface water quality, and a Water Quality Certification is required for federal actions (including construction activities) that may result in impacts to surface water. In California, NPDES permitting authority is delegated to, and administered by, the nine RWQCBs. The Project is located within Region 8, regulated by the Santa Ana RWQCB.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES permit program was established by the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States, including discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems. Federal NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges, including point-source municipal waste discharges and non-point source stormwater runoff. NPDES IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-5
permits generally identify effluent and receiving water limits on allowable concentrations and/or mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge; prohibitions of discharges not specifically allowed under the permit; and provisions that describe required actions by the discharger including industrial pretreatment, pollution prevention, self-monitoring and other activities.

Developers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil or whose projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres are required to file a notice on intent to obtain coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit. The Construction General Permit requires the preparation and implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) which must be completed before construction begins. The SWPPP should contain a site map that shows the construction site perimeter; existing and proposed buildings, lots, roadways, and stormwater collection and discharge points; general topography both before and after construction; and drainage patterns across the project site. The SWPPP must list best management practices the discharger will use to manage stormwater runoff and the placement of those BMPs.

State
California Coastal Act
The State of California passed the California Coastal Act in 1976 which created protections over the State’s coastal zones to promote the public safety, health, and welfare, and to protect public and private property, wildlife, marine fisheries, ocean resources, and the natural environment from deterioration and destruction from existing and future development.

Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The State of California established the SWRCB, which oversees the nine RWQCBs, through the PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne). Through the enforcement of Porter-Cologne, the SWRCB determines the beneficial uses of the waters (surface and groundwater) of the State, establishes narrative and/or numerical water quality standards, and initiates policies relating to water quality. The SWRCB and, more specifically, the RWQCB, are authorized to prescribe Waste Discharge Requirements for the discharge of waste, which may impact waters of the State. Furthermore, the development of water quality control plans, or Basin Plans, is required by Porter-Cologne to protect water quality. The SWRCB issues both General Construction Permits and Individual Permits under the auspices of the federal NPDES program.

State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards In California, the SWRCB has broad authority over water quality control issues for the state. The SWRCB is responsible for developing statewide water quality policy and exercises the powers delegated to the state by the federal government under the CWA.

Regional authority for planning, permitting, and enforcement is delegated to the nine RWQCBs. The regional boards are required to formulate and adopt water quality control plans for all areas in the region and establish water quality objectives in the plans. The City of Seal Beach is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB (Region 8). The Santa Ana RWQCB adopted a Water Quality Control Plan for the IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-6
Santa Ana River Basin (Basin Plan) which includes the water quality standards (water quality objectives, beneficial uses, and anti-degradation policy) for the Region, regionally important water quality management and improvement initiatives, policies and practices for implementing water quality standards, and implementation plans.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is a three-bill package that passed the California state legislature and was signed into California state law by Governor Jerry Brown in September 2014.

SGMA establishes a framework for long-term sustainable groundwater management across California and requires local agencies to bring over drafted basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge The DWR uses the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Model Priority List to rank groundwater basins across the state according to priority levels of high, medium, low, or very low, and SGMA specifies deadlines for completion of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) in order of basin priority. Under SGMA, high- and medium-priority basins, as designated by DWR, must establish GSPs in order of basin priority. Under SGMA, high- and medium-priority basins, as designated by DWR, must establish Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) that oversee the preparation and implementation of a local GSP.

Safety Element
• Policy 2N: Facilitate the proper separation of sewer and storm drain systems through construction upgrades and operation and maintenance of sewer and storm drain infrastructure to eliminate the flow of sewage into the City storm drains. • Policy 2O: Facilitate coordination and participation by all of the jurisdictions that make up the Los Angeles and Santa Ana RWQCBs to improve water quality. Encourage the elimination of sewer discharges and non-point source pollution into the San Gabriel River. • Policy 2S: Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant loading, require incorporation of control, including structural and non-structural BMPs to mitigate the projected increase in pollutant loads and flows, ensure that post-development runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat, minimize the quantity of storm water directed to impermeable surfaces and the MS4s, and maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to allows more percolation of storm water into the ground.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-7
• Policy 2U: Encourage the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed-scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible.
• Policy 2V: Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from the development site.
• Policy 2W: Establish development guidelines for areas particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code includes Chapter 9.45, Floodplain Management. The chapter’s purpose is to promote public health, safety, and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions by legally enforceable regulations applied uniformly throughout the community to all publicly and privately-owned land within flood prone, mudslide, or flood related erosion areas. The chapter includes provisions of methods of reducing flood losses and specific standards related to construction and development within areas of the City

3.9.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant hydrology and water quality impacts.

When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The evaluation of potential hydrologic and water quality impacts was based on a review of City documents, including the General Plan. Mapping tools provided by FEMA were also reviewed. The information obtained from these sources is summarized to establish existing conditions and to identify potential environmental effects. In determining the level of significance, the analysis assumes that the Project would comply with relevant federal, state, and local ordinances and regulations.

Would the Project:
• Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-8
• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
o Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flood on or offsite;
o Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantially additional sources of polluted runoff; or o Impede or redirect flood flows?
• In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite? Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Groundwater
Impact HYD-1 The Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

Impact Analysis
A significant impact would occur if future developments under the Project resulted in a net reduction in the groundwater supply or lower the groundwater table. As noted in Section 3.9.1, Environmental Setting, the City is located within the Orange County Groundwater Basin which is located within an area designated by the DWR as Basin 8-1. The DWR has designated the Orange County Groundwater Basin as a medium-priority basin, primarily due to heavy reliance on the Basin’s groundwater as a source of water supply. Sources of groundwater recharge for the Basin include Santa Ana River base flow, storm flow, imported water, recycled water, incidental recharge, and in-lieu programs (OCWD 2015). Future IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-9
development facilitated by the Project would likely be located within developed areas of the City and would not be anticipated to substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. The majority of the Housing Opportunity Sites and the entirety of the Main Street Program area are located on sites that are developed with existing uses or have been developed with impervious surfaces and therefore, the sites for potential future development would not be identified as an area with high groundwater recharge potential. However, Housing Opportunity Site 8 – 99 Marina Drive and the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are undeveloped and contain pervious surfaces. Therefore, there is some potential for the site to provide opportunities for groundwater recharge. However, as identified in OCWD’s Groundwater Management Plan, the Santa Ana River base flow and recycled water are the largest sources of groundwater recharge for the basin (OCWD 2015). This site is an extremely small site area compared to the OC Basin and not within the basin recharge areas, therefore this Housing Opportunity Site would not result in a significant decrease in groundwater recharge potential.

A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was prepared for the Project by Stantec Consulting Services in April 2025 (Appendix G). As identified in the WSA, the eight Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program area have existing structures that have existing water uses. These existing water demands were part of the City’s and Golden State Water Company’s (GSWC) demand analysis in their respective 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Therefore, the WSA calculated the additional demand that would result at these sites from buildout of the Project. It should be noted that Housing Opportunity Site 4 – The Shops at Rossmoor is anticipated to be served by GSWC West Orange Service Area. The remaining seven Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program would be served by the City of Seal Beach. The Housing Element Update plans for up to 1,339 new dwelling units in the City by 2029 to accommodate its RHNA allocation of 1,243 units. However, the assumed residential development potential of the Housing Element Update is developed using conservative assumptions that would develop the Housing Opportunity Sites below the maximum allowable density. For the purposes of analysis contained in this EIR, a more intense level of development (maximum buildout) was analyzed so that potential impacts resulting from projects that might propose maximum developable densities are considered as part of this EIR. Therefore, the analysis contained herein as well as the analysis contained in the WSA assumed maximum buildout under the Project.

The WSA compared the percentage increase in water demand over a 25-year period due to the Project for a normal year and the highest demand from the five-year period of multiple dry years as a worst-case scenario for portions of the Project served by the City of Seal Beach and GSWC. As shown in Section

3.17, Utilities and Service Systems, the maximum buildout scenario of the eight Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program would result in a total additional water demand of 405-acre feet per year (AFY). This includes 139 AFY for Housing Opportunity Site 4 – the Shops at Rossmoor served by GSWC and 266 AFY for the remaining seven Housing Opportunities Sites and the Main Street Program served by the City of Seal Beach. This equates to 139 AFY above the projected demands for a normal water year in 2030 established in the GSWC West Orange Service Area 2020 UWMP. Regarding the City’s portion of the Project, for the remaining 7 Housing Opportunities Sites and the Main Street Program, an additional supply of 266 AFY is required above the projected demands for a normal water year in 2030 established in the City’s 2020 UWMP. For multiple dry-years, the total additional water demand of 435 AFY, which equates to 282 AFY above the City’s 3,570 AFY projected for the fifth dry year in 2030 and 153 AFY above GSWC’s 16,330 AFY projected for the fifth dry year in 2030. Based on IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-10
the estimated additional water required for the Project, an approximate 8 percent and 1 percent increase in supply for the City and GSWC, respectively, is needed to meet these demands.

As identified in the WSA, both the City’s 2020 UWMP and GSWC’s 2020 UWMP project that after 2025, the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) will be set at 85 percent. This means that the water portfolio for each retail water supplier will be composed of 85 percent groundwater and 15 percent imported water. As part of the OCWD’s Groundwater Reliability Plan, the groundwater levels are managed within a safe operating range to mitigate land subsidence, provide sustainability to the basin, and reduce the risk of overdraft. OCWD assesses the basin annually and sets a BPP uniformly for all producers, which is defined as the percentage of the City’s total water demand that comes from groundwater.

Per OCWD Groundwater Management Plan and Basin 8-1 Alternative, the BPP is based on estimated demands from all groundwater producers, the amount of imported water available from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET), the estimated basin operating range, basin storage conditions, the amount of recharge water available to OCWD, and other factors (OCWD 2017).

Groundwater producers meet bi-annually with OCWD to establish a Replenishment Assessment (RA) based on demands estimated from the previous year and the amount of groundwater that has been pump during the year. While there is no legal limit as to how much a groundwater producer pumps from this basin, agencies that pump above the established BPP are charged a RA fee plus a Basin Equity Assessment (BEA) fee. OCWD forecasts that the basin would be able to sustain a BPP of 85 percent beyond 2025 to meet demands from groundwater producers (City of Seal Beach 2021). Since the BPP is established annually by OCWD’s assessment of the OC Basin, the BPP is subject to change. For this analysis, the BPP is assumed to be held at 85 percent through 2045.

The City’s projected water supplies along with GSWC West Orange Service Area’s projected water supplies, identified in the respective 2020 UWMPs, would not be adequate to serve the additional demand that would result from maximum buildout of the Project. However, the City and GSWC would be able to meet the projected and additional demand associated with the Project through 2045 with a combination of groundwater production and imported water purchased. Moreover, since imported MET water purchases through Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) and the BPP within the OC Basin are established annually via agency coordination, the future developments constructed as a result of the Project would start being incorporated into this agency coordination as the future developments under this Project came online. Therefore, the estimated Project demands would start being incorporated as the eight Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program were built out.

Based on MET’s reliability and sustainable management of the OC Basin by OCWD, the WSA concluded that the additional demand from the Project along with the projected demands from the UWMP can be met as these additional demands would be accounted for during coordination and BPP establishment for both the City and GSWC the following year that future developments under the Project is developed. With the assumption that BPP is set at 85 percent, an 8 percent increase in demands for the City, or 282 AF during dry years, would require ground water pumping of 240 AF and purchasing of 42 AF from imported sources by the City. With an additional 1 percent increase in demand for GSWC, or 153 AFY during dry years, 130 AFY of groundwater and 23 AFY of imported water would be required by GSWC to meet these demands. This is a total increase in demand of 435 AFY during dry year, which represents approximately IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-11
a 0.1 percent increase in total groundwater production over the estimated average within the OC Basin and a 0.05 percent increase over the total estimated average water purchased from MWDOC for retail sales. For any demands beyond the annual estimates within the City’s and GSWC West Orange’s service area, the City would have to increase groundwater production beyond the BPP established by OCWD, which may result in costs incurred associated with RA and BEA. The other option would be to purchase more imported water from MWDOC to provide adequate supplies to meet the increased demand.

It should be noted that Housing Opportunity Site 4 - The Shops at Rossmoor, would receive water distribution service from GSWC. This has been accounted for in the additional demand from the Project shown in the supply and demand analysis described in the WSA, which concluded that there would be adequate water supplies available to the City of Seal Beach and GSWC serve the Project during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The WSA determined that the maximum buildout scenario of the seven Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program served by the City would result in an additional water demand of 266 AFY (1,054 dwelling units) for a normal water year. Scaling to the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project, the additional 167 units would result in an additional water demand of 42 AFY for a total of 308 AFY above the projected demands established in the City’s 2020 UWMP. With the additional demands associated with the Project, the City would require additional water supplies to be able to meet the City’s projected overall demand. As identified in the WSA, based on the estimated additional water required for the Project and the residential component of the ORCC, an approximate 9.3 percent increase in supply is required to meet these demands. Based on MET’s reliability and sustainable management of the OC Basin by OCWD, the WSA concluded that the additional demand from the Project along with the projected demands from the UWMP can be met as these additional demands would be accounted for during coordination and BPP establishment for the following year. With the BPP set at 85 percent, additional demands of 308 AF would require ground water pumping of 262 AF and purchasing of 46 AF from imported sources for the City. This represents approximately a 0.12 percent increase in groundwater production over the estimated annual average within the OC Basin and a 0.05 percent increase over the estimated annual average MET water purchased for retail sales. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

For any demands beyond the annual estimates, the City and/or GSWC may have to increase groundwater production beyond the BPP established by OCWD, which may result in costs incurred associated with RA and BEA. The other option would be to purchase more imported water from MWDOC to provide adequate supplies to meet the increased demand.

Though the Project itself does not propose any specific developments at this time and approval of this Project would not result in the construction of new development, the Project would facilitate the ability for new developments to be proposed and constructed within the City. The Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-12
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin and impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Drainage Pattern
Impact HYD-2 The Project could substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or offsite;
ii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iii) Impede or redirect flood flows.

Impact Analysis
Site-specific drainage reports to evaluate hydrological impacts would be prepared as individual developments are proposed on individual Housing Opportunity Sites. However, the development of some of the Housing Opportunity Sites may result in the alteration of existing drainage patterns of the site or area and have potential adverse effects on existing surface drainage patterns caused by the creation of new impervious surfaces. These would be minimized through the required construction and postconstruction stormwater controls and measures for minimizing erosion and stormwater runoff.

Full buildout of future developments resulting from Project implementation could potentially increase the rate and amount of surface runoff and could create flood hazards. As identified in Section 2.0, Project Description, the eight Housing Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program area are within areas already developed with existing uses; therefore, development of these sites and areas with uses would not result in a substantial increase in runoff and are required to be designed to not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the area. To prevent long-term impacts related to Project operation, new developments related to Project implementation would be required to comply with City’s Municipal Code Chapter 9.20, Storm Water Management Program. Municipal Code Section 9.20.015, Controls for Water Quality Management, outlines water quality management requirements for all new development and significant redevelopment projects, including requiring compliance with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Additionally, future development resulting from Project implementation would IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-13
be required to comply with development requirements and standards for storm drainage and stormwater runoff identified under City Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.020(H), Storm Drainage and Stormwater Runoff, including prevention of runoff, connection to the public drainage system, incorporation of design requirements and integration of BMPs, as required by the City’s NPDES permit requirements. All future developments would also be required to comply with the applicable requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit related to preparation and implementation of a SWPPP and associated BMPs during the construction period to ensure that polluted runoff does not leave the site and enter the storm drainage system.

However, there are existing storm drainage capacity issues within portions of the City. Therefore, Project implementation and development of some of the identified sites may result in flooding related impacts due to the existing drainage system in the City not providing adequate capacity. The majority of the Housing Opportunity Sites as well as the Main Street Program area are located within areas identified by FEMA as Zone X with reduced flood risk due to levees and therefore, is not anticipated to result in impeding or redirecting flood flows. However, a small portion of Housing Opportunity Site 5 – Old Ranch Town Center is located within an area identified by FEMA as Zone AE (EL 14), or a special flood hazard area with a flood elevation of 14 feet. Therefore, the development of Housing Opportunity Site 5 – Old Ranch Town Center could result in the new development impeding or redirecting flood flows and result in an impact.

Housing Opportunity Site 5 – Old Ranch Town Center would be required to be designed per the FEMA flood zone requirements. The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would also be located within FEMA Zone AE, see below.

General Plan Policy 5G states the City will review and update the Master Plan of Drainage to integrate the drainage systems of the entire City into one plan and include an implementation schedule and priorities for improvements. The City’s Master Plan of Drainage was last updated in 2008, and the plan identifies areas of the City’s storm drainage system which require improvements ranking them from high priority projects to low priority projects. Long-range improvement needs as documented in the City’s Master Plan of Drainage are prioritized and budgeted into the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

The City‘s CIP would be used as a management tool to facilitate the planning and construction of specific projects such as storm drainage improvement projects.

As outlined in Mitigation Measure HYD-1, future development projects facilitated by the Project shall be required to prepare a site-specific evaluation to determine the potential impact the proposed development project could have on the existing deficiencies to the City’s storm drainage system and provide onsite mitigation measures to resolve impacts to the City’s storm drain infrastructure. If it is found that using onsite mitigation measures does not resolve all impacts consistent with federal, state, and local requirements, then it shall be required to fund improvements to the storm drainage system as a condition of approval for the proposed development. As potential Housing Opportunity Sites are proposed in all areas of the City, each proposed project would have varying drainage patterns. Future development projects would be required to design and construct storm drainage systems in accordance with City standards and requirements. For potential development within identified flood zones, the development structures and associated storm drainage system would be required to be designed and constructed to meet FEMA flood zone requirements.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-14
As the City already has existing storm drainage capacity issues within portions of the City, future development projects facilitated by the Project could contribute to the existing issues and could result in increased impacts. Therefore, the Project identified Mitigation Measure HYD-1 to reduce potential impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1 would ensure that potential impacts to storm drainage systems from future development projects facilitated by the Project are analyzed and mitigated.

Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impacts.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM HYD-1: Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure. Future development projects facilitated by the Housing Element and Zoning Code Update shall be required to prepare a site-specific evaluation to determine the potential impacts the proposed development project could have on the existing deficiencies to the City’s storm drainage system and provide onsite mitigation measures to resolve impacts to the City’s storm drain infrastructure. If it is found that using onsite mitigation measures do not resolve all impacts consistent with federal, state, and local requirements, then it shall be required to fund improvements to the storm drainage system as a condition of approval for the proposed development. The requirement for contribution to funding improvements and the anticipated cost shall be analyzed at the time of project-specific environmental analysis.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-15
Project Inundation
Impact HYD-3 The Project would not, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.

Impact Analysis
The majority of the Housing Opportunity Sites as well as the Main Street Program area are located within areas identified as Zone X with reduced flood risk due to levees. Therefore, these sites would not be located in a flood hazard zone and would not risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation.

However, a small portion of Housing Opportunity Site 5 is located within areas identified by FEMA as Zone AE (EL 14), or a special flood hazard area with a flood elevation of 14 feet. Additionally, due to the City’s proximity to the Pacific Ocean, the City is at risk of tsunamis. The City’s General Plan Safety Element identified that the risk of inundation by a tsunami appears to be low; however, if an earthquake occurred along the Newport-Inglewood fault, a tsunami of high inundation level could be expected (City of Seal Beach 2003).

The City’s Municipal Code includes Chapter 9.45, Floodplain Management, includes provisions of methods of reducing flood losses and specific standards related to construction and development within areas of the City. Sites in identified flood areas are required to adhere to the development specifications in City’s Municipal Code Section 9.45.08, Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction. This Municipal Code section provides standards of construction in areas of special flood hazards, standards for utilities, and standards for different proposed developments and floodways.

Compliance with the City’s Municipal Code requirements would reduce impacts of flooding on future development projects facilitated by the Project to less than significant. Future development of identified Housing Opportunity Sites as well as new developments within the Main Street Program area facilitated by the Project may be subject to subsequent individual environmental review to analyze its potential impacts related to flood risk. As all future development projects would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with City requirements and standards, the future developments would be anticipated to be constructed to withstand any potential flooding impacts and would not risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation. Future developments located in flood risk or tsunami risk areas would be anticipated to be constructed to be located above the anticipated flood elevation.

Seiches are stationary oscillations of enclosed or partly enclosed bodies of water caused by landslides, sudden changes in atmospheric and wind pressure or earthquakes. As identified in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, seismically induced seiches are not considered a potential hazard for the City. With minimal potential for inundation by flood, low likelihood of inundation by tsunamis, and no potential for inundation by a seiche, there would be little potential for future development sites to release pollutants into water resulting from inundation. Additionally, future development projects located within flood zones would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the City’s flood hazard reduction standards and requirements which would reduce potential impacts. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact related to releasing pollutants during inundation of future project sites.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-16
inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan is located within FEMA Flood Zone AE and has a moderate risk of flooding that would be evaluated within its own EIR. The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with City requirements and standards. The future developments would be anticipated to be constructed to withstand any potential flooding impacts and would not risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation. Future developments located in flood risk or tsunami risk areas would be anticipated to be constructed to be located above the anticipated flood elevation.

Therefore, the 167 dwelling units proposed under the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Water Quality Control Plan or Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan Impact HYD-4 The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Impact Analysis
Water Quality Control Plan
The City’s water quality control plan is the Basin Plan prepared by the Santa Ana RWQCB. Future residential developments facilitated by the Project would be required to implement and comply with the Basin Plan to ensure that new development minimizes potential water quality impacts. Additionally, the City has adopted regulations and requirements related to protection of water quality. Construction activities related to future development projects facilitated by the Project would be required to comply with Chapter 9.30, Storm Water Management Program, of the City’s Municipal Code which includes requirements for stormwater drainage systems, polluted runoff, construction of water quality management, and enforcement and permit requirements. Any projects that include one acre or greater of soil disturbance would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit and associated NPDES regulations. Additionally, future development associated with Project implementation would be required to comply with all relevant NPDES requirements and would be required to prepare a SWPPP.

The SWPPP would be required to include construction BMPs that address pollutant source reduction and provide measures of control necessary to mitigate potential pollutant sources.

To prevent long-term impacts related to operation, new developments resulting from the Project would be required to comply with City’s Municipal Code Chapter 9.20, Storm Water Management Program.

Municipal Code Section 9.20.015, Controls for Water Quality Management, outlines water quality IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-17
management requirements for all new development and significant redevelopment projects, including requiring compliance with the Orange County DAMP. Additionally, future developments resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with development requirements and standards for storm drainage and stormwater runoff identified under City Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.020(H), Storm Drainage and Stormwater Runoff, including prevention of runoff, connection to the public drainage system, incorporation of design requirements and integration of BMPs, as required by the City’s NPDES permit requirements. Future developments facilitated by the Project would be required to incorporate General Plan policies which ensure that new development does not impact water quality. Implementation of City standards and requirements would ensure that future developments comply with the Basin Plan.

With adherence to federal, state, and local regulations and requirements, runoff associated with both construction and regular operation of future developments facilitated by the Project would not violate any water quality control standards or any water quality control plan, and impacts would be less than significant.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan
The City is located within the Orange County Groundwater Basin which is located within an area designated by the DWR as Basin 8-1. The DWR has designated the Orange County Groundwater Basin as a medium-priority basin, primarily due to heavy reliance on the Basin’s groundwater as a source of water supply. In 2014, the State of California adopted the SGMA to support and manage its groundwater sustainably and mitigate significant low groundwater levels, land subsidence, and water quality issues.

SGMA requires all high- and medium-priority basins, as designated by DWR, be sustainably managed. To comply with the SGMA, the agencies within Basin 8-1, led by OCWD submitted an Alternative to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan in 2017, titled the “Basin 8-1 Alternative”.

As identified in the OCWD’s Groundwater Management Plan, sources of groundwater recharge for the Basin include Santa Ana River base flow, storm flow, imported water, recycled water, incidental recharge, and in-lieu programs (OCWD 2015). As the majority of the Housing Opportunity Site and the Main Street Program area are developed with existing uses including existing impervious surfaces, future development projects facilitated by the Project on these sites are not anticipated to interfere with groundwater recharge and would not conflict with the OCWD’s Groundwater Management Plan.

However, the City relies on groundwater and imported water for sources of potable water. The Project would increase the City’s water demands and therefore would require more pumping of the groundwater basin.

OCWD collects samples and analyzes water elevation and water quality data to ensure a safe and sustainable level of groundwater production is established (OCWD 2015). The OCWD monitors the groundwater supply and operates the basin in accordance with an identified safe operating range which ensures that the basin is not over pumped leading to potential impacts such as seawater intrusion and land subsidence. As identified above under Impact HYD-1, future development projects facilitated by the Project could result in increased groundwater pumping, but not above the safe operating range for the basin and therefore would not conflict with sustainable management of the basin. Any future development projects facilitated by the Project would be required to comply with the goals and objectives of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan to ensure that construction and operation of the future IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-18
project would not result in groundwater impacts. As future developments would be anticipated to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan, impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

3.9.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts is the extent of the watersheds located in Seal Beach, as described above under Section 3.9.1, Environmental Setting. This geographic scope is appropriate for hydrology and water quality because water quality impacts are localized in the watershed where the impact occurs.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-19
Table 3.9-1: Cumulative Projects Related to Hydrology and Water Quality # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
Preparation of
EIR 167
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-20
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
site for potential
future residential
development
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of
Westminster)
122
Development under the Project in combination with cumulative development identified in Table 3.9-1 could increase stormwater runoff such that water quality impacts could occur. The cumulative projects listed within Table 3.9-1 are located within the Santa Ana watershed, the geographic scope of this analysis. Projects located in other watersheds would not impact the hydrology or water quality within the City and therefore were not evaluated below. For example, Long Beach lies within the San Gabriel watershed and, as a result, those projects would not contribute to cumulative hydrologic and water quality impacts in combination with the Project and were not included in this evaluation.

The Naval Weapons Station and Water Storage Site are in FEMA Zone D and are in areas that are known to flood according to the City of Seal Beach 2018 Evacuation Plan. The Lampson Project is also located within FEMA Zone D and would drain to the City. The Orange County and Westminster Housing Element Sites are in FEMA Zone X and, therefore, would have a low risk of flooding.

The ORCC Specific Plan Project is in FEMA Zone AE and includes the ORCC golf course that serves as a drainage basin for the City. Development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would reconfigure the drainage basin. However, new development and redevelopment within the City would be subject to City, state, and federal policies and ordinances, design, guidelines, the Zoning Code, and other applicable regulatory requirements that reduce impacts related to water quality on a project-by-project basis. Overall, implementation of the Project and cumulative developments would not substantially increase the total area of impervious surface in the area; would not result in substantial groundwater use within the entire groundwater basin or affect groundwater recharge; and would not modify the course of an existing stream or river. Required conformance with state and local policies and regulations would reduce hydrology and IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-21
water quality impacts associated with future cumulative development. The anticipated Project related impacts from future housing development facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development in the City, would include increased development in a previously developed area (changes in impermeable surfaces) and could result in impacts to water quality. Potential impacts concerning hydrology and water quality would be site-specific and would require evaluation on a case-by-case basis at the project level when future development is proposed including in accordance with the Housing Element Update. As required by Mitigation Measure HYD-1, each cumulative project may require separate discretionary permit approval and development subject to CEQA would address potential hydrology and water quality impacts and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate.

Consequently, future housing development facilitated by the Project and cumulative development would not result in significant cumulative impacts concerning violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, decreased groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge, alterations to existing drainage patterns, or conflicts with water quality or groundwater plans. Therefore, the Project would not cause a cumulatively considerable impact concerning hydrology and water resources.

3.9.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan, December 2003. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed August 2024. _____. 2018. Evacuation Plan. https://sealbeachpd.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Evacuation-Plan2018.pdf. Accessed March 2025. _____. 2019. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment. PDF. City of Seal Beach. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, Final Draft, June 2021.
https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Public%20Works/Seal%20Beach%202020%2 0UWMP%20FINAL%20DRAFT-2021.05.27.pdf?ver=2021-06-01-161424-263. Accessed August 2024.
_____. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.
https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Public%20Works/Seal%20Beach%202020%2 0UWMP%20FINAL%20DRAFT%2006102021.pdf?ver=2021-06-10-151133-793. Accessed October 2024.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2019. FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search By Address – Seal Beach, City of.
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=Seal%20Beach%2C%20California. Accessed March 2025.
_____. 2023. FEMA Flood Maps and Zones Explained. https://www.fema.gov/blog/fema-flood-maps-andzones-explained. Accessed March 2025.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9-22
Golden State Water Company. 2020. West Orange Service Area 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/getfile?filename=/public%2Fuwmp_attachments%2F1441205680% 2FGSWC-West%20Orange%202020%20UWMP%20Final.pdf. Accessed March 2025.

Orange County Water District (OCWD). 2015. Groundwater Management Plan 2015 Update. https://www.ocwd.com/wpcontent/uploads/groundwatermanagementplan2015update_20150624.pdf. Accessed October 2024.
_____. 2017. Basin 8-1 Alternative. https://ocwd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/basin-8-1- alternative-final-report-1.pdf. Accessed October 2024.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-1

3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for land use and planning. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to land use and planning that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not result in conflicts with existing City regulations, policies, and plans adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and impacts would be less than significant.

Development of the residential portion of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would require adoption of the ORCC Specific Plan and rezoning of the site from the existing Recreational Golf zoning designation to ORCC Specific Plan, neither of which entitlement is included as part of this Housing Element and Zone Code Updates Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

3.10.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Seal Beach consists of 11.51 square miles of land area and 1.72 square miles of water area for a total of 13.23 square miles.

Table 3.10-1 provides an overview of the land use categories within the City as they were inventoried at the time of the General Plan adoption in 2003. As noted, Table 3.10-1 provides an inventory of the land use categories within the City as of 2003 when the last General Plan was adopted. Additional development has occurred within the City since the inventory was taken and therefore, the table may not provide an exact representation of the current existing land use categories within the City. However, the table is provided to show an estimate of how land use categories within the City are distributed. The City has varied range of density with different zoning district. The Zoning Ordinance includes residential zoning districts, commercial districts, industrial district, public and semi-public facilities districts, and open space district. Table 3.10-2 lists the zone district and land uses allowed in each district.

Table 3.10-1: City of Seal Beach Land Use Type Acreage 2003 Land Use Type Acres Percent of Total Land Area
Residential
Low 353.7 5.0
Medium 505.4 7.1
High 166.4 2.3
Commercial
Professional Office 16.4 0.2
Service 49.3 0.7
IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-2
Land Use Type Acres Percent of Total Land Area
General 93.4 1.3
Industrial
Light 117.0 1.6
Oil Extraction 54.6 0.8
Open Space
Open Space 42.7 0.6
Golf Course 156.8 2.2
Wetlands & Wildlife
Refuge
1,020.0 14.3
Park 65.4 0.9
School 15.3 0.2
Community Facility 61.8 0.9
Military 4,336.0* 60.8
Beach 80.3 1.1
Total 7,134.5 100
* does not include Wildlife Refuge
Table 3.10-2: Summary of City of Seal Beach Zoning Code Base District Designator Base District Name General Uses RLD Single-Unit Residential Single-unit and small, zero-lot line neighborhoods at a base density of
up to 15 dwelling units per net acre.

RMD Medium-Density Residential Duplexes, townhouse projects, apartments, and small-lot, singleunit residential uses, at a density of 15 to 18 dwelling units per net acre.

RHD High-Density Residential Multi-unit residential developments at a base density of 20 to 46
dwelling units per net acre.

LC-RMD Limited Commercia/Residential
Medium Density Zone
Limited commercial and office uses
in conjunction with residential uses.

PO Professional Office Office, medical and related uses that may also serve as a buffer area
between residential areas and more
intensive commercial areas.

MSSP Main Street Specific Plan Visitor-serving and resident-serving office, retail, restaurant, and
personal service uses with upper
floors devoted to office uses along
Main Street.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-3
Base District Designator Base District Name General Uses SC Service Commercial Neighborhood-serving commercial
areas that provide retail, restaurant,
and personal service uses.

GC General Commercial Sub-regional and regional centers of commercial activity and may
include both pedestrian- and autooriented development. Other typical uses are auto service stations, auto
repair, and sale.

LM Light Manufacturing Sites in a business park
environment for moderate- to lowintensity commercial services and light manufacturing uses.

OE Oil Extraction Oil extraction and related production storage and processing,
maintenance facilities, and related
operational and maintenance
facilities.

PC Public and Semi-Public Appropriate public uses, including private utilities (electrical, gas,
water, and telecommunications),
schools (both private and public),
and other city, county, state, or
federal facilities.

RG Recreational Golf Golf courses and associated club
houses, maintenance facilities,
accessory concession sales, and
related plant nurseries.

OS-N Open Space – Natural To preserve publicly owned
parklands, environmentally sensitive
lands and habitats in their natural
state. Uses permitted shall be
limited to those that maintain the
property in its natural state.

OS-PR Open Space – Parks and
Recreation
To provide appropriately located
areas for recreation and
recreational uses. Uses permitted
shall be limited to those that are
devoted to public recreation
including parks, playgrounds,
swimming centers, tennis and
basketball courts, golf courses,
community centers within the
facilities, and accessory concession
sales.

3.10-4

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10.2 Regulatory Setting
State
General Plans
The land use planning and zoning authority of local jurisdictions in California is set forth in the state’s planning laws. California Government Code (GC) Section 65300, et seq. obliges cities and counties to adopt and implement general plans. The general plan is a comprehensive, long-term, and general document that describes plans for the physical development of a city or county and of any land outside its boundaries that, in the city’s or county’s judgment, bears relation to its planning. The general plan addresses a broad range of topics including, at a minimum, land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. In addressing these topics, the general plan identifies the goals, objectives, policies, principles, standards, and plan proposals that support the city’s or county’s vision for the area. The general plan is a long-range document that typically addresses the physical character of an area over a 20-year period. Although the general plan serves as a blueprint for future development and identifies the overall vision for the planning area, it remains general enough to allow flexibility in the approach taken to achieve the plan’s goals.

State Zoning Law
The State Zoning Law (California GC Section 65800, et seq.) establishes that zoning ordinances, which are laws that define allowable land uses within a specific district, are required to be consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plans. When amendments to the general plan are made, corresponding changes in the zoning ordinance may be required within a reasonable time to ensure the land uses designated in the general plan would also be allowable by the zoning ordinance (California GC Section 65860, sub.[c]).

Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Seal Beach. The General Plan contains the current Housing Element Update, which was adopted in 2022, and revised in 2024. The various elements within the General Plan include goals and policies for the physical development of the City. The City’s General Plan goals and policies applicable to land use are presented below:

Housing Element Update
The following Housing Element Update policies related to land use and planning apply to the Project:

Goal 1: Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all income levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-5
• Policy 1a: Provide adequate sites for a variety of housing types through the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, while ensuring that environmental and infrastructure constraints are addressed.
• Policy 1b: Where appropriate, encourage the redesignation of vacant and underutilized nonresidential land to residential uses with appropriate densities to facilitate the development of a variety of housing types to address the housing needs of all economic segments of the population.
• Policy 1c: Encourage the infilling of vacant residential land. • Policy 1d: Encourage the recycling of underutilized residential land, where such recycling is consistent with established land use plans.
• Policy 1e: Provide compatibility of residential uses with surrounding uses through the separation of incompatible uses, construction of adequate buffers, and other land use controls. • Policy 1f: Improve all residential environments through the provision of adequate public facilities and services, including streets and parks, as well as water, sewer, and drainage systems. • Policy 1g: Provide for adequate, freely accessible open space within reasonable distances of all community residents.

Goal 2: Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low and moderate-income households.
• Policy 2a: Expand housing opportunities for households with special needs, including the elderly, persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, large households, female-headed households, and the homeless.
• Policy 2b: Provide incentives to encourage the development of new affordable housing for lowerand moderate-income households, including extremely-low-income persons. • Policy 2c: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to expand housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households, including persons with special needs. • Policy 2d: Encourage construction of low- and moderate-income housing on sites that are:
o located with convenient access to schools, parks, public transportation, shopping facilities, and employment opportunities;
o adequately served by public utilities;
o adequately served by police and fire protection;
o minimally impacted by noise, flooding, or other environmental constraints; and o outside of areas of concentrated lower-income households.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-6
Goal 3: Address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing.
• Policy 3a: Assist City residents in securing decent safe and affordable housing. • Policy 3b: Conserve the affordability of housing units assisted with public funds through affordability covenants or resale controls.
• Policy 3c: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to maintain and/or improve the affordability of existing housing units to low- and moderate-income households.

Goal 4: Maintain and enhance the quality of residential neighborhoods in Seal Beach. • Policy 4a: Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of existing owner-occupied and rental housing where feasible.
• Policy 4b: Promote the replacement of any substandard units that cannot be rehabilitated. • Policy 4c: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources available to assist in the improvement of residential property.
• Policy 4d: Encourage the continued affordability of housing units rehabilitated with public funds. • Policy 4e: Discourage the conversion of existing apartment units to condominiums where such conversion will diminish the supply of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households.
• Policy 4f: Promote the conservation and rehabilitation of older neighborhoods, preventing the encroachment of incompatible commercial or industrial uses into established neighborhoods. • Policy 4g: Assist residents, wherever possible, in securing decent safe and adequate housing. • Policy 4h: Promote a safe, healthful, aesthetically pleasing environment that strengthens individual and family life.
• Policy 4i: Preserve and enhance viable residential neighborhoods and strengthen neighborhood identity.
• Policy 4j: Upgrade and improve community facilities and municipal services in keeping with community needs.
• Policy 4k: Encourage the use of innovative land use techniques and construction methods to minimize housing costs without compromising basic health, safety, and aesthetic conditions. • Policy 4l: Periodically reexamine local building and zoning codes for possible amendments to reduce construction costs and processing times without sacrificing basic health and safety considerations.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-7
Goal 5: Promote equal housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, marital status, or familial status. • Policy 5a: Promote fair housing practices throughout the community. • Policy 5b: Encourage the development of housing that meets the special needs of disabled and elderly households.
• Policy 5c: Promote the provision of housing to meet the needs of families and households of all sizes.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code includes Title 11 Zoning which outlines the zoning designations and permitted uses for various sections of land located within the City. The Zoning Ordinance includes development standards and regulations for specific zoning designations in order to separate incompatible uses and to promote cohesive city planning.

3.10.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant land use and planning impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The analysis of potential land use impacts considers the Project’s consistency with adopted plans and policies that regulate land use, and the Project’s compatibility with surrounding land uses. The determination of consistency with applicable land use policies and ordinances is based upon a review of the previously identified planning documents that regulate land use or guide land use decisions pertaining to the Project site. CEQA Guidelines section 15125(d) requires that an EIR discuss inconsistencies with applicable plans that the decision-makers should address. Evaluations are made to determine whether a project is consistent with such plans. Projects are considered consistent with regulatory plans if they are compatible with the general intent of the plans and would not preclude the attainment of their primary goals. The intent of the consistency evaluation is to determine if noncompliance with regulatory plans would result in a significant impact.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-8
Would the Project:
• Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:
• Physically divide an established community?
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Conflict with Plans, Policies, or Regulations
Impact LU-1 The Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Impact Analysis
The Housing Element Update addresses the state mandate to update the housing element of the local General Plan and accommodate the housing obligation designated by the RHNA. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The Housing Element Update and the RHNA identified the need for 1,243 additional homes in the City, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories. The Project, including establishment of the new zoning designation and rezoning of sites, would result in increased densification of residential uses. To meet the City’s RHNA obligations, the Housing Element Update has identified eight Housing Opportunity Sites with a developable area of 35.05 acres and the ORCC Specific Plan pipeline project to meet the state’s requirements for Seal Beach’s portion of the regional housing need estimates.

According to the Housing Element Update, the eight Housing Opportunity Sites have an assumed residential development potential of 1,165 dwelling units. Additionally, because the RHNA projection period for 2021-2029 began on June 30, 2021, housing development that have already been proposed and are not expected to be issued a certificate of occupancy until July 1, 2021 or after, but are expected to be completed before the end of the planning period (October 15, 2029), can be credited toward the RHNA. The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project that proposes development of 167 new dwelling units is a current pipeline project pending approval that would be credited toward the RHNA.

An additional seven ADUs are projected to be constructed within the planning period and would be credited toward the RHNA. The combination of the projected ADUs, pipeline projects, and Housing Opportunity Sites would result in a total residential development potential of 1,339 dwelling units. With an RHNA allocation of 1,243, there would be a surplus of 96 dwelling units or an eight percent buffer over the RHNA. However, the Housing Element assumed a residential development potential of the Housing Opportunity Sites of 1,165 dwelling units using conservative assumptions that would develop the Housing IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-9
Opportunity Sites at below the maximum allowable density. If the eight Housing Opportunity Sites were all developed at 100 percent of the maximum developable density, the two underutilized sites would provide 182 dwelling units and six rezone sites would provide 1,309 dwelling units for a total of 1,491 dwelling units. In addition, the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would provide an additional 167 dwelling units and therefore, the eight Housing Opportunity Sites and the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project could result in the potential for 1,658 dwelling units. The eight identified Housing Opportunity Sites as well as current pipeline projects pending approval within the City and anticipated ADUs projected to be constructed within the planning period would accommodate the RHNA allocation for the City. Therefore, implementation of the Housing Element Update would not conflict with the RHNA allocation for the City as the increase in dwelling units would be required in order to meet the state mandated allocation.

The Housing Element Update also includes Program 1R (Main Street Program) which commits to modifying the existing Main Street Specific Plan to allow housing above the ground floor of properties located within the Main Street Specific Plan area. Therefore, the Project would require an amendment to the Main Street Specific Plan. The Main Street Program’s proposed amendments to the Main Street Specific Plan would allow for and permit the development of dwelling units above the ground floor of properties located within the Main Street Specific Plan area. Though development of housing within the Main Street Specific Plan is currently not allowed, with approval of the proposed amendment, the Main Street Specific Plan and the Housing Element’s Main Street Program would be consistent with each other and the Project would not result in a conflict with the Main Street Specific Plan. Additionally, the City adopted Measure Z in 2008 that limited the maximum height of residences in the City’s Old Town area to 25 feet. The Main Street Specific Plan is located within the area governed by Measure Z and therefore, future developments facilitated by the Project within this area would be required to comply with the provisions of Measure Z.

City of Seal Beach General Plan
As the Housing Element Update is a component of the larger City General Plan, the Housing Element Update has been developed to comply with the goals and policies of the General Plan. Therefore, the goals and policies included in the Housing Element Update are consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and further implement the General Plan. With approval and certification of the Housing Element Update, the proposed Housing Element would be consistent with the existing General Plan and the Project would not result in a conflict with the General Plan. As shown in Table 3.10-3 below, the Project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan. The goals and policies included in the table are only those that are applicable to the Project. Additionally, goals and policies included in the Housing Element Update are not included as the Project itself is the Housing Element Update and therefore, is inherently consistent with the Housing Element Update.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-10
Table 3.10-3: City of Seal Beach General Plan Consistency Analysis General Plan Policy Consistency
Land Use Element
Population: Despite the minor decrease in City
population experienced in the 2000 U.S. Census, the
City will continue to provide support for its residents, maintain its infrastructure and provide jobs and housing balance while still maintaining its small town
atmosphere.

Consistent. The Project would provide new
opportunities for housing within the City and would
promote housing balance through planning for housing
for different income levels and different densities.

Housing: It is to be a goal of the City to preserve its lowand medium-density residential character while still providing a wide choice of living accommodations and
life styles for its residents.

Consistent. As stated above, the Project would provide
new opportunities for housing within the City and plans for housing of different income levels and different
densities.

Cultural Resources Element
Policy 5: Assess development proposals for potential
impacts to significant archaeological resources
pursuant Section 15064.5 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Require a study
conducted by a professional archaeologist for all
development proposals located in areas known to be
sensitive for cultural resources.

Consistent. As outlined in Section 3.4, Cultural
Resources, all future development proposals facilitated by the Project would be required to assess potential
impacts to archaeological resources and would be
required to prepare a study conducted by a professional archaeologist.

Safety Element
Policy 1R: Ensure compliance with the City of Seal
Beach with the Notice Requirements for Federal
Aviation Regulations Part 77, “Objects Affecting
Navigable Airspace,” and with the referral requirements of Public Utilities Code, Chapter 4, Article 3.5, Section 21676.

Consistent. As outlined in Section 3.8, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, all future development projects
would be required to comply with the Los Alamitos
JFTB AELUP. Pursuant to state law, the zoning code
update will be provided to the Orange County ALUC for
review.

Policy 2S: Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant
loading, require incorporation of control, including
structural and non-structural BMPs to mitigate the
projected increases in pollutant loads and flows, ensure that post-development runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream
erosion and stream habitat, minimize the quantity of
storm water directed to impermeable surfaces and the
MS4s, and maximum the percentage of permeable
surfaces to allow more percolation of storm water into
the ground.

Consistent. As outlined in Section 3.9, Hydrology and
Water Quality, future development projects facilitated
by the Project would be required to comply with all City regulations and requirements including with City’s
Municipal Code Chapter 9.20, Storm Water
Management Program, Municipal Code Section

9.20.015, Controls for Water Quality Management,
Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.020(H), Storm
Drainage and Stormwater Runoff, to minimize
hydrological impacts. Additionally, site-specific
evaluation of hydrological impacts would be required to be prepared as individual residential developments are
proposed per individual site.

Policy 3A: Require a soils and geology report to be
prepared and filed for all development projects as
specified in the City’s Municipal Code.

Consistent. As outlined in the Project’s Initial Study as well as Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to be Significant, of this Draft EIR, future developments resulting from
Project implementation would require mandatory
compliance with existing regulations, including the
preparation and submission of soil engineering studies, geotechnical evaluations, and seismicity reports.

Circulation Element
Policy: Assess all development projects in order to
identify their traffic impacts and require that they pay Consistent. As outlined in Section 3.15,
Transportation, new development under the Project
I
1 IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-11
their fair share of the system improvements necessary
to accommodate traffic generated by the project.
would need to comply with Transportation Impact Fees
which would be collected at the time of building permit.

Additionally, individual development proposals under
the Housing Element Update would be evaluated
individually for consistency with Orange County and
City of Seal Beach plans and would be required to
undergo assessment to identify their potential traffic
impacts.

Source: City of Seal Beach General Plan
SCAG’s Connect SoCal 2024
SCAG is the transportation planning, coordinating, and financing agency for six counties in Southern California, including Orange County. Connect SoCal 2024 is Southern California’s RTP/SCS. SCAG’s Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal 2024 on April 4, 2024. Connect SoCal 2024 is a long-range blueprint to guide transportation investments and land-use decisions through 2050 while meeting the requirements of California’s SB 375, which calls on each of the state’s 18 metropolitan areas to develop a SCS to accommodate future population growth and reduce GHG emissions from cars and light trucks. As shown in Table 3.10-4, the Project would be consistent with the policies of Connect SoCal 2024.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with Connect SoCal 2024 and impacts would be less than significant.

Table 3.10-4: Connect SoCal Consistency Analysis
Connect SoCal Policy Consistency
Mobility
Policy 09: Encourage residential and employment
development in areas surrounding existing and planned
transit/rail stations.

Consistent. The Project would provide new
opportunities for housing within areas that are highly
urbanized and served by existing transit services.

Communities
Policy 32: Promote the growth of origins and
destinations, with a focus on future housing and
population growth, in areas with existing and planned
urban infrastructure that includes transit and utilities.

Consistent. The Project would promote future housing
developments in areas with existing urban
infrastructure, including transit and utilities services.

Policy 35: Encourage housing development in areas
with access to important resources and amenities
(economic, educational, health, social and similar) to
further fair housing access and equity across the
region.

Consistent. The City is almost entirely built out and
any future housing would be located within highly
urbanized areas of the City, located in close proximity to important resources and amenities.

Policy 36: Encourage housing development in transitsupportive and walkable areas to create more interconnected and resilient communities.

Consistent. The City is almost entirely built out and
therefore, the City is developed with existing transit and walkable communities. The Project’s Housing
Opportunity Sites and the Main Street Program area
are located within highly urbanized areas and would
encourage housing development in already developed
areas that are serviced by existing transit and are
walkable and connected to nearby commercial and
retail areas.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-12
Policy 37: Support local, regional, state and federal
efforts to produce and preserve affordable housing
while meeting additional housing needs across the
region.

Consistent. The eight Housing Opportunity Sites would
provide for increased opportunities for new residential developments in the City, including construction of
affordable housing at various income levels.

Implementation of the Main Street Program would
provide additional opportunities for the development of dwelling units. Therefore, implementation of the Project would allow the City to meet its RHNA requirements.

Additionally, the residential component of the ORCC
Specific Plan Project identified as a pipeline project
would provide additional opportunities for housing
within the City.

Environment
Policy 48: Promote sustainable development and best
practices that enhance resource conservation, reduce
resource consumption and promote resilience.

Consistent. This Draft EIR analyzed the Project’s
potential impacts on City resources. As outlined
throughout this Draft EIR, future developments
facilitated by the Project would be required to be
constructed and operated in accordance with City
requirements including, but not limited to, the City’s
Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and the
CALGreen Code for indoor and outdoor water use.

Policy 51: Reduce hazardous air pollutants and
greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality
throughout the region through planning and
implementation efforts.

Consistent. As outlined in Section 3.2, Air Quality, and Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas, of this Draft EIR, future
developments facilitated by the Project would be
required to comply with all applicable regulations and
requirements related to hazardous air pollutants and
greenhouse gas emissions. Mitigation measures have
been identified to reduce potential impacts resulting
from future development projects facilitated by the
Project including Mitigation Measure GHG-1 which
requires implementation of GHG reduction measures
and Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3 which
include measures to reduce hazardous air emissions
during construction and operation.

Source: Connect SoCal 2024
City of Seal Beach Local Coastal Program
Additionally, the City is currently preparing a LCP. LCPs are planning documents used by local governments to guide development in the coastal zone, in partnership with the Coastal Commission for the purpose of upholding the California Coastal Act. LCPs contain rules and regulations for future development and protection of coastal resources, by specifying appropriate location, type, and scale of new or changed uses. LCPs conform with the broad requirements of the California Coastal Act and reflect the unique and specific community characteristics of the jurisdiction. Each LCP consists of a Land Use Plan and Local Implementation Plan. The Land Use Plan designates land use classifications, and goals/policies guiding development (similar in nature to a City’s General Plan, but specifically for the coastal zone). The Local Implementation Plan includes measures to implement the Land Use Plan, typically through the zoning ordinance. As required by Policy 2.2.2-1 of the City’s May 2023 Draft Land Use Plan, any future developments facilitated by the Project and located within the City’s Coastal Zone IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-13
would require a Coastal Development Permit. As outlined by Policy 2.2.2-3 of the City’s May 2023 Draft Land Use Plan, prior to approval of any Coastal Development Permit, the City shall make findings that the proposed development conforms to the policies and regulations contained in the certified Local Coastal Program, including the Coastal Land Use Plan and Implementation Plan (City of Seal Beach 2023).

Housing Opportunity Sites 1, 3, 7, 8 and the Main Street Program area are located within the coastal zone identified in the Draft Land Use Plan (City of Seal Beach 2023). Should development at these sites be proposed prior to certification of an LCP, the Coastal Commission would review development applications to determine consistency with the California Coastal Act. Should the City achieve certification of an LCP, proposed development would need to comply with the regulations, standards, and requirements within the LCP.

The Project has been developed in accordance with existing City regulations, policies, and plans and implementation of the Project would not result in conflicts with existing City regulations, policies, and plans adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The ORCC Specific Plan Project area is presently identified by the City’s General Plan land use designation as Open Space Golf and is zoned Recreational Golf. The existing zoning designation of the site allows residential development in conjunction with a golf course subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Development of the residential portion of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would require adoption of the ORCC Specific Plan. Additionally, adoption of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would result in a change from the existing Recreational Golf zoning designation to ORCC Specific Plan. As this EIR is not rezoning or entitling the ORCC Specific Plan Project, specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

3.10.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative land use and planning impacts includes the geographic area of the City of Seal Beach.

Development that is considered part of the cumulative analysis includes past, present, and probable IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-14
future projects located within the City that are identified in Table 3.0-2 of Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis.

Cumulative development can change the area’s character and land use patterns. While land uses and development patterns are typically established in local land use planning documents specific to jurisdictions, it is important to consider land use changes and how it would influence development pattern in the area as a whole because land uses merge and flow together along jurisdictional boundaries.

Table 3.10-5: Cumulative Projects Related to Land Use and Planning # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
Preparation of
EIR 167
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-15
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
community off
Anchor Way
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

Pacific Coast
Hwy, City of
Long Beach
(7242011013)
Two, 5-story
buildings with a
total of 563,529
square feet
containing 600
residential units
and 4,000
square-feet of
ground-level
restaurant space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
600
6 Carmel Partners
6615 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7237020050)
Construction of
a six-story
mixed-use
project
consisting of
390 residential
dwelling units
and 5,351
square feet of
commercial/retai
l space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
380
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
The cumulative developments identified in Table 3.0-3 of Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, as sites within the Long Beach, Orange County, and Westminster Housing Element has not been included in the list of cumulative developments that are driving cumulative land use and planning impacts as there are no specific development proposals for those sites. The sites are opportunity sites that are being planned for IJ

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use and Planning

3.10-16
development of residential uses in the future and therefore, though those sites may include requiring amendments to the respective land use designations of the sites, project implementation of Long Beach, Orange County, and Westminster Housing Element sites would not result in impacts when considered with the Project as potential buildout would be speculative.

Cumulative developments identified in Table 3.10-5 as potentially driving cumulative impacts when considered with the Project include cumulative developments within the City as well as approved developments located directly adjacent to the City as cumulative developments in the immediate vicinity of the City could result in impacts to land use patterns within the City.

The Project’s anticipated impacts from future developments facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development in the City and directly adjacent to the City, would increase the allowance for additional housing stock in already developed areas. Potential land use impacts would be site-specific and would require evaluation on a case-by-case basis at the project level when future development is proposed in accordance with the Housing Element Update and General Plan. Unless exempt, each cumulative project would require separate discretionary approval and review under CEQA, which would address any potential land use impacts and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate.

Consequently, the Housing Element Update identifies future implementation actions to increase housing capacity to accommodate the City’s assigned RHNA pursuant to state, regional, and local growth projections. Therefore, future developments that are facilitated by the Housing Element Update in conjunction with cumulative developments would not result in significant land use impacts.

Furthermore, unless exempt, future developments pursuant to the Housing Element Update and General Plan would be subject to discretionary permits and CEQA evaluation. Cumulative developments would be reviewed by the City under CEQA for consistency with the General Plan and zoning ordinance, as well as with a state or local plan, ordinance, or regulatory standards aimed at avoiding or minimizing an environmental impact. Any significant conflicts would be mitigated or resolved through the City discretional review and approval. Therefore, the Project in combination with cumulative developments would not cause a cumulatively considerable impact related to land use and planning.

3.10.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2003. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan, December 2003. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed September 2024. _____. 2023. Draft City of Seal Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, May 2023. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Seal%20Beach%20LUP_DRAFT%20compre ssed.pdf?ver=2023-05-09-154143-560. Accessed October 2023.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2024. Connect SoCal. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-05/23-2987-connect-socal-2024-final-complete040424.pdf. Accessed February 2025.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-1

3.11 NOISE
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for noise and vibration. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to noise that would result from the implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not result in a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

The Project would not result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, and the Project impact would be less than significant.

The Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels, and the Project impact would be less than significant.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project was considered as part of the construction and operation noise and vibration analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

3.11.1 Environmental Setting
Noise Fundamentals and Terminology
Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound that annoys or disturbs people and potentially causes an adverse psychological or physiological effect on human health. Because noise is an environmental pollutant that can interfere with human activities, evaluation of noise is necessary when considering the environmental impacts of a Project.

Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves over a medium such as air or water. Sound is characterized by various parameters that include the rate of oscillation of sound waves (frequency), the speed of propagation, and the pressure level or energy content (amplitude). In particular, the sound pressure level (SPL) is the most common descriptor used to characterize the loudness of an existing sound level.

Although the decibel (dB) scale, a logarithmic scale, is used to quantify sound intensity, it does not accurately describe how sound intensity is perceived by human hearing. The perceived loudness of sound is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies in the entire spectrum, so noise measurements are weighted more heavily for frequencies to which humans are sensitive in a process called A-weighting, written as dB(A) and referred to as A-weighted decibels. There is a strong correlation between Aweighted sound levels and community response to noise. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-2
become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. Table 3.11-1 summarizes typical Aweighted sound levels for different common noise sources.

Table 3.11-1: Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dB(A)) Common Indoor Activities Jet flyover at 1,000 Feet
Gas lawnmower at 3 Feet
Diesel truck at 50 Feet at 50 MPH
Noisy urban area, daytime
Gas lawnmower, 100 Feet
Commercial area
Heavy traffic at 300 Feet
Quiet urban daytime
Quiet urban nighttime
Quiet suburban nighttime
Quiet rural nighttime
-110-
-100-
-90-
-80-
-70-
-60-
-50-
-40-
-30-
-20-
-10-
-0-
Rock band
Food blender at 3 Feet
Garbage Disposal at 3 Feet
Vacuum Cleaner at 10 Feet
Normal Speech at 3 Feet
Large business office
Dishwasher in next room
Theater, large conference room
(Background)
Library
Bedroom at night, concert hall
(Background)
Broadcast/recording studio
Source: Caltrans 2013
Different types of measurements are used to characterize the time-varying nature of sound. These measurements include the equivalent sound level (Leq), the minimum and maximum sound levels (Lmin and Lmax), percentile-exceeded sound levels (such as L10, L20), the day-night sound level (Ldn), and the community noise equivalent level (CNEL). Ldn and CNEL values often differ by less than 1 dB. As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are considered to be equivalent and are treated as such in this assessment. Table 3.11-2 defines sound measurements and other terminology used in this report.

Table 3.11-2: Definition of Sound Measurements
Sound Measurements Definition
Decibel (dB) A unitless measure of sound on a logarithmic scale, which indicates the squared ratio of sound pressure amplitude to a reference sound pressure amplitude. The reference pressure is 20 micro-pascals.

A-Weighted Decibel (dB(A)) An overall frequency-weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-3
Sound Measurements Definition
Maximum Sound Level (Lmax) The maximum sound level measured during the measurement period.

Minimum Sound Level (Lmin) The minimum sound level measured during the measurement period.

Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) The equivalent steady state sound level that in a stated period of time would contain the same acoustical energy.

Percentile-Exceeded Sound Level
(Lxx)
The sound level exceeded xx % of a specific time period. L10 is the sound level exceeded 10% of the time. L90 is the sound level exceeded 90% of the time. L90 is often considered to be representative of the background noise level in a given area.

Day-Night Level (Ldn) The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24- hour period, with 10 dB added to the A-weighted sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM
Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL)
The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24- hour period with 5 dB added to the A-weighted sound levels occurring during the period from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and 10 dB added to the Aweighted sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM.

Peak Particle Velocity (Peak
Velocity or PPV)
A measurement of ground vibration defined as the maximum speed (measured in inches per second) at which a particle in the ground is moving relative to its inactive state. PPV is usually expressed in inches/second.

Frequency: Hertz (Hz) The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure.

Source: FHWA 2006
With respect to how humans perceive and react to changes in noise levels, a 1 dB(A) increase is imperceptible, a 3 dB(A) increase is barely perceptible, a 5 dB(A) increase is clearly noticeable, and a 10 dB(A) increase is subjectively perceived as approximately twice as loud. These subjective reactions to changes in noise levels were developed on the basis of test subjects’ reactions to changes in the levels of steady-state pure tones or broadband noise and to changes in levels of a given noise source. These statistical indicators are thought to be most applicable to noise levels in the range of 50 to 70 dB(A), as this is the usual range of voice and interior noise levels. Numerous agencies and municipalities have developed or adopted noise level standards, consistent with these and other similar studies to help prevent annoyance and to protect against the degradation of the existing noise environment.

For a point source such as a stationary compressor or construction equipment, sound attenuates based on geometry at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. For a line source such as free-flowing traffic on a freeway, sound attenuates at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance. Atmospheric conditions including wind, temperature gradients, and humidity can change how sound propagates over distance and can affect the level of sound received at a given location. The degree to which the ground surface absorbs acoustical energy also affects sound propagation. Sound that travels over an acoustically absorptive surface, such as grass, attenuates at a slightly greater rate than sound that travels over a hard surface, such as pavement. The increased attenuation is typically in the range of 1–2 dB per doubling of distance.

Barriers, such as buildings and topography that block the line of sight between a source and receiver, also increase the attenuation of sound over distance.

I 7 ~
I -
-
I ~
r---
,--
I -
I -
I ~ -
I -
- L I
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-4
Decibel Addition
Because decibels are logarithmic units, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. On the dB scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3 dB increase. In other words, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, their combined sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. For example, if one source produces a sound pressure level of 70 dB(A), two identical sources would combine to produce 73 dB(A). The cumulative sound level of any number of sources can be determined using decibel addition.

Vibration Standards
Vibration is like noise such that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While related to noise, vibration differs in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, whereas vibration usually consists of the excitation of a structure or surface. As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s perception to vibration depends on their individual sensitivity to vibration, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source and the response of the system that is vibrating.

Vibration can be measured in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration in terms of peak particle velocity in inches per second (in/sec PPV). Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration levels defined in terms of in/sec PPV. Human and structural response to different vibration levels is influenced by a number of factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events. Table 3.11-3 notes the general threshold at which human annoyance could occur is 0.1 PPV for continuous/frequent sources. Table 3.11-4 indicates the threshold for damage to typical residential and commercial structures ranges from 0.3 to 0.5 PPV for continuous/frequent sources.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-5
Table 3.11-3: Guideline Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria Human Response
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Sources
Barely perceptible 0.035 0.012
Distinctly perceptible 0.24 0.035
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.0 0.40
Notes: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seal equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

Source: Caltrans 2020
Table 3.11-4: Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Criteria Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings,
ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile1 buildings 0.30 0.12
Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.20
Older2residential structure 0.70 0.30
New residential structures 1.2 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial
buildings 2.0 0.50
Notes:

Transient sources again create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seal equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. 1 A fragile building is considered one where the structural components are weakened due to age, poor construction materials, or significant deterioration, making it susceptible to damage from even minor stress. 2 An older building refers to a structure that has been around for a considerable period of time, regardless of its current structural integrity, with factors like construction materials, maintenance history, and design playing a role in determining its overall condition.

Source: Caltrans 2020
The operation of heavy construction equipment, particularly pile driving, and other impact devices, such as pavement breakers, create seismic waves that radiate along the surface of the ground and downward into the earth. These surface waves can be felt as ground vibration. Vibration from the operation of this equipment can result in effects ranging from annoyance of people to damage of structures. Varying -
~ 1~
-
,--
I -
I
r---
I
~
L __ _ I J
I -----i
~
I
-
-
I -
I -
I
I ~
I

I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-6
geology and distance will result in different vibration levels containing different frequencies and displacements. In all cases, vibration amplitudes will decrease with increasing distance. Perceptible groundborne vibration is generally limited to areas within a few hundred feet of construction activities.

Table 7-4, Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment, in the 2018 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018) lists vibration source levels for the construction equipment most likely to generate high levels of ground vibration. The equipment listed in the FTA table includes impact and sonic pile drivers, clam shovel drops, hydromills, vibratory rollers, hoe rams, large and small bulldozers, caisson drilling, loaded trucks, and jackhammers.

Table 3.11-5 below summarizes typical reference vibration levels generated by select construction equipment.

Table 3.11-5: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment PPVref at 25 Feet
Pile Driver (Impact) 1.518 – Upper Range

0.644 - Typical
Vibratory roller 0.210
Large bulldozer 0.089
Caisson drilling 0.089
Loaded trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small bulldozer 0.003
Source: FTA 2018
Vibration amplitude attenuates over distance and is a complex function of how energy is imparted into the ground and the soil conditions through which the vibration is traveling. The following equation can be used to estimate the vibration level at a given distance for typical soil conditions (FTA 2018). “PPVref” is the reference PPV from Table 5 and “Distance” is the distance between the source and the receptor:

PPV = PPVref x (25/Distance)1.5
Existing Project Setting
Mobile Sources
The predominant noise source in the City of Seal Beach originates from the movement of motor vehicles on roadways. While some of the noise comes from the engine and exhaust, at higher speeds tires and wind noise predominate. Several major arterial roadways pass through the City, including the San Diego Freeway (I-405), the San Gabriel River Freeway (I-605), the Garden Grove Freeway (SR 22), Pacific Coast Highway (SR 1), and arterial roadways. These major roadways bisect residential, commercial, public, and industrial areas, therefore mobile sources along these routes means that noise levels from traffic are audible throughout areas of the City.
- 1 I -
- -
-
-
-
-
- -
-
L--~ l J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-7
The City of Seal Beach also encompasses the Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach in the southeast half of the City. The base has “evolved into the Navy’s primary West Coast ordnance storage, loading and maintenance installation. Under the station's primary tenant, the Navy Munitions Command, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and medium-sized amphibious assault ships are loaded with missiles, torpedoes, countermeasures devices and conventional ammunition at the facility’s 1,100 foot-long pier. Personnel also perform maintenance on some weapons systems. An average of 40 vessels are loaded or unloaded each year. The weapons station services a majority of the U.S. Pacific Fleet” (United States Navy 2024).

In addition, noise levels within the City are affected by overflights from military aircraft from the Los Alamitos JFTB and from civilian aircraft from the Long Beach Airport. The Los Alamitos JFTB aircraft flights occur over residential and other noise sensitive land uses within the City. The CNEL contours from the Air Installations Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) study for the Los Alamitos JFTB are contained within the Noise Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. Some residential noise sensitive areas north of I-405 experience aircraft-generated noise levels greater than 65 CNEL.

Also as noted in the City of Seal Beach General Plan, the 65 CNEL noise contour for Long Beach Airport is located approximately three miles outside the City of Seal Beach boundary. Therefore, aircraft noise generated from the Long Beach Airport will not have a significant impact on residential and other noise sensitive land uses within the City.

Other mobile sources within Seal Beach include trucks, cars, motorcycles, buses, leaf blowers, lawn mowers, and other portable maintenance equipment. These are considered typical sounds of a city and are regulated by the City’s Municipal Code (Chapter 7.15) and the Noise Element in the City’s General Plan (City of Seal Beach 2003, 2024).

Fixed Noise Sources
Stationary sources of noises may occur from all types of land uses. Residential uses would generate noise from primarily air conditioning systems. Commercial and industrial uses would generate noise from heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) systems, loading docks and other sources. Stationary equipment often generates noise on a continual basis due to the functioning of the equipment. Other common noise sources from fixed locations includes nightclubs, outdoor dining areas, gas stations, car washes, fire stations, drive-throughs, swimming pool pumps, school playgrounds, athletic and music events, and public parks.

Existing Vibrations
Commercial and industrial operations can generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the operational procedures and equipment. Such equipment-generated vibrations spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. The effect on buildings in the vicinity of the vibration source varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and receptor-building construction. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight structural damage at the highest levels. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-8

3.11.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal, state, and local agencies regulate different aspects of environmental noise. Generally, the federal government sets standards for transportation-related noise sources closely linked to interstate commerce, including aircraft, locomotives, and trucks. The state government sets standards for transportation noise sources such as automobiles, light trucks, and motorcycles. Noise sources associated with industrial, commercial, and construction activities are generally subject to local control through noise ordinances and general plan policies. Local general plans identify general principles intended to guide and influence development plans.

Federal
Federal Highway Administration
Proposed federal or federal-aided highway construction projects at a new location, or the physical alteration of an existing highway that significantly changes the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes, require an assessment of noise and consideration of noise abatement per 23 CFR Part 772, “Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise.” The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has adopted noise abatement criteria for sensitive receivers—such as picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sport areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals—when “worst-hour” noise levels approach or exceed 67 dBA Leq (Caltrans 2020).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
In addition to FHWA standards, the EPA has identified the relationship between noise levels and human response. The EPA determined that over a 24-hour period, an Leq of 70 dBA will result in some hearing loss. Interference with activity and annoyance will not occur if exterior levels are maintained at an Leq of 55 dBA and interior levels at or below 45 dBA. These levels are relevant to planning and design and useful for informational purposes, but they are not land use planning criteria because they do not consider economic cost, technical feasibility, or the needs of the community; therefore, they are not mandated. The EPA also set 55 dBA Ldn as the basic goal for exterior residential noise intrusion. However, other federal agencies, in consideration of their own program requirements and goals, as well as the difficulty of actually achieving a goal of 55 dBA Ldn, have settled on the 65 dBA Ldn level as their standard. At 65 dBA Ldn, activity interference is kept to a minimum, and annoyance levels are still low. It is also a level that can realistically be achieved.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has set the goal of 65 dBA Ldn as a desirable maximum exterior standard for residential units developed under HUD funding (this level is also generally accepted within the State of California). Although HUD does not specify acceptable interior noise levels, standard construction of residential dwellings typically provides 20 dBA or more of attenuation with the windows closed. Based on this premise, the interior Ldn should not exceed 45 dBA. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-9
Occupational Health and Safety Administration
The federal government regulates occupational noise exposure common in the workplace through the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) under the EPA. Noise limitations would apply to the operation of construction equipment and could also apply to any proposed industrial land uses. Noise exposure of this type is dependent on work conditions and is addressed through a facility’s Health and Safety Plan, as required under OSHA, and is therefore not addressed further in this analysis.

State
California Building Code
Part 2, Title 24 of the CCR California Noise Insulation Standards establishes minimum noise insulation standards to protect persons within new hotels, motels, dormitories, long-term care facilities, apartment houses, and dwellings other than single-family residences. Under Section 1207.11, Exterior Sound Transmission Control, interior noise levels attributable to exterior noise sources cannot exceed 45 dB(A) Ldn in any habitable room. Where such residences are located in an environment where exterior noise is 60 dB(A) Ldn or greater, an acoustical analysis is required to ensure interior levels do not exceed the 45 dB(A) Ldn interior standard. If the interior allowable noise levels are met by requiring that windows be kept closed, the design for the building must also specify a ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment.

California Green Building Standards
CalGreen establishes interior noise insulation standards for non-residential occupied buildings, such as office buildings. The CalGreen code also applies to occupied non-residential spaces within a multi-family residential building, such as community rooms, offices, etc. CalGreen Section 5.507, Environmental Comfort, states the following:

5.507.4.1 Exterior noise transmission. Wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source making up the building or addition envelope or altered envelope shall meet a composite sound transmission class (STC) rating of at least 50 or a composite OITC rating of no less than 40, with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 or OITC of 30 in the following locations:

Within the 65 CNEL noise contour of an airport
Exceptions:

Ldn or CNEL for military airports shall be determined by the facility Air Installation Compatible Land Use Zone (AICUZ) plan.

Ldn or CNEL for other airports and heliports for which a land use plan that has not been developed shall be determined by the local general plan noise element.

Within the 65 CNEL or Ldn noise contour of a freeway or expressway, railroad, industrial source or fixed-guideway notice source as determined by the Noise Element of the General Plan. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-10

5.507.4.1.1 Noise exposure where noise contours are not readily available. Buildings exposed to a noise level of 65 dB Leq-1-hr during any hour of operation shall have building, addition or alteration exterior wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source meeting a composite STC rating of at least 45 (or OITC 35), with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 (or OITC 30).

5.507.4.2 Performance method. For buildings located as defined in Section 5.507.4.1 or

5.507.4.1.1, wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source making up the building or addition envelope or altered envelope shall be constructed to provide an interior noise environment attributable to exterior sources that does not exceed an hourly equivalent noise level (Leq -1Hr) of 50 dBA in occupied areas during any hours of operations

5.507.4.2.1 Site features. Exterior features such as sound walls or earth berms may be utilized as appropriate to the building, addition, or alteration project to mitigate sound migration to the interior.

5.507.4.2.2 Documentation of compliance. An acoustical analysis documenting complying interior sound levels shall be prepared by personnel approved by the architect or engineer of record.

5.507.4.3 Interior sound transmission. Wall and floor-ceiling assemblies separating tenant spaces and tenant spaces and public places shall have an STC of at least 40.

California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, indicates a significant noise impact may occur if a project exposes persons to noise or vibration levels in excess of local general plans or noise ordinance standards, or cause a substantial permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels. CEQA standards are discussed more below under Section 3.11.3, Environmental Impacts.

Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The Noise Element in the City of Seal Beach General Plan “quantifies the community noise environment in terms of noise exposure contours for near-term and long-term levels of growth and traffic activity. The Noise Element identifies noise sensitive land uses and noise sources and defines areas of noise impact for the purpose of developing programs to ensure that Seal Beach residents will be protected from excessing noise intrusion.”
Figure N-3 “Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines” in the City of Seal Beach General Plan (shown below) identifies land use compatibility noise standards for noise-sensitive land uses affected by transportation and non-transportation noise sources.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-11
The City of Seal Beach General Plan also lists the following goal, objectives, and actions relating to noise:

Goals: A beach town should be a quiet place where one can hear the surf and the wind. Reduce the level of noise, so that it causes less human stress or health damage, is not as likely to interfere with human activities such as sleep, work, play, or thought, and allow the peaceful existence of wildlife and pets.

Objectives:

The identification in quantitative, numerical terms of existing and projected noise levels, noise sources, and noise-sensitive land uses in the City of Seal Beach.

Establishment of appropriate criteria and guidelines for desirable sound levels and the identification of means available to achieve those sound levels in the City of Seal Beach. •
m
La ,d Use C&l8!)ory
Res,dent1al - Low Derrs,ly Single Family. Duplex, Mobile Homes Resi denllal • MUlU Family
Transier l Lodging . Mot Is . Hotels
Sct,ool, , Libr eries .

Church es , Hospitals.

Nurs ln Homes
Audi tor urn s, Co cer Hall ' AmphithealAr
Sports Arer1a, 0 tdoor Spectato r Sports
Playg rounds, Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables , Waler
Recrea ti on, Cemelenes
Office Bui ldings , Business Commerci al and Profession..:il lnduslnal, Manufacturing, Utili lies,
Agri culture
55 Commvnity Noise Exposure
Ldn or CNEL. dB 60 65 70 75
Figure N-3 - Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines
Norm lly Ac-ceplable
Speci fied land use is sati sfar.tc,y, based
upon lhe sssumpl10n Iha\ any b.J!ld1ngs
involved are of norm a convenaonal
co11struct1on. 1N1 th out any spea d noise
insulation requirements
Wff/2'.j
Cond1Uonslly Acoeplabl e
New structi cn ordevel opment sh)uld
be under taken only after e de tai led
anal ys:is of ~!::I naiss reduction
requ1re1nen1s 1s made and needed noise
insul ation features included ,n lhe
design. Conven!onsf cons~ucUon, bul
wi of ed window - d Ire h a-r supply
di b ornng ~11 II roorm y
Norma ly Unacceptab le
New strucUm or development should
ge,ieral y be discolfa<:;ed If new
construcl1on or developmen l does
proceed, a deta1l&J a · lys,s of the noise
reducb on requirements mus.t be made
ard newed ncise lnsJ!ation fealures
ind uded in lh0 de~1gn
Clearly Unae<:eplable
New con,tructlon or development
e ~l"II 11,i l"IIAl'VloUlh,t rtM' kb lll'tl"tAl"t~lcAft

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-12
Direction for an implementation program that may be used to achieve and maintain a minimal noise environment.

Maintain the relatively quiet areas of Seal Beach by regulating existing and potential noise sources, especially in public open space and the designated Wildlife Refuge area.

Inform the citizenry of Seal Beach of real and potential noise hazards, both physical and psychological.

The City shall encourage a long-term development pattern that minimizes noise conflicts through planning and zoning.

The City shall require the construction of barriers to mitigate sound emissions where necessary and feasible to protect outdoor noise sensitive land uses.

The City shall require the inclusion of noise mitigation measures in the design of new roadway projects in Seal Beach.

The City shall minimize potential transportation noise through proper design of street circulation, coordination of routing, and other traffic control measures.

The City shall ensure the effective enforcement of city, state, and federal noise level standards by all appropriate city divisions. The city shall provide quick response to complaints and rapid abatement of noise nuisances within the scope of the city’s police powers.

Actions:

Issue 1 – Transportation Noise Control.

The most efficient and effective means of controlling noise from transportation systems is reducing noise at the source. However, since the City has little direct control over source noise levels because of state and federal preemption (e.g., State Motor Vehicle Noise Standards), policies should be focused on reducing the impact of the noise on the community. Cooperative efforts with state and federal offices are essential.

Encourage the use of walls and berms in the design of residential or other noise sensitive land uses that are adjacent to major roads, commercial, or industrial areas.

Provide for continues evaluation of truck movements and routs in the City to provide effective separation from residential or other noise sensitive land uses.

Encourage the enforcement of State Motor Vehicle noise standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles through coordination with the California Highway Patrol and Seal Beach Police Department.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-13
Aircraft noise standards shall be enforced by the local Airport Environ Land Use Plan (AELUP), which is regulated by the local Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Issue 2 – Noise and Land Use Planning Integration.

Community noise considerations are to be incorporated into land planning. These measures are intended to prevent future noise and land-use incompatibilities.

The criteria shown previously in Figure N-3 are used to assess the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment. These criteria are the basis for review of projects to ensure the compatibility between land-use and noise environment. These guidelines are the primary tool that will allow the City to ensure noise integrated planning for compatibility between land uses and outdoors.

Incorporate noise reduction features during site planning to mitigate anticipated noise impacts on affected noise sensitive land uses. The noise referral zones (areas exposed to noise levels greater than 60 CNEL) can be used to identify locations or potential conflict. New developments will be permitted only if appropriate mitigation measures are included such that the standards contained in this Element or the ordinance are met.

Enforce the State of California Uniform Building Code that specifies that the indoor noise levels for residential living spaces not exceed 45 dB[A] LDN/CNEL due to the combined effect of all noise sources. The state requires implementations of this standard when the outdoor noise levels exceed 60 dB[A] LDN/CNEL. The Noise Referral Zones (60 CNEL) can be used to determine when this standard needs to be addressed. The Uniform Building Code requires that “Interior community noise levels (CNEL/LDN) with windows closed, attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed an annual CNEL or LDN of 45 dB[A] in any habitable room.” The code requires that this standard be applied to all new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family dwellings. The City can and is encouraged to reduce the noise standard from 45 CNEL to 40 CNEL. Additionally, the standard should be applied to single-family homes.

Issue 3 – Community Noise Control for Non-Transportation Noise Sources.

The focus of noise from non-transportation sources is the Community Noise Ordinance. The ordinance can be used to protect people from noise generated on adjacent properties.

The purpose of the ordinance is to protect people from non-transportation-related noise sources such as music, machinery and pumps, air conditioners, landscaping and gardening activities, and truck traffic on private property. The Noise Ordinance does not apply to motor vehicle noise on public streets, but it does apply to motor vehicle noise on private property. The Noise Ordinance is designed to protect quiet residential areas from stationary noise sources. The noise levels encouraged by the ordinance are typical of quiet residential areas. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-14
Continue to enforce the community Noise Ordinance. The most effective method to control community noise impacts from non-transportation noise sources is through application of the community noise ordinance.

All new residential projects to be constructed near existing non-transportation noise sources (including, but not limited to commercial facilities, public parks with sports activities) must demonstrate via an acoustical study conducted by a Registered Engineer that the indoor noise levels will be consistent with the limits contained in the noise ordinance.

Require construction activity to comply with the limits establishes in the City Noise Ordinance.

Designate one agency in the City to act as the noise control coordinator. This will ensure the continued operation of noise enforcement efforts in the city.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
Chapter 7.15 “NOISE” in the City’s Municipal Code offers the following limits and requirements relating to noise in the City.

7.15.010 Designated Noise Zones. The noise zones of the City are as follows:

A. Noise Zone 1: Residential properties.

B. Noise Zone 2: Commercial properties.

C. Noise Zone 3: Industrial, manufacturing and oil properties.

7.15.015 Exterior Noise Standards. A. Unless otherwise specifically indicated, the following exterior noise standards shall apply to all property within a designated noise zone:

B. No person shall create any noise, or allow the creation of any noise, on property owned or occupied by such person when such noise causes the noise level to exceed the following when measured from a residential property:

1. The exterior noise standard for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour.

2. The exterior noise standard plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour.
•
•
Noise Standards:

Noise Zone Noise Level Time Period
55 db(A) 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
50 db(A) 10:00 p.m. - y:oo a.m.
2 65 db(A) At any time
3 70 db(A) At any time
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-15

3. The exterior noise standard plus 10 db(A) for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour.

4. The exterior noise standard plus 15 db(A) for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour.

5. The exterior noise standard plus 20 db(A) for any period of time.

C. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds any of the first 4 noise limit categories in subsection B, the cumulative period applicable to such category shall be increased to reflect that ambient level. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds the fifth noise limit category, the maximum allowable noise level under such category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level.

7.15.020 Interior Noise Standards.

A. Unless otherwise specifically indicated, the following interior noise standards shall apply to all residential property within a designated noise zone:

In the event the alleged offensive noise consists of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech, music or any combination thereof, each of the above noise levels shall be reduced by 5 dB(A).

1. The interior noise standard for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour.

2. The interior noise standard plus 5 db(A) for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour.

3. The interior noise standard plus 10 db(A) for any period of time.

C. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds either of the first 2 noise limit categories in subsection B, the cumulative period applicable to such category shall be increased to reflect that ambient level. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds the third noise limit category, the maximum allowable noise level under such category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level.
•
Noise Zone
m
Noise Standards:

Noise Level
55 db(A)
50 db(A)
Time Period
7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-16

7.15.025 Exemptions. The following activities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter:

A. Activities conducted on the grounds of a nursery, elementary, intermediate or secondary school or college.

B. Activities conducted pursuant to a special event permit issued by the city.

C. Activities conducted at a publicly owned park or playground.

D. Any mechanical device, apparatus or equipment used in connection with emergency machinery, vehicle or work.

E. Noise associated with construction, repair, remodeling or grading of real property performed in the following periods: between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays; and between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Saturday.

F. Noise associated with real property maintenance performed in the following periods: between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays; between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Saturday; and between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Sunday or a holiday.

G. Activities for which local noise regulations are preempted by federal or state law.

7.15.030 Schools, Hospitals and Churches.

A. No person shall create any noise that causes the noise level at a school, hospital or church to exceed the exterior noise standard for the noise zone in which such facility is located.

B. No person shall create any noise that causes the noise level at a school, hospital or church to interfere unreasonably with the operation of the facility.

C. The prohibitions of this section apply only if signs are conspicuously displayed at 3 separate locations within one-tenth of a mile of the school, hospital or church. Additionally, the prohibitions of this section apply only if the school, hospital or church is in use.

7.15.035 Heating, Venting, and Air Conditioning Equipment.

A. No building permit shall be issued for the installation of heating, venting and air conditioning ("HVAC") equipment in or adjacent to residential areas if the noise produced by the HVAC equipment exceeds an A-weighted exterior sound pressure level of 50 dB(A). The method of computation used shall be that specified in the "Application of Sound Rating Levels of Outdoor Unitary Equipment," Standard 275, Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute, 1997 ed. or the latest revision thereof.

B. Notwithstanding subsection A of this section, a building permit may be issued for the installation of:
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-17

1. HVAC equipment containing a timing device deactivating the HVAC equipment between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. provided the noise produced by the HVAC equipment does not exceed an A-weighted exterior sound pressure level of 55 dB(A).

2. HVAC equipment generating noise that does not exceed an A-weighted exterior sound pressure level of 65 dB(A), provided that the applicant obtains the prior written consent of the owner of each property where the exterior sound pressure level would exceed 55 dB(A).

3.11.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant noise impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
Construction Noise Thresholds
The City of Seal Beach does not have specific limits or thresholds for construction noise but rather limits the times of construction as shown in Section 7.15.025 of the City’s Municipal Code.

Stationary Noise Thresholds
The City’s Municipal Code Sections 7.15.015 and 7.15.020 provides exterior and interior noise standards for new development with new stationary noise sources, respectively. For the purposes of this analysis, these standards are used to determine significant stationary noise impacts.

Transportation Noise Thresholds
A Project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to noise if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas. Most people can detect changes in sound levels of approximately 3 dB(A) under normal, quiet conditions, and changes of 1 to 3 dBA are detectable under very quiet, controlled conditions. Changes of less than 1 dB(A) are usually indiscernible. A change of 5 dB(A) is readily discernible to most people in an exterior environment. Based on this, the following thresholds of significance, similar to those recommended by the FAA, are used to assess traffic noise impacts at sensitive receptor locations (e.g., residential dwellings, schools, hospitals, educational facilities, and libraries). A significant impact would occur if traffic noise increase would exceed: 1.5 dB(A) in ambient noise environments of 65 dBA CNEL and higher, 3 dB(A) in ambient noise environments of 60 to 64 dBA CNEL, and 5 dB(A) in ambient noise environments of less than 60 dBA CNEL.

Vibration Thresholds
The City does not have specific limits or thresholds for construction vibration. Therefore, the recommended criteria by Caltrans for human annoyance and vibration damage shown in Tables 3.11-3 and 3.11-4 above are used in this analysis.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-18
Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with the current CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions were analyzed and evaluated to determine whether noise impacts are significant.

Would the Project result in:

Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project noise levels 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? For a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Noise Levels in Excess of Standards
Impact NOI-1 The Project would not result in the 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.

Impact Analysis
Construction
The Project is intended to result in the construction of future residential developments which would generate temporary noise level increases on and adjacent to existing development in the City.

Construction is performed in distinct steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment, and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. Table 3.11-6 lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended for noise-impact assessments based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and noise receptor.

Table 3.11-6: Reference Construction Equipment Noise Levels Construction Equipment Source at the
Project Site
Distance to
Nearest Sensitive
Receptor
Sound Level at Receptor
Lmax, dB(A) Acoustical
Use Factor (%) Leq, dB(A)
Backhoe 50 feet 77.6 40 73.6
Compressor (air) 50 feet 77.7 40 73.7
•
•
•
r- -
I I
~ -
~ - I - L I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-19
Construction Equipment Source at the
Project Site
Distance to
Nearest Sensitive
Receptor
Sound Level at Receptor
Lmax, dB(A) Acoustical
Use Factor (%) Leq, dB(A)
Concrete/Industrial Saw 50 feet 89.6 20 82.6
Crane 50 feet 80.6 16 72.6
Dozer 50 feet 81.7 40 77.7
Dump Truck 50 feet 76.5 40 72.5
Excavator 50 feet 80.7 40 76.7
Forklift (Gradall) 50 feet 83.4 40 79.4
Front End Loader 50 feet 79.1 40 75.1
Generator 50 feet 80.6 50 77.6
Grader 50 feet 85.0 40 81.0
Pavement Scarafier 50 feet 89.5 20 82.5
Paver and Paving Equipment 50 feet 77.2 50 74.2
Pumps 50 feet 80.9 50 77.9
Roller 50 feet 80.0 20 73.0
Scraper 50 feet 83.6 40 79.6
Tractor 50 feet 84.0 40 80.0
Welder / Torch 50 feet 74.0 40 70.0
Source: Federal Highway Administration Road Construction Noise Model v1.1 2018 As shown, construction equipment generates high levels of noise, with average noise levels ranging from 73 to 83 dB(A). Construction of individual future developments associated with implementation of the Project would temporarily increase the ambient noise environment and would have the potential to affect noise sensitive land uses in the vicinity of an individual project. Construction noise levels are highly variable and dependent upon the specific locations, site plans, construction details of individual projects.

Significant noise impacts may occur from operation of heavy earth-moving equipment and truck haul operations that would occur during the construction phase of an individual development.

The City’s Municipal Code includes noise mitigation measures such as limiting hours of operation for construction. Municipal Code Section 7.15.025.E exempts noise associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading or real property performed between 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. on weekdays; and between 8:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. on Saturday. Furthermore, Municipal Code Section 7.15.015 requires stationary equipment not exceed the maximum allowable noise levels listed in the table (shown above).

The General Plan Noise Element also requires construction activity to comply with the limits established in the City Municipal Code. Even with the application of noise attenuation policies from the General Plan and Municipal Code, it is likely that construction noise would affect adjacent sensitive receptors, therefore construction noise impacts associated with implementation of the Project are considered potentially significant. As such, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 described below has been identified to reduce potential I I l
~ -
-
r-
-
- -
r--
-
-
~
- -
- -
-
-
-
-
- -
- I I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-20
impacts. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires Project applicants to describe and commit to a mitigation plan that would be developed when the individual project information is available to make final decisions on all specific mitigation measures to be implemented. Additionally, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 lists potential provisions that could be included in the mitigation plan. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Operation
The Project would expose nearby noise sensitive receptors to noise from operations associated with increased traffic and stationary operational noise, such as lawn maintenance and air conditioning equipment. All new residential development under the Project would be required to comply with the policies in the City’s General Plan Noise Element and noise limits in the Municipal Code, which would reduce noise impacts to less than significant.

Operational Traffic
Implementation of the Project would facilitate new development and would impact offsite sensitive receptors due to Project-related traffic. Vehicle trips associated with future developments would increase traffic volumes throughout the City along the entire existing roadway network. The total additional vehicle trips would be dispersed throughout the City associated with each proposed housing site. As such, traffic from the Project would represent an incremental increase in traffic on individual roadways and result in a less than significant impact related to noise.

The City’s Noise Element includes actions to control the development of noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing or projected noise which exceed the levels specified in Figure N-3 of the General Plan (shown above) unless the project includes specific and effective mitigation measures to reduce noise levels. Where noise-sensitive projects are proposed within areas which exceed standards in Figure N-3 of the General Plan, future developments will need to prepare a report that performs a project specific analysis of noise impacts and recommend mitigation measures to reduce noise levels in the site to comply with standards set in Figure N-3 of the General Plan. Following the noise level standards set in the City’s Noise Element for noise exposure from transportation noise sources would result in less than significant impact.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-21
As discussed, this EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. Operation of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project may increase traffic volumes. However, the total additional vehicle trips associated with the Project, include the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project, would be dispersed throughout the City and represent an incremental increase in traffic related noise. Therefore, the 167 dwelling units proposed under the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Operational Stationary Noise
Implementation of the Project would facilitate the addition of new development throughout the City. New development would result in the installation of HVAC systems. Future developments would need to comply with the noise level limits listed within Sections 7.15.015 and 7.15.020 in the City’s Municipal Code. Following the regulations in the City’s Noise Ordinance would result in impacts related to stationary noise to be less than significant.

Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-1: Noise Mitigation Plan. Project applicants shall describe and commit to a mitigation plan that will be developed when the information is available to make final decisions on all specific mitigation measures. The objective of the plan should be to minimize construction using all reasonable (e.g., cost vs. benefit) and feasible (e.g., possible to construct) means available. Components of a mitigation plan may include some or all of the following provisions, which should also be specified in construction contracts.

During the entire active construction period, equipment and trucks used for project construction shall use the best-available noise control techniques available. (e.g., mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds).
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-22
Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers and hoe rams) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible. Where the use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used along with external noise jackets on the tools.

Stationary equipment, such as generators and air compressors shall be located as far as possible from nearby noise-sensitive uses.

Stockpiling shall be located as far as possible from nearby noise-sensitive receptors.

Construction traffic shall be limited to approved haul routes established by the City.

Construct noise barriers, such as temporary walls or piles of excavated material, between noisy activities and noise-sensitive receptors.

Combine noisy operations to occur in the same time period. The total noise level produced will not be substantially greater than the level produced if the operations were performed separately.

At least 10 days prior to the start of construction activities, a sign shall be posted at the entrance(s) to the job site, clearly visible to the public, that includes permitted construction days and hours, as well as the telephone numbers of the City’s and contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. If the authorized contractor’s representative receives a complaint, they shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City.

Signs shall be posted at the job site entrance(s), within the onsite construction zones, and along queueing lanes (if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. All other equipment shall be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes.

During the entire active construction period, the use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only. The construction manager shall use smart back-up alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm level based on the background noise level or switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters in compliance with all safety requirements and laws.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant with Mitigation.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-23
Excessive Groundborne Vibration
Impact NOI-2 The Project would not result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Impact Analysis
Construction Vibration Impacts
Construction activity at projects within the plan area would generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures and equipment. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. The effect on buildings in the vicinity of the construction site varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and receptor-building construction. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight structural damage at the highest levels. Vibration from construction activities rarely reaches the levels that can damage structures but can achieve the audible and perceptible ranges in buildings close to the construction site. Table 3.11-5 lists reference vibration levels for construction equipment.

As shown in Table 3.11-4, vibration generated by construction equipment has the potential to be substantial, since it can exceed the Caltrans criteria for architectural damage (e.g., 0.12 inches per second [in/sec] PPV for fragile buildings, 0.30 in/sec PPV for older residential structures, and 0.5 in/sec PPV for new residential and commercial buildings). Construction details and equipment for future projectlevel developments under the Project are not known at this time but may cause vibration impacts. This would be a potentially significant impact. As such, Mitigation Measure NOI-2 described below has been identified to reduce potential impacts. Mitigation Measure NOI-2 requires Project applicants to prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to construction activities prior to issuance of a building permit. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. As with the Project, construction details and equipment associated with the development of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are not known at this time; however, would be subject to a vibration and noise analysis to assess potential impacts. Specific vibration impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Operational Vibration Impacts
Operational vibration is typically associated with commercial and industrial uses which can generate varying levels of groundborne vibration, depending on operational procedures and equipment. Other sources of groundborne vibration include rail traffic and subways. The Project would allow for future developments with conventional road traffic that is not anticipated to generate significant levels of operational vibration. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-24
This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. Similar to the Project, the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would result in a use that would generate conventional road traffic that is not anticipated to generate significant levels of operational vibration. Therefore, development of the 167 dwelling units proposed under the ORCC Specific Plan Project were considered within the analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-2: Noise and Vibration Analysis. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a project requiring pile driving during construction within 135 feet from fragile structures, such as historical resources, 75 feet from older residential structures, of non-engineered timber and masonry buildings (e.g., most residential buildings), or within 55 feet of new residential or commercial buildings; or a vibratory roller within 25 feet of any structure, the project applicant shall prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. A qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer shall conduct this noise and vibration analysis. The vibration levels shall not exceed the Caltrans damage thresholds listed in the table below. If vibration levels would exceed this threshold, alternative uses such as drilling piles as opposed to pile driving and static rollers as opposed to vibratory rollers shall be used. If necessary, construction vibration monitoring shall be conducted to ensure vibration thresholds are not exceeded.

Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Sources
Extremely fragile historic
buildings, ruins, ancient
monuments

0.12 0.08
Fragile1buildings 0.30 0.12
Historic and some old
buildings 0.50 0.20
Older2 residential
structure 0.70 0.30
New residential structures 1.2 0.50
I I
I
-
e---- -
- -
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-25
Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Sources
Modern
industrial/commercial
buildings

2.0 0.50
Notes:

Transient sources again create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls.

Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seal equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. 1 A fragile building is considered one where the structural components are weakened due to age, poor construction materials, or significant deterioration, making it susceptible to damage from even minor stress. 2 An older building refers to a structure that has been around for a considerable period of time, regardless of its current structural integrity, with factors like construction materials, maintenance history, and design playing a role in determining its overall condition.

Source: Caltrans 2020
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

Airport Land Use Plan
Impact NOI-3 For a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

Impact Analysis
Noise levels within portions of Seal Beach are affected by overflights from military and civilian aircraft from the Los Alamitos JFTB and from civilian aircraft from the Long Beach Airport. The Los Alamitos JFTB aircraft flights occur over residential and other noise sensitive land uses within the City. The CNEL contours from the AICUZ study are contained within the Noise Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. Residential noise sensitive areas north of I-405 experience aircraft-generated noise levels greater than 65 CNEL.

The City’s Noise Element includes actions to control the development of noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing or projected noise which exceed the levels specified in Figure N-3 of the General Plan unless the project includes specific and effective mitigation measures to reduce noise levels. This includes noise generated from aircraft flyovers. The City’s General Plan Noise Element states “all new residential projects to be constructed near existing non-transportation noise sources (including, but not limited to commercial facilities, public parks with sports activities) must demonstrate via an acoustical study conducted by a Registered Engineer that the indoor noise levels will be consistent with the limits contained in the noise ordinance.” Where noise-sensitive projects are proposed within areas which exceed standards in Figure N-3 of the General Plan, future developments will be required to prepare a report that performs a project specific analysis of noise impacts and recommend mitigation measures to reduce noise levels in the site to comply with standards set in Figure N-3. Following the I I
~
-
I I I J_
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-26
noise level standards set in the City’s Noise Element for noise exposure and compliance with the City’s requirements for preparation of an acoustical study would reduce potential impacts and the Project would result in a less than significant impact.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

3.11.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative noise impacts is the immediate project vicinity. This geographic scope is appropriate for noise as effects of noise are highly localized.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-27
Table 3.11-7: Cumulative Projects Related to Noise
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
Preparation of
EIR 167
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
These two cumulative projects listed in the table above are located within close proximity to and adjacent to one of the Housing Opportunity Sites. Cumulative project 1 is located adjacent to and within close proximity to Housing Opportunity Sites 4 and 5. Cumulative project 2 is located within close proximity to Housing Opportunity Site 1. All other cumulative projects listed in Table 3.0-3 in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, are located more than a quarter mile away from a Housing Opportunity Site or Main Street Program area and would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to noise when considered with the Project. If the two cumulative projects listed in the table above were to have the same construction schedule and timeline as the adjacent Housing Opportunity Site, then there could be a cumulatively considerable increase in construction noise in the area resulting in potential impacts.

However, as future development of Housing Opportunity Sites is currently speculative and there is no timeline for actual buildout for any of Housing Opportunity Sites, it is currently not feasible to predict whether construction noise from buildout of the cumulative projects would combine with construction noise from buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites in a manner that could result in significant impacts.

Buildout of future developments facilitated by the Project and cumulative developments would be required to comply with and adhere to the City’s construction noise ordinances and requirements to minimize impacts.

The Housing Element Update’s anticipated noise and vibration-related impacts from future developments facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development in the City, would increase housing development in an already developed area, thereby resulting in increased ambient noise levels. Potential noise and vibration-related impacts would be site-specific and would require evaluation on a case-by- - I I I
I
1~
-
-
!... I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Noise

3.11-28
case basis at the project level when future development is proposed in accordance with the Housing Element Update. Unless exempt, each cumulative project would require separate approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would verify compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and address potential noise and vibration impacts and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate. Future developments facilitated by the Project in conjunction with cumulative development is not anticipated to result in significant noise and vibration impacts, or conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan, ordinance, or standards aimed at avoiding or minimizing excessive noise, following compliance with the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, the Project would not cause a cumulatively considerable noise or vibration impact, and no mitigation is required.

3.11.5 References
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013-a11y.pdf. Accessed October 2024.
_____. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020. https://dot.ca.gov/- /media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf.

Accessed October 2024.

City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Noise%20Element.pdf. Accessed November 2024.
_____. 2024. Municipal Code. https://ecode360.com/43955072#43955106. Accessed November 2024.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. Construction Noise Handbook, 2006. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook02.cfm.

Accessed October 2024.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf. Accessed October 2024.

United States Navy. 2024. Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach. https://cnrsw.cnic.navy.mil/Installations/WPNSTA-Seal-Beach/About/InstallationGuide/Installation-Locations/SealBeach/#:~:text=Under%20the%20station's%20primary%20tenant,on%20these%20vessels%20an d%20weapons%2C. Accessed November 2024.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-1

3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for population and housing. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to population and housing that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area and the Project would have a less than significant impact.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would result in population growth in the City. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

3.12.1 Environmental Setting
Population Trends
Historic Growth
Seal Beach was incorporated in 1915 primarily as a farming community and beachside tourist destination.

The population of the City remained relatively stable from 1915 to 1944 with little more than 1,000 residents. However, in 1944 the U.S. Navy acquired roughly half of the land within the City to construct the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, bringing new residents. The population increased to more than 7,000 residents by 1954. In 1962, the Leisure World retirement community was established, adding an estimated 9,000 senior residents. Other housing development during this time took place in the neighborhoods known as College Park East, College Park West, and Marina Hill; and the Surfside community was annexed into the City. However, these development booms were followed by very limited growth in the 1970’s and afterward.

The City’s historic population growth between 1990 and 2024 is summarized in Table 3.12-1.

Table 3.12-1: Seal Beach Historic Population Growth
Year Population Change from Previous (Percent)
1990 25,098 -- 1995 24,454 -2.6
2000 23,705 -3.1
2005 24,257 2.3
2010 23,864 -1.6
2015 25,227 5.7
2020 25,349 0.5
2024 24,350 -3.9
-
I ~
-
I ,---
-
I r--
I r--
I -
I ~
I -
~
I -
~ -
L __ _ I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-2
Source: DOF 2007, 2012, 2023, 2024
Population provided in this table are estimates and may be different from the census count.

Current and Projected Population
According to the City’s Housing Element Update, the City had an estimated population of 24,992 residents in 2020 and as of January 1, 2021, the City population was estimated to be approximately 24,443 residents (City of Seal Beach 2024). Additionally, as of January 1, 2024, the DOF population estimates identify the City’s population to be approximately 24,350 residents (DOF 2024). The SCAG’s demographics and growth forecast predicts the City’s population would increase to 25,400 by 2045 (SCAG 2020).

Housing Trends
Housing Units and Average Household Size
The housing stock in the City consists of a mix of single-family and multi-family units with one mobile home park. As of January 1, 2024, it is estimated that the City has 14,678 total dwelling units with a vacancy rate of 8.9 percent (DOF 2024).

The City’s housing growth between 1990 and 2024 is summarized in Table 3.12-2.

Table 3.12-2: Seal Beach Historic Dwelling Units Growth Year Dwelling Units Change from Previous (Percent)
1990 14,407 -- 1995 14,342 -0.5
2000 14,270 -0.5
2005 14,481 1.5
2010 14,557 0.5
2015 14,590 0.2
2020 14,645 0.4
2024 14,678 0.2
Source: DOF 2007, 2012, 2023, 2024
The City’s Housing Element Update noted that the most commonly occurring household size in the City is of one person (45.1 percent) and the second-most occurring household is of two people (35.4 percent).

The Housing Element Update noted that the City has a higher share of single-person households than the SCAG region overall (45.1 percent vs. 23.4 percent) and a lower share of 7+ person households than the SCAG region overall (0.1 percent vs. 3.1 percent) (City of Seal Beach 2024). The DOF estimated that the total housing in Seal Beach, as of January 1, 2024, to be 14,678 units with an average household size of

1.8 persons per household. Additionally of the 14,678 existing units, approximately 13,366 dwelling units were occupied, resulting in an 8.9 percent housing vacancy rate (DOF 2024). - I I
I~
-
I -
I
I
- I
I
I
I -
I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-3
Regional Housing Need Allocation
SCAG prepared the RHNA to allocate regional housing growth among different jurisdictions. The RHNA is the state-mandated process to identify the total number of dwelling units (by affordability level) that each jurisdiction must accommodate in its Housing Element for an eight-year period. The RHNA indicated that the City is expected accommodate 1,243 new dwelling units within the four income levels between 2021 and 2029. Table 3.12-3 summarizes the RHNA by income category. It indicates that approximately 63 percent of the housing need will be moderate to upper-income households, and 37 percent will be very low to low-income households (City of Seal Beach 2024).

Table 3.12-3: Housing Need Allocation
Jurisdiction
Very Low Income
(<50% of Area
Median Income)
Low Income
(50-80% of
Area Median
Income)
Moderate Income
(80-120% of Area
Median Income)
Above Moderate Income
(> 120% of Area Median
Income)
Total
Seal Beach 258 201 239 545 1,243
Source: City of Seal Beach 2024
Employment Trends
According to the City’s Housing Element Update, the City has 10,005 workers living within its borders who work across 13 major industrial sectors. The most prevalent industry is Education and Social Services with 2,671 employees (26.7 percent of total) and the second most prevalent is Professional Services with 1,452 employees (14.5 percent of total). The most prevalent occupation category in the City is Management, in which 5,440 employees (54.4 percent of total) work and the second most prevalent type of work is in Sales, which employes 2,535 people (25.3 percent of total) (City of Seal Beach 2024).

According to the Employment Development Department’s (EDD) Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Places, in August 2024, the City had a total labor force of 9,800 people with 9,300 employed people and 500 people unemployed which results in a 5.1 percent unemployment rate (EDD 2024). The SCAG’s demographics and growth forecast predicts the City’s employment would increase to 13,100 by 2035 and 13,500 by 2050 (SCAG 2023).

IC- I
I
I I
I
7 -
I I I I _J
~
L ___ ~ I
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-4

3.12.2 Regulatory Setting
State
California Housing Element Law
State law requires each city and county adopt a general plan for future growth. This plan must include a housing element that identifies housing needs for all economic segments and provides opportunities for housing development to meet that need. At the state level, HCD estimates the relative share of California’s projected population growth that would occur in each county in the state, based on DOF population projections and historic growth trends. Where there is a regional council of governments, HCD provides the regional housing need to the council. The council then assigns a share of the regional housing need to each of its cities and counties. The process of assigning shares provides cities and counties the opportunity to comment on the proposed allocations. HCD oversees the process to ensure that the council of governments distributes its share of the state’s projected housing need.

Each city and county must update its general plan housing element on a regular basis (every eight years).

Among other things, the housing element must incorporate policies and identify potential sites that would accommodate the municipality’s assigned share of the regional housing need. Ultimately, housing elements must be certified by HCD signifying compliance with state law and adopted by the municipality's governing body.

The Housing Crisis Act
Senate Bill 330 (SB 330), or the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, as amended, aims to address California’s housing shortage by expediting the approval process for housing development of all types, particularly in regions suffering the worst housing shortages and highest rates of displacements. To address the crisis, this bill prohibits some local discretionary land use controls currently in place and generally requires cities to approve all housing developments that comply with current zoning codes and general plans. SB 330 requires that a housing development project only be subject to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application is submitted, notwithstanding the provisions of the HAA or any other law, subject to certain exceptions.

State Density Bonus Law
The State Density Bonus Law (California Government Code Sections 65915-65918) encourages the development of affordable and senior housing, including up to a 50 percent increase in project densities for most projects, depending on the amount of affordable housing provided. Under Government Code 65915, cities and counties are required to grant a density bonus and other incentives or concessions to housing projects which contain one of the following:

Ten percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to lower-income households.

Five percent of the total units of a housing development, including a shared housing building development, for rental or sale to very low-income households. •
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-5
A senior housing development or a mobile home park that limits residency based on age requirements for housing for older persons.

Ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development are sold to persons and families for moderate-income provided that all units in the development are offered to the public for purchase.

Ten percent of total units of a housing development for transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, or homeless persons, provided at the same affordability level as very low-income units.

Twenty percent of the total units for lower-income students in a student housing development in housing dedicated for fulltime students at an accredited college.

One hundred percent of all units in a development (exclusive of a manager’s unit or units), are for lower-income households except that up to 20 percent of the units in the development may be for moderate-income households.

The City of Seal Beach has adopted the State Density Bonus Law by reference in Section 11.4.55.010, State Affordable Housing Density Bonus, in its Municipal Code.

Assembly Bill 1397
California’s AB 1397 (2017) amended sections 65580, 65583, and 65583.2 of the Government Code, relating to housing by revising what could be included in a local government’s inventory of land suitable for residential development. AB 1397 changed the definition of land suitable for residential development to increase the number of multifamily sites. Identified sites must be “available” and “suitable” for residential development and have a “realistic and demonstrated potential” for redevelopment during the planning period. In addition, AB 1397 requires housing element inventory sites to be 0.5 acre to 10 acres, have sufficient infrastructure, or be included in a program to provide such infrastructure, to support and be accessible for housing development. The local government must specify the realistic unit count for each site and whether it can accommodate housing at various income levels.

Senate Bill 166
SB 166 (2017) requires a local government to ensure that its housing element inventory can accommodate its share of the regional housing need throughout the planning period. It prohibits them from reducing, requiring, or permitting the reduction of the residential density to a lower residential density than what was used by the California Department of Housing and Community Development for certification of the housing element, unless the city or county makes written findings supported by substantial evidence that the reduction is consistent with the adopted general plan, including the housing element. In such cases, any remaining sites identified in the housing element update must be adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need. A local government may reduce the residential density for a parcel only if it identifies sufficient sites remaining within the housing element as replacement sites, so that there is no net loss of residential unit capacity. •
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-6
Regional
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAG is a Joint Powers Authority under California state law, established as an association of local governments and agencies that voluntarily convene as a forum to address regional issues. SCAG produces growth forecasts so that other agencies can use the forecasts to make funding and regulatory decisions. General plans, zoning regulations, and growth management programs of local jurisdictions inform the SCAG projections. The projections are also developed to reflect the impact of “smart growth” policies and incentives that could be used to shift development patterns from historical trends toward a better jobs-housing balance, increased preservation of open space, and greater development and redevelopment in urban core and transit-accessible areas throughout the region. SCAG calculates the RHNA for individual jurisdictions within Orange County, including Seal Beach.

Connect SoCal
The most recent Connect SoCal was adopted on April 4, 2024. Connect SoCal 2024 is the SCAG’s RTP/SCS for the region. Connect SoCal 2024 outlines a vision for a more resilient and equitable future, with investment, policies and strategies for achieving the region’s shared goals through 2050.

Connect SoCal 2024 reflects a continuum of progress across each planning cycle, not just in the technical capabilities of modeling tools or advancements in data collection but in building upon local agencies progress completing projects. While the Plan remains focused on its core responsibilities, and on the requirements of comprehensive regional transportation planning integrated with the development of a SCS, it also encompasses a holistic approach to programs and strategies that support success of the RTP/SCS, such as workforce development, broadband and mobility hubs.

Connect SoCal also identified Priority Development Areas (PDAs). PDAs are areas within the SCAG region where future growth can be located to help the region reach Plan goals. Generally, this means that people in these areas have access to multiple modes of transportation or that trip origins and destinations are closer together, allowing for shorter trips. PDAs are a technical tool to facilitate Plan development and analysis, and are used for different purposes, such as growth visioning, performance measurement or grant applications. Connect SoCal projects that 66 percent of new households and 54 percent of new jobs between 2019-2050 will be located in PDAs (SCAG 2024).

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-7
Land Use Element
The City’s Land Use Element, adopted in 2003, contains the following goals, objectives, and policies related to population and housing that apply to the Project:

Population
Seal Beach has experienced a decrease in population of 3.7 percent during the past decade.

Despite the minor decrease in City population experienced in the 2000 U.S. Census, the City will continue to provide support for its residents, maintain its infrastructure and provide jobs and housing balance while still maintain its small town atmosphere.

Housing
For more than half a century, Seal Beach has grown and developed. As a result, neighborhood identify is visible in the types of residential structures that have been constructed within various sections of the community. It is to be a goal of the City to preserve its low- and medium-density residential character while still providing a wide choice of living accommodations and lifestyles for its residents.

Housing Element Update
The City’s Housing Element Update contains the following goals and policies related to population and housing that apply to the Project:

Goal 1: Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all income levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents.

Policy 1a: Provide adequate sites for a variety of housing types through the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, while ensuring that environmental and infrastructure constraints are addressed.

Policy 1b: Where appropriate, encourage the redesignation of vacant and underutilized nonresidential land to residential uses with appropriate densities to facilitate the development of a variety of housing types to address the housing needs of all economic segments of the population.

Policy 1c: Encourage the infilling of vacant residential land.

Policy 1d: Encourage the recycling of underutilized residential land, where such recycling is consistent with established land use plans.

Policy 1e: Provide compatibility of residential uses with surrounding uses through the separation of incompatible uses, construction of adequate buffers, and other land use controls.

Goal 2: Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income households.
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-8
Policy 2a: Expand housing opportunities for households with special needs, including the elderly, persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, large households, female-headed households, and the homeless.

Policy 2b: Provide incentives to encourage the development of new affordable housing for lowerand moderate-income households, including extremely low-income persons.

Policy 2c: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to expand housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households, including persons with special needs.

Policy 2d: Encourage construction of low- and moderate-income housing on sites that are:
o located with convenient access to schools, parks, public transportation, shopping facilities, and employment opportunities;
o adequately served by public utilities;
o adequately served by police and fire protection;
o minimally impacted by noise, flooding, or other environmental constraints; and o outside of areas of concentrated lower-income households.

Goal 3: Address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing.

Policy 3a: Assist City residents in securing decent safe and affordable housing.

Policy 3b: Conserve the affordability of housing units assisted with public funds through affordability covenants or resale controls.

Policy 3c: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to maintain and/or improve the affordability of existing housing units to low- and moderate-income households.

Goal 4: Maintain and enhance the quality of residential neighborhoods in Seal Beach.

Policy 4a: Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of existing owner-occupied and rental housing where feasible.

Policy 4b: Promote the replacement of any substandard units that cannot be rehabilitated.

Policy 4c: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources available to assist in the improvement of residential property.

Policy 4d: Encourage the continued affordability of housing units rehabilitated with public funds. •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-9
Policy 4e: Discourage the conversion of existing apartment units to condominiums where such conversion will diminish the supply of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households.

Policy 4f: Promote the conservation and rehabilitation of older neighborhoods, preventing the encroachment of incompatible commercial or industrial uses into established neighborhoods.

Policy 4g: Assist residents, wherever possible, in securing decent safe and adequate housing.

Policy 4h: Promote a safe, healthful, aesthetically pleasing environment that strengthens individual and family life.

Policy 4i: Preserve and enhance viable residential neighborhoods and strengthen neighborhood identity.

Policy 4k: Encourage the use of innovative land use techniques and construction methods to minimize housing costs without compromising basic health, safety, and aesthetic conditions.

Policy 4l: Periodically reexamine local building and zoning codes for possible amendments to reduce construction costs and processing times without sacrificing basic health and safety considerations.

Goal 5: Promote equal housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, marital status, or familial status.

Policy 5a: Promote fair housing practices throughout the community.

Policy 5b: Encourage the development of housing that meets the special needs of disabled and elderly households.

Policy 5c: Promote the provision of housing to meet the needs of families and households of all sizes.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
Section 11.4.55.005, General Affordable Housing Provisions, of the City’s Municipal Code outlines the City and state requirements for affordable housing. As outlined in the section, the provisions of the Municipal Code section are governed by the requirements of Government Code Section 65915. The provision outlines requirements for affordable housing compatibility with market rate projects, availability of affordable housing, inclusion of an affordable housing agreement as a condition for discretionary permits for projects granted a density bonus, medium income level requirements, and requirements for granting a density bonus.

Section 11.4.55.010, State Affordable Housing Density Bonus, implements Government Code Section 65915 which allows the city to grant a density bonus over the otherwise allowable maximum residential density permitted by the city and the general plan, and one or more of the affordable housing incentives set forth in Section 11.4.55.020, Affordable Housing Concessions and Incentives, if the applicant agrees •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-10
or proposes to construct lower income units, very low income units, senior citizen housing development, moderate income units in condominiums and planned unit developments, and housing accompanied by land donation.

3.12.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant population and housing impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The following evaluation of potential population, housing, and employment impacts associated with the Project was based on data obtained from the U.S. Census, DOF, and applicable planning documents from the City. The following impact discussions consider the impacts of the Project related to employment, population, and housing in the City.

Would the Project:

Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:

Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-11
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Unplanned Population Growth
Impact POP-1 The Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

Impact Analysis
The Project involves implementation of the City’s Housing Element and Zoning Code Update which is being prepared for planning of additional dwelling units in the City to meet the City’s RHNA allocation of 1,243 new dwelling units. As the Housing Element Update itself is a plan, it would not induce “unplanned growth” per this threshold.

While no development is directly proposed by the Project, construction associated with the development of the Housing Opportunity Sites and Main Street Program area would require contractors and laborers as projects are developed in the future. However, the City expects that the supply of general construction labor would be available from the local and regional labor pool. The implementation of the Housing Element Update would not result in a long-term increase in employment from short-term construction activities. As the Project would primarily result in residential development as opposed to job-generating development, the impacts of employment increases in the City are not further evaluated in this analysis.

Implementation of the Project would provide for the development of additional dwelling units in the City resulting in an increase in the City’s population. The Housing Opportunity Sites identified to meet the City’s RHNA could be developed with up to 1,491 dwelling units at their maximum capacity. These sites include underutilized sites that are suitably zoned for residential development and would not require such changes, and sites that would require a zoning change to allow for residential development or increased residential development capacity. In addition, the Housing Element Update includes the Main Street Program which could facilitate development of additional dwelling units within the City’s Main Street Specific Plan area. This EIR analyzes build out from the Main Street Program at 70 percent of maximum potential build out for the area which results in the potential for 115 units. Therefore, implementation of the Project would have a resulting build out potential of a total of 1,606 new dwelling units. Additionally, this EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the proposed buildout of 167 dwelling units included within the City’s site inventory as a pipeline site.

Therefore, with the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project incorporated, the resulting maximum buildout potential would increase to 1,773 dwelling units. These sites are shown in Table 2.4-6 in Section 2.0, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. Using the City’s DOF average of 1.8 persons per household, the development 1,773 dwelling units would contribute an estimated population increase of 3,191 residents, which is an approximately 13.1 percent increase to the City’s 2024 population of approximately 24,350 residents.

As shown in Table 3.12-4, maximum buildout of these sites would increase the City’s total dwelling units from 14,678 to 16,451. This growth would exceed the City’s population projection for 2045 of 25,400 m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-12
residents by 2,141 residents. However, this scenario is highly conservative as it is unlikely that 100 percent of sites would be developed at the capacity analyzed in this EIR.

Table 3.12-4: Maximum Unit Buildout
Dwelling Units Population
Maximum Unit Buildout 1,773 3,191
Maximum Unit Buildout + City
Existing
16,451 27,541
Percent Increase 12.1 13.1
As discussed in Appendix B, Sites Inventory and Methodology of the Housing Element Update, a “realistic development capacity” was used to determine the most probable yield of units at sites in the inventory.

The City assumed development of the five Housing Opportunity Sites being rezoned MC/RHD at 80 percent of maximum allowable density with the remaining three Housing Opportunity Sites at 70 percent of the maximum allowable density. Additionally, the site inventory includes the ORCC Specific Plan Project as a pipeline site that would provide 167 additional units. As shown in Table 3.12-5, the “realistic” buildout of the Housing Element Update is 1,332 dwelling units. Similar to the maximum unit buildout, if all sites identified as a Housing Opportunity Site and pipeline site were to be developed, the resulting population would also exceed SCAG’s projection for the number of residents in the City by 2045.

Table 3.12-5: Realistic Unit Buildout Growth
Dwelling Units Population
Realistic Unit Buildout 1,332 2,397
Realistic Unit Building + City
Existing
16,010 26,747
Percent Increase 9.1 9.8
The purpose of the Housing Element Update is to plan for and promote housing growth within the City to meet the housing needs of the region and state. While the scenarios exceed the population projections identified by SCAG, it is important to note that the identification of Housing Opportunity Sites in the City’s Housing Element Update does not mean that they will be developed at the estimated unit counts or level of affordability. Several laws passed in recent years, including the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330), aim to address the need for more housing and expedite approvals for housing projects in order to respond the state’s housing crisis. Implementation of the Project and future developments consistent with the Project would not directly induce substantial unplanned population growth but rather would address an existing need for housing and plan for future housing demand in the City. As such, the Housing Element Update is the City’s proposed plan to accommodate anticipated future growth and would not induce unplanned population growth. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Additionally, as stated previously, this EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 dwelling units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The 167 dwelling units r
I I
I
I
J
t--
I
- I I I
-
I -
- I
I -
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-13
resulting from the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would increase the City’s total dwelling units and result in population increases. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.

3.12.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The topic of population and housing has cumulative implications on the entire Southern California region, not just on the City of Seal Beach. Therefore, this cumulative impact analysis is based on regional planning documents including Connect SoCal 2024, Southern California’s most recent RTP/SCS. The Housing Element Update would accommodate projected citywide and regionwide population and housing growth that has been identified by SCAG’s Connect SoCal. By its nature, the impact analysis under Impact POP-1 considers cumulative impacts associated with population growth throughout the City and consistent with SCAG’s Connect SoCal. The Housing Element Update incorporates regional growth anticipated by SCAG’s RHNA projections and thus considers cumulative growth.

Table 3.12-6: Cumulative Projects Related to Population and Housing # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
Preparation of
EIR 167
,--
I
I I I
,--
- ----'
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-14
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-15
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
consisting of
390 residential
dwelling units
and 5,351
square feet of
commercial/retai
l space
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
8 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
6695 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020040);
6411 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020051);
No address
(7237020904)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
940
9 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
1000 N
Studebaker Rd
(7238015021)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
115
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
I 1 I I I 7
~ -
~ -
-
-
L I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-16
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of
Westminster)
122
As identified in Table 3.12-6, the list of cumulative past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding areas include those in the City of Los Alamitos, Long Beach, Westminster, and Orange County. Included in this list are candidate sites identified in the Housing Element Update for Long Beach, Westminster, and Orange County for potential future development. Development of these sites would be within the planned growth identified by SCAG for the region and would not result in substantial unplanned population growth. As identified in SCAG’s 6th Cycle RHNA Allocation Plan, the Southern California region has a total RHNA of 1,341,827 dwelling units (SCAG 2021). Similar to the City, all jurisdictions within the SCAG region are required to prepare a Housing Element Update that identifies sites within its jurisdictional boundaries for future residential development to accommodate its respective RHNA. Implementation of each respective Housing Element Update and future developments consistent with the Housing Element Update would not directly induce substantial unplanned population growth but rather would address an existing need for housing and plan for future housing demand in the region. As such, the Housing Element Update for each jurisdiction would be the jurisdiction’s proposed plan to accommodate anticipated future growth and would not induce unplanned population growth.

The combination of the cumulative developments outlined in the table above proposes the development of a total of 3,685 dwelling units. However, out of the total units proposed by the cumulative developments, only 1,674 dwelling units are actually currently proposed undergoing environmental review or already approved developments. The remaining 2,011 dwelling units are proposed only as a conceptual development for buildout as part of a Housing Element Update or as a potential future project.

Development of the currently proposed undergoing environmental review and already approved developments would lead to direct population growth. However, the impacts of the growth have already been analyzed or is currently being analyzed in its project-specific environmental analysis.

As previously stated, the Housing Element Update would provide for a planned increase in the City’s housing capacity to meet the City’s RHNA allocation. The Housing Element Update does not propose any housing development at this time. Instead, the Housing Element Update identifies a series of I 1 I I I 7
~ -
-
- __J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-17
implementation actions to facilitate future housing development, as necessary to meet the City’s housing obligations per state law. Unless exempt, future developments facilitated by the Project, as well as cumulative projects, would be subject to discretionary permits from the City or other local decision-making agency, and would be required to undergo applicable CEQA review and be analyzed for its compliance with City or other municipal requirements before their approval. This would ensure that any potential environmental effects stemming from their development would be minimized to the extent feasible. As previously mentioned, the build out scenario presented in this EIR is highly conservative and it is unlikely that 100 percent of sites would be developed at their analyzed development capacity. As such, it is likely that the growth forecasts presented in this analysis are overstated and that actual population growth from implementation of the Project and related future developments will end up being less. As the Project would not result in significant impacts to population and housing and the Project in combination with cumulative developments would not result in substantial unplanned population growth, cumulative impacts associated with Project implementation would therefore be less than significant.

3.12.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2024. 2021-2029 Housing Element, Adopted February 7, 2022, Revised August 2024. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Users/027/27/27/Seal%20Beach_HEU%20MainBody_Cle an-compressed.pdf?ver=2024-08-20-083139-120. Accessed October 2024.

Department of Finance (DOF). 2007. E-8 Historical Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 1990-2000. August 2007. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e8-historical-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-1990-2000/.

Accessed February 2024.
_____. 2012. E-8 Historical Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 2000- 2010. November 2012. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/estimates-e8- 2000-2010/. Accessed February 2024.
_____. 2023. E-8 Historical Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 2010- 2020. November 2023. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/estimates-e8- 2010-2020/. Accessed February 2024.
_____. 2024. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2024. May 2024. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housingestimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2024/. Accessed September 2024.

Employment Development Department (EDD). 2024. Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Census Designated Places, Orange County, August 2024.
https://labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-cities-and-censusareas.html. Accessed September 2024.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020. Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report, Adopted on September 3, 2020. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Population and Housing

3.12-18
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-andgrowth-forecast.pdf?1606001579. Accessed February 2024. _____. 2021. SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation Plan (approved by HCD on 3/22/21 and modified on 7/1/21). https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/6th_cycle_final_rhna_allocation_plan_070121.pdf?1646938785. Accessed February 2025.
_____. 2023. Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report, Draft November 2, 2023. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/23-2987-tr-connect-socal-2024- demographics-growth-forecast-draft-110223.pdf?1698263165. Accessed February 2024. _____. 2024. Connect SoCal, Adopted April 4, 2024. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-05/23- 2987-connect-socal-2024-final-complete-040424.pdf. Accessed February 2025. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-1

3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for public services. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to public services that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would result in increased demand for public services including fire and police protection services and parks and recreational facilities. Impacts to fire and police protection services would be less than significant; however, even with implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1, the Project would be considered significant and unavoidable related to parks.

The residential components of the ORCC Specific Plan Project’s generate new residents in the City which would increase the need for additional public services including fire and police protection services, and parks. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

3.13.1 Environmental Setting
Fire Protection
Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) contracts with the City to provide fire, emergency medical, and rescue services. The OCFA works with the City’s Community Development Department and developers to conduct project review through an application and plan check process. OCFA Station 44 and Station 48 are located within the City at 718 Central Avenue and 3131 North Gate Road, respectively, though additional resources may respond from OCFA stations located in nearby jurisdictions as needed. In addition, OCFA and the Naval Weapons Station have a reciprocal agreement where the installation’s fire department can respond to calls for service if required.

Police Protection
Police services for the City are provided by the Seal Beach Police Department (SBPD), primarily comprised of patrol, traffic enforcement, detective bureau operations, parking management, animal control services, and other public safety related services. The SBPD is also responsible for updating the Emergency Services Plan, evacuation plans, emergency aid, comprehensive communications components, and a coordination program with other local government agencies, schools, hospitals, and utility companies (City of Seal Beach 2003). Existing police facilities include the Police Station at 911 Seal Beach Boulevard, a substation at Marine Safety Headquarters at the pier, and a report writing office at the City Hall Annex building.

Marine Safety
In addition to fire and police services provided to residents, the City has a Marine Safety Department that provide safety services in the coastal and aquatic environment for the public through prevention m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-2
education, rescue, medical aid, outreach, beach management, and enforcement. The Seal Beach Marine Safety headquarters is located at 888 Ocean Beach Avenue. The Marine Safety Department is staffed 365 days per year and the hours of staffing change seasonally. Beach lifeguards are the primary staff within the Marine Safety department and provide marine safety protection including patrolling the beach in a mobile unit, warning locals of hazardous conditions, rescuing people in distress or in danger of drowning, applying first aid, answering questions and giving information pertaining to the beach and ocean environment, removal of hazardous obstacles from sand and water, and advising the public in regard to local beach and ocean related ordinances, regulations, safety, and conduct.

Parks
Open space or outdoor recreation is defined by the City as land that is set aside for neighborhood, community or regional parks, beaches, special use parks or facilities, greenbelts, and open space corridors (City of Seal Beach 2003). According to the City’s 2003 General Plan, the City has a total of 18 parks that provide 75.45 acres of parkland. Additionally, in 2021, the City acquired River’s End Park which was constructed by a private developer and provides an additional 6.2 acres of parkland.

Therefore, the City has a total parkland acreage of 81.65 acres.

80.3 acres of beaches, the 192.-acre Sunset Aquatic Marina and Park operated by the County, and the National Wildlife Refuge located within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. All of these areas provide unique regional recreational opportunities (Seal Beach 2003). School district shared property also provides non-Quimby Act park facilities for use by City residents.

Water, Wastewater, and Storm Drainage Services
The City is the water service provider for the City using local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and supplementing the water supply obtained from its regional wholesaler, Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). The City also manages the water distribution system within the City. The City does not own or operate wastewater treatment facilities but owns and operates the wastewater collection system in its service area that sends all wastewater to Orange County Sanitation District (OC San) for treatment and disposal. Additionally, storm drainage systems within the City are owned and maintained by the City; however, County and federal storm drainage channels are also located within the City. Therefore, in addition to the services outlined above, City provided public services include water supply and distribution systems, wastewater collection systems, and storm drainage systems. This section does not include an analysis of City provided water, wastewater, and storm drainage services but this text has been included to provide an outline of all relevant City provided public services. An analysis of water, wastewater, and storm drainage services provided by the City can be found in Section 3.17, Utilities and Service Systems. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-3

3.13.2 Regulatory Setting
State
California Building Code
The California Building Code which is in Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, establishes the minimum state building standards. The CBC is currently updated every three years. The City of Seal Beach adopted the 2022 CBC and went into effect January 1, 2023. The CBC is based on the 2021 International Building Code but has been amended to account for California conditions. The CBC is generally adopted on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis, subject to further modification based on local conditions. Commercial and residential buildings are plan-checked by City building officials for compliance with the CBC. Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code include fire regulations for building standards (also in the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training. The newest edition of the California Building Standards Code is the 2022 edition with an effective date of January 1, 2023, with the next update planned at the end of 2025 for implementation January 1, 2026.

California Fire Code
The 2022 California Fire Code incorporates, by adoption, the 2021 International Fire Code of the International Code Council, with California amendments. This is the official Fire Code for the state and all political subdivisions. It is in Part 9 of CCR Title 24. Like the CBC, the CFC is revised and published approximately every three years by the California Building Standards Commission. The City of Seal Beach adopted the 2022 California Fire Code, which became effective January 1, 2023. The CFC contains regulations for safeguarding life and property from fire hazards, including setting certain building requirements regarding hazardous materials, storage, and occupancy.

Quimby Act
Section 66477 of the California Government Code, also known as the Quimby Act, was enacted in 1965 in an effort to promote the availability of park and open space areas in California. The Quimby Act authorizes cities and counties to enact ordinances requiring the dedication of land, or the payment of fees for park and/or recreational facilities in lieu thereof, or both, by developers of residential subdivisions as conditions to the approval of a tentative map or parcel map. The Quimby Act authorizes a city or county to require that the subdivider provide three acres of park area per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision, unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park exceeds that limit, in which case the city or county may adopt a higher standard not to exceed five acres per 1,000 residents. The Quimby Act also specifies acceptable uses and expenditures of funds from fees. The City’s General Plan has established a goal of five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Pursuant to the Quimby Act, the City’s Municipal Code Section 10.50.010, Park Land Dedications and Fees, requires as a condition of tentative map approval, for the subdivider to dedicate land and/or pay a fee for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreation facilities to serve the subdivision. The amount of new land m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-4
to be dedicated is required to be five acres per 1,000 residents, or a fee in-lieu established within the City’s adopted fee schedule.

California Coastal Commission
In partnership with coastal cities and counties, the CCC plans and regulates the use of land and water in the coastal zone. Development activities, which are broadly defined by the California Coastal Act to include (among others) construction of buildings, divisions of land, and activities that change the intensity of use of land or public access to coastal waters, generally require a coastal permit from either the CCC directly or through a Local Coastal Program, if applicable. The California Coastal Act includes specific policies (Division 20 of the PRC) that address issues such as shoreline public access and recreation, lower cost visitor accommodations, terrestrial and marine habitat protection, visual resources, landform alteration, agricultural lands, commercial fisheries, industrial uses, water quality, offshore oil and gas development, transportation, development design, power plants, ports, and public works. The policies of the California Coastal Act constitute the statutory standards applied to planning and regulatory decisions made by the CCC and by local governments. The City is currently preparing a LCP which is a planning document used by local governments to guide development in the coastal zone, in partnership with the Coastal Commission for the purpose of upholding the California Coastal Act.

Regional
Airport Land Use Commission
The ALUC is governed by Public Utilities Code Section 21670 and has a basic responsibility to assist local agencies in ensuring compatible land uses in the vicinity of airports. The ALUC reviews land use proposals near civilian and military airports and other land use issues which have a potential impact on airport operations. The ALUC strives to protect the public from adverse effects of aircraft noise, ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft incidents, and to ensure that no structure or land use activities adversely affect the operational integrity of the airports or their navigable airspace. The ALUC has two specific duties according to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook:

1. Prepare and adopt an airport land use plan for each of its airports within its jurisdiction.

2. Review the plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and airport operators.

The City is located within the jurisdiction of the Orange County ALUC and land use policy changes such as the proposed zoning code update and Housing Element update would require review by the Orange County ALUC under applicable AELUP.

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-5
development of the City. The City’s General Plan goals and policies applicable to public services are presented below:

Land Use Element
The City’s Land Use Element contains the following goals, objectives, and policies related to public services that apply to the Project:

Parks, Recreation, and Community Beautification
An important goal of the City should be to acquire and develop recreational facilities at strategic locations throughout the community. Because open land is rapidly being developed, acquisition of park sites should be accomplished at the earliest date. Development and maintenance of these sites should follow in a relatively short period of time. The City should cooperate with other governmental agencies to promote a comprehensive plan of park acquisition and development.

Public Facilities
The City should anticipate and maintain public service demands. Future development of schools, libraries, and municipal facilities should be located in such a manner as to provide the maximum level of service to all members of the community and to promote objectives of the City.

General Plan Safety Element
The City’s Safety Element contains the following policies related to public services that apply to the Project:

Policy 1J: Encourage emergency vehicular access that is of a sufficient width to allow people and emergency equipment into the hazard area and still allow for evacuation, if needed.

Policy 4A: Ensure that adequate facilities and fire service personnel are maintained based on population, fire hazard in and around the City, and a performance standard of an average total response time of seven minutes or less.

Policy 4B: Educate and inform the public on fire safety, especially regarding landscaping installation and maintenance in urban areas, to further protect the community and the environment from unnecessary fire hazards.

Policy 4C: Enhance the ability of all structures within the City to resist wildland and structural fires through ongoing, appropriate and cost-effective changes to the City’s Zoning, Building and Fire Codes and standards.

Policy 4D: Work with the Water Department and Orange County Fire Authority to analyze the supply and delivery aspect of the water system for fire fighting use to help identify and correct deficiencies.
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-6
Policy 4E: Develop an early warning system with Santa Ana wind fire danger to alert the public of possible precautions or safety measures that may be taken during those critical times.

Policy 4F: As a condition of new development, require private responsibility for development and maintenance of necessary new fire flow water lines and hydrants in accordance with the recommendations of the Orange County Fire Authority.

Policy 4G: Encourage property owners to create defensible space surrounding their homes, including providing access for fire-fighters, maintaining plantings and outdoor areas, and minimizing combustible structures.

Policy 4H: Encourage property owners to consider “fire-wise” planting and the use of fireresistant building materials, especially in landscaped and developed areas adjacent to Gum Grove Park.

Housing Element Update
The City’s Housing Element Update contains the following goals and policies related to public services that apply to the Project:

Goal 1: Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all income levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents.

Policy 1f: Improve all residential environments through the provision of adequate public facilities and services, including streets and parks, as well as water, sewer, and drainage systems.

Policy 1g: Provide for adequate, freely accessible open space within reasonable distances of all community residents.

Goal 2: Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income households.

Policy 2d: Encourage construction of low- and moderate-income housing on sites that are:
o located with convenient access to schools, parks, public transportation, shopping facilities, and employment opportunities;
o adequately served by public utilities;
o adequately served by police and fire protection;
o minimally impacted by noise, flooding, or
o other environmental constraints; and • outside of areas of concentrated lower-income households.

Goal 4: Maintain and enhance the quality of residential neighborhoods in Seal Beach. •
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-7
Policy 4j: Upgrade and improve community facilities and municipal services in keeping with community needs.

3.13.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant public services impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The following analysis is based on a review of the General Plan and the Seal Beach Municipal Code.

Would the Project:

Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services?
o Fire protection
o Police protection
o Parks
The following issues were determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact during the NOP Scoping. These issues are summarized in Section 6.0, Effects Found Not to Be Significant and are not discussed further in this section.

Would the Project:

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-8
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Government Facilities
Impact PUB-1 The Project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection
Police protection
Parks
Impact Analysis
Fire Protection
While no specific developments are proposed by the Project, implementation of the Project would increase the potential for housing development in the City. Future development of housing facilitated by the Project would increase the number of residents in the City under build out conditions analyzed in this EIR, and would increase demand for fire protection services and thus, the potential need for additional facilities.

The increase in population as a result of future developments facilitated by the Project would be expected to generate more service calls. New fire personnel, vehicles, and equipment may be required to provide adequate response times to serve future developments. Therefore, the OCFA’s costs to maintain equipment and facilities, and to train and equip personnel could also increase. However, the increase in required personnel and materials costs would be gradual over time and would grow with the incremental increase in population resulting from individual development of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites, ORCC Specific Plan Project pipeline site, and within the Main Street Program area. All identified Housing Opportunity Sites, the ORCC Specific Plan Project pipeline site, and the Main Street Program area are located within highly urbanized areas of the City already served by existing fire services and therefore, as the Project would be located within the existing service boundaries for fire protection, the Project is anticipated to be serviced by existing fire stations without additional new facilities needing to be built.

To reduce the demand of fire protection services, future developments proposed under the Project would need to comply with the City’s and OCFA’s fire safety requirements, which include compliance with the California Fire Code and the California Building Code. These requirements regulate new structures related to safety provisions, emergency planning, fire-resistant construction, fire protection systems, and appropriate emergency access throughout a site. Future developments would be subject to a site plan review and approval by the City and OCFA which would include review of compliance with fire safety requirements prior to obtaining a building permit. Additionally, future developments would require a final •
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-9
inspection to be conducted by the City and OCFA to ensure adequate fire safety measures are implemented prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy.

The need for additional or expansion of existing fire protection facilities as a result of future discretionary developments would need to go under CEQA review at a project-specific level. In the event new fire protection facilities are required, they would be disclosed and mitigated, as feasible, at a project-specific level. Compliance with requirements for individual project-specific CEQA review, City fire safety requirements, California Fire Code and the California Building Code requirements would reduce the impacts related to fire protection services to less than significant. The potential impacts on fire protection services generated by the Project be less than significant.

Police Protection
As stated above, while no specific developments are proposed by the Project, implementation of the Project would increase the potential for housing development and number of residents in the City which would increase demand for police protection services and thus, the potential need for additional police facilities. All identified Housing Opportunity Sites, the ORCC Specific Plan Project pipeline site, and the Main Street Program area are located within highly urbanized areas of the City already served by existing police services and therefore, would be located within the existing service boundaries for police protection. However, future developments under the Project would incrementally increase the number of residents in the City and would require expansion or additional police facilities to accommodate future growth.

Implementation of the Project would increase demand for law enforcement services incrementally as housing units are built out. The SBPD would evaluate its budget annually to provide adequate police services to accommodate additional growth; however, the additional personnel and materials costs would likely be gradual as the increase in population would occur incrementally over time.

Unless exempt, future discretionary development of identified Housing Opportunity Sites and the ORCC Specific Plan Project pipeline site, as well as new developments within the Main Street Program area facilitated by the Project would be subject to subsequent individual environmental review to analyze its potential impacts to police protection services and facilities. If impacts to police services are identified during individual environmental review, mitigation of impacts would be required, as feasible, at a projectspecific level.

Depending on the population growth in the area and/or staff additions, the City may require modifications to existing facilities or the addition of new facilities. The construction of new facilities or modifications to existing facilities would be subject to subsequent environmental review at a project specific level. Unless exempt, compliance with requirements for subsequent project level CEQA review for future developments proposed under the Project would reduce impacts to police services as it would be required to analyze the potential impacts to existing services and implement mitigation measures to reduce impacts if needed. The potential impacts on law enforcement services generated by the Project be less than significant.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-10
Marine Safety
In addition to police service facilities, future developments under the Project may incrementally increase the use of City beaches and result in increased demand for marine safety services. Implementation of the Project would increase demand for marine safety services incrementally as the Housing Opportunity Sites, the ORCC Specific Plan Project pipeline site, and new developments within the Main Street Program area are built out. The City would evaluate its budget annually to provide adequate marine safety services to accommodate additional growth; however, the additional personnel and materials costs would likely be gradual as the increase in population would occur incrementally over time. Depending on the population growth in the area and/or staff additions, the City may require modifications to existing facilities or the addition of new facilities. The construction of new facilities or modifications to existing facilities would be subject to subsequent environmental review at a project specific level. This analysis related to marine safety is provided for informational purposes as marine safety services is not an identified impact question under CEQA.

Parks
As identified in Section 3.12, Population and Housing, under the build out conditions analyzed in this EIR, the Project would result in an estimated population increase of 2,891 residents. The City’s Municipal Code Section 10.50.010 includes the Seal Beach Park Dedication Ordinance which requires five acres of parkland to be located within the City per 1,000 residents. As identified by the City, the City has a total parkland acreage of 81.65 acres which is comprised of 19 parks. Therefore, with an existing 2024 population of 24,350 residents, the City currently needs a total of 121.75 acres of parkland to meet its park standard requirement and the City currently has a parks ratio of 3.35 acres per 1,000 residents.

Therefore, the City does not currently meet the desired acreage requirements for parkland and is at a deficit for parkland. With a potential increase of 2,891 residents, the Project would require an additional

14.46 acres of parkland to be developed further increasing the deficit of the City.

Thus, the future developments facilitated by the Project would result in the need for new additional park facilities. However, the City benefits from non-Quimby Act recreational amenities within its boundaries, including 80.3 acres of beaches, the 192-acre Sunset Aquatic Marina and Park operated by the County, the National Wildlife Refuge located within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, and school district shared property. All of these areas provide unique regional recreational opportunities (Seal Beach 2003).

The CCC regulates the use of land and water in the coastal zone including shoreline public access and recreation. Implementation of the Project would not result in a reduction in available Quimby Act park and recreational facilities or non-Quimby Act recreational amenities such as beaches and shoreline access.

However, the Parks Inventory prepared as part of the City of Seal Beach Parks and Community Services Master Plan in 2013 states that it is readily apparent that the City would not be able to ever achieve the local Municipal Code standard of five acres per 1,000 people due to a high percentage of the City being developed prior to the adoption of the current acreage goal. As discussed above, the City does not currently meet the necessary acreage requirements as a significant portion of the City has been developed prior to the City adopting its parks standard. Excess park and recreation land does not exist to meet the forecast demand that would be generated by future developments facilitated by the Project and would result in impacts to parks.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-11
Future development of identified Housing Opportunity Sites as well as new developments within the Main Street Program area facilitated by the Project would be subject to subsequent individual environmental review to analyze its potential impacts to park facilities. If impacts to parks are identified during individual environmental review, mitigation of impacts would be required, as feasible, at a project-specific level. In addition, future residential developments would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section

10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, which requires new developments to dedicate land and/or pay a fee for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park and recreational facilities as a condition of tentative map approval. As the Project does not propose any actual development at this time, the Project is not subject to Municipal Code Section 10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, requirements at this time.

Future developments proposed under the Project’s compliance with requirements for individual project specific environmental review and compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, would reduce potential impacts related to park facilities. Mitigation Measure PUB-1 has been identified to ensure that project-specific impacts resulting from individual development projects facilitated by the Project would be reduced and mitigated to the extent feasible. However, as stated above, the City does not currently meet the necessary acreage requirements and there are limited excess park and recreation land that would be able to be developed to meet the forecast demand that would be generated by future developments facilitated by the Project. Therefore, even with implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1, the Project and future developments facilitated by the Project would result in substantial impacts to parks. Impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM PUB-1: Parks and Recreation. Subsequent environmental review at a project specific level shall be required for individual development projects facilitated by the Housing Element Update and Zone Code Update. The environmental analysis shall include an analysis of the proposed project’s contribution to potential impacts to parks and recreation facilities, and potential impacts resulting from implementation of individual development projects m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-12
under the Housing Element Update and Zone Code Update shall be mitigated to the extent feasible. The proposed project’s required contribution to the City related to parkland dedication and payment of required fees as required by Municipal Code Section

10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, shall be determined at the time of subsequent environmental review at a project specific level.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

3.13.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative public services impacts is the City and immediate vicinity. This geographic scope is appropriate for public services as public services such as police and fire are typically provided by City departments with the respective service area being limited to the City with some service areas extending beyond the city limits but within the immediate vicinity. Additionally, though impacts to parks and applicable parks standards are evaluated at the city level, residents of cumulative developments outside of the City but located within the immediate vicinity could utilize City parks and therefore, are included in the list of cumulative developments analyzed in this section.

Table 3.13-1: Cumulative Projects Related to Public Services # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
Preparation of
EIR 167
r---
I
7 I I
,---

L I I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-13
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

L I I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-14
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
8 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
6695 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020040);
6411 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020051);
No address
(7237020904)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
940
9 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
1000 N
Studebaker Rd
(7238015021)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
115
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
122
I 1 I I I 7
~ -
,--
-
-
-

I ----'
~
-
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-15
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
(By City of
Westminster)
Cumulative development in Seal Beach and surrounding areas, including but not limited to new development facilitated by the Housing Element, would increase demand for public services provided by the City, including fire and police protection services, and parks. The Project, including future developments facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development citywide and within neighboring cities that are also located within the respective service areas for fire and police protection services, would increase demands for public services that could require facility expansion or construction.

Potential impacts would be dependent on existing service capacity of fire and police protection services at the time of individual project approval and the incremental increase in the need for fire and police protection services resulting from other developments. Potential impacts would require evaluation at the project level when future development is proposed in accordance with the Housing Element Update and General Plan. Unless exempt, each cumulative discretionary project would require separate approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential impacts to public services and identify necessary mitigation measures, where appropriate. The Project would not result in significant cumulative environmental impacts concerning fire and police protection services.

However, future developments facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative development identified in Table 3.13-1 identified above would increase demands for parks, as indicated in the discussion above. The increased demand for park facilities during the Housing Element Update’s planning period (2021-2029) would be significant and would not be accommodated by the existing supply and thus, would require the need for construction or expansion of recreational facilities, the construction of which could result in significant impact. Potential increased demands for recreational facilities from cumulative development would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis at the project level when future development is proposed in accordance with the Housing Element Update and General Plan. Population growth from future developments facilitated by the Project would require an additional 14.46 acres of parkland within the City. However, even if the 14.46 acres of additional parkland was developed, the City would still continue to be at a deficit of parkland and would not be able to meet the standard of five acres per 1,000 people. The development of cumulative past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding area would further increase the need for additional parkland in the City.

Unless exempt, each cumulative discretionary project would require separate approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential impacts to recreation facilities and identify mitigation measures, where appropriate. The Project and cumulative development would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative environmental impacts concerning parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the project would cause a cumulatively considerable impact on recreation resources, and Mitigation Measure I 1 I I I 7
~ -
I_ I I I J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Public Services

3.13-16
PUB-1 is required. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1 would not reduce impacts to a less than significant level and therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact to public services.

3.13.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan, December 2003. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed September 2024. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-1

3.14 RECREATION
This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for recreation. It also describes existing conditions and potential impacts related to recreation that would result from implementation of the Project, and mitigation for potentially significant impacts, where feasible.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1, the Project would be considered significant and unavoidable.

The Project would require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which may have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1, the Project would be considered significant and unavoidable.

The development of the residential portion of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would increase use of existing parks and recreational facilities and would require additional parkland to offset the increase in population resulting from the ORCC Specific Plan Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

3.14.1 Environmental Setting
Open space or outdoor recreation is defined by the City as land that is set aside for neighborhood, community or regional parks, beaches, special use parks or facilities, greenbelts, and open space corridors (City of Seal Beach 2003). Per the 2003 General Plan, the City has a total of 18 parks that provide 75.45 acres of parkland. Additionally in 2021, the City acquired River’s End Park which was constructed by a private developer and provides an additional 6.2 acres of parkland. Therefore, the City has a total parkland acreage of 81.65 acres.

The Quimby Act allows the City to require the dedication of parkland or payment of in-lieu fees for new development. The acreage to be dedicated is based on five acres per 1,000 residents as specified by the City’s Municipal Code. The City has not met the acreage standards set forth in the City’s General Plan as a significant portion of the City was developed prior to the time the Quimby Act was passed. However, the City benefits from non-Quimby Act recreational amenities within its boundaries, including 80.3 acres of beaches, the 192-acre Sunset Aquatic Marina and Park operated by the County, and the National Wildlife Refuge located within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. All of these areas provide unique regional recreational opportunities (City of Seal Beach 2003). School district shared property also provides nonQuimby Act park facilities for use by City residents. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-2

3.14.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
There are no federal regulations related to recreation applicable to the Project.

State
Quimby Act
Section 66477 of the California Government Code, also known as the Quimby Act, was enacted in 1965 in an effort to promote the availability of park and open space areas in California. The Quimby Act authorizes cities and counties to enact ordinances requiring the dedication of land, or the payment of fees for park and/or recreational facilities in lieu thereof, or both, by developers of residential subdivisions as conditions to the approval of a tentative map or parcel map. Pursuant to the Quimby Act, a city or county may require the provision of three acres of park area per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision, unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park exceeds that limit, in which case the city or county may adopt a higher standard not to exceed five acres per 1,000 residents. The Quimby Act also specifies acceptable uses and expenditures of funds from fees. The City’s General Plan has established a goal of five acres per 1,000 residents. Pursuant to the Quimby Act, the City’s Municipal Code Section

10.50.010, Park Land Dedications and Fees, requires as a condition of tentative map approval, for the subdivider to dedicate land and/or pay a fee for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreation facilities to serve the subdivision. The amount of thew land to be dedicated is required to be five acres per 1,000 residents, or a fee in-lieu thereof as established in the City’s adopted fee schedule.

Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Seal Beach. The General Plan contains the current Housing Element Update, which was adopted in 2022. The various elements within the General Plan include goals and policies for the physical development of the City. The City’s General Plan goals and policies applicable to recreation are presented below:

Land Use Element
The City’s Land Use Element contains the following goals, objectives, and policies related to recreation that apply to the Project:

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-3
sites should follow in a relatively short period of time. The City should cooperate with other governmental agencies to promote a comprehensive plan of park acquisition and development.

Housing Element Update
The City’s Housing Element Update contains the following goals and policies related to recreation that apply to the Project:

Goal 1: Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all income levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents.

Policy 1f: Improve all residential environments through the provision of adequate public facilities and services, including streets and parks, as well as water, sewer, and drainage systems.

Policy 1g: Provide for adequate, freely accessible open space within reasonable distances of all community residents.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code Section 10.50.010 includes the Seal Beach Park Dedication Ordinance which has established a goal of five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The Ordinance requires that as a condition of tentative map approval, the subdivider shall dedicate land and/or pay a fee for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park and recreational facilities to serve the subdivision. The amount of land to be dedicated shall be five acres per 1,000 residents, or a fee in lieu thereof based on the fair market value of five acres of land per 1,000 residents, as determined by appraisal.

3.14.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant recreation impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
The following analysis is based on a review of the General Plan and the Seal Beach Municipal Code.

Would the Project:

Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse effect on the environment? •
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-4
Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
Existing Parks
Impact REC-1 The Project would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.

Impact Analysis
The Project does not propose any development. Unless exempt, future developments facilitated by the Project would be subject to discretionary permits and would occur as market conditions allow and at the discretion of the individual property owners. However, the Housing Element Update would identify a series of implementation actions to increase housing capacity that would induce population growth in the City. Future developments facilitated by the Project and the resulting population growth of approximately 2,891 residents (see Section 3.12, Population and Housing), would incrementally increase the City’s demand for park and recreation land. The City’s Municipal Code Section 10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, requires provision of five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Therefore, resulting population growth from future developments facilitated by the Project would require an additional 14.46 acres of parkland within the City.

The forecasted population growth could also incrementally increase the use of existing recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration could occur or be accelerated. As identified by the City, the City has a total parkland acreage of 81.65 acres which is comprised of 19 parks. Therefore, with an existing 2024 population of 24,350 residents, the City currently has a parks ratio of 3.35 acres per 1,000 residents. The Parks Inventory prepared as part of the City of Seal Beach Parks and Community Services Master Plan in 2013 states that it is readily apparent that the City would not be able to ever achieve the statewide standards or reach the local Municipal Code standard of five acres per 1,000 people due to a high percentage of the City being developed prior to the adoption of the current acreage goal (City of Seal Beach 2013). The City does not currently meet the desired acreage requirements as a significant portion of the City has been developed prior to the time the Quimby Act was passed. Excess park and recreation land does not exist to meet the forecast demand that would be generated by future developments facilitated by the Project and would result in the overuse of existing recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration could occur or be accelerated. However, the City benefits from non-Quimby Act recreational amenities within its boundaries, including 80.3 acres of beaches, the 192- acre Sunset Aquatic Marina and Park operated by the County, the National Wildlife Refuge located within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, and school district shared property. All of these areas provide unique regional recreational opportunities (City of Seal Beach 2003).

Future developments facilitated by implementation of the Project would result in further impacts to parks and recreational facilities beyond the existing conditions. In accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, as a condition of tentative map approval, any future developments and the subdivider would be required to dedicate land and/or pay a fee for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park and recreational facilities to serve the subdivision. The amount of land to be dedicated would be required at a standard of five acres per 1,000 residents, or a fee m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-5
in lieu thereof based on the fair market value of five acres of land per 1,000 residents, as determined by appraisal at the time the fee was set. The City is in the process of updating its park in-lieu fees.

Any fees contributed would be required to be used for either acquiring land or developing new or rehabilitating existing park and recreational facilities. Adherence to mandatory requirements and regulations for providing recreational opportunities would support the City’s goals for providing sufficient recreation opportunities for residents. Implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1, identified in Section

3.13, Public Services, and the dedication of land and payment of fees would reduce potential impacts to parks and recreational facilities. However, as stated above, the City does not currently meet the park acreage standards set by the General Plan and there is limited excess park and recreation land that would be able to be developed to meet the forecast demand that would be generated by future developments facilitated by the Project. Therefore, the Project and future developments facilitated by the Project would result in substantial physical deterioration of existing neighborhood or regional parks.

Impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 residential units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The residential components of the ORCC Specific Plan Project’s development of approximately 167 residential units would be anticipated to result in generation of approximately 301 residents. With the five acres per 1,000 resident standards set by the City’s General Plan, the development of the residential portion of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would require an additional 1.51 acres of parkland to offset the increase in population resulting from the ORCC Specific Plan Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure PUB-1 identified in Section 3.13, Public Services, would be required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

Recreational Facilities
Impact REC-2 The Project would include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Impact Analysis
The Project does not propose any development, or new or modified recreational facilities. As noted above under Impact REC-1, the City has an existing total park acreage of 81.65 acres with a park ratio of 3.35 acres per 1,000 people and does not meet the parks standard for the state or the City. m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-6
As concluded in REC-1 above, the Project’s maximum buildout scenario would create a demand for park and recreation land of approximately 14.46 acres. As the City’s existing parks acreage does not meet the applicable standard of five acres per 1,000 people, and due to the limited land available for development within the City, sufficient excess park and recreation land does not exist to meet the increased demand that may be generated by future developments facilitated by the Project. Therefore, the increase in residents resulting from future developments under the Project would require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which could result in an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Future construction or expansion of recreational facilities required as a result of future developments facilitated by the Project would be required to complete applicable environmental review at a project specific level to determine the potential impacts that would result from construction or expansion of recreational facilities.

As outlined in Mitigation Measure PUB-1, identified in Section 3.13, Public Services, all future developments facilitated by the Project would be required to comply with City Municipal Code Section

10.50.010, Parkland Dedication and Fees, which as a condition of tentative map approval, requires any future developments and subdivider to dedicate land and/or pay a fee for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park and recreational facilities to serve the subdivision. Adherence to mandatory requirements and regulations for providing recreation would support the City’s goals for providing sufficient recreation opportunities for residents and would reduce potential impacts. Future developments facilitated by the Project would require construction or expansion of recreational facilities in the future which may have an adverse effect on the environment and therefore, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

This EIR includes a discussion of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project based on the site location and proposed buildout of the 167 residential units that are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The residential components of the ORCC Specific Plan Project’s development of approximately 167 residential units would require an additional 1.51 acres of parkland to offset the increase in population resulting from the ORCC Specific Plan Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure PUB-1 identified in Section 3.13, Public Services, would be required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

3.14.4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA requires that EIRs evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of a project. A project’s environmental impacts are “cumulatively considerable” if the “incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-7
effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)). The geographic scope for cumulative recreation impacts is the City and immediate vicinity. This geographic scope is appropriate for recreation as parks standards for each city are set by the respective cities and impacts to parks are evaluated at the city level.

Table 3.14-1: Cumulative Projects Related to Recreation # Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
1 Old Ranch
Country Club
Project
Old Ranch
Country Club,
City of Seal
Beach
Construction of
a 116-unit, 4-
level (188,500
square feet)
multi-family
housing
development; a
51-unit, 3-level
senior housing
complex;
medical office
facility; overnight
accommodation,
including a bar
and lounge and
specialty
restaurant
Preparation of
EIR 167
2 Naval Weapons
Station
Pacific Coast
Hwy & Seal
Beach
Boulevard
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 150
3 Water Storage
Site
Within the Naval
Weapons
Station,
approximately
1,000 feet east
of Seal Beach
Boulevard, near
the housing
community off
Anchor Way
Potential future
housing
developments
proposed within
the Naval
Weapons
Station
Anticipated 65
~
I
7 ~ -
-
- -
L I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-8
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
4 Lampson
Project
4665 Lampson
Avenue, City of
Los Alamitos
Redevelopment
of existing office
building with a
residential
development
consisting of
cluster homes,
townhomes, and
apartments
totaling 246
units
Approved (By
City of Los
Alamitos)
246
5 Onni Marina
Shores
6500-6670 E.

Pacific Coast
Hwy, City of
Long Beach
(7242011013)
Two, 5-story
buildings with a
total of 563,529
square feet
containing 600
residential units
and 4,000
square-feet of
ground-level
restaurant space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
600
6 Carmel Partners
6615 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7237020050)
Construction of
a six-story
mixed-use
project
consisting of
390 residential
dwelling units
and 5,351
square feet of
commercial/retai
l space
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
380
7 Holland Partners
6700 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy, City
of Long Beach
(7242012006)
Construction of
a new mixeduse project
consisting of
281 residential
dwelling units,
3,100 square
feet of
commercial/retai
l space in a
building with
592,100 square
feet of area
Approved (By
City of Long
Beach)
281
8 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
6695 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020040);
6411 E. Pacific
Coast Hwy
(7237020051);
No address
(7237020904)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
940
I 1 I I I 7
~ -
,--
-
~
r--
- __J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-9
# Project Name Location Project
Characteristics Status Total Dwelling Units
future residential
development
9 Long Beach
Housing
Element Site
1000 N
Studebaker Rd
(7238015021)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of Long
Beach’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of Long
Beach)
115
10 Orange County
Housing
Element Sites
11061 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-47);
11031 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-46);
3352 Katella
Ave (086-521-
19);
11131 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-23);
11088
Wallingsford Rd
(086-521-11);
11171 Los
Alamitos Blvd
(086-521-24)
Candidate site
identified in the
County of
Orange’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By Orange
County)
619
11 Westminster
Housing
Element Sites
13251
Springdale
Street (203-073-
04);
Dorothy Lane
/Melanie Lane
(203-073-05);
Dorothy
Lane/Lee Drive
(203-073-01 and
203-073-03)
Candidate site
identified in the
City of
Westminster’s
Housing
Element as a
site for potential
future residential
development
Proposed in
Housing
Element Update
(By City of
Westminster)
122
Though impacts to parks and applicable parks standards are evaluated at the city level, residents of cumulative developments outside of the City but located within the immediate vicinity could utilize City parks and therefore, are included in the list of cumulative developments analyzed in this section.

Cumulative development in Seal Beach and surrounding areas, including but not limited to new development facilitated by the Housing Element, would increase demand for recreation facilities. Future developments facilitated by the Project, in conjunction with cumulative developments identified in Table

3.14-1, would increase demands for recreational facilities, as indicated in the discussion above. The list of I 1 I I I 7
~
I
-
~
r--
L_ I I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Recreation

3.14-10
cumulative past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding areas include those in the City of Los Alamitos, Long Beach, Westminster, and Orange County. Included in this list includes candidate sites identified in the Housing Element Update for Long Beach, Westminster, and Orange County for potential future developments. The increased demand for park and recreation facilities during the Housing Element Update’s planning period (2021-2029) would be significant and would not be accommodated by the existing supply and would require the need for construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Population growth from future developments facilitated by the Project would require an additional 14.46 acres of parkland within the City. However, even if the 14.46 acres of additional parkland was developed, the City would continue to be at a deficit of parkland and would not be able to meet the standard of five acres per 1,000 people. The development of cumulative past, present, and probable future residential projects in the City and surrounding area would further increase the need for additional parkland in the City. Potential increased demands for recreational facilities from cumulative developments would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis at the project level when the future development is proposed in accordance with the Housing Element Update and General Plan. Cumulative developments proposed within the City and surrounding areas identified in the list of cumulative past, present, and probable future residential projects would be anticipated to further increase the existing deficit in parkland and would result in increased impacts.

Unless exempt, each cumulative discretionary project would require separate approval and evaluation under CEQA, which would address potential impacts to recreation facilities and identify mitigation measures, where appropriate. The Project and cumulative development would result in significant cumulative environmental impacts concerning parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the Project would cause a cumulatively considerable impact on recreation resources, and Mitigation Measure PUB-1 is required. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure PUB-1 would not reduce impacts to a less than significant level and therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact to recreation.

3.14.5 References
City of Seal Beach. 2003. City of Seal Beach General Plan, December 2003. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed February 2024. _____. 2013. Parks and Community Services Master Plan, July 22, 2013. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/0/Documents/APPROVED%20MASTER%20PLAN%20- %20Website.pdf. Accessed February 2024.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-1

3.15 TRANSPORTATION
This section describes the existing transportation setting and potential effects from implementation of the Project. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on data prepared by Stantec (Appendix F), the City‘s General Plan Circulation Element (City of Seal Beach 2003), the City’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines (City of Seal Beach 2020a), and the City’s SB 743 Implementation Policy adopted on June 8, 2020 (City of Seal Beach 2020b).

The City’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines and General Plan policies outline the analysis methodology, performance criteria, and thresholds of significance for transportation impacts applied in this analysis. The transportation analysis for the Project were prepared in accordance with these guidelines and policies.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The Project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The impacts are considered less than significant.

The Project would potentially result in inconsistencies with CEQA Guidelines Section 15034.3, subdivision(b). Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 the Project would be considered significant and unavoidable.

The residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project was considered within the traffic analysis of this Project. Specific impact findings associated with the development of the ORCC Specific Plan Project are being evaluated in a standalone EIR.

3.15.1 Environmental Setting
Roadway System
Regional Access
The City is served by State Route (SR) SR 1 (also referred to as Pacific Coast Highway or PCH), SR 22 (Garden Grove Freeway), and I-405 (San Diego Freeway). PCH extends in a northwesterly to southeasterly direction along the Pacific coastline with a portion passing through the southern part of the City. PCH through the City is four lanes. SR 22 generally runs in an east-west direction from Long Beach to SR-55 in the City of Orange, by way of the Cities of Westminster and Garden Grove. SR 22 merges with I-405 for an approximately two-mile stretch before terminating in the City of Long Beach. I-405 extends in a northwesterly to southeasterly direction and passes through the City generally in an eastwest direction as it merges with SR 22. Through the City, I-405 has six mixed-flow lanes and two high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes in each direction.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-2
Local Access
The local circulation system within the City is composed of a hierarchy of streets and roads with varying functions. Arterials link residential and commercial districts to the freeway network and provide intercity connections. Collector streets are two lanes, Secondary arterials are four lanes (undivided), Primary arterials are also four lanes (divided), and Major arterials are six lanes. Arterial roads that provide intracity access include Seal Beach Boulevard, Westminster Avenue, Marina Drive, Lampson Avenue, Main Street, Bolsa Avenue, Electric Avenue, and Ocean Avenue.

Collector streets are low to moderate capacity streets that move traffic from local streets to arterial roads and are two lanes wide. Collector streets serve the beach and the various residential areas within the City. Collector streets that provide local access to the various Project sites include Balboa Drive, El Dorado Drive, 1st Street, and Central Avenue.

Seal Beach Boulevard runs north/south through the entire length of the City, starting at Bradbury Road, the north city limits, and terminating at Ocean Avenue south of PCH. The arterial is six lanes (divided), except for a two-lane segment south of Pacific Coast Highway. This arterial connects the freeway to other arterials throughout the City. The City’s Circulation Element classifies Seal Beach Boulevard as a Primary arterial from Electric Avenue to PCH and a Major arterial from PCH to the City’s northern limits.

Westminster Avenue is four-lanes (divided) and runs through the City in an east/west direction, parallel to the I-405. The City’s Circulation Element classifies Westminster Avenue as a Primary arterial for the entire length through the City.

Marina Drive is located in the southwest portion of the City and extends from the west City limits to PCH.

It is generally two lanes (undivided), with on-street parking, bike lanes, and runs in an east/west direction.

The City’s Circulation Element classifies Marina Drive as a Secondary arterial.

Bolsa Avenue is located in the southwest portion of the City and extends from PCH to Seal Beach Boulevard. It is a two-lane undivided roadway with bike lanes and runs in an east/west direction. The City’s Circulation Element classifies Bolsa Avenue as a Secondary arterial.

Main Street is located in the southwest portion of the City and extends from Ocean Avenue to PCH. It is a two-lane undivided roadway with a combination of parallel and diagonal on-street parking and runs in a northeasterly/southwesterly direction. The City’s Circulation Element classifies Main Street as a Secondary arterial.

Electric Avenue is located in the southwest portion of the City and extends from 6th Street to its terminus just past Ocean Avenue. It is a two-lane divided roadway with on-street parking. The Mary Wilson Branch of the Orange County Library and the Red Car Museum are located in the median park. The City’s Circulation Element classifies Electric Avenue as a Secondary arterial.

Ocean Avenue is located in the southwest corner of the City and runs in an northwesterly/southeasterly direction adjacent to the Pacific Ocean waterline. It extends from 1st Street at the west end to Electric Avenue at its east end. Past Electric Avenue, Ocean Avenue connects to Seal Beach Boulevard. The facility is two-lanes undivided with on-street parking and bike lanes between Dolphin Avenue and Electric m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-3
Avenue. The arterial primarily provides access to the beach, local shops, and residential areas. The City’s Circulation Element classifies Ocean Avenue as a Secondary arterial.

Balboa Drive is located in the southwest portion of the City and extends from PCH to Catalina Avenue. It is a two-lane undivided local street and primarily provides access to residential areas.

El Dorado Drive is a private road located in the northwest portion of the City within the Leisure World community and extends from Monterey Road to Northwood Road. It is a two-lane undivided local street and generally runs in a north/south direction.
1st Street is located in the southwest corner of the City and extends from Ocean Avenue to PCH and runs in a northeasterly/southwesterly direction. 1st Street is two-lanes (undivided) with on-street parking south of Marina Drive and is four lanes undivided with on-street parking north of Marina Drive. The City’s Circulation Element classifies 1st Street as a Secondary arterial south of Marina Drive and a Primary arterial north of Marina Drive.

Central Avenue is located in the southwest portion of the City, extends from Marina Drive to 12th Street and is a two-lane undivided local street with on-street parking. Central Avenue generally runs in an east/west direction.

Pedestrian Facilities
The pedestrian network within the City of Seal Beach consists largely of sidewalk infrastructure supported by marked crossing treatments at certain locations and intersection controls (i.e., pedestrian countdown signals). The City requires new road infrastructure to construct sidewalks to facilitate pedestrian movements.

As documented in OCTA’s Orange County’s Bike + Ped Plan (OCTA 2019), regionally significant roadways within the City of Seal Beach generally have sidewalk infrastructure except for missing sidewalk gaps totaling approximately seven miles (combined total). Gaps exist on Westminster Avenue, 1st Street, PCH, Seal Beach Boulevard, and Lampson Avenue.

The City of Seal Beach currently has an overall Walk Score of 41 out of 100, indicating that most trips require a car (Walk Score 2024). However, the Main Beach/Old Town Neighborhood is “very walkable” with a score of 85, which indicates that most common trips could be accomplished on foot (City of Seal Beach 2022).

Bicycle Facilities
Seal Beach classifies bicycle facilities consistent with OCTA’s bikeway classifications:

Class I Bike Path – Provides for bicycle travel in a paved right-of-way completely separated from the roadway.

Class II Bike Lane – Provides a striped bicycle lane for one-way travel within the roadway. •
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-4
Class III Bike Route – Provides a signed-only bikeway in a shared lane with vehicles within the roadway.

Class IV Bike Boulevard – Provides a separated/dedicated bikeway within the roadway.

There is an existing Class I Bike Path along Seal Beach Boulevard from Electric Avenue to PCH. There is also an off-road bicycle trail along the San Gabriel River. An off-road trail running parallel to SR-22 connects to the San Gabriel River Bicycle Trail to the west, and Class II bike lanes on North Gate Road to the east. Lastly, there is a multi-use path on Seal Beach Boulevard from Lampson Avenue to the frontage of the Old Ranch Town Center. There are existing Class II Bike Lanes on Seal Beach Boulevard, PCH, Bolsa Avenue, Electric Avenue, Marina Drive, Westminster Avenue, Gates Road, College Park Drive, and Lampson Avenue.

Transit Facilities
Various bus transit operators directly service the City of Seal Beach. OCTA is the transit operator of OC Bus and provides transit services throughout Orange County, including Seal Beach. There are three OC Bus transit routes serving the City: Route 1 (Long Beach to San Clemente via PCH), Route 42 (Seal Beach to Orange via Seal Beach Boulevard/Los Alamitos Boulevard/Lincoln Avenue), Route 46 (Orange to Seal Beach via Ball Road) and Route 60 (Long Beach to Tustin via Westminster Avenue/17th Street).

Long Beach Transit provides public transportation for the southeastern Los Angeles County area and northwestern portion of Orange County. Long Beach Transit Route 171 operates within the City and provides transportation between the Cities of Long Beach and Seal Beach.

The City also has a Senior Transportation Program provided by California Yellow Cab. The Senior Transportation Program is a Dial-a-Ride service that is free for City residents aged 60 years and older and that operates Monday through Friday from 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM, by reservation. In addition, there is a separate program called Senior Non-Emergency Transportation program that is similar to the Dial-A-Ride program but is dedicated to non-emergency health related trips.

3.15.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal
There are no federal regulations related to transportation applicable to the Project.

State
California Department of Transportation
Caltrans is responsible for planning, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining all state-owned roadways. The state facilities providing regional access to and from the project site are SR 1 (PCH), SR 22, and I-405.
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-5
Senate Bill 743
SB 743 was signed into law on September 27, 2013. The legislature found that with the adoption of the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), the state had signaled its commitment to encourage land use and transportation planning decisions and investments that reduce VMT and, thereby, contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions, as required by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32).

SB 743 started a process that changed the approach to transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. Changes include the elimination of auto delay, level of service (LOS), and similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as the basis for determining significant transportation impacts.

As stated by the legislation, the new criteria “shall promote the reduction of GHG emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses” (PRC Section 21099(b)(1)).

In January 2016, OPR released revisions to its proposed Draft CEQA guidelines for the implementation of SB 743. In December 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the CEQA Guidelines update package, including the Guidelines section implementing SB 743 (Section 15064.3) and OPR simultaneously released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2018), which contains OPR’s technical recommendations regarding assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures.

The provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 applied prospectively as described in Section 15007, and on July 1, 2020, the provisions of this section applied statewide.

Regional
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAG is the transportation planning, coordinating, and financing agency for six counties in Southern California, including Orange County. It also functions as the federally mandated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the region and under state law as a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Council of Governments.

Connect SoCal 2024 is Southern California’s RTP/SCS. SCAG’s Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal 2024 on April 4, 2024. Connect SoCal 2024 is a long-range blueprint to guide transportation investments and land-use decisions through 2050 while meeting the requirements of California’s landmark 2008 SB 375, which calls on each of the state’s 18 metropolitan areas to develop a SCS to accommodate future population growth and reduce GHG emissions from cars and light trucks. The Project’s relationship to GHG emission reductions is discussed in detail in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-6
Local
Orange County Transportation Authority
Within the SCAG region are six County Transportation Commissions that hold the responsibility of programing and implementing transportation projects, services, and programs in their respective counties, including Orange County. OCTA is the Transportation Commission responsible for funding and implementing transit and capital projects in Orange County. OC Go, formerly known as Measure M, is a 30-year one-half-cent sales tax for transportation improvements in Orange County. OCTA manages the funds and implements the improvements to freeways, arterials, and transit projects and programs.

Currently, approximately 43 percent of the funds go towards freeways, 32 percent to arterials and 25 percent to transit (OCTA 2023). The goals of OC Go are to relieve congestion, improve street conditions, expand Metrolink, reduce costs for seniors and people with disabilities, synchronize signals, and reduce transportation related air and water pollution.

City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City’s General Plan Circulation Element (City of Seal Beach 2003) includes goals and policies addressing the City’s circulation system and development within the City. The following goals, objectives, and policies from the General Plan are relevant to this transportation impact analysis:

Circulation Element
Goal: Provide and maintain a comprehensive circulation system that facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods throughout the City and near open space habitat for wildlife, which minimizes environmental impacts (including air, light, and noise pollution).

Objective: Ensure that the circulation system is in balance with the City’s Land Use Element. o Policies:

Monitor and participate in applicable county, regional, state, and federal transportation plans and proposals.

Maintain compliance with the County’s Congestion Management Plan (CMP) and Growth Management Plan (GMP).

Review implementation programs that coordinate the transportation needs and requirements of the City with those of other public agencies in order to ensure that the overall circulation plan of the City is effective, efficient, and safe.

Develop and implement an annual Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for transportation system projects.

Objective: Provide adequate capacity for the City’s circulation needs while minimizing negative impacts, including environmental impacts needing mitigation. •
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-7
o Policies:

Maintain circulation system standards for roadways and intersection classifications, rightof-way width, pavement width, design speed, capacity, maximum grades, and associated features such as medians and bicycle lanes.

Develop a circulation system that enhances environmental amenities and scenic areas.

Goal: Provide a circulation system that supports existing, approved, and planned land uses throughout the City while maintaining a desired LOS on all streets and at all intersections.

Objective: Comply with adopted performance standards for acceptable Levels of Service (LOS). o Policies:

Maintain a citywide LOS not exceeding LOS D for roadway segments and intersections during the peak hours. The [General Plan] study area intersections that are projected to operate at worse than LOS D (with improvements) are all located along PCH. The relatively high levels of traffic along this corridor are a direct result of increased development outside of the City of Seal Beach and the congestion along the I-405 Freeway. The City of Seal Beach General Plan Circulation Element and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) depict PCH as a Primary Highway (4- lanes divided). As a Primary highway (4-lanes divided), there is insufficient capacity along PCH to accommodate the existing as well as future traffic volumes.

Coordinate transportation improvements along PCH with Caltrans in a manner that minimizes disruptions to the community.

Objective: Ensure that the location, intensity, and timing of development are consistent with the provision of adequate transportation infrastructure and standards defined in the Growth Management Element.
o Policies:

Assess all development projects in order to identify their traffic impacts and require that they pay their fair share of the system improvements necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the project.

Limit the number of driveways on arterial streets to reduce vehicular conflict and facilitate traffic flow.

Require new development to install traffic signals at intersections on arterials that, based on individual study, are shown to satisfy traffic signal warrants.

Promote the use of traffic signal coordination within the City and with adjacent jurisdictions.
■
■
•
■
■
•
■
■
■
■
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-8
Goal: Develop and encourage a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) system to assist in mitigating traffic impacts and in maintaining a desired LOS on the circulation system, while minimizing air pollution and other environmental impacts.

Objective: Pursue transportation management strategies that can maximize vehicle occupancy, minimize average trip length, and reduce the number of vehicle trips. o Policies:

Encourage non-residential developments to provide employee incentives for utilizing alternatives to the conventional automobile (e.g., carpools, vanpools, buses, bicycles, and walking).

Encourage the implementation of employer TDM requirements included in the South California Air Quality Management Plan.

Encourage industry to use flextime, staggered working hours, and other means to lessen commuter traffic.

Encourage the use of multiple-occupancy vehicle programs for shopping and other uses to reduce traffic.

Support national, state, and regional legislation directed at encouraging the use of carpools and vanpools.

Promote ridesharing through publicity and provision of information to the public.

Require the proposals for major new non-residential developments include submission of a TDM plan to the City.

Encourage the development, implementation, and use of new advanced technologies to optimize safe traffic flow and manage traffic congestions.

Goal: Maintain participation in a public transit system that provides mobility to City residents and employees as a logical alternative to automobile travel.

Objective: Encourage improved local and express bus service through OCTA to the City. o Policies:

Coordinate with OCTA and other appropriate entities to improve bus service to and within the City,
Encourage the provision of safe, attractive, and clearly identifiable transit stops throughout the community.

Implement and expand, wherever feasible, programs aimed at enhancing the mobility of senior citizens and disabled persons.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-9
Objective: Require new development that is designed in a manner that facilities provision or expansion of transit service, provides onsite commercial/recreational facilities to discourage midday travel, and provides onsite public transportation circulation. o Policies:

Encourage developers to work with agencies providing transit service with the objective of maximizing the potential for transit use.

Encourage employers to reduce vehicular trips by offering employee incentives.

Require proposed developments to include transit facilities, such as park-and-ride sites, bus benches, shelters, pads or turnouts, where appropriate, in their improvement plans or as needed in proximity to their development.

Goal: Provide a citywide system of safe, efficient, and attractive bicycle and pedestrian routes for commuter, school and recreational use.

Objective: Promote the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians by adhering to citywide standards and practices.
o Policies:

Develop citywide standards for construction and maintenance of bikeways and pedestrian walkways.

Develop and adopt a planned bikeway system that is consistent with the County of Orange Master Plan of County-wide Bikeways, and other adopted Master Plans, to assure that local bicycle routes will be compatible with routes or neighboring jurisdictions.

Maintain existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian walkways between developments, schools, and public facilities.

Where appropriate, require proposed developments adjacent to proposed bikeway routes to include bicycle paths or lanes in their street improvement plans and to construct the bicycle paths or lanes as a condition of approval.

Construct safe, convenient paths for bicycles and pedestrians so as to encourage these alternative forms of transportation.

Require plans for bicycle and pedestrian facilities to give priority to providing continuity and closing gaps in the bikeway and sidewalk network.

Develop programs that encourage the safe utilization of easements and/or rights-ofway along flood control channels, public utilities, railroads, and streets wherever possible for the use of bicycles and/or pedestrians.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-10
Develop a comprehensive pedestrian circulation plan that facilitates pedestrian traffic in major activity areas.

Ensure accessibility of pedestrian facilities to the elderly and disabled.

Require the installation of sidewalks with all new roadway construction and significant reconstruction of existing roadways.

Develop a plan and pursue funding for bicycle support facilities and cycling education/information programs.

City of Seal Beach Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code Chapter 4.10, Transportation Impact Development Fee, establishes a transportation facilities and program development fee that imposes on development projects an equitable share of the cost of mitigating future transportation facility and program needs created by such projects.

Developers pay a transportation impact fee which is generally calculated using a project’s peak hour trip generation and the cost to implement transportation facilities improvement.

The City’s Municipal Code Chapter 11.4.45, Transportation Demand Management (TDM), complies with Section 65089.3(a)(2) of the California Government Code, which requires the City to adopt a trip reduction and TDM ordinance. TDM is the implementation of programs, plans, or policies designed to encourage changes in individual travel behavior. TDM includes, but is not limited to, programs that encourage alternatives to single occupant vehicles (SOV), such as through the use of carpools, vanpools, and transit; reduction or elimination of vehicle trips; and efforts to encourage rescheduling of peak period trip to non-peak periods.

Safety Action Plan
The City’s Safety Action Plan (SAP) was developed to identify solutions and create a holistic strategy to prevent and reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on the local roadways across the City. The plan examines local, state, and federal data, along with peer research, to identify safety solutions for all users, including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, and more. It addresses both user behavior and infrastructure improvements through a collaborative approach with stakeholders. Prepared in compliance with Safe Roads and Streets for All requirements, the plan incorporates a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) and follows the Safe System Approach. The SAP prioritizes and analyzes safety improvements for intersections, roadway segments, and the High Injury Network, proposing countermeasures to reduce collisions in high-risk areas.

Local Roadway Safety Plan
The City’s LRSP identifies a framework to evaluate and develop traffic safety enhancements on the City’s roadways that is updated every five years. The most recent LRSP was approved by the City in 2022. The goals of the LRSP include: identify areas with a high risk for collisions; illustrate the value of a comprehensive safety program and the systemic process; plan future safety improvements for near-, mid- , and long-term implementation; and define safety projects for Highway Safety Improvement Program) ■
■
■
■
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-11
and other program funding consideration. The LRSP analysis found that influences leading to collisions within the City include aging drivers, impaired driving, improper use of occupant protection, distracted driving, aggressive driving, land departure collisions, and bicyclists.

3.15.3 Environmental Impacts
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to result in significant transportation impacts. When an impact is determined to be significant, mitigation measures are identified that would reduce or avoid impacts.

Methodology for Analysis
In accordance with state guidelines, VMT analysis that incorporates the requirements of SB 743 is utilized as one measure of the Project’s potential transportation impacts. SB 743 required OPR to establish guidelines under CEQA for identifying and mitigating VMT transportation impacts. Generally, SB 743 moves away from using delay-based LOS as the metric for identifying a significant impact and instead uses VMT. The City of Seal Beach adopted an SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Seal Beach 2020a) and a new Transportation Analysis Guidelines (City of Seal Beach 2020b). The methodology and threshold of significance identified in the Transportation Analysis Guidelines are used in this VMT analysis.

The tool used to calculate VMT is the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) (OCTA 2024), a subarea model of the SCAG travel demand model. Per the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, the existing/baseline year of the model is used to determine the CEQA baseline conditions, and the future year (approximately a 20-year forecast) provides the cumulative analysis conditions.

Screening Criteria
Per the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, projects may utilize screening criteria prior to conducting a full VMT analysis to determine if a project would have a less than significant impact on VMT. The screening criteria are based on factors that include project size, locally serving retail, affordable housing provision, and community serving projects as shown in Table 3.15-1.

Table 3.15-1: Project Screening Criteria and Threshold
Category Criteria/Screening Threshold
Project
Screened?
(Yes/No)
Small projects
Screening
Small projects can be screened out
from completing a full VMT analysis.

If the project generates less than 250
vehicle trips per day, it is assumed to
have a less than significant impact.

No1 Retail Projects
Screening
Retail projects that are locally
serving can be screened out from
completing a full VMT analysis.

A project that proposes locally serving
retail uses that are 50,000 square feet
or less.

No
I~ I I I
~
- -
L_ I I I _J
m

CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Report
Transportation

3.15-12
Category Criteria/Screening Threshold
Project
Screened?
(Yes/No)
Affordable Housing
Projects Screening
Affordable housing in high quality
transit areas can be screened out
from completing a full VMT analysis.

If the project is 100 percent affordable
housing and is in an infill location, the
project is assumed to have a less than
significant impact.

No
CommunityServing Projects
Screening
Projects such as schools, parks,
community centers, public buildings,
day care, and libraries can be
screened out from completing a full
VMT analysis.

If a project is a community serving use
and is intended for local use, then the
project is presumed to have a less than
significant impact on transportation
based on the discretion of the city.

No 1 One Housing Opportunity Site would meet the small project screening criteria.

Because this is a program-level analysis, the Housing Opportunity Sites would collectively generate more than 1,000 vehicle trips per day. The Project does not include any retail uses or community serving development. While some of the opportunity sites include affordable housing/low-income units, the Project is not comprised of 100 percent affordable units. Since the Project does not meet any of the established screening criteria, a VMT analysis has been conducted as discussed below.

Seal Beach City CouncilOctober 27, 2025

Seal Beach City Council
October 27, 2025